TMT - Contested Case Hearing Status - Hilo

[Eric1600]

This approval is not a surprise in fact it was very predictable from the beginning.

In the hearing more than one person threatened the board members or made threats of violence in general. They've been on social media with similar claims. All of them pleaded for the board to suspend taking action until the supreme court could rule on their appeals (which don't even exist yet). I found that to be ironic, because there is no grounds upon which I could see the supreme court reversing the decision. The irony is assuming that a supreme court decision would be acceptable to them, many of whom argue that state law is non-existent to start with.

The supreme court ruled in their favor on the sole claim that the permit was issued before all arguments were heard. Simple. Plain. Unbiased. They've had 44+ days in court to be heard now. The judge's findings and the boards findings are all in agreement and they line up with the previous decisions made before the permit was revoked. There's really no reason to reverse the decision. The appeals might find a loop hole but it is unlikely, and it wouldn't be anything that could overturn the decision only delay things more.

Gypsy, this isn't your fight. You shouldn't be taking sides either way. And you should be aware you are not helping their cause.

[Eric1600]

What is interesting is that one of two the BLNR members that voted "I do not concur." was requested to be removed the petitioners. Stan Roehrig laid into UH during the Q & A. on the videos about PUEO's exceptions and the treatment of Priscotta's ahu.

[MarkP]

This approval was a foregone conclusion anywhere outside the Twilight Zone, unless the state was ready to give up the pretense that their agreements and/or permits were worth more than the paper they were printed on. I guess that still remains to be seen.

[rainyjim]

1 million dollars a year in scholarships is kind of cool. It would be interesting to do a comparison of how that money is spent versus scholarships from OHA, KS, etc.

[randomq]

Now to get the self-important okoles to pay for all the time they've wasted. And a million dollars a year from access-road practitioners for scholarships.

[TomK]

"1 million dollars a year in scholarships is kind of cool. It would be interesting to do a comparison of how that money is spent versus scholarships from OHA, KS, etc."

Remember, the TMT has already donated $1 million to the THINK fund this year even though they were not legally required to do so; it was a voluntary contribution. The protesters, if ultimately successful, will be responsible for this funding to end and fewer opportunities for local students to follow their ambitions of careers in STEM-related fields.

In the meantime, there is still a long way to go. Another possible contested case hearing, appeals and then further protests. There's still a very long road ahead - or short if the TMT stick to their decision deadline of Spring next year.

[Aaron S]

The Hawaii Supreme Court accepted the appeal of the TMT's sublease ruling in June. They haven't set a date for oral arguments, but I heard it may be in early 2018.

http://hawaiitribune-herald.com/news/loc...ase-appeal

As far as the appeal of the CDUP, the petitioners have 30 days to file
an appeal of the BLNR's decision.

The BLNR's permit conditions require the University of Hawaii to remove five existing telescopes. Three of them have to be completed in a timely manner, and the other two need to be decommissioned by 2033. CSO and the VLBA are already slated for removal, which means three other telescopes are facing closure.

[TomK]

I will try and find out about the decommissioning of five telescopes. I learned this today in a meeting with the other observatories in Waimea and it came as a complete surprise to me. The meeting continues on Friday so as soon as I get more info I can share, I'll let people here know.

[Eric1600]

UH's Hokukea is the 3rd, in addition to CSO and VLBA.

[kalakoa]

three other telescopes are facing closure

BLNR also says "no new sites after TMT", which suggests that new telescopes could be built on the existing decommissioned sites.

"What the case is about is: Can the state transfer land without any input from the community?"

Community input didn't stop the rail project. Why is this different?