Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutdec2 KAUAI COUNTY HISTORIC PRESERVATION REVIEW COMMISSION Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B MINUTES A regular meeting of the Kauai County Historic Preservation Commission (KHPRC) was held on December 2, 2010 in the Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B . The following Commissioners were present: Randy Wichman, Chairperson, Danita Aiu, Vice Chairperson, David Helder, Kuuleialoha Santos, Patsy Sheehan and Molly Summers. The following Commissioner was absent: Dennis Alkire and Alan Faye, Jr. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Wichman called the meeting to order at 3 , 07 p .m. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA The Agenda was approved. RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD All items were received for the record. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES The November 7, 2010 meeting minutes were approved as amended, as follows: Page 1 , Paragraph 2, line 2, delete Molly Summers. Page 1 , Paragraph 3 , line 1 , add Molly Summers. ANNOUNCEMENTS AND GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS There were no Announcements and General Business Matters, KAR: 0 8 2011 December 2, 20I0 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 2 COMMUNICATIONS There were no Communications, UNl~INISHED BUSINESS There was no Unfinished Business NEW BUSINESS Re: Presentation on the Certified Local Government Program by Larry Oaks, National Park Service. Chair: New Business. Today we are very fortunate. We have Larry Oaks. He has kindly agreed to brief this Commission on his duties and objectives and we would like to welcome Larry Oaks. Mr. Larry Oaks : Is it ok if I set up here so I can be among you? Chair: Ok. Mr. Oaks: It feels so formal sitting out there. Thank you so much it' s a pleasure to be here. It's a wonderful place. There are few places that have such a sense of place as Hawaii does and we have the noble undertaking which you have been talking about this morning and I compliment you on the job you have done. Not only this year but for decades in preserving those things that are character defining that make this place that it is. At then end of the day we want to make sure that as preservationist we preserve those things that define us and make us different and that we don't become homogenized into a look like the rest of the Country so you appear to be doing a great job. I look forward to working with you and that's pretty much why I came today is I will be working with you in a number of ways over the next year, year and a half almost two years. I thought we will instead of just you hearing about this phantom person down on Oahu and never seeing him. Just like the historic resources I don't think you can manage them and know them unless you see them and interact with them as preservationist I think it's very helpful for us to know each other well enough so that' s when issues come up and whether they are misunderstandings or basic difference in decisions trying to manage cultural resources that we all work together to come up with a good plan for managing those and saving the things that basically make us, us. So who the heck am I and what am I doing here? I have been in historic preservation for; I am older than dirt, for about forty years. I have worked in Virginia for about ten years in preservation. I actually had a start in a wonderful place, northern Virginia in a small Quaker village that had about eighty houses in it. We lived in the third newest one. It was built in 1894 so a lot of buildings going back before the revolutionary war. But that's where I sort of fell into t December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 3 this as sort of a profession as opposed to just application and just really began to love those things that make up our history in the United States. I am actually originally from Alabama and in 1980. I answered a called to the Alabama Historical Commission which is sort of the equivalent to the State Preservation Office and I was the State Historic Preservation Officer there for eighteen years. Everybody in the State visited every building and structure that was eligible for the National Register. In 1999 I moved from Alabama and became the State Historic Preservation Officer for Texas for twelve years. So I have a background in some interesting places that belong to history. Just a little over a year ago I retired from the Texas Historical Commission and was loving living out in the country and taking care of my garden and yard when the National Parks Service called and said we have got a little task we would like you to take on. Let me assure you if it had been in Minnesota or Washington or Arizona or any other place I would've said I am retired. But when they told be the place that they would like me to work with the State Preservation Office was in Hawaii I thought how perfect to see a whole new culture and people and resources to learn so this is one that I didn't turn down. So what has sort of happened because the National Park Service is basically trying to get some assistance finding of programs to Pua and her staff out at the State Preservation Office and I guess some folks who were looking at that programs simply you have been telling them what to do for a long time but you have not been there and you haven' t been giving them guidance and help. So having them found somebody who has been doing the same job for the last thirty five years decided oh well maybe I could do that because in the past because some folks have come National Parks Service employees will hopefully bring to a wonderful place is the experience of a State and working in the trenches of preservation and with thirty five years you are bound to find some legitimate good short cuts for things, ways of doing things a little bit better because you know sort of the ropes . So I have been here about three months now. I have been getting to know the place and visiting around. I will be here roughly about one and a half to two years. And I spend about a half a day each week in Honolulu downtown in the Kuhio Building doing things there. The other four, four and a half days I am out in Pua' s spot out in Kapolei. It would be nice if they were in town and not as remote. That' s one of the issues we will be talking about. But basically my role is to have really no authority. So when I am here is to be here to work with the staff and with Pua just to figure out given the dynamics that have taken place in that office for the last five or ten years that have been pretty much beyond their control and has basically, excuse the term, but almost neutered them. They have half the staff that they had. So my world is to work with them to figure out how to meet time deficiencies and you know creative ways to do things with reduced resources we have, or human resources and just you know monies that are appropriated to us but to also work on programs and to work with other partners in the community to figure out how to regain some of that strength to have a strong program which is the same as the upward move around the country. It's just some of collegial working together. I think it is working well so far. The staff that is there is very devoted and they are desperate to doing the right thing, literally sitting there and watching it' s amazing that December 2, 2020 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 4 they are able to carry out the major functions the Federal and State programs call for with the number of people they have. So it' s just going to be sitting down and figuring out ok how we can improve the operation in a matter of fine tuning so that we are able to meet the needs of preservationist all over the state. The State Historic Preservation Office is an important office that is only (inaudible) because it is helping to provide services to folks that are in the trenches. So I will be working over the next year and a half so that five areas that have been identified. Where hopefully we will meet all of the Federal requirements that do that in such a way that local government and in particular CLGs you are probably aware that there are four potential governmental entities which we have two. I am hoping that in the next two, three years we will get those other two counties to join in the program too . At some point I will quit blabbering stuff and let you guys ask questions. Let me tell you just a little bit about the various (inaudible) that I have been asked to work with because each State has, 1 guess depending on how things are going at the State, have what they call a program review periodically. The Parks Service comes in, and the reason why they come in is the CLG, you all know the history of preservation in the Country when they created the Act in ' 66 in stead of just simply having the National Program and running everything from Washington or even putting regional offices in places like Denver and Atlanta or wherever they very wisely figured out nobody is going to know the history of the State like the people in that State. So from the very beginning the program was to have a State Office that is not only carrying out historic preservation for its State but that the Federal Program will be married to that State program which I think was incredibly wise because what we wound up with was units in each State which are one stop shopping, holistic offices for carrying out and assisting historic preservation in their State. Now what that means now is that because there are fifty states and nine territories also if we are successful at saving the Nation' s history we got to do a good job in each of the States. So the Feds give us a certain amount of money and that' s about $550,000 in Hawaii to help the State in carrying out the Historic Preservation Program. Now that is in no State enough to do what the State needs to do. So you have got several catch 22s going on in here already. So a lot of what we are doing is trying to figure out how to physically do these programs because we don't get enough money from the Feds. We don' t get enough money from the State to do all that we should and want to do. So they came and did a program review and found some deficiencies in some of the areas. Understand that it is because they are understaffed etc. So some of those involve simply understanding programs and having worked with them long enough to figure out ways to make them more smoothly and to get more bang for the buck. So they have asked me to look at five program areas. One is survey and inventory. They are about eleven shoulds that a State Preservation Office should have, of those eleven shoulds there are five that our States must. December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 5 So the five areas they have asked me to work with are what they call the non-discretionary areas and the first one is survey and inventory that' s the most basic of all things. When I was out giving my talks around Virginia, Alambama and Texas it' s all about common sense and what we do is very simple it' s three words and three things. You've got to find it. You know you can't save historic things if you don't know what' s historic. We have to make some valued judgments about it because we can't save everything that the hands of man have made. And then third, if you found it and you decided what' s really important these are (inaudible) what you look for and you have to be careful and you want to make sure when we evaluate things that we are saving and telling everybody' s story cause if you found it and you know what those critical things are you develop strategy. So the survey and inventory is the most important thing. You have to have a baseline to know what you have got and what it is. And that' s one thing that you have been doing and doing a pretty good job of and hopefully will assist you. What we have asked the State Office to do that those things that we have already surveyed most of those are each structure or element it' s potentially eligible for the National Register but the folders are not as organized as they should be if somebody wants to do research on plantation style houses and agricultural communities of the 1920s you' d spend your lifetime going through and finding all of those. So the first thing, and I am spending too much time on this I apologize, the first thing is we are looking at the whole survey process . Are we doing enough surveys? How can we better organize the information we have? If not today how within the next year or two can we reestablish the GIS system and computers so that we can digitize that information into a data bank so that at least somebody can come to one of our offices and do research and find it out. The long term goal while I 'm here is to get that information digitized to get it into a data base that is available via the internet so that anyone can have access to what we have in Kapolei or what we have in Hilo or wherever. So that's the first area, survey, what' s the condition of the current surveys, how to retrieve that information and how do we make it more accessible. The second thing and this gets more key publicity is the 106 review and compliance cause generally most of our work in our office is not regulatory but this is one area that more people can move forward if they must advise with us before they take actions. Now there area very specific things that the Federal Government requires at the State office, in Texas before I retired there I think we did at that point about thirteen thousand reviews of 106 every year. The big states are more than here but we still do somewhere about fifteen hundred to two thousand reviews here in Hawaii and we are mandated to not only do the reviews within a certain time period, usually thirty days, within thirty days of receiving complete information and the review has to be done not by simply a preservationist but if the primary undertaking is archeological in nature it has to be an archeologist which is certified by the National Park Service. If it' s a structure it has to be an architectural historian. So if we have half the number of staff you can imagine they didn't leave by equal numbers of each of the disciplines. So one of the things Pua and I are working on daily is trying to get all of the positions filled that we have and we are talking with a number of other agencies who might be willing to let us use a slotted position from their organization and possibly even pay for them for a couple of years so we can get ourselves back on our feet and get all this done correctly. But December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 6 the secondary event is 106 and that is one that has formed us more than anything else. And that is typical of every state because most people (inaudible) sign off by the State Historic Preservation Officer. They frequently do not understand why they have to do it and when we ask for the information we really need which they haven't provided it' s late. So hopefully with sort of fine tuning how that works. Getting current system so that every single one of them at any moment in the day could be found out who they sent what and when is it due and where is it in the process. Then we will return to more credibility in the office because we will be able to do those in the right time frame. The third area is the National Register of Historic Places. You helped us because you have done some nominations. One of the requirements of a Federal program is we have to do two, at least, National Register nominations each year. So when we are talking about the money in just a few minutes that' s one thing we want you to encourage you to use some small amount of the money at different times during the process to do the surveys because we are required to do the surveys and to the most endangered properties to be put on the register. So one of the positions we are filling, we have some good applicants for, is the person to be in charge of the architectural building and they will oversee the National Register, the Certified Local Government and will be located in the division and 106 review structures. The fourth area is Certified Local Governments. The reason it got on the radar screen and I think Randy expressed some of the frustrations that had lead to you know getting the resource. The person who is running the CLG program does a good job with contracts etcetera but he is a clerk and administrator. He is not an historic preservation professional. So that' s one reason why the program will now be shifted into the architectural division because there will be people there to understand the guts of what it is that you are about saving. We are sort of looking at the whole thing. A number of things we haven't done but understand is we have not done adequate training for people who run Certified Local Government Commissions. So I don't have a date yet but I want you to keep the synapses connected in the back of your mind for late May or early June through a very special arrangement with the Washington office of the Parks Service we are going to be able to use some funds that have expired and were going to do major training. And we are hoping to actually do that, it has to be done at one of the CLGs, and we are hoping to maybe do it here on Kauai. What we are looking at, it' s not all planned yet cause we are hiring someone to do the planning to get all the perfect people to do the training who know it and you now well how to convey it to be there. But we are looking at maybe paying travel for people to come to do the training on Friday morning. Having training Friday afternoon, all day Saturday, Sunday morning and pay for return and hopefully pay for hotel rooms. You have been asked to do hundreds of dollars of work and not get reimbursed so we want to encourage every single CLG commissioner to be at that training and we will facilitate getting you there. The other thing with the CLGs that has been a very big problem and this is part of Randy' s discussion earlier and I understand your concern. When the 66 Act was amended in 1980 that's what set up the CLG program. There has been a strong program between the Federal Government and the States but the States you know in varying degrees just the local entities but it was in the ` 80 amendment that said communities who recognize that they have important December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 7 historic resources and want to get more organized and develop a plan and strategies for protecting the most important. We want to be an official partner in the Federal Historic Program. So that's when they set up the Certified Local Governments from day one we thought it was the worst name to call a program and has never come up with a better name to call it. The idea as you all know and (inaudible) was to assist Iocal governments ten percent of the appropriation to the State would then be used/passed down to the Certified Local Governments basically to carry out activities that in theory the State could do then the local governments could use these funds to do . And decisions would be made on a number of things at the local level very close to the resource. Over the last fifteen or twenty years each year has been sort of different. Some years all the money was distributed other years none went out. I don't know what the reason is for that. I am moving toward the future. I am not looking at the past. So we are going to make sure that they all get awarded and Federal does not receive a penny of what we should have had here. I think there is some ways that we can pass that money through and do it much more efficiently and make it less burdensome on you. The monies, and I mentioned the ten percent, you are now to cross your fingers and pray that some day that the appropriation to all fifty States and territories is about forty-seven/forty—eight million dollars now about the same thing we got in 1988 . But the Secretary of the Interior, the first time in the history of the program, the Interior of the Park Service has recommend to the President and to Congress that they fully fund the historic preservation program. The money comes from leases from off shore oil and gas wells and that would be one hundred and fifty million dollars. The reason I said cross your fingers is once that appropriation gets to sixty five million which is not that far away instead of ten percent of the money the CLG' s will get fifty percent of all the money above that. So it' s not a lot of money. It' s useful but there is not a lot but if we get to that appropriation level instead of fifty thousand dollars it might be three hundred thousand dollars and that would start to make a real difference in what you could do . So the main reason was to make sure that we understand how the program grants really work and I'll be back sitting down with a char with Myles who I think understands it fairly well but to make sure that we look at this thing in the long term over the next three to five years. We don't want to work him or the staff to death but if we get the monies we make decisions about how it is going to be used and we do that so that the entire grant period is available to us and carrying out this grant is not going to be a very difficult task. What I will agree is an enormous task when money that you as a CLG should have twenty four months to carry out a project and get it spent or we don't get around it till nine or ten months to say ok what do we want to do . Take another two or three months to start writing the contracts. There is a lot of bureaucracy in Hawaii but to get a contract through on our end and then your end to be able to higher somebody to do a survey at least for the last five or six years you had typically had most of that eight or nine months or maybe even six months left to expend that money before losing it. So the main thing I mentioned to Myles and I want to talk with you and I hope we will adopt as a goal for this program is sort of a signing thing because we have got roughly fifty thousand dollars each year the way it' s been working in the past is all fifty thousand dollars if we get around to it get dumped onto one of the CLGs. It' s a big amount of money. You have typically December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page S got at most a year to do a project. If you are doing fifty percent match you are talking about a hundred thousand dollar project that' s got to be done and wrapped up and all the bills paid for in maybe eight or nine months because we didn' t get the (inaudible) done. So our goal is going to be this and I will write it out so that you don't have to store it all up here. The monies become available October 31St, technically, of each year that' s the Federal fiscal year. Instead of waiting to just start the whole process after that time period what I hope we will do is about March of each year before we get to that October money date the State is supposed to issue a call for proposals for grants for the coming year. Now sometimes that has happened sometimes it has not but we will be meeting that responsibility in the future so that whoever is Chair will get a letter saying we expect to have X amount of money; you are currently one of two Certified Local Governments, our preservation plan, and that' s the last area that I will finish up, we ask in March for what do you want to do that is a critical preservation priority that is also consistent with the State Historic Preservation Plan cause that' s the main thing that the National Park Service requires of us . That the undertaking that is eligible on that list in the grant' s manual but that you have chose it because it' s typically an endangered property or resource that you are dealing with and it' s very significant and important. So we would do that in March. By June we will decide what do we want to fund come October. Instead of you getting fifty thousand one year and getting nothing the next year, I am proposing that you get the same amount of money but that you get twenty five thousand dollars if it's fifty if it' s more it would be half of that. You would then say by June here is what we are doing that next year that starts on October but first develop the contracts so all I have to do is sign it when the monies comes through when Congress passes the budget. Then you would have twenty four full months to begin the project knowing that ok if you are doing the updates for the island' s survey and it' s going to take two grant periods to do that you could begin phase one in October 1 , 2011 and then you would know to expect another twenty five thousand dollars a year from now. So you would go ahead and determine if you wanted to two to three years in advance where we are headed so that the outcome would be a bigger picture. So that would give you the same amount of money. It would sort of spread it out so that they don't (inaudible). He is doing a hundred dollar one project and nothing one year and nothing the next year that sort of places havoc with his work schedule. That' s a concept. The last thing that we are working on is one of the most important is the Statewide Comprehensive Plan. We are supposed to do one of those every ten years but with a revisiting every five years. It' s been, I think, almost twenty one years since the plan so we are behind. So during the next year we will be starting that within the next couple of months. The good thing is to sort of keep your antenna, we will be communicating with you but there would be a number of public meetings held on each of the island notified well in advance where we will have facilitators to talk about what are the real issues in historic preservation here in the trenches and how can we address those on both the local and the state level and then the facilitator will set up ways for you. They will probably do a draft of the plan which would be circulated again and then hopefully within about a year it will adopt a Statewide Comprehensive Plan that gives general directions for all of Hawaii where we need to find ourselves. December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 9 So it took me almost two years to explain why I am here. I apologize but I am looking forward to it. I think it' s a wonderful place to find oneself at this stage in my life. Generally any place you go when you are working with the preservation community there are folks that have in their gut you know a love for their place, their very special place and hopefully in this year and a half or so, everything is not going to be perfect, but we will have worked together to identify the things we need to do better so that hopefully (inaudible). I brought along, I am sure all of you Google, and so I think I have printed out the right number but Google NPS and CLG that' s all it takes. You will find about thirty or forty entries a lot from the parks services on what is the CLG program. Even more useful I find I go to some of the other States because they will all have things in there describing their programs too but this is one from NPS and its twenty eight frequently asked questions about the program. This won't answer all the questions between now and the main meeting but it' s sort of a good place. Do you have questions? Chair: Thank you very much. Mr. Helder; I have one. The way you are describing it is that the State Historic has a mandate that there is things that they are going to accomplish. The funds that would be available to us is a CLG for a certain amount but in order to use it we have to pick this mandate what we would do at the local level and then the State would choose to fund it or not to fund it. That's in a nutshell but. . . Mr. Oaks : The State is absolutely required to pass through ten percent of the money. If you do not pass that through the State flat loses that. So it can't be used for anything else. Now what can it be used for? The Federal Government mandates the State Office to do certain things and then it has a whole long list of things that it can do. All kinds of educational things, there is a list of, if you look at different states, there is over a hundred different things that people do saying this is what we see as being historic preservation in need in our state and the law allows you to do that. So I would convey that there are several very specific things like you could do a general history or a walking tour of Lihue or somewhere else but you could not do an academic (inaudible) of five hundred pages of one small aspect. It' s more . . . Mr. Helder: That' s not what I am asking. What I am asking is the approval level from the State, if you are saying that the money comes through that' s where it goes or it gets lost ok so those funding comes here. Do we have a list from the State that they are allowed to do or do we have a list from the parks service that we are allowed to do and who is the Certified Local Government? Who are they answerable to in terms of making a presentation and having the preservation approved to use the funds that way? Does it go through State or does it go through Parks? Mr. Oaks: Sort of all of the above . One thing that would be useful for you to have is, and I have this marked up and I will send Myles a copy of this or you can get it online too, there is what is called the National Park Service Grants Manual. There is a chapter in there, chapter nine, which is all of the rules . This is written as a result of Congress adding a new section for the sixty sixth law that says the will be a CLG Program and here is how it will operate and then the Parks Service developed these sort of guidelines for when they said this is how we are implementing it. So where they are starting to tell you what you can use the money for is actually your December 2, 20 10 K.11P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 10 Congressmen but this has a list. It says anything that the State Historic Preservation Office could do relative to historic preservation then the CLG can do that thing too and it lists some of the things in here too. The list is maybe a dozen things that are so broad that it is probably a thousand things. Mr. Helder: Oh yes I am sure. My question was just who is the gate keeper. Mr. Oaks: The gate keeper is each of the State has got this thing saying here is how you must run the CLG program. This is what the Feds used when they came in to program review about two years ago they went down this list and said you are doing this but you are not doing this. And one of the things we were, frankly I think not doing which is required by the law specifically not even just the NPS when we do the pass the money the intent is to get good historic preservation projects results accomplished. So then they went up and said the States were mandated by the statewide plan which one of its requirements is to figure out what are the issues and problems and things that we need to do in the State. So the primary thing that this thing does is it says that you as a CLG would want to use about thirty two thousand dollars and I got to tell you that we have on a short term your project must choose something that you can make a rational that it is dealing with significant historic properties that are in danger that needs to be saved. Mr. Helder: Yes but the question is, is that decided off of the State' s list that they have decided that they need to do then they tell us we need to decide? Mr. Oaks: It is Pua and the Chairman working together saying does that meet what they are trying to tell us to do here. I mean ultimately here in looking at something not from this island but other places while they were interesting projects they were clearly things that the law says for some reason it says you cannot pay for museum installations and I think we have done something close to that so for that we would have to have said that one won't work, what else do you want to do that clearly we would agree that when the Parks Service comes in to do their review they so oh yea that was . . . Mr. Helder: Alright let's try this. Mr. Oaks: Am I still not answering? Mr. Helder: If the State had a list and we found something that was on the list that the State hadn't chosen but it was on the list and on the ground here we decided that it was something important to do, would we be able to do it? As long as it was on the list but even if State didn't, it wasn't on their list or one of their priorities. Mr. Oaks: The list and then we will try to get each one of these and it' s not that specific and it clearly says to do a survey of an historic structure cause it' s clearly the highest priority and they want everybody to do and the others produced products that successfully educate the public to be historic structures. Now there are hundreds of ways you could do that and we don't want to limit you by saying here is a list of twenty two things you can do but nothing else. We want you to be December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 11 creative and pick out what will work on Kauai for preserving something on Kauai. What we find in most states is some of history as some physical manifestation that is what the landscape represents that' s what we are working out and there used to be five hundred of them on Kauai and the last time we counted there are only like twenty two left and so you come up with something you know which educates specifically to certain groups that certainly would be able to make the island turn around (inaudible). You know be creative. Come to us with any idea that you think will work that will save the physical, the material culture. That's mainly what it' s about. You could go to the State archives and basically preserve papers. We preserve some papers but that is not our primary job. It' s mainly material or culture that is sitting on the landscape that man left here through some kind of activity. If you get some CLG money anything that would help lean towards its preservation would be eligible. Mr. Helder: So in order to get it basically we have to write grants? Mr. Oaks: Each year we will get some money from the Federal Government. We have got it so regularly we can expect that and that' s why I am saying don't wait till October the first for thirty years now. We have gotten ten percent of whatever we did and a lot of the time is that' s the same from year to year so we probably could have said two or three years ago what we expect this year and you could go ahead and start planning for what it is that you want to do cause a lot of time it' s not enough money to do an entire project. You want to comprehensively survey or review the survey this entire island let' s say maybe costs sixty seven thousand dollars. You could then sit down and say ok for the next three times or the next two times and then layoff a year and then come back that' s our priority. We could go ahead and have it arranged so that you could count on and plan for staff to manage their time ahead. Mr. Helder: We need to hire a grant writer and if so where would the funds . . . Mr. Oaks: No because we will send down the letter that simply says money is going to be available. We want you to submit proposal to us that meet the requirements of this sort of rules and then you fill out a form which is usually about at the most two or three pages and then simply here is what we want to do . Here is what the resource is. Here is what' s happening to it. Here is what we want to do to kind of save it. Here is a rough budget for what we think it will cost us and here is who will do it. That' s sort of important because one of the requirements is if you do a survey someone who knows the difference between an Italian and a second empire building has to be doing it but the application anybody who has gotten out of high school successfully could fill it out. Ms. Sheehan: Can 1, just a clarification, when you say we will send you a piece of paper are you talking about Pua? Or are you talking about NPS? Mr. Oaks : Good question. Everybody at NPS said be careful on that too because like I said I see myself as a state person. I have been running a state program for forty five years so when we say we, unfortunately I am meaning the state not NPS . The NPS is not, I mean technically it' s a big story but I am being paid by them. All of this the State will do, Pua' s office will do this, the new architecture person who is in charge of CLGs. Thank you for bringing this up. December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 12 Ms. Sheehan: So the County is dealing with the State. Yes and I am sure we need to read a lot more about this but I was understanding, beside the fact that things lapsed and the County didn't get the money or couldn't use it, we were also dealing with sharing it with Maui. So Maui got some one year and then it went like this. Mr. Oaks: That' s been the old (inaudible) is to through some of these ideas out. Yes in the past the State didn' t realize it had to do the announcement each year and solicit proposal from you. That' s what it was supposed to be doing each year is sending out a letter saying it' s that time of year we are expecting to get five hundred seventy one thousand or whatever and here is the time frame. If you are interested submitting a proposal here is the form that we would like you to use and we have done this purposely short and simple so that anybody can fill it out. Fill this out and return it to us by X date cause one of the things that the congress said is these grants have to be competitive. Now what is competitive? There are two CLGs here if there are four we will probably have, and we only had fifty thousand dollars, we will have to look probably more seriously at how do you compete but the idea is somebody has figured out what is the requirements that as parameters they have written a good application and almost every state as one of their requirements as in their rules that they will try to, when good projects are presented, there will be good geographic distribution. Chair: As long as we are not in competition with the Maui or hopeful Hawaii when the come on line and Oahu. It seems like it' s competitive now instead of sharing of the revenues now we compete for them. Mr. Oaks : I guess what I' d say is if you submit a grant that falls within the criteria here there is no reason the State, it should not be so competitive that there was a rating and you won by one point out of a hundred. The States are asked to the degree that when good applications are submitted is to get geographic equity in the distribution. So it is legitimate if decent projects are presented each year to give every year to CLGs. We have no problem with that at all. Mr. Helder: Here is my thing. I just came off of the State Foundation of Culture of the Arts (inaudible) and reviewed all of the grant proposals and in some instances where you have this kind of competition, and you fifty thousand dollars available, and eighty thousand dollars are being asked, and so sometimes they take each of the grant proposals and they cut what they have asked for to the point where yes you get money but you don't get enough money to do the project what you signed up to do so you have to rewrite it and then subsist the project to the amount of money which requires a great deal of skill in terms of grant writing. None of which probably the members of this particular board have that skill and the competition for the grants when they are read is based upon the quality of the grant that is being proposed, how well it is written, and al of those things. So it begins to be a grant presentation competition which, as far as I am concerned, is a draw back from the function you are trying to do. So that is why I was trying to clarify is the money, that is coming through, is it being fed to us this money is available you write a grant for it then we will review the grant and the we will decide whether you are going to get it out of what we had which means that it transmits to that at the State level you have a review board that is reviewing the grant proposals. December 2, 2010 K.I I.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 13 Mr. Oaks: I don't think it will or work that way. I have done the panels where they have to do the grants for the NIA and a lot of their decisions are made of grants at the National level instead of State. I think what you are describing is because there are eighty five organizations who are desperate to get that money and they know they are likely going to award five and it turns into a huge competition. I agree that happens, for example, in Texas with the CLG grant because there are sixty six CLGs. Some States have a hundred eighty or ninety cause they can be community cities even if all four would be CLGs you still would not have much competition. I guess I have seen no problem with awarding to the two CLGs as long as we have them and they present a decent application. You know if they did something that is not eligible by written law you know we wouldn't be able to fund that. In fact you know for the current year we have done some negotiation because a couple of things weren' t eligible but they simply said here is the things we want to do we found the ones that were eligible for the money. I would expect, and this is the Parks Service is talking, but we are setting up a system that hopefully there will be a handbook is what we are proposing to have produced for you in about the next eight or ten months. It would describe the program more thoroughly. It would talk about the grants process. It would say here is what the Federal Law says about eligibility and a very simple application. I don ' t see a problem with simply sharing the money with the two CLGs cause there is so much work that's needed. The only difference I am proposing at all is that we do that in a more timely basis. We notify you and instead of you know the whole big lump sum and theoretically you would use that for two years. You will have the same amount of money to use in two years it' s just that now you get it and you have got to carry it all out within you know X number of months. This way we get it all approved three or four months ahead. You get the money on the first of October. It goes well for four or five months but oh my God somebody retires and leaves and instead of losing the rest of that money at the end of the year you have got time to recover. You can actually continue that project into the second year while you are getting the second year' s worth of new twenty five thousand dollar money. So it gives you a lot more flexibility in managing and carrying out the projects. Mr. Helder: I just got one more, I would like to suggest, which they did at the State Foundation level, they had a liaison that we could call and that person would be their hands on helping who ever was writing the proposal to be able to qualify and rather than somebody going through and writing up the whole thing and then having made a mistake waste all of that energy. Cause I don't think we have collective amount of energy to write two, or three, or five of these things. But someone who is actually on that review says this is good. This is all complete. This is what we need. This will qualify. And then if there is a break in the middle of the program somebody to go back to and say you are supposed to come up how are we gong to rewrite this and that' s at the State' s level we can avail ourselves that . . . Mr. Oaks : That person will, that' s the person I mentioned, who will be hired in the architecture division and there will be a preservationist who will be running the program. December 2, 2010 KA.PR.C. Meeting Minutes Page 14 Mr. Helder: And they will be aware of what the qualifications are for all of this and they will be available to us? Mr. Oaks : Yes. Now with only two, I don't think we need this. What we did and what the State did in Texas was, because there was sixty six CLGs and they all wanted all of the monies, we would let them on X day submit the initial proposal which was maybe about three paragraphs. No budget or anything else basically describing what they wanted to do and then they would say ok which ones are not eligible so you don' t go through filling out the entire form and then which ones, you know which third of em are the most competitive and then they can decide whether they want to fill out the whole form or not. With only two people I can't imagine, I certainly hope the State will produce an application that is simple that someone can fill out and that you can do hopefully in no more than an hour or two at the most and give us enough information to make a decision on it. Ms. Sheehan: I think I am really close but I guess one, it just depends on how much money you are talking about. I mean if it' s fifty thousand dollars and you are saying ok then we qualify this project is going to take three years or two years. So you would get twenty five to start and twenty five the next year. It' s the whole fifty thousand you are talking about. Mr. Oaks: It' s your option. Ms. Sheehan: I mean if we are asking for all of the money that you have available and it' s going to take us two years the next year is our grant that we write a two year grant and we are sure that we get the money next year because Maui will write something the next year maybe for the same idea for all of the fifty thousand for two years. I mean how are you, I guess I see that we are . . . Mr. Oaks : The project would typically be a Part A and Part B . When a County for example does a comprehensive survey . . . Ms. Sheehan: But if we are asking for all the money, just a hypothetical, if we wanted to do something with bridges and we need all the money that is available that really does cut out Maui and our project is a two year project which because for all of the good reasons that you said we are taking fifty thousand for two years the next year, that second year, you are getting another fifty thousand in theory. Maui says I have something you know it starts hopping out so that at some point is the goal to keep the project certainly happening and on time and timely but most of our projects could take two years, can we assume that the money will always be there? Can we assume that? Mr. Oaks : Well we will have to figure out how to address that. Certainly we want you to think out the bigger picture. So if you get approved for one year for a project and it' s Part A and Part B that' s coming then I think the contract can be written with the assumption that this is Part A and then the Part B will be completely messed up if the Federal Government made no appropriation to the States but if they do that then everything all of us are doing will be sort of. . . Chair: I need to change the lines of inquiry if you don't mind 106 compliance naturally we go through the 106 review and we have done it many times in the past. We have noticed December 2, 2010 K.H.P.RC. Meeting Minutes Page 15 inconsistencies in the nature of compliance. Where do you see, where is the faults in 106 compliance here today. We do you see the CLG commission playing and important role in upholding the Federal standards to the 106? And I know that it is important that we take one instance at a time because every single instance is different. Different circumstances for different . . . Mr. Oaks: Inconsistencies that you are talking about how the State apply standards or how people do not carry it out? Chair: The first one that comes to mind is public participation. Clearly I think a lot of people will be able to tell you that years and years and years of attending meetings by the public it' s gotten to a level here on Kauai that is absolutely ridiculous. The public input in the process, and again we can talk individual on this and show the marginalization of public input into this process. That's one of em already. How is the public aware that compliance is actually there? What do they have as a resource to be able to question certain of the findings about certain. . . Mr. Oaks: Well the law requires anyone who is participating in the 106 process whether it' s a Federal Agency, the State Agency that' s carrying out the project, the State Agency that is reviewing the project like the State Preservation Office to be open, and transparent, and to share information with the public. Chair: Let me give you a specific example say because you have the minutes of our meeting last month. We have been dealing with DOT Honolulu for quite a bit, for a while we were particularly alarmed at last month's meeting and the attitude of DOT. The recommendations of this Council on numerous and once again I can point to specific instances that the public input process and the recommendations made by this particular are not considered in any way, shape or form. Nor do we, every time we have asked DOT to open up to the public and discuss it, it isn't there anyways. I think many other people can tell you of their involvement in the attempt to help DOT in making better decisions. Mr. Oaks : So are they not having public hearings locally an projects? Chair: Yes I think there is a serious disconnect between DOT and the general public. Of that there is no question. So as part of the review compliance of course naturally as a commission this is where the public has a chance to kind of voice their concerns and it' s our kuleana to take these concerns up to the next level which we do . So I would like to see the public participation in the 106 upheld to a much higher standards then currently is there but I need to preface that I would like to kind of separate its, the Honolulu DOT is really where we have certain issues that make this very uncomfortable. Naturally with DOT has a tremendous impact on the way we live our lives, the way we move around on this island, and I think in particular I think at this point which we are going to get into and I would like to get into it soon is the nature of the DOT' s 106 compliance as it comes to the Wailua, let's take that as a specific. Mr. Oaks : The bridge? December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 16 Chair: Yes the Wailua corridor as a specific example in order to work out what the 106 compliances really need to be. What are the mitigating factors that must be in place when we take something else and put nothing back in place? I think there is a difficulty and I think the disconnect with the public is, I don't think necessarily that anybody is opposed to development, it's development in a wise way taking into consideration the cultural aspects of it. Wailua adds another dimension in that it' s a National Historic Landmark and numerous attempts by the public and this commission to raise the level of sensitivity there is problematic to the point where now it' s now an issue of courts and this particular point at certain levels of it. Mr. Oaks : I just went to Lahaina a week ago so that exact same issues are going on down there with the expansion of the small boar harbor. It' s a good question and a great time to ask it. One of the things I am (inaudible) but the thing I have observed I am having a meeting with Ed (inaudible) I think he is the number two man at DOT next Monday and we are talking about this. I was shocked to find out when I started investigating, you know we do a lot of reviews for DOT and most states have substantial amounts of staff members on their payrolls who are archaeologists, architectural historians, they don' t do all the work but they are there because they are reviewing and working with CRM firms to make sure that they meet the requirements of the law. They are none of those in DOT. So one thing that we are proposing is that in a number of states have convinced their DOT and to pay for an employee in the State Historic Preservation Office to do nothing but, unless they have nothing else to do, highway issues. I think your question will help me on Monday in making sure that they have hopefully agreed to do this here cause there are no cultural resource people in DOT. They have a project that has maybe been in their minds and they have studied for five to ten years because all of their projects play out that long. We only hear about them, not when the project starts, after the cultural resource managers have been hired and decided what to do whether it' s right or wrong and then bring it to us . So what we are proposing is they need to hire one or two persons who from the very beginning will meet with them quarterly and do an annual meeting for what are all the projects. What are they going to involve? And then when they go out and start to move forward on the planning for this corridor that person would be responsible and have a travel budget to so that they could set up meetings. They can go and meet with the cultural resource people on the island and this would be much to the benefit of DOT cause you wouldn't get ninety percent of the project only to find that everybody hates this aspect of it. You would have discussed it already. So I know exactly where you are coming from and the system that's used here sets us up for failure. So this would be one thing that would help us because if we could get an archeologist and an architect historian paid for but hired by us so that they are not their people. Then they would, the second that anything came in from DOT, drop anything that they are doing and work. It would allow DOT to meet these responsibilities on each island in each way that, we are not solving all the problems but at least it would help. Chair: It would help a lot with DOT cause since their representatives that somebody among those representatives has an understanding of cultural history which clearly the last time around and all the other times there isn't. You can look at the verbatim minutes and see that there really is no December 2. 2010 K.H.RR.C. Meeting Minutes Page I7 discussion with DOT as it pertains to history which is our kuleana here right. So of course they are coming in here with no historical knowledge whatsoever. Mr. Oaks: (Inaudible) about eight years ago some kind of study and were really unaware of any of the history of the project. Chair: And then the nature of the EIS in relation to the 106 compliance. When can we insist on the full EIS instead of breaking it up into little tiny pieces? As an island and as a Commission to this 106 compliance is always been at the forefront. Mr. Oaks: And they are required to consult with you. One of the interesting things about the CLG is that' s one of the things that the State Office is prohibited from delegating responsibility of. They have to get your opinions and sit down and talk to you. We cannot officially delegate to you to be the agent to make the final decision. Chair: No but we are in the compliance process. Mr. Oaks: You know but I think what you could do is like what we are proposing there, hiring an employee, but I think you could insist. l think it would be hard for them to say no on having that annual meeting with the planners who are working on projects for Kauai to introduce you to new projects and bring you up to date on ones that are working. Most of these projects from inception, to design, to build are six, eight or ten years. Chair: And changing all the time so it makes everything that we have done so far moot. Mr. Oaks: Have you asked for an annualized meeting? Chair: Yes we insisted on many different levels on having longer range planning. One example I can point to quickly, and I need to change into a public participation, is the bridge inventory that we have on the island. DOT is piecing out each one of these historic bridges into individual. We have asked DOT, on numerous occasions, to bring us a larger comprehensive plan about all of our historic bridges here on Kauai. Essentially all of the things we area looking for in this particular plan is obviously the long term maintenance parts of it. Not allowing these historic bridges to such a deteriorated state because of none maintenance whatsoever. It just rots and then they go into a condemnation process. Clearly that's got to stop. Our bridges are really important. Mr. Oaks: In most states have done comprehensive surveys or at least they have begun with the oldest ones. Chair: Yes we have a survey of the bridges. It' s a larger issue with the so many . . . Mr. Oaks: Yes but they don't have a strategic plan for . . . Chair: Yes no strategic plans with regards to all of the various historic bridges. December 2. 2010 K.H.PR.C. Meeting Minutes Page 18 Mr. Oaks: And that' s typically what the in house cultural resources staff will do. They will figure out. In fact I guess we need to work together because if you identify the ones that need to be saved then if there is one that is not in terrible shape that has to be torn down then maybe the mitigation can be working out a preservation plan for six of this type. Chair: All of DOT, and I am going to end it with this, essentially of DOT' s approach to our bridges so far is just is taking out and replace and no taking into consideration this Commission sensitivity or part in the process. I have a couple of other lines but at this particular point I know people have been here patiently waiting and Commission if you don't mind I would like to open it up to the public welcome. Ms. Cheryl Lovell-Obatake: Thank you Mr. Chair. For the records my name is Cheryl Lovell- Obatake. I' d like to ditto with the comments that you have made and I would also like to say for the records my presence here today at this meeting is because it is a historical meeting with historical matters especially with the party that is here and his name is Larry Oaks with the National Park Service. Besides, and I ditto all that you said, and I support everything that you said. I have been thinking about this even from the last meeting about the bridge over here and I would like to hop on and talk about County bridges such as the Niumalu Bridge that goes up to an historical property of Alekoko Fish Pond. I just thought about it as I was sitting here and you know that in history people that live here heard of the explosive matters of Louie Rego removing rocks up above Alekoko and while doing that the capacity, weight capacity, crossing over this bridge and just to be sure, and you know Niumalu Bridge services a lot of residences that are now populating the Niumalu area although my mentor Mr. Standford Achi had many reservations of Niumalu especially when he lived in Governor Kanoa' s home that has been renovated. I am concerned about the bridge. It' s a County bridge, I am assuming, but what about that and do they get their monies from the Federal for County bridges and those are some of the questions I' d like to know and of course with the stream that this bridge crosses is, what was it? I knew all of the streams but I am so excited about what you were saying. But you know it has some historic significance too because all of stream, and I may be out of line in speaking of the natural resources that we have in this area that has five streams that discharges into the ocean and into the bay, and of course submerged lands, and also historical sites on the submerged lands like heiau or temples. But on the matter of bridges I'd like to know more information regarding County bridges and what is the criteria of preserving County brides and I am sure this may not be the only bridge. Chair: I think it's important that, in regards to bridges, that when the changes are done normally what we are seeing is that now we are having to take them off. They are eligible to be on the National Register but by the time they finish these particular jobs they are no longer. So essentially here we are watching bridges just disappear off the eligible list and less, and less, and less. December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 19 Ms . Lovell-Obatake : And I just want to say too that it is an important area. If you look at the geographies of the harbor it' s a very important place that supplies the entire island. Residences have been increased in this area. Evacuation routes in getting out of the area when there is an explosion or even a tidal wave but I would request and I hope that in the future, specifically Niumalu Bridge, you know kind of look into that matter and its historical value in that area. Chair: Thank you. Commissioner' s any question for Cheryl? (None.) Ok is there anyone else in the public that wishes to? Welcome. Mr. Manini : My name is Manini. Not Joe Manini. Just Manini. I represent the Kanaka Hui. The Kanaka Hui is to Manini, not to Joe Manini. That' s my grandfather. The grant that comes from the Interior probably would cover him because he is talking about parks and all that. I assume that maybe he is involved with the National Park and all that. I not sure because I no more his card but if he is then if you check you know the United States Bush had mortgage some of the parks to China when they borrowed money. I know like see them mortgaging Hawaii lands to China, or to Japan, or to wherever it is. I cannot trust the haoles because they talk in foreign tongue. They say one thing to you and then they do something else . Now the Park Service is one way to get your foot on the land but the land is joint tenancy lands I told him. See joint tenancy lands, this is all joint tenancy lands. I did a seven year research. I don't care what the County says . We going meet with the Mayor as soon as he ready cause he said after the inauguration. If we got to sue somebody we going sue em you know what I mean? Cause the land is joint tenancy lands. You must understand that the joint tenancy law in plain. The surviving tenants can take back the land from anybody. In this grant it' s talking about Moloaa, and Papaa, and Aliomanu but the deed for this particular court it' s the audited lands of Kamehameha III that shows a lot of lands in Honolulu. You see all the lands? Twenty something pages of property. This is not property that belongs to the Kingdom of Hawaii that the United State overthrew. It belongs to the Kanaka Hui . It' s a different entity. That' s where the problem is see, the entity is different. The Kanaka Hui goes right down the whole archipelago . The Kingdom of Hawaii is only Kamehameha. Even though if we all related the Hawaiians come from the third brother. The Kanaka came from the fourth brother. It' s complicated but the Kanaka would be the Samoans, the Tongans, (inaudible), Tahitians, Maori and the Kanaka from Hawaii. Kanaka is a big nation. This island was the capital of Polynesia and we no like see anybody come here and destroy the island. We no mind if you folks do preservation. You know what I mean? Preservation of maybe the Spouting Horn, preservation of like you folks did some on the North Shore. That' s all right. We agree with that because you are supposed to preserve certain places . But when the National Park comes in, it' s different story. We no like National Park. Chair: No Kauai has said it really clear that they really did not want Na Pali to go under National Parks . Yes there is that element here. Mr. Manini : Ok if you take the case with Nakahiki and the State. He was in jail for about three months because he went to Kokee and he cut some koa wood over there and he got caught. They December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 20 put him in jail but they couldn't pin him because the State couldn't prove that they owned that lands. The State is saying that they own the land. They own this. They own that. Even the County they said they own certain place but do they own it? They don't. Not according to this they don't own it. And so certain things we can let go. Right now I ' m in charge of the whole thing. I don't care what anybody says. What we are dong right now is getting (inaudible) no we get Atooi, he call him self Atooi Gonsalves, Kane Pa, all the different people saying they have right to the lands, and myself, and the Mayor going be in there. What we want in that thing is one international attorney, he would be just like the judge of the whole thing. And he looks at everybody' s documents and if this percent doesn't have claim step back. The other person doesn't have claims set back. The same thing if he like claim something and they say this is United State property bring out the papers cause we want to challenge them. We don't want the County just to pass anything but he historical preservation is something good that you folks are doing on Kauai. Is something good because get plenty places that gotta be preserved. I am aware of that and it' s not being preserved even the cemeteries not being preserved. It's sickening. I not against you people but anybody else coming in and trying to take a big portion of land or control a big portion of land. I don't believe that Niumalu belongs to the State and I don't like what they did over there cause they kicked out Itamura from planting taro. He had to go down Koloa side. They did something over there that is uncalled for. I don't know who that comes under in the County but maybe this preservation stuff can preserve certain places if that was taro land then you can preserve that area so that they cannot change em and put all hoses on top then later on they wonder where they going plant their food because get plenty good properties on Kauai and right now the best properties on Kauai according to in the 1970s they made a land/property study on Kauai and it was by the airport. You see all the houses over there by the airport. That was the test land they had on Kauai. I have the book, the study. They checked the whole island. They showed where you can till, where you cannot till and all that. That was one good study that, I had em from long time ago. The one thing we don' t want is a National Park because you get the National Park all this plantation workers that used to go hunting, yes they go hunting, they gotta live on hunting cause they no make enough money so they live on hunting and fishing. One thing I agree with was the monk seal because he eat all the fish on the shoreline and these guys cannot go fishing. I worked for the ranch, forty five years for Robinson, and I know plenty of the plantation workers retired and all that kind. They get really small income so they have to live on hunting, fishing, and all that kind. They live off the land that's why if you go in Waimea Valley, that' s where I live, you see em every week coming up with the trailer. Some from this side because they were working for Lihue Plantation, some from Kilauea Plantation and you no see Waimea people complain because they hunting in our hunting ground. We don't do that because they looking for food and if they looking for food if it's up there fine. So long you don' t waste em. Get what you need. As what should be like see but National Park going take all that rights away and we cannot do December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 21 that. And so we gotta tip toe when we go in before somebody take one big property like one big place for use. I just no agree with that. I am sorry. Chair: I believe when push comes to shove on that issue, even today that I sincerely doubt that Kauai will go even though the State machine is broke down as it is. We probably would rather fix the internal management machine at the State the responsibilities of the management of these lands rather than go into Federal jurisdiction because of the customary and cultural rights that would disappear it if happens. Mr. Manini : Because when we took the State to court (inaudible) for the Hawaiian Homes. The DLNR and the State, I mean the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands that's Federal. The Federal Judge said the Department of Hawaiian Homes is only a trustee to the lands. They don't own em. The DLNR is only a trustee. Now I am a Hawaiian Homesteader. I am only a lessee. I only leasing the land. Who owns the land? That' s why I am saying the owner is here because you know when they was selling the lands fee simple you buy em fee simple. There is an owner on top of you. When you have the County say they have fee simple lands and you have the State say they have fee simple lands you kind of wonder know cause if they had fee simple lands the owner must be on top of them. That's why I said the owner has their name under joint tenancy. If we going have to prove em we going international attorney. You cannot prove em with one attorney that goes into the civil court because the person has to either go to the Federal Court or go straight. One more thing is I wrote to Mary Ann Kindle, Inspector General for the Interior Department. She ' s in charge of any kind of fraud so you better be real sure about the land ownership because I wrote to her. She referred me back to the State for the State to contact me and we talked. The State didn't so far. They hiding. I know what they doing so this year I not going just tell em for come out. If we gotta nail em then we going nail em some other way cause at what we did their land, we nail right in the court, but you see joint tenancy is something that is no probate. There is no break in title so the title remained from the beginning when Kamehameha did the land he did it to the Kanaka Hui. The Kanaka is Kokee aupuni and Manini. Kokee aupuni means definitely belonging to the aupuni of the area. You know the Kanaka natives they more advanced then the Hawaiians . The have like one arrow when they started and all the time through until they are here and they came from 200 BC. The Hawaiians came 5464 BC. They came from Yucatan. I can even give you the genealogy who and who came you know what I mean? Until you reach that point. Chair: Yes and if you don't mind I think you have given us some really good input. Manim: That' s all I would like to say. Chair: Ok and then I can have closing remarks on your testimony. Manini : I don't have nothing against him, you know what I mean, personally. December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 22 Chair: The point here is that we have the numerous historic preservation issues. In order for us to make the proper decisions to have kind of lasting effect we must have some direction on the nature of these claims I think we were talking about it earlier was that all the various entities are coming together under the Mayor soon to discuss some of these important overriding issues that effect all of us here. And definitely title for the land is absolutely critical and an important discussion. I think we need to keep at it. And then with that I would like to change the lines of inquiry one more time. Thank you for your patience. Ms. Waldeen Palmeira: Good afternoon my name is Waldeen Palmeira. I am under the organization of Lineal and Cultural Descendents. We are native inhabitants of the original inhabitants of Wailua, Kauai. We are not going to be able to provide all of our comments. I would like to be here because I believe this is your first time here with the Kauai Historic Preservation Commission. So I will not go over all of the comments that we do have for you but I would like to establish a relationship as well . I am not under this Council and not under the County of Kauai. We are lineal and cultural descendants and we have birth rights . Not as Native Hawaiians but as native tenants and that is in relation with the konohiki and the Alit of the original people of this land. Now I did want to make a comment on your, you do know, everybody know about the report that was done regarding SHPD. You folks are all aware of. It wasn't, in our opinion, it wasn't our opinion it was actually the opinion of the Department of Interior, National Parks. They are a high risk grantee. The report was scathing. The report highlights the blatant discrepancies of law and they are not State of Hawaii, not only the DOT but State Historic Preservation Office and so forth, a lot of parties who were involved with the big Wailua project which involves three EAs, an EIS, and other things. You know a separate EIS for the Kapaa Relief Route which began in 2000 prior to that. Then it was stopped. Then it went into the three EAs for the lower portion. Now this body as well, you are letting them know that when we talk about these properties, these historic properties, this is not something just for the public. Although the is entitled to Section 106 and this is why one of my first question is do you really represent National Park Service or do you represent State because you did comment that you are being funded by the State and I would just like to ask that question. Mr. Oaks: I am working for the National Park Service basically to assist the office in dealing with some of the issues that you have discussed to make sure that as they consider issues that relate to the cultural resources, no matter whom they belong to, that they . . . Ms. Palmeira: The problem is that no matter who they belong too, they actually do belong to the native peoples and then when the other people had arrived just that period does exist but prior to that we are talking about an ancient culture and historic properties and because when you talk about Section 106 we are talking about what is supposed to be a high level consultation with a federal officer and a lot of times that doesn't happen. But what happened in the process of Wailua actually we were not allowed, we did not have consultation for Section 106 under we as December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 23 lineal descendants . We were actually excluded by the County of Kauai for the bridge and then that portion although we did put it in writing requesting the consultation. So the blatant disregard of the National Historic Preservation Act. In a sense there are a lot of loop holes yea and so basically my point right now is that we have started consultation for the Kuhio Highway project which involves, it' s actually segmented to the bike path project right on Wailua Beach. So when you talk about surveying the properties for this project there was no survey of the burial ground. This wasn't just a burial ground but this is a significant historic property area concerning the Chiefs of this island. There is only one place like that although there are a few other places on the island Wailua being one of the most important. My point is that some of the discussion of such a high level consultation did start to take place, however, they broke down. They are, I believe after the political you know the parties get into office and so forth that this will begin again cause they are, at this point, in violation of Section 106 . The have the funds authorized for that project without having done Section 106 with us. Not just with a preservation committee, not just with, but actually with those of us with whom Section 106 was actually created for the Native Americans, Native Alaskans, and so forth. However, we have certain other details that we would like to provide to you. I would to let you know that some of initial letters to the Department of the Interior concerning the archeological protection act we are asking for an investigation of the horrific violations by County of Kauai, State of Hawaii, and the Federal Highways Administration. So in your now taking steps towards local governments we are letting you know at this point that we would like to be also included in any discussion regarding our historic properties for which landownership is one big, big, big question. However, I would like to just provide you with this. Again, like what Randy mentioned Wailua is, not only a National Historic Landmark, it' s a National Historic District. However, beyond that for our people it consists of crown and crown patent and national lands of our people and we actually have certain rights and authority but we will not get into that now. I just wanted to let you know of two projects . A second one is Kaumualii Park which is also a 6F property and for that property I do have a little file for you to have basically to Secretary Salazar who at one point did stop the project because of our letters and because the State of Hawaii was not in compliance with any environmental laws for Kaumualii Park for install a leach field on historic properties. And so that is part of, if you drive over to Kaumualii Park you will see the bulldozers stopped. They are the property is open. There are two burials found. We are asking for a closure and we are asking for this archaeological process. Not only the archaeological process the entire discrepancy. For example this a project required by the EPA, a conversion of the cesspool, large capacity cesspool. However, EPA person (inaudible) mentioned, told me that the State still needs to be in compliance and that did not occur. There was no EA and there is no category for exemption for a National Historic Property. They are not exempt from doing and EA. December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 24 Also just to mention this is not just because of a lack of physical bodies in the State Historic Preservation Division Office. There is a lot of other problems I don't want to mention right now. Like you said Hawaii is very bureaucratic. However, when it comes to protecting the properties it hasn't been done, Not by any of the bodies involved and we have a culture and people that needs to exist into the future on these lands, on this island. Whatever the large picture is doesn't seem to be following the laws and not only historic preservation but environmental . So anyway I would just like to provide to you. I would like to get your, I will find your address, your email address. These letters are the most recent ones. We are not done with this process of the Section 106 for Kuhio Highway. We are not done with the Kapaa, the Lydgate to Kapaa bike path. That is something that we have addressed regarding many processes that were not completed. It was nice to meet you and this is the letters regarding the first project and this is the one regarding Kaumualii Park. Both projects are in the National Historic Landmark and of course this is a picture of the area. Mr. Oaks: Can I ask one question and I will look at this carefully. You talk about sending the letter, was that a request to become a consulting party? Ms. Palmeira: We are a consulting party yes for Kuhio Highway short term project. Mr. Oaks: Ok and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the DOT granted that status? Ms. Palmeira: Yes. Well actually the letter went in through the Army Corp of Engineer' s preconstruction notice. However, with the two previous projects although we submitted letters nobody with Federal Highways or the County of Kauai followed the processes for inviting Section 106 consultation with is required by Statutes. Mr. Oaks : Part of that happened before you even knew or became a consulting party? Ms. Palmeira: Right, since 2004 yes we did submit letters in 2004 regarding Wailua Beach and because we identified ourselves as Native Hawaiians they were supposed to have invited us for Section 106 consultation. However, Section 106 is not working very well in Hawaii. There are reasons for that. Our organization in one of the letters is from Liko Martin is the second letter in there and we are talking about consultation at a high level with Federal Highways and with the Department of Interior. Mr. Oaks : Have you been involved with any discussion under Section 110 of the Act which relates to historic landmarks. Ms. Palmeira: We haven't. Mr. Oaks: I have been with the Parks Service for three months so this is new and I only expect to be working for a year and a half with them but I will be glad to study this and get it to the folks who would be involved with it. December 2, 2010 K.Ii.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 25 Ms. Palmeira: It is ok most people have a copy. You don't need to give it to anyone but I would like to let you know that, that is with the Department of the Interior and we are not (inaudible) and there are many violations of Federal and State law regarding these two projects so continue or quest to work with the local government for the protection and for historic preservation. It means a whole different thing than our quest to actually certain properties that are important for the continuity for the people and our culture in our lands . So again, that was just; I just came to provide that to you. Mr. Oaks : Thank you very much. Chair: Aloha. Ms. Noelam Josselzn: Aloha. Noelani Josselin for the record. Talk about preservation and I think it' s really important that we also focus on the spiritual preservation (inaudible) . And I don't know where you stand. You talk about architecture as a designer you mentioned buildings, Native Hawaiians and primitive people we, our architecture is our environment and I think it is really important and what Mr. Manini said you know here on Kauai we are the center of the Polynesian Triangle. We are the Polynesian Triangle. We are the capitol. So we need to some how incorporate the spiritual preservation and this is what I see happening because when I look in the newspaper and I see oh this certain culture went and floated their lanterns down the Wailua River. I think wonderful . Oh this certain culture built a temple on our temple. I'm thinking ok this is not right. It' s just we have a burial area that is very significant and we are building a bike path and a highway and I think it's really important for all of us who are kanaka in here, that we touch, connect to our aina. For you it might not mean anything but I think in preservation you need to focus on the spirituality part of it. And I don't if you have a department of someone you can hire and so ok you know you are going to be in charge of researching why this area is so significant spiritually. But that is the core of our culture. I think it's important. I just wanted to say that. Thank you. Ms . Wendy Wichman: I just wanted to say hello. Hi Molly. H1 Patsy. We are (inaudible) and we had a meeting yesterday afternoon with the DOT regarding the bridge. I knew none of this and we are being asked (inaudible). Chair: Well thank you. Clearly I think you can see that we need to be open (inaudible) and you can see people are still open to that but as you can see the frustration is really high. We are a small group of the community but we are proud of our heritage and our place. Commissioners do you have any questions? Ms. Summers: As Randy said there has been a lot of history and a lot of history leads to a lot of frustration. I think it' s kind of exciting, actually, but I think your presence here is a result of the survey of how the Historic Preservation Office was doing and for cleaning house and setting things in order and then perhaps you were sent here to help out with all that. So I am excited and this can get all better and I also had a thought and I hope somebody gives you a primer on a lot December 2, 2010 K.H.PR.C. Meeting Minutes Page 26 of the Hawaiian terminology so that when people speak of konohiki rights and ahupuaa, and kuleana and everything like that. Mr. Oaks: That' s what I learned earlier. That would be one of the great bits of being here is (inaudible) . Chair: We will let Danita go. Ms. Aiu: I just want to thank you for being here. I learned a lot of things. Sometimes when I talk to Pua she is like is that right? Pua is a native speaker and Molly said if you need words you can get them from her. She's a lineal descendent of the Wailua area and has a whole lot of knowledge. So thank you for being here to help her (inaudible). Ms. Palmeira: Excuse me I object to that. As a lineal descendent of Wailua Pua has not. Not in her role. Ms. Aiu : I am sorry Waldeen I don't know what you are talking about. The Apanas have lived in the Wailua area. Ms. Palmeira: Oh I am sorry I thought you were talking about Pua Aiu, Ms. Aiu: Pua Aiu, I am talking about Pua Aiu. Mr. Manini : Let me tell you something about Wailua. A lot of people think that Wailua is where Wailua is. Wailua supposed to be from the top of the mountain. You know where Waialeale is? I have a map that shoes Waialeale to be Wailua. They moved the name down. Actually Wailua is in Puna. Puna district, Huleia district cause the word Huleia means you know the machine that measure the earthquake? That' s what that means in English. One machine that registers the earthquake, you know the earthquake before he irrupt that' s what that thing is. So that whole place over here is all Huleia go to Kealia is all in Puna. The County can change em and put em Kawaihau and they can put em all kind names but when you look at the survey when they got the land from Kamehameha III they surveyed the land. The didn't survey with instrument, they surveyed just like how they surveyed the longitude latitude. This other one they surveyed by names of the places and they put em all down. Chair: Ok thank you. I think we are going to finish with closing remarks and bring this meeting to close. Ms. Sheehan: I also want to say thank you for putting all this on the table. Your commentary will definitely help to explain it and it' s very complicated to me. I feel like the bureaucracy is just awesome and for you to clean it up quickly, but more power to you. I hope you understand how complicated, even on a little island, the issues can be and there is a lot of intangible that you don' t really see and as you want to preserve buildings and special places I agree that landscape and environment is in it self something that we really need to look at with new fresh eyes. Thank you. December 2, 2010 KAY.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 27 Chair: And then I would like to, the cultural history here on Kauai is really important to a lot of people. I think over decades actually this has been going on right? We can start with under administration of Don Hibbard, SHPD . They were fully staffed but yet they weren't even in compliance back then and it' s been a long time since Don Hibbard had the go at that point. But the point of that is I don't think there is a state in the union that has an outfit like DLNR. The mission of DLNR is in absolute conflict with State Historic Preservation and State Parks. You have under the same entity two completely different agendas. Now the overriding agenda is that DLNR agenda which is the maximization of their lands and produce as much money as possible verses the mandates of the State Parks and Historic Preservation. Add it to that that we need another element of tribal preservation, which, I know you are familiar with and so we, especially (inaudible) the nature with the tribal organization under the Navahos are set up. So we have that addition element required here whether or not you if cultural entity or through this particular thing right there. Mr. Oaks : (Inaudible) Chair: I have a great deal of respect for her. I love the way they set up the Arizona Historic Preservation Office. I wish the State Historic would take a good look at the way they set up the aspect because the elements of the tribal historic preservation must be implemented with the State Historic Preservation Office. If you can't take it directly out of DLNR as its own entity you are (inaudible) to separate those two completely opposite agendas. So those are just a little bit of insight to some of the history of all of this. But ultimately I think we are really glad to have this dialogue with you here today and I look forward to more discussions along this line. Mr. Oaks: Hopefully not only yours but everybody' s spirit here. When I said something about having preservation in your gut I think that what you are talking about is not about the buildings or the places themselves it' s about the people and the spirits that were there and how all of that ties together and is a part of preserving the place. Ms. Palmeira: And just for your information too Wailua is the religious, and cultural, and political center (inaudible). And the spiritual part of it is something that is consecrated many, many (inaudible). Chair: There are two capitols on Kauai. Waimea and Wailua but only one religious and royal center not only that but it is (inaudible) many elements of the old road. SELECTION OF NEXT MEETING DATE AND AGENDA TOPICS Chair: Now with that I would like our final discussions to be on the topic of next months meeting and I think what we covered over here it would be nice if the Commission had a Chapter 19 review that would be Chapter 19 of the NPS Manual, Gang I think we need to be, in light of the reinstatement of the funding of this commission I think it would help if we were all familiar with this Chapter of the NPS grant proposal in order for us to facilitate the process with the County and earmark this particular program that we need to move forward. December 2, 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 28 Mr. Oaks : I did not get into much detail but I did talk to Myles about Maui, Maui is not going to be able to use the entire amount of money as it has to be used by the end of this year. There is approximately thirty two thousand dollars that is available. We are hoping we can get a good project going. Chair: We got four objectives and really briefly number one is to add other properties to the nomination. We are frustrated with the fact that for years we have had these properties and we need to get them nominated to the register. It is a priority with this council that we get the properties. Some of em has gone half way through the process and a good example of that are the salt ponds. Essentially (inaudible) we all had the cultural kuleana. But it made it through the State process but not the Federal. Ms. Santos : Not quite to the State. It' s not complete. Chair: Ok the point of it is Mr. Oaks : Registered (inaudible). Chair: Yes and we got five or six of em right off the bat that we got the land owner' s permission for but we are not able to move through with the review because we don't have the funding. Another one is our building inventory survey. That one is very important. The other one too is this Commission has spent a lot of time gathering all the information that in the CLG program that will enable us to educate this island as to the real function of this CLGs, the role and duties of this commission a lot of it has been done. We already have it there. We already even checked with all the other people and clearly everyone that we had we are far more educated as to who we are as a commission how do we get this across message across to this island. We have a proposal already. So we would like to carry out business that was interrupted. So we are under agenda topics so Commissioners if you are ok with that it looks like Chapter 19 review. Yes Chapter 9 and also we need to have a three to five year projection where we would like to go in regards to CLG funding, Mr. Helder: I think we are going to have to form a committee (inaudible). Chair: But keep in mind for all of us I think for that we need to have a three to five year operating strategy. Mr. Helder: Well if there are funds available I think we need to figure out an operational budget so we can go out and do more sight visits and prioritize. You know some of the kind of stuff (inaudible) . I was just Iooking at the form that you just gave out and some of it has to do with that the funds were matching grants for the CLG? Is that right? Mr. Oaks: It' s technically a sixty/forty program but as we were talking through the time that you volunteer for these meetings there are all kinds. Most entities can find a match and staff time, your time. December 2. 2010 K.H.P.R.C. Meeting Minutes Page 29 Chair: This County has carried on this Commission for the last five years without a dime is indicative of the County' s willingness to continue this CLG program, Mr. Helder: And I would really like to see an open line of communication about this. This has been very useful and I would like to see this carry on every so often for six months or so when we can touch base rather than have a big ball of stuff that builds up and then we try (inaudible) but it has been very productive. The next KHPRC Meeting is scheduled on Thursday, January 6, 2011 . ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5 : 16 p.m. ec fully Submitted, ftrnlee U. Jimenez Secretary Date: FEB 0 3 201