Monday, July 26, 2010

Musings: Monday, Monday

The big moon, which got me up and out the past two nights to revel in its glory, was still gloriously bright when Koko and I went walking this morning. My head swiveled from the rosy stain growing in the eastern sky to the sphere in the west that seemed to be growing larger, and certainly was becoming more yellow, as it descended toward Waialeale, which wore a raspberry beret, to borrow a line from Prince.

About that time I ran into Farmer Jerry on his way to work, and when he stopped to talk I told him to pull up a little bit so I could watch the moon, which was just about to set, and he happily obliged because he appreciates such things, too. And as it slipped down we chatted about pruning lychee, and plans to install another fence on Waialeale to keep out the pigs and the decision to move the high school football games to daytime to protect Newell’s shearwaters, two of which he’d seen dead on the road this past week.

“When I was playing football in high school, 20 or 30 of them would drop during a game,” he said. "This was over at Isenberg Park."

“What did they do?” I asked.

“Throw ‘em on the side and let the cats finish ‘em off,” he said. “There were a lot of birds then, and there wasn’t much consciousness at that time.”

“There still isn’t,” I said, and he agreed, adding that if the pros can play football during the day, that ought to be good enough for the kids.

As the moon grew whiter and sunk lower in a lavender sky, Waialeale draped herself in purple hues and our talk turned to politics, which got us both feeling a little down, until we brought things back around to the beauty of this place and felt better again.

Yes, the political season is in full swing, as the campaign signs attest, some of them dating back years. The other day I was driving with a friend down Olohena when he pointed out an I Like Lehua sign way up a hill. And you still see the John Hoff pineapple signs here and there.

Candidates took advantage of Saturday’s Koloa Days parade to gain some visibility, with the mayor riding a horse that was sweating beneath the load and Tim Bynum and Derek Kawakami carrying the County Council banner as Kaipo Asing trotted along, waving to the crowd. Jay Furfaro wasn’t walking with them, but as a friend noted, he’s more the kind of guy you’d expect to see on a float.

Neil Abercrombie was there, too, and Jon Riki Kuramatsu, who is running for Lieutenant Governor against Gary Hooser, who issued a strong statement pointing out one of the differences between himself and Lt. Gov Duke Aiona, who is running for governor:

The people of Hawaii watched as the Governor blatantly disregarded the promises contained in both the Federal and State constitutions. She was aided and abetted in this assault on civil rights by a Lieutenant Governor who has made no secret of his missionary zeal of “saving Hawaii for Jesus” - driven by his version of the bible and his version of God’s word.

The need to separate church and state is just one of the things that makes me a little uncomfortable about Mufi Hanneman, who bases his leadership style on the Mormon faith and directs his staff to pray about decisions, according to an article in the Mormon Times.

Getting back to local issues, the bill that would allow vacation rentals on agricultural lands to apply for a special use permit will go to the full Council for a vote on Wednesday. During last week’s committee hearing, both Jay and Tim said several times that it’s all about due process, giving folks a chance to apply. But if that’s really the case, why make it so easy for them to get the permit by easing requirements in the existing TVR bill and adding that big loophole that allows even those without a farm to get approved if the surrounding uses won’t support intensive agriculture?

It seems that allowing the planning department and commission to decide whether land can support intensive agriculture undermines the work of the Important Ag Lands group.

And as another Council observer noted, will this result in a separate tax class for vacation rentals on ag land? Has the Council really thought through all the ramifications?

Former Councilman Mel Rapozo, who is running again, is making this a key component of his campaign, devoting considerable blog space to the topic and publicizing an on-line petition asking the Council to reject the bill.

Meanwhile, I did ask Council candidate JoAnn Yukimura to clarify her stand on ag TVRs back on July 13 and got this email response:

Yes, my position has appeared confusing--partly because I am still searching for a fair and clear resolution of a situation and process that has been fraught with negligence and unwise decisions or inaction over a 30-year span of time. I intend to draft a written statement in the next few days.

So far, though, I haven’t seen it.

While we're talking about emails, one written by attorney Laura Barzilai offers evidence that people do listen to KKCR and things are getting even touchier around the Larsen’s Beach issue. Barzilai represents Patricia Hanwright, who owns property adjacent to the access. The land also is believed to include a segment of the coastal trail that currently runs across McCloskey’s land and stops at her fence.

Anyway, according to the email :

“[I]i was was reported to me by my client and her neighbors that on or about July 14, 2010, Hope [Kallai] and Richard Spacer were guests on the Blue Grass Radio Show, during which time they instructed listeners to commit the crime of trespass upon my client’s private property on non-existent trails southeast of Larsen’s Beach. Any and all trespassers found on my client’s property will be immediately reported to the Kauai Police Department and prosecution will be pursued. We now intend to report Mr. and Mrs. Spacer’s instructions to the police.

I’m not sure that inciting to trespass is a crime, but these days, who knows.

And finally, just to end on a positive note, I did a little story for Honolulu Weekly that offers proof that people can make a difference if they get on it and don't give up.

22 comments:

Mel Rapozo said...

Chapter 205-6 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes defines the process for applicants to request a special permit for a use that is not permitted. Here is the process:

§205-6 Special permit.

(a) Subject to this section, the county planning commission may permit certain unusual and reasonable uses within agricultural and rural districts other than those for which the district is classified. Any person who desires to use the person's land within an agricultural or rural district other than for an agricultural or rural use, as the case may be, may petition the planning commission of the county within which the person's land is located for permission to use the person's land in the manner desired. Each county may establish the appropriate fee for processing the special permit petition. Copies of the special permit petition shall be forwarded to the land use commission, the office of planning, and the department of agriculture for their review and comment.

(b) The planning commission, upon consultation with the central coordinating agency, except in counties where the planning commission is advisory only in which case the central coordinating agency, shall establish by rule or regulation, the time within which the hearing and action on petition for special permit shall occur. The county planning commission shall notify the land use commission and such persons and agencies that may have an interest in the subject matter of the time and place of the hearing.

(c) The county planning commission may, under such protective restrictions as may be deemed necessary, permit the desired use, but only when the use would promote the effectiveness and objectives of this chapter; provided that a use proposed for designated important agricultural lands shall not conflict with any part of this chapter. A decision in favor of the applicant shall require a majority vote of the total membership of the county planning commission.

d) Special permits for land the area of which is greater than fifteen acres or for lands designated as important agricultural lands shall be subject to approval by the land use commission. The land use commission may impose additional restrictions as may be necessary or appropriate in granting the approval, including the adherence to representations made by the applicant.

(e) A copy of the decision, together with the complete record of the proceeding before the county planning commission on all special permit requests involving a land area greater than fifteen acres or for lands designated as important agricultural lands, shall be transmitted to the land use commission within sixty days after the decision is rendered.
Within forty-five days after receipt of the complete record from the county planning commission, the land use commission shall act to approve, approve with modification, or deny the petition. A denial either by the county planning commission or by the land use commission, or a modification by the land use commission, as the case may be, of the desired use shall be appealable to the circuit court of the circuit in which the land is situated and shall be made pursuant to the Hawaii rules of civil procedure.

(f) Land uses substantially involving or supporting educational ecotourism, related to the preservation of native Hawaiian endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species, that are allowed in an approved habitat conservation plan under section 195D-21 or safe harbor agreement under section 195D-22, which are not identified as permissible uses within the agricultural district under sections 205-2 and 205-4.5, may be permitted in the agricultural district by special permit under this section, on lands with soils classified by the land study bureau's detailed land classification as overall (master) productivity rating class C, D, E, or U. [L 1963, c 205, pt of §2; Supp, §98H-6; HRS §205-6; am L 1970, c 136, §1; am L 1976, c 4, §2; am L 1978, c 166, §1; am L 1979, c 221, §1; gen ch 1985; am L 1998, c 237, §6; am L 2005, c 183, §5]

Mel Rapozo said...

Chapter 205-6 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes defines the process for applicants to request a special permit for a use that is not permitted. Here is the process:

§205-6 Special permit.

(a) Subject to this section, the county planning commission may permit certain unusual and reasonable uses within agricultural and rural districts other than those for which the district is classified. Any person who desires to use the person's land within an agricultural or rural district other than for an agricultural or rural use, as the case may be, may petition the planning commission of the county within which the person's land is located for permission to use the person's land in the manner desired. Each county may establish the appropriate fee for processing the special permit petition. Copies of the special permit petition shall be forwarded to the land use commission, the office of planning, and the department of agriculture for their review and comment.

(b) The planning commission, upon consultation with the central coordinating agency, except in counties where the planning commission is advisory only in which case the central coordinating agency, shall establish by rule or regulation, the time within which the hearing and action on petition for special permit shall occur. The county planning commission shall notify the land use commission and such persons and agencies that may have an interest in the subject matter of the time and place of the hearing.

(c) The county planning commission may, under such protective restrictions as may be deemed necessary, permit the desired use, but only when the use would promote the effectiveness and objectives of this chapter; provided that a use proposed for designated important agricultural lands shall not conflict with any part of this chapter. A decision in favor of the applicant shall require a majority vote of the total membership of the county planning commission.

d) Special permits for land the area of which is greater than fifteen acres or for lands designated as important agricultural lands shall be subject to approval by the land use commission. The land use commission may impose additional restrictions as may be necessary or appropriate in granting the approval, including the adherence to representations made by the applicant.

(e) A copy of the decision, together with the complete record of the proceeding before the county planning commission on all special permit requests involving a land area greater than fifteen acres or for lands designated as important agricultural lands, shall be transmitted to the land use commission within sixty days after the decision is rendered.
Within forty-five days after receipt of the complete record from the county planning commission, the land use commission shall act to approve, approve with modification, or deny the petition. A denial either by the county planning commission or by the land use commission, or a modification by the land use commission, as the case may be, of the desired use shall be appealable to the circuit court of the circuit in which the land is situated and shall be made pursuant to the Hawaii rules of civil procedure.

(f) Land uses substantially involving or supporting educational ecotourism, related to the preservation of native Hawaiian endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species, that are allowed in an approved habitat conservation plan under section 195D-21 or safe harbor agreement under section 195D-22, which are not identified as permissible uses within the agricultural district under sections 205-2 and 205-4.5, may be permitted in the agricultural district by special permit under this section, on lands with soils classified by the land study bureau's detailed land classification as overall (master) productivity rating class C, D, E, or U. [L 1963, c 205, pt of §2; Supp, §98H-6; HRS §205-6; am L 1970, c 136, §1; am L 1976, c 4, §2; am L 1978, c 166, §1; am L 1979, c 221, §1; gen ch 1985; am L 1998, c 237, §6; am L 2005, c 183, §5]

Anonymous said...

Mel insists on peddling the story that an AG opinion letter states that TVAs on ag land are per se illegal. There is no such claim in any AG opinion.

Anonymous said...

"the county planning commission may permit certain unusual and reasonable uses within agricultural and rural districts other than those for which the district is classified."

Yes, but the Ag land is classified such that people may have a dwelling on it, and renting your dwelling is not prohibited by 205.

HRS 205 just states that one will not get a special permit to build a separate hotel and call it ag tourism. But 205 does allow for a dwelling unit, with no limitations on who has to live in it. 205 does not ban renting out a farm dwelling. Building and renting a farm dwelling is allowed under 205. The previous poster is correct that the A.G. opinion does not say what it is represented.

So if I go away for the summer, I can't rent out my house if its not in a VDA? Really?

And so this time it is the left that would bring us into fascism. How things change.

Arthur Ralston said...

As usual, now is the beginning of the long hot summer. The season of politicians holding up signs and waving, and lolo drivers that hold up traffic to wave back. I have news for you, how they wave has no bearing on their actual "would be" governmental performance. The only benefit is if you make it through, without overheating, you have tested your cars cooling system. The best alternative, ignor them and keep on driving. 2,stay off the road at that time. 3, go the back way. Best solution - make it illegal!

Aberdumbie really stuck his foot in his mouth last week. He promised the carpenters union that if he is elected, the economy would magicaly transform itself to more prosperous times,like the 80's

Neil, I found an old tab of purple haze.

Then, he chewed out Mufi for quitting the mayors job when he wasn't finished.

Hey Neil didn't you quit congress in the middle of health care and economic reform?

Lolo!

I did watch rhe tvr bill county council meeting on tv. What a word dance. Right On Arthur, Ann, and Joan!

Maybe we'll elect a governor that can run up and down stairs and say no.

We need some decent politicians badly.

Mahalo

Art

Anonymous said...

To Anonymous July 26, 2010 10:36 AM:

Please review the definition of "farm dwelling" before you comment on permitted uses of ad land.

"Farm dwelling", as used in this paragraph, means a single-family dwelling located on and used in connection with a farm, including clusters of single-family farm dwellings permitted within agricultural parks developed by the State, or where agricultural activity provides income to the family occupying the dwelling."

Where does it say that rentals are legal? Please help me.

Anonymous said...

Looks like muffi wants the stuperferry.

http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/breaking/99286069.html

Anonymous said...

Why can't Mel just post the link to HRS docs instead of wasting space here!

jack said...

HAS THIS BEEN DONE?
(a) Copies of the special permit petition shall be forwarded to the land use commission, the office of planning, and the department of agriculture for their review and comment.

HAS THIS BEEN HONORED? (Notice this part does not say subject to approval by the Planning Commission)
d) Special permits for land the area of which is greater than fifteen acres or for lands designated as important agricultural lands SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE LAND USE COMMISSION

(f) Land uses substantially involving or supporting educational ecotourism, related to the preservation of native Hawaiian endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species,..

WHICH ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS PERMISSIBLE USES within the agricultural district under sections 205-2 and 205-4.5, may be permitted in the agricultural district by special permit under this section, on lands with soils classified by the land study bureau's detailed land classification as overall (master) productivity rating class C, D, E, or U.

Has the County Planning Commission been over-reaching their authority?

jack said...

Hanwrightʻs attorney..."Any and all trespassers found on my client’s property will be immediately reported to the Kauai Police Department and prosecution will be pursued. We now intend to report Mr. and Mrs. Spacer’s instructions to the police."

Can I ask if anyone is shaking in their boots yet???
Would this attorney be so brave as to unearth anything attached to the McCloskey theft so that we might find a venue to readdress the theft of Crown lands at Kealia?

And to the voices on KKCR who are being threatened with malicious and frivolous litigation by this ʻjump the gunʻ attorney, arenʻt your 1st amendment rights to free speech in place as what you stated, in no way, sounds remotely like somebody screaming "fire" in a packed movie theatre.

Thereʻs a trend starting to form here in Kauai with wannabe attorneys puffing up and acting as if their clients are royal bloods...far from it, we all know they are bunch of sharks trying to get over any way they can. Take Waipouli coconuts litigants for example: threatening to destroy a Hawaiian kupuna for speaking up about the iwi.
These people are vile and terribly deficient in human decency.

Hele on KKCR. I didnʻt hear "fire". Did anyone else? Tell the pompous lil ʻlawyerʻ to wiggle it outta this town.
Names are not forgotten here.
There is only one good attorney on this island. His name doesnʻt need to be mentioned. We all know who he is.

Anonymous said...

Seems that Brescia got judgments against the Naue trespassers. Could cost some people their homes?

R. Jordan said...

Brescia ainʻt seen nothing yet.
He doesnʻt have a clue whatʻs coming soon.

Anonymous said...

Brescia ainʻt seen nothing yet.
He doesnʻt have a clue whatʻs coming soon.


If it's illegal, I guess blogspot will be getting a subpoena for the IP address of the computer R. Jordan used to make that comment.

R. Jordan said...

Oh brother. You are laughable.
Worried?

Anonymous said...

Brescia ainʻt seen nothing yet.
He doesnʻt have a clue whatʻs coming soon.


Let me guess. Someone who says she is the actual true owner of the property is going to file a temporary restraining order to stop Brescia from watering his lawn because it disrespects the kapuna?

Anonymous said...

July 26, 2010 6:33 PM

One more question for your list, has the State submitted any form of review of the proposed ordinance?

Anonymous said...

Let me guess. Someone who says she is the actual true owner of the property is going to file a temporary restraining order to stop Brescia from watering his lawn because it disrespects the kapuna?

Lol. And waving a xerox copy of a land patent, no doubt.

Anonymous said...

Goofy Hannemann as Governor scares me. That could end up being worse than Lingle.

Anonymous said...

Throw in inexperienced young punk Brian Schatz and we could be in more trouble than we are now.

Wahine Warrior said...

KUPUNA!! KUPUNA!!

K-U-P-U-N-A !!!!!!!!


please. for god sakes STOP MISSPELLING THAT WORD!!!!!!

Lord knows I misspell tons of English words all the time, but STOP MISSPELLING the word kupuna.

grrrr

PS chapter 205, and Mel Rapozo are absolutely correct. I will be there to OPPOSE this bill. Oh and in light of the little "beer summit", I would say a little investigation of that would be in order.

Thanks again Joan, for the brave investigative reporting on that one, and thanks to Mel, for getting on the ball right away to launch complaints!!

Mel you definatly have my vote this election!!

Anonymous said...

This attorney Laura Barzilai should check her facts next time she blindly accepts of the word of her client unverified and then accuses people of instructing people to tresspass. (What HRS is that anyway?)

Richard Spacer was never on the radio show "Blue Grass" on KKCR on or about July 14. Ask KKCR.

I am sure if Spacer knows about this email from Barzilai, knowing his personality, he has already consulted with an attorney for a defamation lawsuit against Barzilai and her client and clients neighbor(s). I know he can use the money, and he knows Hanwright has plenty of it.

County Council Hangover said...

http://vetotvrbill.webstarts.com/