Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-13 Cindy Freitas Opposition Testimony Item #2 From: cindv Freitas To: LPCtestimonv Subject: Agenda#2 Date: Tuesday,May 13,2025 7:29:09 PM Attachments: Boaz LLC OPPOSE revoke#437 permit.docx May 14, 2025 County of Hawaii Leeward Planning Department LPCtestimonyghawaiicoun ov RE:Agenda Item # 2 Applicant: Boaz LLC (Formerly Koa Ventures LLC) (SMA 437) Request to revoke SMA 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. OPPOSE to revoke permit no. 437 Revocation of a Special Management Area(SMA)use permit must not be taken lightly. These permits are critical tools for ensuring the protection of Hawai`i's shoreline resources, traditional and customary Native Hawaiian practices, and public access rights. The revocation request by BOAZ LLC appears to be an attempt to bypass the safeguards originally placed on the parcel. Such action could have significant environmental, cultural, and legal implications. Under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-26(2023), a permit may be revoked only upon a finding that the permit holder has violated its conditions or applicable laws, and only after appropriate notice and a hearing. The applicant has provided no evidence of such a violation. Thus, the Planning Commission lacks the legal basis to approve this request. Additionally, under Hawaii County SMA Rules, revocation must comply with established public process and findings. (See, e.g., Haw. Admin. R. §15-150, County of Hawai'i). A. Revocation Requires a Legal Basis Under Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-26(2023), a permit may be revoked only upon a finding that the permit holder has violated its conditions or applicable laws, and only after appropriate notice and a hearing. The applicant has provided no evidence of such a violation. Thus, the Planning Commission lacks the legal basis to approve this request. Additionally, under Hawaii County SMA Rules, revocation must comply with established public process and findings. (See, e.g., Haw. Admin. R. §15-150, County of Hawai'i). The development site is located in a vulnerable and ecologically sensitive shoreline area. Under the Hawaii Coastal Zone Management Act, development must avoid significant adverse impacts on: 9 Coastal ecosystems • Traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights • Public access See Haw. Rev. Stat. § 205A-2(c) (2023). Revoking the SMA permit may eliminate prior conditions meant to safeguard these interests. In Ka Pa`akai O Ka `Aina v. Land Use Comm'n, 94 Haw. 31, 7 P.3d 1068 (2000),** the Hawaii Supreme Court held that agencies must make findings to ensure the protection of constitutionally protected Native Hawaiian rights when considering land use decisions. These include: • Identification of cultural resources • The extent to which those practices will be affected • Measures to mitigate harm The Puapua`a region is a storied place (wahi papa) and contains resources of cultural, historical, and spiritual significance. Revoking the SMA permit without renewed environmental and cultural review would violate these constitutional obligations under Haw. Const. art.XII, § 7. In Mahuiki v. Planning Comm'n of County of Kauai, 65 Haw. 506, 654 P.2d 874 (1982)**, the Court emphasized the importance of due process and public involvement in SMA decisions.Any attempt to revoke and potentially reapply for new entitlements must go through full environmental review and community participation. Under Haw. Const. art.XI, § 1, and case law, the State and counties hold Hawai`i's natural resources in trust for the benefit of present and future generations. The Planning Commission has an affirmative duty to conserve,protect, and enhance coastal resources—not to deregulate them without substantial justification. The SMA Use Permit No. 437 was granted with environmental, cultural, and public trust safeguards. BOAZ LLC has presented no legal or factual basis for revocation. If the intent is to redevelop the parcel, the applicant should be required to submit a new SMA permit application and comply with: • A new Environmental Assessment(EA) or Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) • A Cultural Impact Assessment(CIA) • Public notice and hearing • Updatd shoreline management and climate resilience standards For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Planning Commission deny the request to revoke SMA Permit No. 437. Mahalo, Cindy Freitas