Laserfiche WebLink
PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RULING <br /> Use Permit 15-000056 (TMKs (3)1-5-017:084 & 118) <br /> Windward Planning Commission — March 5, 2026 <br /> Presenter: Brandy Camacho <br /> Today is about the integrity of the Commission's own mandates. <br /> 1. Administrative Exhaustion (Court Ordered This Step) <br /> Third Circuit Court (3CCV-25-0000499) dismissed my case without prejudice on January 23, <br /> 2026 specifically so the Commission could rule first. <br /> • Verizon Opposition (Dkt. 95, pp. 2-3) and County Joinder (Dkt. 75) confirm: Commission <br /> must address permit validity before any return to court. <br /> 2. The Permit Was Void from Day One <br /> Condition 3 was a mandatory condition precedent: perpetual easement had to be recorded <br /> before any building permit issued. <br /> • Applicant admits 251-day failure (Planning Department Background Report, p. 5, point 29 & <br /> Exhibit 29). <br /> • Easement finally recorded January 30, 2026 (T-13178213) — after building permit and after <br /> construction began. <br /> 3. No Vested Rights in Bad Faith <br /> Applicant knew of the breach by December 3, 2025 yet "surged" construction within 100 ft <br /> of my children's bedroom. <br /> • Rights cannot vest when the permit holder violates a core condition (Background Report <br /> timeline). <br /> 4. Procedural Bar— Bill 24 Controls <br /> This Commission no longer has authority to grant Horizon's requested "Contested Case" hearing. <br /> • Bill 24 / Ordinance 25-55 repealed the Use Permit process and imposed 600-ft residential <br /> safety setbacks. <br /> • HRS § 46-89 requires immediate ruling on the void permit. <br /> Public Safety <br /> 150-ft tower+ 120-ft fall radius places my home (and children) inside the collapse zone. The <br /> county now enforces 600-ft setbacks for all new towers. <br /> • <br /> It. Id 80 ru4 b.a <br /> ii' Read.: <br />