HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-10-24 EMC testimony (10-23) Flaherty, Chuck
P O Box 1137 Hilo, HI 96721-1137 | hawaiiislandsierraclub@gmail.com sierraclubhig.org
October 24, 2023
Hawaiʻi County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo HI 96720
Re: Testimony on Agenda Item V.2.
Aloha Madame Chair and members of the Environmental Management Committee,
The Sierra Club of Hawai’i, Hawai’i Island Group (HIG) is respectfully requesting the EMC to
defer any final recommendations related to agenda item V.2. to allow the EMC to receive input
from an informed public, debate the merits and weaknesses of General Plan 2045 (GP2045), and
amend the GP2045 to address any uncovered weaknesses.
The General Plan comprehensive review process was initiated by the Planning Department in
2015. The recommended draft, General Plan 2040, was released in 2019. After a couple of
public meetings, nothing more was heard about the comprehensive review process.
Then, on September 18th, the Planning Department released to the public the current completely
re-written recommended draft, GP2045, via a website owned and operated by a contractor,
Konveio. In order to comment on GP2045 and the General Plan Land Use (GPLU) maps,
members of the public must first learn how to operate and navigate Konveio’s artificial-
intelligence-enhanced software in order to submit comments on GP2045.
Needless to say, this has been a challenge for a majority of the members of the public and so the
Planning Department has agreed to extend the time to comment from November 20, 2023 to
March 1, 2024.
Since the General Plan supercedes all county law, rules, and regulations, with the exception of
the county Charter, HIG appreciates the Planning Department giving the public, county agencies,
commission, committees, boards, etc. more time to evaluate and comment on GP2045.
HIG does not know when the EMC was first given access to the GP2045, but has the EMC had
an adequate amount of time to:
1. compare the existing 2005 General Plan with the GP2045 to determine if language, goals,
policies, and/or courses of action have or have not been adequately addressed in the
GP2045,
2. evaluate the degree to which the GP2045 addresses past, current, and future
environmental issues,
3. determine the extent that the GP2045 implements solutions to these issues under
“GENERAL PLAN IMPLEMENTATION”, and
4. determine which sections of GP2045 fall within its purview and the extent to which they
do?
For instance, in the GP2045 there are six themed “chapters”. Chapter 3 is “SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT AND RESILIENT COMMUNITIES”. Section 3 of Chapter 3 is “Public
Utilities”. Section 3.4 is “Drinking Water Conservation”, 3.5 is “Wastewater Treatment and
Reuse”, and Sec. 3.6 is “Stormwater Infiltration and Green Infrastructure”. Section 4 is “Public
Facilities and Services” with Section 4.3 being “Solid Waste Management”. All of these are
inter-related with regard to environmental management.
In addition, Chapter 5 is “COLLABORTIVE BIOCULTURAL STEWARDSHIP” under which
is listed “Environmental Goal”. Our understanding of the term “biocultural” is to acknowledge
that it is impossible to draw a line between culture and environment for kanaka maoli. To what
extent will the EMC be involved in the environmental goal of biocultural stewardship?
Members of the HIG have not had time to properly evaluate the currently recommended
GP2045, so is unable to provide additional testimony at this time on agenda item V.2. other than
to ask:
1. Has the Planning Department explained to the EMC how the current language contained
within GP2045 will impact current laws, rules, and regulations associated with the
operation and responsibilities of the EMC and the Department of Environmental
Management (DEM),
2. Will the GP2045 empower or impede the EMC and DEM with regard to current
operations and responsibilities, and
3. Does the language in the GP2045 adequately address violations of existing environmental
laws, rules, and regulations, such as the Clean Water Act, and non-compliance with two
existing federal consent decrees in a timely, well-funded manner?
4. Does the GP2045 adequately consider the lack of sustainable funding that has led to
existing wastewater infrastructure deterioration?
5. Does the GP2045 adequately consider the facilities and funding needed to construct
additional infrastructure to keep up with growth?
Mahalo for the opportunity to testify,
Chuck Flaherty, Chair