02-24-2015, 06:13 AM
My point on the HB374 was to bring up the fact that the DOT feasibility study will cost TAX MONEY, and most likely will generate an EA that will cost TAX MONEY, and will probably look to CZM issues that will cost TAX MONEY...
All of this attached to something that the DLNR has already found will have cultural impacts (the old-ancient fishpond issue) that will most likely stall, stop or cause HUGE cost overruns if anything is planned for the bay, something that I would hope Joy Buenaventura would be very well aware PRIOR to proposing HB374...
SO, either the Puna rep was NOT aware of the DLNR work on this Bay & the implications, or she was, and went ahead.
Either case, it is our TAX MONEY that is being proposed to be thrown at something that most of us could easily see, given the DLNR paper, probably would be a huge, long, costly process.... for the out come of a harbor bay that would have limited use - look at Kapoho vs Poihiki bays for size (remember 4+ acres of Kapoho bay was a fishpond...so probably not on any table for a harbor) current, draft, access...
I really wonder why the study is not how to make Poihiki a more useable harbor maybe look at separating the recreation uses, swimmers should have separate & distinct access, make the launch area more useable in common weather patterns... those sorta REASONABLE things!
All of this attached to something that the DLNR has already found will have cultural impacts (the old-ancient fishpond issue) that will most likely stall, stop or cause HUGE cost overruns if anything is planned for the bay, something that I would hope Joy Buenaventura would be very well aware PRIOR to proposing HB374...
SO, either the Puna rep was NOT aware of the DLNR work on this Bay & the implications, or she was, and went ahead.
Either case, it is our TAX MONEY that is being proposed to be thrown at something that most of us could easily see, given the DLNR paper, probably would be a huge, long, costly process.... for the out come of a harbor bay that would have limited use - look at Kapoho vs Poihiki bays for size (remember 4+ acres of Kapoho bay was a fishpond...so probably not on any table for a harbor) current, draft, access...
I really wonder why the study is not how to make Poihiki a more useable harbor maybe look at separating the recreation uses, swimmers should have separate & distinct access, make the launch area more useable in common weather patterns... those sorta REASONABLE things!