Posts: 145
Threads: 13
Joined: Oct 2006
Aloha Council Member Naeole...
Hopefully you or a member of your staff read's these posts.
The PCDP has been on-going for more than 2 years.
Why then, did you propose 20, yes, 20, amendments to the Draft Proposal at the very last minute at the County Council Meeting 7/1/08?
Why did YOU not move adoption of the Draft Plan? Cradle it in your arms as the "new baby" that it is, and keep it safe?
Your fellow Council Members seemed surprised that YOU, Council representative of the 5th County Council District, would NOT support the very document your constituents have been crafting together.
You had a precious moment to demonstrate leadership. Instead, you insulted your fellow council members, particularly Brenda Ford by name, and you brought shame to your district.
You wanted to bi forcate your amendments right there and then. I realized then that you didn't have a clue to the importance of the moment. Instead of moving approval of the PCDP, you dragged it down so that it could be dealt with bit by bit. That's not working for your district, that's helping tear it apart.
You were so insistent that YOU got to do something that your fellow council members have done (whatever that is) that you TOTALLY IGNORED ALOHA and repect for your constituents in the 5th Council District.
We need a Council Member who values all people, not a special interest group known only to you.
With sadness,
Barbara
Many of us, from many different experiences and points of view, live in Puna. We agreed to compromise, we agreed to listed to each other.
We really believed that THIS TIME THE COUNTY REALLY MEANT WHAT IT SAID IN ESTABLISHING THE PROCESS OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
Posts: 8,464
Threads: 1,032
Joined: May 2003
Hi Barbara, People are largely in a reactive state on this. We are gathering information and getting a grip on the situation day by day.
Quite unpleasant to have this jack-in-the-box tactic take place.
Punaweb moderator
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Agreed: this is not a good situation.
We shall overcome.
Ms Naeole, Council lady, must hear the weeping and feel the sorrow.
Whether that does or does not happen, and no matter what does or does not happen, I make this plea to all of my Puna neighbors:
Will it be possible for each of all of us to criticize or exalt, as the case may be and as we each see fit, ideas and then actions, all the while using whatever inner courage we need to muster so that we will not partake in personal attacks nor psychophantic adoration -- please.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
part of my comments from the Planning Committee Meeting are at bottom of this article
http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/articles/...ocal05.txt
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Posts: 6
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2008
It does seem strange that Emily seems to be getting advice from her "new friend" Bill Walter of Shipman and Stacy Higa and not her own constituency. As one who attended the Planning Committee meeting last night it looked like she was trying her best to kill the PCDP and doesn't grasp the issues at stake. It's sad to see our own council person disregarding her constituents testimony so completely and putting two years of community work and input at risk. Some of her amendments may indeed be harmless or useful but the way they were presented without input or review compromised the integrity of the process. Even more disturbing are planning director Chris Yeun's proposed amendments which gut the PCDP and hand Puna to W. H. Shipman on a plate.
Jeff Delaney
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Jeff,
Certainly, so many "amendments ... presented without input or review" was not akamai.
Specifically, to what are your referring when you say, "planning director Chris Yeun's proposed amendments which gut the PCDP and hand Puna to W. H. Shipman on a plate."
As of yet, I have not see the amendments.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Posts: 8,464
Threads: 1,032
Joined: May 2003
Emily Naeole's performance in this is hard to fathom. I have emailed Tiffany asking for two things. The list of Emily's amendments and the names of those with whom she consulted.
The Puna Community Development Plan is a two year effort involving hundreds of Puna residents. If Emily Naeole, who declined to participate in the PCDP effort, is now attempting to rewrite it without consultation with her constituents then we need to know it. No one I know of, and I know many, have been consulted on this. Her sudden raft of amendments is a shock and surprise. The text and content of the amendments are themselves of minor interest at this point.
This is an election year folks. We are about to find out if Emily Naeole really wants to keep her job.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Agreed on these points:
1. make public the amendments and the names of those consulted.
2. rewriting PCDP without constituent consultation has zero acceptability.
3. sudden raft of amendments is a shock and surprise.
4. this is an election year and everybody better be registered and turn out/mail-in the absentee ballots: VOTE, because it does make a difference 
On one point I disagree:
In the business of amendments, once those 'words have been crafted', as we say in the trade, text and content of the amendments remain important. Couriers are dispensable to those who would use them to deliver dirty tricks. As soon as one courier is taken out, another is put in it's place with the same message, i.e, content of the amendments.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Posts: 8,464
Threads: 1,032
Joined: May 2003
I think that the text and content are of minimal importance at this moment.
If there is a PCDP then potential amendments will acquire meaning.
If there is no PCDP then the potential amendments are meaningless.
The number and timing of rafts of amendments are well capable of bringing down the PCDP.
Someone wants us all to break into small groups and argue about various amendments. That is how Puna's issues have been dealt with in the past and the question now is:
Will it work again?
It is time to start putting in some time and effort on the front lines.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 56
Threads: 19
Joined: Aug 2007
These are Emily's proposed amendments, having read through the CDP. The community can decide if they approve or disapprove of the amendments. Feel free to call her and discuss them after reading through them. She can be reached at (808) 961-8267 or via cell at (808) 936-8212. Rob Tucker, I really resent the fact that you yelled at me on the phone this morning when I called to let you know I emailed you the amendments. I am not your council person. I work for your council person and OUR community. I have a deep love for Puna and the island, and my work for the council person comes from that space.
To the bloggers, please consider the council woman's proposed amendments and don't buy any of this nonsense that the council woman is seeking to bag the plan, to discredit it, etc. She is merely offering suggested amendments that can be accepted or rejected.
Aloha,
Tiffany Edwards Hunt
legislative assistant
MEMORANDUM
TO: Angel Pilago, Council Planning Committee Chair
And Council Members
FROM: Emily I. Naeole, Council Member
DATE: July 1, 2008
RE: Proposed Puna Community Development Plan Amendments
Following are my proposed amendments to the Puna Community Development Plan:
A. The relocation of the P#257;hoa and Kea`au Transfer Stations:
Page 3-15, Section 3.4.3: Public Safety and Sanitation Services
Delete Action Item “g” and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Page 5-21, Section 5.3: Implementation Table
Delete Item “(G)” under Section 3.4.3 and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Justification: Locations of existing transfer stations are satisfactory.
B. The proposed County Historic Preservation Commission:
Page 2-4, Section 2.1.3: Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Delete Action Item “a” and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Page 5-18, Section 5.3: Implementation Table
Delete Item “(A)” under Section 2.1.3 and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Justification: Ordinance 08-42 was adopted on April 11, 2008 and establishes a Hawai`i County Cultural Resources Commission that provides for the goals and objectives of this action item.
C. Low-interest loans on a sliding scale for housing repair and renovation:
Page 3-13, Section 3.3.3: Social Services and Housing
Delete Action Item “h” and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Page 5-21, Section 5.3: Implementation Table
Delete Item “(H)” under Section 3.3.3 and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Justification: Rather than low-interest loans, the county should provide tax credits or incentives for this purpose.
D. Wastewater treatment in Puna:
Page 3-15, Section 3.4.3: Public Safety and Sanitation Services
Add Action Item “j” to read:
“j. Support the funding of an Environmental Impact Statement to determine the feasibility of constructing a wastewater treatment facility to service Puna Makai.”
Page 3-15, Section 3.4.3: Public Safety and Sanitation Services
Add Action Item “k” to read:
“k. Provide tax credits to Kapoho residents who convert their existing cesspools into aerobic treatment systems.”
Page 5-21, Section 3.4.3: Implementation Table
Add Action Item “J” to read:
“(J) Prepare an EIS to determine the feasibility of a wastewater treatment facility in Puna Makai.”
Page 5-21, Section 3.4.3: Implementation Table
Add Action Item “(K)” to read:
“(k.) Provide tax credits to Kapoho residents who convert their existing cesspools into aerobic treatment systems.”
Justification: The County must address Puna wastewater issues.
E. Use of the existing P#257;hoa Fire Station:
Page 3-17, Section 3.5.3.c: Parks and Recreation
Second bullet item regarding the P#257;hoa Regional Park currently reads in part:
“P#257;hoa Regional Park: (1) Convert the existing fire station into a senior center with certified kitchen for congregate meals program and activities/dining room.”
Amend Section 3.5.3.c (1) as follows:
“P#257;hoa Regional Park: (1) Convert the existing fire station into a One Stop Community Center providing, but not limited to, a senior center with certified kitchen for congregate meals program and activities/dining room, and linkages, support and advocacy for affordable housing, employment, home bound access, child care, teen pregnancy, substance abuse and domestic violence intervention. ”
Justification: This combines the proposed language of the Puna steering committee and the social services working group for the best use of this centrally located building.
F. County acquisition of agricultural lands:
Page 3-9, Section 3.2.2: Agriculture and Economic Development
Delete Objective Item “c” and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Page 3-11, Section 3.2.3.o: Agriculture and Economic Development
Delete Action Item “o” and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Page 5-20, Section 5.3: Implementation Table
Delete Item “(O)” under Section 3.2.3 and accordingly renumber the remaining action items in this subsection.
Justification: The business of agriculture is best left for the private sector. The County can encourage agricultural use of lands with tax incentives and special projects.
G. Protection of fallow agricultural lands:
Page 3-9, Section 3.2.2: Agriculture and Economic Development
Amend Objective Item “k” as follows:
“Protect quality agricultural lands, especially fallow agricultural lands, through purchase or lease by County, State or community land trust[s], and provide long term leases for community use [or with tax incentives for farmers.”
Justification: The business of agricultural is best left for the private sector. The County can encourage agricultural use of lands with tax incentives and special projects.
H. Establishment of HCC/UH-Hilo satellite campus in Puna:
Page 3-12, Section 3.3.2: Social Services and Housing
Add Objective Item as follows:
“(h) A Hawai`i Community College/UH-Hilo satellite campus is established in Puna.”
Page 3-13, Section 3.3.3: Social Services and Housing
Add Action Item as follows:
“(k) Encourage the State to pursue establishment of a Hawai`i
Community College/UH-Hilo satellite campus in Puna.”
Page 5-21, Implementation Table
Add Action Item “(K)” under Section 3.3.3 as follows:
“(K)” Encourage the State to pursue establishment of a Hawai`i Community College/UH-Hilo satellite campus in Puna.”
Justification: Satellite university and/or community college campuses in the Puna District will make the pursuit of higher education more convenient to rural residents, and lessen commute times for students, faculty and staff.
I. Maku`u as a Community Village Center
Page 3-5, Section 3.1.3.c: Land Use Pattern
The second bullet item to be amended as follows:
“Community Village Centers shall provide a more limited range of services in smaller existing urban settlements and in large subdivisions that are experiencing the greatest rates of build-out; namely at `#256;inaloa, Kurtistown, Maku`u Homesteads, Mountain View, two or more locations in Hawaiian Paradise Park, and at Volcano; and”
Page 3-6
In Figure 3.2: Proposed Town and Village Center Locations, add a red dot, representing a Community Village Center, to the map in the location of the existing Maku`u Farmer’s Market.
Page 5-16
Add the following:
“Maku`u Community Village Center
The Maku`u as a Community Village Center includes the site of the Maku`u Farmer’s Market along with the existing and planned Hawaiian Homestead subdivisions makai of Highway 130.”
Justification: The community is already establishing this area as a village center by holding widely attended weekly farmers markets here. The Maku`u Farmer’s Association has plans for a community and cultural center, and a comprehensive health center similar to the one that exists in Wai#257;nae on O`ahu.
J. Maku`u Farmers Market intersection with Highway 130
Page 4-11
In Figure 4-1: Proposed Transportation Corridor Improvements, denote the Maku`u Farmer’s Market intersection with Highway 130 with a red dot. The market entrance is on the makai side of the highway just south of the dot for `#256;inaloa Boulevard.
Justification: These improvements are necessary for the area to be developed into a Community Village Center.
|
