HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-5-26 Open Space Commission Minutes Approved COUNTY OF KAUAI
PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, & NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION
FUND COMMISSION
Liliu'e Civic Center, Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213
MINUTES
A regular meeting of the County of Kauai, Public Access, Open Space, & Natural
Resources Preservation Fund Commission of the County of Kaua'i was held on
May 26, 2011, in the Lihu'e Civic Center, Moikeha Building Meeting Room 2A/2B.
The following Commissioners were present: Tessie Kinnaman, Chairperson, Johanna
Ventura, Vice Chairperson, Linda Dela Cruz, Maurice Nakahara, and Jean Souza.
The following Commissioners were absent: Four (4) vacancies.
The following staff members were present: Nani Sadora, Duke Nakamatsu, and Deputy
County Attorney Ian Jung.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Kinnaman called the meeting to order at 1:16 p.m.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Chair Kinnaman requested taking item VIB out of order to accommodate public
testimony on Ka'aka'aniu and Kauapea.
MOTION:
It was moved by Johanna Ventura and seconded by Linda Dela Cruz to approve the
agenda as amended.
All were in favor by unanimous voice vote — motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES — Regular meeting minutes of 2/24/11, 3/10/11,
and 3/24/11 and 4/28/11.
Deputy County Attorney Jung asked if there were any amendments to the minutes.
Commissioner Ventura stated that she submitted corrections at the last meeting before
approval was deferred.
t
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the minutes should be taken up and approved
subject to amendments. Then, the Commission can make amendments in discussion
and take a roll call vote on the motion as amended.
Commissioner Souza stated that there were also amendments that she wanted to make
to the minutes and suggested approving the minutes after receiving public testimony.
Deputy County Attorney Jung suggested moving this item to the end of the agenda.
MOTION:
It was moved by Linda Dela Cruz and seconded by Jean Souza to defer approval the
2/24/11, 3/10/11, 3/24/11, and 4/28/11 meeting minutes.
All were in favor by unanimous voice vote — motion passed.
NEW BUSINESS
Project updates on priority recommendations.
• Kauapea
The Commission received public testimony from Tim and Hope Kallai.
Ms. Kallai stated that Kauapea is 1.5 miles that is separated into 3 beaches, especially
during high waves. She said that there is no safe lateral access during high waves and
each beach needs to be accessed individually. She noted that there has been massive
erosion on the beaches. She stated that there used to be a County access to Paahau
or 3rd beach that was traditionally used for fishing and community hukilaus, but they are
no longer able to locate the access.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if the access was on a map.
Ms. Kallai noted that the access is on the County map. She referenced Resolution 9-
2.9 in the County Code stating that when there are more than six units in a subdivision,
access is required. She noted that there was an access referred to as the Garfinkle
access when Kilauea Gardens was subdivided. She stated that the area is now gated,
locked, and planted out. She noted that there have been a lot of after-the-fact
permitting of roads and trails in Kauapea that are heavily marketed on vacation rental
advertisements as private accesses to secluded beaches. She noted that the 23 acre
makai parcel is for sale and the property owner has spoken with the Hawai'i Land Trust.
She noted that it would be important for the Kilauea community since children are
unable to access the beach without going onto the highway. She stated that there are
158 vacation rentals on ag/open land between 'Aliomanu to "Anini and also vacation
rentals that do not appear on the County's list. She stated that one of the neighbors
informed them that what used to be the access to Kauapea Beach on parcel 171 has
been offered for sale to the contiguous property owners. She stated that one of the
2
owners paid $1 million to utilize the public access to Kauapea Beach. She referenced
that under HRS 115-9, you cannot close off a public access. She stated that the
Administration has been looking into the Kauapea access since Mayor Kusaka's
Administration. She stated that according to the County Resolution, there shall be
access every 300' to not more than 1500'. She stated that the Kilauea community has
been asking what happened to the Kauapea access and how they can get it back.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if they were referring to the Kilauea Neighborhood
Association.
Ms. Kallai stated that the community knows that she and her husband are on the
Kilauea Neighborhood Association and often approach them regarding the easement.
She noted that there have been after-the-fact permitting situations that have raised
concerns on the Kilauea Neighborhood Association so started looking at what
happened to the easement.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if they were testifying in any formal capacity on
behalf of the Kilauea Neighborhood Association.
Ms. Kallai indicated that they were not testifying in a formal capacity.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if the Kilauea Neighborhood Association has taken
any formal action other than having a discussion.
Mr. Kallai stated that he sits on the Board for the Kilauea Neighborhood Association and
they have formed a committee for access in which they are participants. He stated that
the formal action was to look into the matter. He said they were at the forefront of
Lepeuli and the parallels between the two accesses being lost were similar, because
the individual that has gotten the lease or maintenance privileges to the properties is
Paradise Ranch LLC, so they felt they needed to look deeply into the process. He said
that most of the populous of Kilauea is questioning what happened to the easement, so
he stated that the Board, through a larger scope, is asking on behalf of the community
members.
Commissioner Ventura questioned whether the Kilauea Neighborhood Association
formed the committee to work on Kauapea Beach access or accesses in general.
Mr. Kallai stated that the committee was formed to work on access in general but
currently this is the closest to the community of Kilauea, so it is a priority.
Commissioner Ventura requested an electronic version of the presentation.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that in his preliminary investigation, the original tax
map with the old land grant award before the subdivision didn't show the trail easement
that is now indicated on the tax maps. He stated that the original developer of the
Kilauea Gardens subdivision was willing to give the County access and it was put on
3
the maps, but they are unable to locate any recorded and executed documents that
denotes exactly where the easement is located. He stated that he is still reviewing
documents from the County Attorney's office and the office of the former attorney of the
original subdivider to see if there was anything executed and recorded. He stated that
although there are some deeds that state that there is a trail easement, it doesn't
specify the holder or who maintains it. He expressed appreciation for the presentation.
He stated that there were some consolidation, re-subdivision, and SMA minor permits
where the County attempted to gain access but the lawyers fought to retain the access.
He said there was an agreement for lateral access on those documents, but going back
to the original subdivision action, they still need to review the documents to see who is
identified as the holder. He said generally they can only enforce their rights under the
easement if they have an easement document to refer to. However, he stated that
there are no other avenues to establish access where there is no specific grant of
easement document which he is researching.
Commissioner Ventura asked for clarification that when the original subdivision was
approved, it was approved with an easement, but that was never recorded.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that it appears that way, but they still have boxes
of documents to review.
Commissioner Ventura questioned whether lack of recording would affect the legal
standing if it was a condition of subdivision approval but subsequently never recorded.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that they are still trying to make that determination.
Chair Kinnaman questioned whether Ordinance 777 would apply.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that generally Ordinances are not retroactive.
Commissioner Souza stated that this access was brought up since the Commission was
formed in 2004 and a list of unresolved issues has been started since then. She
expressed that she was disturbed that there was only an investigation now.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that on the Western side of Kauapea there is a
County access, but during the winter, the sand sometimes gets swept away and makes
traversing the beach difficult.
Commissioner Souza stated that it has been a concern of the Commission for 6 or 7
years and in their early field trips, they took pictures of where they thought the access
was. She stated that he may want to look at those photos. She recommended action to
move it forward and not just discuss it. She stated that former Commissioner Blaich
knew the most information about that access, and she suggested speaking with her.
4
Ms. Kallai stated that it came up because of the after-the-fact permitting and because of
the proposed commercial development for Kilauea town and the bypass. They noticed
that kids need to walk on the highway to access the beach.
The Commission received public testimony from Richard Spacer.
Mr. Spacer stated that he was in agreement with the Kallais' testimony. He stated that
he rides the Kaua'i Bus to the Shell station and walks. He stated that he complained
about the vegetation that grows over the highway as you walk toward the beach. He
said that legal easements in that area should be a high priority of the Open Space
Commission. He noted that a large number of the community often refer to 3rd beach as
4t" beach. He stated that 1 St beach which has 1 or 2 shower spouts is often referred to
as 2nd beach as opposed to where the County easement comes out. He stated that if
people refer to the Garfinkel access at 4t" beach, they are referring to the part of
Kauapea Beach closest to the lighthouse.
Commissioner Nakahara questioned whether the law of 1892 regarding public legal
access every 300 feet overrides any other law.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that Resolutions are non binding so it is difficult to
have the full effect of law, but he would look into it.
Ms. Kallai stated that the Neighborhood Association asked for the trails that have been
cut without permits to be removed. She stated that there were stairs that went down to
the beach, but it was her belief that until you identify the era of construction of each of
the trails, you can't ask for removal. She said if they are historic or ancient trails then
they shouldn't be removed. She said one of the owners claims that the stairs are used
by first responders. She stated that when the trails were cut without permits in 2007,
the contiguous property owners paid the maintenance, liability, and security to be able
to use the trail. She stated that it all needs to be looked at as one whole planning
element instead of individually.
Mr. Spacer noted that there is no such thing as a security guard on a public beach. He
stated that according to the contract, the person is a maintenance man and noted that
any security or vigilante activities that this person has done is not authorized.
Ka'aka'aniu
Ms. Kallai stated that Ka'aka'aniu is the reef fronting the Ka'aka'aniu ahupuaa, Lepeuli
ahupuaa, and Waipake. She stated that Lepeuli is the property owned by Waioli
Corporation. She said that when the SMA was presented to the County in 2009, the
County engineer suggested that the map be stamped by a surveyor and noted that you
cannot fence off a public right-of-way. She said the Council did a site visit in 2009 and
found the right-of-way fenced off and had to go around the fence. She stated that the
map was only stamped in February 2011 and was submitted with a whole new
5
interpretation of where the fence would be. She stated that there is a year gap between
the SMA permit submission and final approval. She said there was never a public
hearing and the public has not been given a chance to discuss the impact of the trails.
She referenced a State law stating that if there is any development within 50 feet of a
conservation district boundary, the State must determine where the Conservation
district ends. She stated that the existing fence line still goes across the 10' wide
County right-of-way. She said they are asking why the County is accepting the map
with the County right-of-way blocked.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the fence has since been removed. He noted
that there are two accesses. He stated that what people refer to as the right-of-way is
actually an existing lot of record. He stated that based on the community's concern for
an easier access down to Lepeuli Beach, Waioli was willing to give up the access that
people were using.
Ms. Kallai noted that most of the community doesn't feel that the newly acquired
easement is easier. She stated that it is twice as steep as the other trail. She stated
that it has never been maintained and is not ADA accessible. She stated that it was
created by cattle crashing through the fence and they dislodged three iwi kupuna from
the trail. She stated that the iwi have been re-entered into an area mauka that cattle are
going to go on. She stated that the easement is a graveyard, referred to as the dead
bones trail, and it has never been surveyed for archeological evidence since. She also
noted that the alaloa has just been fenced off last weekend. She stated that it is an
ancient trail that needs a legal decision before it goes any further.
Commissioner Ventura requested a map with a scale. She questioned the width
between the gentle sloping trail and the fence.
Ms. Kallai stated that the fence is only for public access control of the alaloa and has no
livestock. She stated that the alaloa is in coastal Moloa'a and coastal Waipake, but she
said that Paradise Ranch and their attorneys have alleged that the alaloa is on Koolau
Road, a mile and a half mauka. She clarified that she was not saying that she was
right, she just thinks that that alaloa is a lateral coastal trail that stays on the coast. She
stated that they have never had a chance to discuss it, the community has been left out
of the decisions, and they are just asking to be heard. She cited the partition action in
1932 when crown became territory and precipitous pali pieces on the coast were
retained for access. She stated that in the 1860s, after the kuleana act, the Weidemann
Reservation ended up with 100 different owners on 500 acres of lands. She said for 6
years they worked on straightening out the hui lands in Moloa'a called the Moloa'a
partition action from 1926-1932 when the fisherman trails were retained. She said they
were trying to make the land private, but the trail would stay public. She said there are
fragments of the trails that surface in 'Aliomanu, Papa'a, and Moloa'a and that is how
they got the Na Ala Hele piece. She said the trails were reserved for shoreline access,
but the Moloa'a Partition action only dealt with the Moloa'a hui lands. She stated that
for Paradise Ranch to allege that the alaloa in lepeuli was put to bed by the Moloa'a hui
6
action doesn't make sense. She said connecting the paths is important when
considering future lateral trails.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if Ms. Kallai could locate the documents
characterizing the areas that were retained for access.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the issue is whether DLNR through the Na Ala
Hele program can assert its rights to the alaloa. He said there is a delicate balance
between private property rights and the public's right to traverse on the trails, but in
order to qualify under the State Highway's Act the Na Ala Hele program would have to
stake a claim. He noted that if the State were to allege a right to this property, they
would have to petition the Land Court and go through a hearing.
Ms. Kallai stated that it was her understanding that only a Court could make or break a
trail location, not an abstractor working alone in the Na Ala Hele office. She stated that
the abstractor was not familiar with the property like the community is. She said that we
are losing trails on mistakes and misunderstandings.
Deputy County Attorney Jung noted that just as the Open Space Commission serves as
a repository for information, every agency has to rely on representations of other
agencies.
Ms. Kallai stated that the ancient Hawaiian trail is fenced off and the fence is in a
conservation district. She said as soon as the Land Use Commission establishes their
boundary it would be a $1500 a day fine. She said it was just fenced off this weekend.
Deputy County Attorney Jung clarified that there are two existing accesses down to the
beach and that there is a reef protecting the sand bank where people can rightfully walk
on the beach.
Ms. Kallai noted that you are not able to walk the beach when it is taped off due to monk
seals. She said that the State needs to determine where the ag district starts and
where the conservation resource protection lands end, not someone whose interest is in
fencing off the trail.
Commissioner Ventura thanked the Kallais for agreeing to send their presentation via
electronic file and she questioned if the documents are referenced or sourced.
Ms. Kallai stated that she has a bibliography of all the documents.
Mr. Kallai stated that the people of the Kilauea community attempted to reacknowledge
the Na Ala Hele Chapter on Kaua'i and he questioned if the Commission would be able
to follow up on the status.
7
Commissioner Ventura stated that she did not know what the status of Na Ala Hele was
but she stated that better understanding of the Na Ala Hele on Kaua'i is identified on the
list of potential future Commission education sessions.
Ms. Kallai stated that the Na Ala Hele application process was only for one week and
many people didn't see it. She noted that there were nine positions that were available
for Kaua'i that would be announced at the May meeting. She stated that it has been
about a decade since they last met.
Mr. Spacer requested that the suggestion to follow up on the status of Na Ala Hele be
pursued more aggressively. He stated that there was a brief period of application and
he applied but has not yet been notified of the status. He stated that the decision
makers according to the DLNR are Galen Kawakami and Daniel Kawika Smith of DLNR
in L[hu'e.
Commissioner Souza stated that the Commission is not trying to influence another
program. She suggested waiting until the members are selected and develop a
program or agenda before interacting. She did not want to use the Commission to force
the issue.
Mr. Spacer stated that he was not suggesting forcing the issue. He said that anyone
could ask the question. He stated that they are not aware if there are nine people
interested on Kaua'i or if a committee has even been formed.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if Mr. Spacer had inquired to the Lihu'e office as to
the status of his application and whether a decision making timeline was available.
Mr. Spacer said that he assumed that the decision was going to be made from the top
and did not expect that it was going to be made in Lihu'e. He noted that in the past he
submitted questions including the Lepeuli and did not received a reply.
Regarding the Lepeuli, Mr. Spacer stated that it was correctly noted that there are two
other trails that the public has legal access to but he said that lot 4 is in shambles and
has not been maintained. He stated that it appears that some community members
may have cleared part of the path from the part of lot 4 that connects with the easement
trail that they believe is the alaloa overlooking Ka'aka'aniu. He referenced a State Law
that states that what the government owns, it has to maintain. He stated that an
adjacent property owner has stated that the County has not done their job in
maintaining the right-of-way and it should be properly maintained so that people can go
down that trail with a minimal amount of difficulty. He stated that the August 2010 trail
from Waioli is the steepest of the trails in the area, but their interest is to secure the
lateral trail that has been blocked off from Saturday. He stated that they are asking the
Commission to look into the legal avenues to reverse the situation. He stated that if the
Land Use Commission determines that the fence posts and the makai fencing are in the
conservation district, then the Open Space Commission and others who are interested
have the opportunity to have this trail as a public access because the permit holder of
8
the SMA does not have permission to do work in the conservation district. He noted
that authority ceased in January at the BLNR meeting in Honolulu. He said if the law is
to be followed, that would mean that the portion of the fence would have to come out
from a point 300' mauka of the shoreline including the two fence posts. He stated that
another issue the Commission could use is that condition 6 of the SMA permit doesn't
allow that trail to be fenced off. He said those are two windows of opportunity that the
Commission could use to keep this trail open.
The Commission received testimony from Peter Waldau.
Mr. Waldau stated that when Paradise Ranch applied for the County SMA permit for
fencing, they indicated that the proposed development would not affect an existing
public access to or along the shoreline. He noted that condition 6 states that the
location of the fence would be approved by the DLNR and Na Ala Hele to ensure public
access to and along the lateral coastal trail. He stated that although there is the
mauka/makai access, there is also the issue of a coastal trail or alaloa. He stated that
although the DLNR is a successor to the Commission of public lands, Na Ala Hele is
under DLNR and that parks could come forth and claim the trail. He also noted that the
State never said that they couldn't claim ownership.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if the Deputy County Attorney could offer any insight
to the testimony.
Deputy County Attorney Jung noted that Na Ala Hele is authorized with jurisdiction over
the trail system through the Division of Forestry and Wildlife under DLNR. He said
whether or not their attorneys want to go after and pursue a title claim to the proported
alaloa is up to the State jurisdiction. He said whether or not they have true jurisdiction
of the trails through the Highways Act, is for the State to decide.
The Commission received testimony from Ray Miller of Hanap6p6.
Mr. Miller stated that he has been on the island for 40 years. He stated that his family
camped Kauapea and noted that there were 3 accesses that were used to get down to
the beach. He said before the cul-de-sac there was a dirt road that went down to the
bluff. He noted that they would park at the top of the bluff and walk down to the beach
on what was referred to as ball bearing hill because the ironwood trees would drop their
pinecones which would act as ball bearings. He stated that the other trail provided
access to the last beach toward the lighthouse. He said that they would walk along a
family garden that went to the bluff, and then they walked down an easy trail to the bluff.
He noted that the trail is still used from the bluff but the public has no access to the trail
head because it has been secured.
Chair Kinnaman stated that both Ka'aka'aniu and Kauapea appears to have a lot of
legal and enforcement issues. She stated that the Commission will try its best to put
forward the questions that have been presented regarding the Na Ala Hele program on
Kaua'i.
9
Commissioner Ventura questioned the process for correspondence that is sent to staff
but addressed to the Commission.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the Chair would have the authority to place it
on the agenda for the next meeting.
Commissioner Souza asked for clarification that if members of the public address a
communication to the Commission it may not be received in on a timely basis because
the Chair would have to first place it on the agenda.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the Commission normally elects a chair who
has the final say on the agenda and she would technically make the final call which
communications are placed on the agenda.
Commissioner Ventura asked for clarification that the Commission could request taking
up the subject of establishing a policy regarding communications on a future agenda.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the Commission could take action to receive
the documents that was presented for testimony so that it is a part of the record.
Commissioner Souza stated that the records should include a printout of whatever
slides are presented.
Commissioner Ventura questioned how documents are officially received at Planning
Commission meetings.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that there would be a motion to accept the
documents for the record. He recommended a standing item on future agendas for
receiving items for the record.
Commissioner Souza requested that motion be made at the end of the meeting.
MOTION:
It was moved by Jean Souza and seconded by Maurice Nakahara to defer receipt of
items for the record until the end of the meeting.
All were in favor by unanimous voice vote — motion passed.
Commissioner Ventura questioned whether it would be appropriate to go into executive
session regarding the information presented in the testimony.
Deputy County Attorney Jung recommended posting a specific executive session item
on this issue on the next agenda since sunshine law requires specific executive session
language. He stated that there can be spontaneous executive sessions, but they have
to have a valid purpose for being spontaneous. He also noted that he would need to
10
evaluate the role of the Commission and the basis of looking into a condition of an SMA
permit.
Commissioner Souza stated that the Commission would also like their role clarified.
She stated that in a previous report, they supported the County's efforts to establish
public access in the area and deliberately did not take a position on which of the three
accesses they preferred because they felt there were others who knew more and are
keeping track. She expressed concern regarding the closure or fencing off of public
access since there is a time limit on when the public can legally counteract closures.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that because the State has not asserted a claim to
the trail, it is private property and they are entitled to block off what the public is
purporting to be an access. He said that the State is claiming that it is not a part of the
Na Ala Hele trail system. He said if the State wants to challenge the deeds and assert
its claim to the alaloa, they are entitled to, but he noted that it is complicated and
beyond the Constitution for the County to get involved in a State function.
Commissioner Ventura stated that members of the public have reported that the project
is not in compliance with SMA requirements. She stated that she understands about
the status of the alleged alaloa, but the question is the legality regarding the
requirements of the County documents. She requested a future executive session for
the Commission to receive more legal opinion with regard to that situation.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that he will need to research if it is proper to go into
executive session with the Commission on interpreting the conditions.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Ms. Sadora announced that she received communication from the Mayor's office
requesting that the Chair and one other commissioner meet on Wednesday, June 8
from 3:OOpm to 3:30pm to discuss the Commission's 2010 report to the Kaua'i County
Council and the Mayor. She stated that she confirmed the date and time but needed to
confirm who would be in attendance.
Commissioner Souza stated that she would not be available. She questioned if the
meeting could also include the proposed changes to Ordinance 812.
Ms. Sadora stated that they are targeting that meeting for presentation of the proposed
changes to the Ordinance as well.
She also announced that the Anti-drug coordinator asked if the Commission would be
willing to reschedule their meeting of September 22 to accommodate the annual health
fair.
Commissioner Souza noted that September 22 is during the HCPO conference.
11
The Commission agreed to cancel the meeting for that week.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Status of filling of vacant Commissioner positions.
Ms. Sadora stated that there were no official updates but noted that the Council may
have an interested applicant.
Commissioner Ventura questioned if staff was able to verify with the Boards &
Commissions office if they were able to put out a press release.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that Mr. Isobe was working with the Council and
wanted to see what they would be able to come up with before considering a press
release.
Commissioner Ventura requested a follow up on the possibility of a press release.
Update and discussion of the Commission's work plan/timeline of events and
activities through 2011, to include future Commission education topics and scope
and timing of facilitated review of the Commission's vision, goals, direction,
priorities, processes, and proposals.
Commissioner Ventura expressed concern regarding the Commission's ability to meet
since they are four vacancies. She stated that she and Commissioner Souza will be
unable to attend the June 23rd meeting and she could see how having only once a
month meetings will affect the Commission's ability to be productive and efficient. She
suggested outlining a schedule for the public input process and starting a task list so
that pending items don't fall off the map, specifically progress on the proposed
amendments to Ordinance 812 and the Commission's review of the unresolved issues
report.
Update and discussion on Commission participation at the upcoming Hawai'i
Congress of Planning Officials (HCPO) 2011 conference in September on Kaua'i
and creation and appointment of task group.
Commissioner Souza questioned if all commissioners would be able to attend or if there
was a limit.
Commissioner Ventura questioned the room rates since she would be driving in from
Ha'ena. She asked if accommodations would be considered if she was willing to forgo
mileage reimbursement.
12
Ms. Sadora stated that she would need to check with the Planning Director on the
possibility of accommodations and if it would be allotted within the budget. She asked if
all commissioners were interested in attending. She stated that the mobile workshops
would be on Wednesday and attendees would choose between the North Shore and
South Shore workshops. She stated that Commissioner Ventura was interested in
participating in the North Shore workshop and that the staff assigned to that workshop
would be Les Milnes and Lisa Ellen Smith. She stated that because there is a lot of
travel time, it would include narration as they drive through the areas. She stated that
the organizers were asking if the Open Space Commission would also be interested in
participating in the break out sessions on either Thursday or Friday.
Commissioner Ventura felt it was a great idea to participate in the break out sessions.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the break out sessions include groups of
people with different views and a moderator that poses questions. Then they debate
and discuss the issues.
Commissioner Ventura stated that a panel discussion on access or related issues would
be a great.
Ms. Sadora stated that the North Shore mobile workshop will begin with the Llhu'e town
core and the bike path to include Kapa'a town. She said the Lihu'e town core would be
a walking tour as well as Kapa'a and the bike path. The rest would be speaking points
on how the path would connect through Hanalei. She stated that Commissioner
Ventura has been in contact with Waipaa and that Kamehameha School would be a
part of the healthy living with Waipaa. She said Dan Burden and his wife would be part
of the speaking tour and that his wife's specialty is food sustainability.
Commissioner Souza stated that the sanctuary border is on the North Shore. She
suggested including makai issues as part of the tour.
Commissioner Ventura felt that having speakers talking on the bus was a good idea.
She suggested including the makai watch program and the Hanalei sustainability
management.
Commissioner Souza stated that she would investigate the programs on the North
Shore and potential speakers.
Ms. Sadora stated that for the South Shore mobile workshop they are looking at going
through Kukui'ula relating to the Master Plan development from the shopping center, on
to the bypass as part of the subdivision for development, through Kaua'i Coffee, to
Hanapepe Salt Pans. Then, on the way back, through the National Tropical Botanical
Gardens, to Hapa Trail, Mahaulepu, and ending at Kaneiolouma. She stated that they
would be able to cover more area because everything is in closer proximity. She
13
suggested that the Commission form an investigative team so they could continue to
discuss the organizing and report back to the Commission at the next meeting.
Chair Kinnaman appointed Commissioners Souza, Ventura, Nakahara and Dela Cruz to
the investigative team.
Commissioner Ventura suggested that staff check with the attorney whether the fact
that the Commission has 5 active members impacts the number of people that can be
on the investigative team. She stated that when the Commission had 8 members
seated there was a determination that 4 members could be on the team.
Review and discussion on proposed amendments to Ordinance 812
Ms. Sadora questioned if the Commission would like to try to arrange for the meeting
with the Mayor to be during the week following the next Commission meeting.
Commissioner Ventura stated that she would not be available after June 9t"
Commissioner Souza questioned if the Commission took action on changing the
Commission's report to the Council and the Mayor from annual to biennial.
Ms. Sadora stated that the Commission took action to change anything that referenced
annual to biennial, but she was awaiting the Director's response to the last section.
Commissioner Ventura stated that it would make sense to reschedule the meeting with
the Mayor for the following week in order to have further discussion.
Commissioner Souza stated that she would only be available to meet on June 15t"
Ms. Sadora stated that she will target the 15t"
APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES — Regular meeting minutes of 2/24/11, 3/10/11,
3/24/11, and 3/28/11
The minutes of 2/24/11, 3/10/11, 3/24/11, and 3/28/11 were deferred.
NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION
Chair Kinnaman stated that the agenda items will be the same for the next meeting with
the addition of a standing item for receipt of items for the record.
Commissioner Souza requested an agenda item regarding the Commission's
administrative rules and communications policy. She stated that she was surprised that
14
any communications isn't automatically forwarded to the Commission, but would have to
be decided by the Chair.
Commissioner Ventura noted that hasn't been the practice, but rather the default. She
agreed that it would be good to have a discussion.
Commissioner Souza also requested that the unresolved issues be placed on the
agenda.
MOTION:
It was moved by Jean Souza and seconded by Johanna Ventura to receive all the
testimony and documents that were offered for the record.
All were in favor by unanimous voice vote — motion passed.
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION:
It was moved by Jean Souza and seconded by to Johanna Ventura to adjourn the
meeting.
All were in favor by unanimous voice vote — motion passed.
Respectfully submitted by:
.a
Duke Nakamatsu, Support Clerk
15