HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-18 Cindy Freitas #3 Testimony From: cindy Freitas
To: LPCtestimony
Subject: #3 Kula Nei Partners,LLC
Date: Wednesday,December 18,2024 10:53:37 AM
Attachments: #3 KULA NEI PARTNERS,LLC.docx
Please add me to the zoom for 43 Mahalo Cindy Freitas
December 18, 2024
Cindy Freitas
makainan i gmail.com
Leeward Planning Department
December 19, 2024
At 1:OOpm
LPCtestimony(a)-hawaiicounty.gov
Item: # 3 Kula Nei Partners, LLC. (PL-PUD-2024-000003)
He Mele komo a he mele aloha no na kupuna o ke au i hala Aloha mai kakou.
Aloha,
My name is Cindy Freitas and I'm a Native Hawaiian descended of the native inhabitants of Hawai'i
prior to 1778 and born and raised in Hawai'i.
I am also a practitioner who still practice the cultural traditional customary practices that was instill in
me by my grandparents at a young age from mauka(MOUNTAIN TO SEA)to makai in many areas.
I'm in OPPOSITION for the following reasons:
The applicant commissioned a report entitled, "Kula Nei Partners, LLC, Planned Unite Development,
Ka Pa'akai O Ka `Aina Analysis" prepared by ASM Affiliates in 2019. According to the report,
"THERE ARE NO ONGOING TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY NATIVE HAWAIIAN RIGHTS
BEING EXERCISED OR OCCURRING WITHIN THE SUBJECT PROPERTYY"
This is an outrage for the Cultural Customary Traditional Practices of the people,WE THE PEOPLE
ARE STILL DOING OUR DUE DIGLILENT OF HAWAIIAN RIGHTS BEING EXERCISED FROM
MAUKA TO MAKAI TILL TODAY IN MANY AREAS.
SEE; reaffirmed HRS 7-1 and expanded it to include, "native Hawaiian rights...may extend beyond
the ahupua`a in which a native Hawaiian resides where such rights have been customarily and
traditionally exercised in this manner" (Pete Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Haw.578, 1992).
Archaeological/Cultural/Historical Resources: An archaeological inventory survey of the subject LAVA
property was conducted in 2005 by Rechtman Consulting (Clark and Rechtman 2005) and accepted in
2008, which identified 19 archaeological sites comprised of 66 features. Of the 19 sites, one site (Site
50-10-28-23834), a Historic era Ahupua`a boundary wall was previously identified by (Haun and
Henry 2003) and the remaining 18 sites were newly identified by Clark and Rechtman (2005). These 19
19 sites consist of 7 historic walls, a historic era enclosure, a historic era roadway, 2 trail segments, a
Precontact era habitation modified outcrop, a Precontact era habitation terrace, 3 Precontact era
habitation lava blisters, one lava blister with human remains, a
Precontact era habitation complex with 5 features, and an expansive agricultural complex with 44
features that extend across the entire project area except at the access pole from Kukuna Street. All 19
sites were assessed as significant for their information content because they have yielded or are likely
to yield information important to understanding the prehistory or history of the project area. One site
was additionally assessed as significant due to its association with events that have made an important
contribution to the broad patterns of our history, and one site was additionally assessed as significant
for its cultural value because of the presence of human remains. The 2005 Rechtman report
recommended the preservation of 2 sites, a lava blister with human remains (Site 24768), for which a
Burial Treatment Plan was submitted and accepted by the Hawai'i Island Burial Council and SHPD in
2019 and a historic boundary wall (Site 24774), for which an Archaeological Preservation plan was
completed and accepted by SHPD in 2016. Four sites were recommended for data recovery (1. Site
24762-Precontact era habitation modified outcrop; 2. Site 24764-Precontact era habitation terrace; 3.
Site 24773 —Precontact era Habitation Complex; and 4. Site 24776 Precontact era Agriculture
Complex). The applicant completed and submitted a Data Recovery Plan in 2015, which was accepted
by SHPD in 2016. However, upon learning that the data recovery for these four sites would require
backhoe trenching, the applicant elected to halt all data recovery excavations and to pursue a
preservation treatment for these sites instead. This decision resulted in the creation of an
Archaeological Preservation Plan for the 4 sites entitled "An Archaeological Preservation Plan for Sites
50-10-28-24762, 24764, 24773 and 24776" dated August 2021 prepared by ASM affiliates, which
outlines the short-term and permanent conservation requirements for the 4 sites and was accepted by
SHPD on September 14, 2021. Four of the 6 sites slated for preservation will occur within the bulk
archaeological and cultural preservation lots (except for Sites 24764 and 24773).
The Constitution of the State of Hawai'i clearly states the duty of the State and its
agencies is to preserve,protect, and prevent interference with the traditional and customary
rights of native Hawaiians. Article XII, Section 7 requires the State to "protect all rights,
customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and
possessed by ahupua`a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the
Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778" (2000). In spite of the establishment of the foreign concept of
private ownership and western-style government, Kamehameha III (Kauikeaouli)preserved the
peoples traditional right to subsistence.As a result in 1850, the Hawaiian Government
confirmed the traditional access rights to native Hawaiian ahupua`a tenants to gather specific
natural resources for customary uses from undeveloped private property and waterways under
the Hawaiian Revised Statutes (HRS) 7-1. In 1992, the State of Hawai'i Supreme Court,
reaffirmed HRS 7-1 and expanded it to include, "native Hawaiian rights...may extend beyond
the ahupua`a in which a native Hawaiian resides where such rights have been customarily and
traditionally exercised in this manner" (Pele Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Haw.578, 1992).
Act 50, enacted by the Legislature of the State of Hawaii (2000)with House Bill 2895, relating to
Environmental Impact Statements,proposes that:
...there is a need to clarify that the preparation of environmental assessments
or environmental impact statement should identity and address effects on
Hawaii's culture, and traditional and customary rights...[H.B. NO. 2895]
Act 16, enacted by the Legislature of the State of Hawaii (2020)with S.B. No. 2060
Section 3; (2) Historic resources;
(A) Protect,preserve, and where desirable, restore those natural and manmade historic and prehistoric
resources in the coastal zone management area that are significant in Hawaiian and American history
and culture.
HRS 711-1107 Desecration
(b)A place of worship or burial
(2) "Desecrate" means defacing, damaging, polluting, or otherwise physically mistreating in a way that
defendant knows will outrage the sensibilities of persons likely to observe or discover the defendant's
action.
Therefor Applicant in all due respect should not RE ZONE THE LOT and destroy what is still beautiful.
Mahalo,
/s/
Cindy Freitas