2024-10-29 David & Susan DeCleene Testimony GP 2045

Home

From:David DeCleene To:WPCtestimony Subject:Windward Planning Commission - General Plan - 11/1/24 Date:Tuesday, October 29, 2024 4:02:57 PM WINDWARD PLANNING COMMISSION DENNIS LIN, Chair RE: County of Hawaii General Plan 2045, Final Recommended Draft dated July 2024 Commissioners: I request that the Final Recommended Draft of the General Plan (GP) 2045 be rejected by the Planning Commission for two reasons, both deriving from a failure to provide for true public input. 1) LACK OF A HILO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) CDPs were established for Kona, Puna, N Kohala, S Kohala, in 2008; for Kau 2017; for Hamakua 2018 (35). What happened to Hilo? CDPs are referenced in the GP on 16 pages, establishing their primacy in constructing our GP. The clearly stated purposes are: as a vehicle for the people's vision, as foundational documents of the GP, and as the way to foster priorities of the community through a conversation. Three samples from the GP: "...CDPs are synthesized to form a singular vision statement for Hawaii Island" (35). "The goals of the GP were formulated by incorporating concepts and value statements from the 2005 GP and the various CDPs. These foundational documents..." (35). "The purpose of a CDP is threefold...#3 Provide a process for citizens to engage in civic dialogue and contribute to the identification of community priorities (217). The absolutely crucial nature of each district's CDP renders incomprehensible the lack of one for Hilo. Below are two hosted meetings with the Planning Department and the community where twice the question was asked as to why Hilo has no CDP. At the Arc of Hilo, the Planning Dept member said they were "...so close into this process we didn't feel we needed to start another whole process of doing a CDP for Hilo..." We Hilo residents might ask: What gives employees of the county the power to determine that the 40,000 people of Hilo can have their voices dispensed with? Because the inconvenience foreseen of commencing a CDP for the largest city in the county seems like it would dash their plans for an early 2025 wrap-up? Or because of the inconvenience of 40,000 voices perhaps in disagreement with points in the already-drafted GP? At the Puna presentation, that same Planning Dept member said: "We are meeting with the council members of Hilo in the next couple of weeks and we're going to talk about the next steps for initiating a Hilo CDP." Why would we set in stone a GP now, when a Hilo CDP may be initiated, and could take a couple of years to finalize? Is there a timeframe that dictates a completion date which overrides the voice of Hilo residents? Surely the document which combines the purpose and authority to establish the policy document for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii (28) is only complete when the largest city in its purview is represented in the same way that the other areas, and towns, and cities are represented. Hilo Workshop at Arc of Hilo 8/29/24 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTxYmRTxUjA 1:14:45 (begin referenced part) Puna Workshop 10/3/24 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#search/pahoa/FMfcgzQXJkSJVPzhchSBNDQJGVmVJrxB? compose=CllgCKCDkpKzHgrbBxDgqJtpwKbjgmcwTTLhqXpxjbZTTkvXwJzCcVXcrWFcvxXbdSsQGDKQwjq&projector=1 1:36:00 (begin referenced part) 2) LACK OF LOCAL DISCUSSION AND ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS/CONCEPTS THAT UNDERGIRD THE GP IN FUNDAMENTAL WAYS Much of the GP sits on the substrate of a theory for which there is no scientific consensus: man-made climate change, formerly called global warming. There have never been townhall meetings and discussions on Hawaii Island to determine what the residents think of this theory. Yet a GP has been written that accepts this theory as scientific fact. In the interest of developing a GP that truly echoes the voice of the people of Hawaii Island, isn't the democratic path one that either: 1) neutralizes any theory in the interest of leaving it an open question for the purpose of reaching a common purpose, or 2) has fully discussed this and other theories through a series of open forums for the purpose of deciding a course of action based upon majority opinion. Chapters 3 & 4 are largely devoted to this theory, but riddled throughout the GP are the terms that