Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-05-07 Status Update Transcript - Admin Matters Puna Pono Alliance GAF Claim WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I STATUS UPDATE TRANSCRIPT (ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS) MAY 7, 2015 At 9:55 a.m., under the Administrative Matters portion of the meeting, the Windward Planning Commission was provided with an update by the Planning Department concerning the status of efforts regarding the claim against the Geothermal Asset Fund by Puna Pono Alliance, et al. in the County of Hawai‘i Aupuni Center Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i with Chairman Myles Miyasato presiding. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Myles Miyasato, Donn Dela Cruz, Gregory Henkel, and Donald Ikeda. ABSENT & EXCUSED: Charles Heaukulani and Raylene Moses. ALSO PRESENT: Duane Kanuha (Planning Director), Danny Patel (Deputy Corporation Counsel for the Windward Planning Commission), Jeff Darrow (Staff Planner), Maija Jackson (Staff Planner), Christian Kay (Staff Planner), and Sarah Hata-Finley (Commission Secretary). And approximately 4 people from the public in attendance. Administrative Matters No. 2: Status of efforts to (1) restructure Claim against the Geothermal Asset Fund by Puna Pono Alliance, Pele Defense Fund, Sierra Club-Moku Loa Group, Ohana Ho‛opakele, Malu Aina, et. al, for funding to conduct a Psycho-social Impact and Community Wellbeing Study and to establish a Native Hawaiian Health Study Review Board and (2) structure request for proposals, as directed by the Windward Planning Commission at its March 5, 2015 meeting. MIYASATO: Okay, under Administrative Matters, we have the status of efforts to restructure claim against the Geothermal Asset Fund. DARROW: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Planning Department would like to provide a brief update on the status of efforts to (1) restructure the claim against the Geothermal Asset Fund by Puna Pono Alliance, Pele Defense Fund, Sierra Club – Moku Loa Group, Ohana Ho‛opakele, Malu Aina, et al., for funding to conduct a Psycho-Social Impact and Community Well Being Study and to establish a Native Hawaiian Health Study Review Board and (2) restructure, structure request for proposals. A brief history on this matter. January 8, 2015, the Planning Commission voted to reject the claims adjuster’s recommendation and awarded $293,760 from the Geothermal Asset Fund to conduct a Psycho-Social Impact and Community Well Being Study and approved the establishment of a Native Hawaiian Health Study Review Board. The Commission also directed 1 EXHIBIT C the Planning Department to investigate the process of establishing the Native Hawaiian Health Study Review Board that will provide advice in the conduct of the study and keep the Windward Planning Commission informed as to the progress of the study. The members comprising the Native Hawaiian Health Study Review Board will be of Native Hawaiian ethnicity, if possible. The Commission further directed the Planning Department to report to the Commission with an outline regarding the establishment of this review board, and the process in which they advise the Commission. February 5, 2015, Commissioner Ikeda made a motion to reconsider the Commission’s th January 8, 2015 decision. Since this matter was not on the agenda, Chairperson Miyasato directed the Planning Department to place the motion for reconsideration on the Commission’s March agenda. March 5, 2015, the motion for reconsideration was approved, and the matter was remanded to the Planning Department with the request that the Planning Department and claimants work together to restructure the application and to structure a request for a proposal, RFP. April 22, 2015, Planning Manager, Daryn Arai, and Tom Travis met to discuss the status of restructuring the claim. The discussion did not go into elaborate details on how to best address the deficiencies of the original claims. Mr. Travis requested a comparison of their claim with the Geothermal Public Health Study being administered by the Office of the Mayor for which an award of $750,000 from the Geothermal Asset Fund was approved by the Windward Planning Commission at its meeting of September 4, 2014. That comparison could highlight approaches that could guide the restructuring of the current claim. Mr. Travis also committed individuals who will assist him with the preparation of revisions to the original claim once the Planning Department provides a framework that would help restructure the claim. He requested advanced notice of such guidance to allow his team enough time to make the necessary revisions. The Planning Department will continue to identify deficiencies of the current claim and provide Mr. Travis a framework so that the claim can be restructured in a manner that satisfies the purpose and eligibility requirements of the Geothermal Asset Fund. th Additionally, we have received two pieces of correspondence. One is dated May 4, 2015 from the Law Offices of Thomas E. Luebben, P.C., and this has been handed out to the Planning Commission, as well as a letter this, received this morning from Thomas Lee Travis dated May 6, 2015. With that, that concludes our update on this matter. MIYASATO: Commissioners, any questions on this update from staff? If not, I have a testifier. Could you please come forward, Geoff Shaw? Could you please raise your right hand? SHAW: Okay. 2 EXHIBIT C MIYASATO: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai‛i County Planning Commission? SHAW: Yes. MIYASATO: Okay, could you please state your name and residence, and you have three minutes. SHAW: Geoff Shaw, and my residence is Orchidland. So, anyhow, I just wanted to say that I had a discussion with a friend of mine. He’s an artist, and I was discussing his painting that depicted, you know, hula dancing. One painting was depicted hula dancing at the Merry Monarch Festival, and the other was, was a—a image of the telescopes with sea urchins and stuff. And, you know, in the process of discussing this painting with somebody who has lived here for 30 years, and seems to you know have a pretty, who I thought would have a pretty good understanding of the culture, when we started talking about the situation up there on Mauna Kea, you know, he started bringing up stuff like how many of those kids actually have alters and do ceremonies and stuff up there, you know. And, I was like that, that doesn’t really mean anything. I mean, they, they’ve grown up their whole lives seeing those telescopes up there and you know, the older practitioners, they can probably remember when Mauna Kea was, was a, you know, just a, just a vacant property with no road up there or anything, and you had to hike up there. You know, and it had a whole different concept then, but now, you know, it, it’s been, you know, it’s been transformed into something different, and you know, I don’t blame the kids for, for wanting to recapture, you know, the, the a---the presence that was there before. And, you know, I guess to a certain extent, you can never get that back, but you can’t blame them for, for trying. And, you know, I would have thought that this person that I was having this discussion with would already understand that, but obviously that’s not the case. And, you know, I can’t speak for Hawaiians, but it seems like a lot of Hawaiians have kind of forgotten, you know, so I just, I’m trying to reiterate that this is a study that needs to be made if for no other reason than to be, begin the, the discussion, and you know, put a, put a, you know, to, to, to give it some, some credibility. So, anyhow, that’s all I have to say. MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? If not, thank you. We have Robert Petricci and Palikapu Dedman. You both can come up at one time. Could you please both raise your right hands? Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth on this matter now before the Hawai‛i County Planning Commission? PETRICCI/DEDMAN: (nodded affirmatively) MIYASATO: Please state your name and residence, and you have three minutes. PETRICCI: I’m going to follow Pali if you don’t mind. MIYASATO: Okay, go ahead. 3 EXHIBIT C DEDMAN: Sorry, I neva put shirt. I stay at work. I just ran down to be here at 9 o’clock. I just wanted to confirm the letter to be part of the record that you got from Mr. Luebben— MIYASATO: Excuse me, could you please state your name and residence? DEDMAN: Palikapu Dedman, Pele Defense Fund President. MIYASATO: Thank you. DEDMAN: So, I just wanted that to be part of the record that you received from Tom Luebben. As president, I’m giving that letter confirmation, and my testimony I don’t have to read the letter. You guys can read, but that’s our concern. And, I think that you have more of an internal problem then you have with the decision. You’re not going against the decision. It’s just more or less how the process going, but it may be to me, some kind of a delay thing. I don’t know if 2015, we became a problem in how you process stuff, but it sure is not like the first time, so, I’m wondering why the delay and how come so much pilikia on something that you folks approved long time already. That’s my only concern here, but we need to do the study. Thank you. MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, any questions? Thank you. PETRICCI: My name’s Robert Petricci. I’m representing the Puna Pono Alliance. Aloha Commissioners. There would be other people here from Sierra Club, etc., but they’re in court in Waimea because they’re part of the Mauna Kea issue. In fact, Charlie Heaukulani is representing one of them up in Waimea today. That’s why he’s not here I believe. So, in January, this Commission approved $293,000 for the health study, and asked the Planning Department to work with the community to, to get that done. Commissioner Ikeda asked for reconsideration at that time, and he didn’t get a second. Rule 12 says that, that that’s it. Here’s, Rule 12 provides that a decision should not be reconsidered more than once, and the effect of not seconding the motion was to make the matter final under the Commission is our position. That’s what this letter from the lawyer’s about. So, we think that this is actually a, that the Planning Department hasn’t been acting in good faith, because we’ve tried to work with them. Tom Luebben, I mean Tom Travis tried to work with them repeatedly, and you can see in his letter, he’ll tell you himself. He thinks it’s roadblocked. We, I suggest you go right to the top. There’s examples in Tom Luebben’s letters. There’s like five examples of, of things that have been funded exactly in this manner, but it, it seems that if it’s politically favor or special interest wants it, they can get done. When the community or when the Native Hawaiians need it, it can’t get done. And that’s political. And you know, how long are we gonna, have we been putting up with that? How long are we gonna keep that up? If you, you guys voted to fund the study, the Planning Department’s stopping that from happening in our opinion. I would like to see you go to the top. If this is an administrative, political 4 EXHIBIT C decision, there’s one guy in the County that can, can undo that log jam, and so maybe you should go talk to him why we can’t just get it done. I mean, they told us we could get Edelstein as a special vendor, and then they send us directions on how to do that, and when he tried to do it, he couldn’t. He couldn’t get it on. It wouldn’t work. And when he tried to find out what he could do, there’s no response from the County. That kind of stuff. Is that really how we’re gonna function because I mean, if it is just, I mean, you’re gonna—are we gonna go to court? Is that what, how it’s gonna be? This, you gonna fund the study, the health study for the people, but for Native Hawaiians, you’re gonna give them a hard time. So, I hope you guys will fix this. We really think that you voted to do it. You had your chance to reconsider. The second reconsideration, all this stuff you guys are talking about, we think is illegal. Thank you. MIYASATO: Commissioners, any questions? If not, thank you. This item ended at 10:09 a.m. MIYASATO: Staff, any announcements? DARROW: No announcements at this time, Mr. Chairman. MIYASATO: Thank you. Commissioners, can I have a motion to adjourn? HENKEL: Wait a minute, can we discuss the administrative item 2? MIYASATO: Yes, sure you can discuss it. It’s just, it’s not in our court right now, so it’s not a dec—it’s a update of what the Planning Department is, that’s on the agenda is the update, so if we stay kind of in those lines, then we’re not violating. HENKEL: Okay, all right. MIYASATO: Go ahead. HENKEL: No, I’m good. 5 EXHIBIT C MIYASATO: Yeah, it’s not an agenda item for further action, yeah. Okay, if not, I’ll take a motion to adjourn. Respectfully submitted, Sarah Y. Hata-Finley, Secretary Windward Planning Commission 6 EXHIBIT C