Posted 12/23/2023

Seasons Greetings and a Joyous Holiday from the FOM Board,

Wow, another year just whizzed by. From our hui emails, you know we have been busy. If ever you want to know what happened throughout the year, feel free to visit FOM’s website. Under the “Current and Past News” tab, you can access all of our hui emails and track our work for the year. One of the more lasting achievements this year is our part in helping to curb the proposed residential electric rate increase from 18+%, to no more than 7.99% max. We are happy to share that we also had a good end of year win on the Coco Palms issue. Our environmental work would not be possible without our generous supporters.

Coco Palms Update

Beginning 12/8/2023, FOM sponsored a number of key people to fly to Oahu and testify to the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR). We partnered with I Ola Wailuanui (IOW), supporting their vision for a historic preservation of the former Coco Palms site, starting with opposing the developers desire to use State lands to meet their hotel ingress and egress in parking requirements. When testimony began, FOM was called to testify first on the Coco Palms Agenda Item. The issue was whether permits for three parcels of State land should be awarded to RP21 Coco Palms, LLC  (RP21), the latest in a string of “would be” developers who have promised to restore the Coco Palms after it was destroyed by Hurricane Iniki 31 years ago. This restoration has not happened for so long that the public is seriously upset with the eyesore that has been allowed to remain year after year as developers, promise a repair and rebuild, get new permits and sell the land again to another “would be” developer, enhancing the lands value with each successive permit entitlement and sale. FOM and IOW were both solidly opposed to the staff recommendation, that the fee simple property owned by RP21 be awarded public land to further improve the value to yet latest developer who has done nothing to either improve the site or remove/demolish the remnant eyesore the hurricane ravaged hotel, since their arrival in February 2021. Rather, they have been cited with a Notice of Violation for the unpermitted removal of more than 75 healthy coconut palms from the State land and conservation area without permits. Our testimony began with calling the Boards attention to the fact that there was another applicant seeking to develop cultural activities, historic signage, and preservation of parking for beach goers rather than dedicating our State lands to better serve hotel occupants, lessening the developers need to use their fee simple lands for hotel parking, ingress, egress, etc. We pointed out that buried in the staff submittal was a vague reference to IOW having an expressed interest in the three State parcels as well. In fact, IOW had submitted full applications for the parcels in April 2023. The Board’s Staff chose to ignore the applications and simply limited the Board’s consideration to one applicant only, RP21. Fortunately the State’s hearing calendar ran long and our agenda item was continued to Friday the 15th. When the Board next convened December 15, 2023, IOW attorney, Teri Tico and FOM attorney, Bianca Isaki, each were able to add to the many who had testified the week before. Teri Tico read from a letter sent to her by Staff in May of this year acknowledging receipt of the IOW permit applications and promising to contact IOW when the State parcels were available for permits. IOW was never contacted as promised. The Board appeared less than pleased with their staff and for now decided to give equal right of access to both IOW and RP21 for the smallest of the three State land parcels, reserving final decision on the two larger parcels until next year. The Board instructed their staff to work with both applicants and prepare a new staff submittal that accurately represented the interests of both applicants. Director and BLNR Chair Dawn Chang stated that it appeared the staff had presumed who the Board would want the property to go to and that was not okay. The many wonderful testimonies supporting IOW generated what appears to be a sincere interest on the part of the Board to permit IOW to use these State lands for preservation rather than aid the hotel who wants to use the State lands to meet their County parking requirements and required comfort station for beach goers. The developers were not happy with the decision because they actually told the Board they were hoping for the RPs to be granted to them 12/15/23 as a critical part of their negotiations, “currently ongoing with the County” per their attorney, Mauna Kea Trask. IOW was pleased with the outcome. Since they had not been put on the Agenda despite their timely and proper applications for the three State parcels, the Board could not award IOW the RPs at this time either. We will keep you posted and let you know when IOW’s applications are to be heard.

A Small Setback

When we last wrote, we shared that Pinkston’s Kiahuna Plantation Drive development was required to prepare a Master Drainage Plan (MDP) to include the project area, all the Kiahuna parcels and developments planned for west and east of Kiahuna Plantation Drive mauka (above) of Poipu Road. The MDP requirement, condition 26, stated further that the MDP had to include whether there would be increased drainage to the Kaneiolouma Heiau site, an archeological preserve, once 280 luxury condominiums are developed/built on Pinkston’s Kiahuna Drive parcel. The preserve is makai of Poipu Road between the road and the ocean. It is the lowest point, below sea level, on the south shore of Kauai.

You may recall that in July of this year, Pinkston asked the County Planning Department and Planning Commission to modify the MDP requirement. Pinkston’s request was that he only study the increased drainage from covering his parcel, and not the cumulative impact of drainage from the surrounding developed parcels or the potential for increased drainage from his parcel to Kaneiolouma Heiau  which is makai (that might reach beach side of Poipu Road). FOM objected and requested a hearing if there was to be any change of condition 26 because of the need to preserve the cultural and archeological significance of Kaneiolouma Heiau, which is suppose to be protected from damage or destruction from increased drainage, likely to occur with the development of a 280 unit luxury condominium complex that will cover Pinkston’s 28 acre parcel, the last remaining open area that is serving as a sponge for several surrounding developments. FOM’s you tube channel “Save Koloa” has photographs of the Pinkston parcel in its pre-development state with culverts that can seen running onto the Pinkston parcel from the Kiahuna Golf Course, the Wainani subdivision, and Kiahuna Golf Village. His large parcel serves as a sponge for that area during rain events. Once covered, it is undisputed there will be an increase in run off.

The recognized increase drainage from rain events with development, was addressed in a 2012 master plan for the Kaneiolouma Heiau restoration and preservation. In that 2012 plan, it states: “Water draining from mauka subdivisions into the park is contributing to flooding problems in the Preserve.” That recognition is likely why the County required the developer comply with condition 26 before any building permits would be issued:

“”
County of Kauai Permit Condition 26

On July 18, 2023, the Planning Commission Ordered an Administrative Hearing to address Pinkston’s request to modify the above condition. On August 9, 2023, Pinkston’s attorney’s sued the County asking Judge Watanabe to modify condition 26. In that suit, they failed to tell the Judge that an Administrative Hearing had already been Ordered by the Planning Commission in response to Pinkston’s earlier request that the Commission modify that condition. It was only through a legal friend that FOM learned that Pinkston had filed a suit asking the Court to do what he had previously asked the Commission to do. Pinkston’s attorneys failed to serve us with Notice even though we were parties to the Administrative Hearing Order. Fortunately, there is a Rule of Law that requires that the Administrative Hearing process be complete before bringing an Action in Circuit Court. As soon as we learned of Pinkston’s Circuit Court lawsuit, we had to quickly file a Petition to Intervene, letting the Judge know that there was an Administrative Hearing that had been Ordered and that we were a party to that Action. We were not included and not given Notice by Pinkston of the Case he filed before the Circuit Court. Judge Watanabe told Pinkston’s attorneys that they could not be in the Circuit Court and when they had not finished the Administrative Hearing Process that Pinkston began when he asked the Planning Commission to modify condition 26. The Judge Dismissed Pinkston’s lawsuit and refused to hear the Summary Judgement Motion he had filed with that Complaint.

So what happens next, Pinkston files a “Master Drainage Plan” December 5, 2023, gets it approved and signed off on by three County Officials and gets put on the Planning Commission Agenda within 24 hours of delivering the claimed MDP to Planning. Meanwhile, the Administrative Hearing Ordered in response to his request to modify is pending. In fact, when we attended the December 12, 2023 Planning Commission meeting to review the “MDP” delivered to the County December 5, 2023, it was evident from the testimony of the engineer who prepared the “MDP”, that it was the very same modified drainage plan they had asked the Commission to let them file July 3, 2023. When you review the link to the following video recording of the Planning Commission meeting 12/12/23, you will find that they only considered the properties mauka (above) Poipu Road, did not aggregate or consider cumulative drainage impact with the development and concrete that would cover Pinkston’s parcel as called for in condition 26. Most importantly, the filed MDP is really a modified “MDP” because it fails to include any consideration of the impact from the increased drainage once Pinkston’s parcel is developed on the Kaneiolouma Heiau. Please see the engineers testimony offered before the Planning Commission where they even go so far as to suggest that a parcel owned by the Knudsen Trust should be dedicated as a detention area to hold the increased flows that will occur from run off during rain events once Pinkston’s parcel is developed:

Planning Commission 12/12/23 MDP Hearing

  1. 5:54 County Planning Director Hull states the Master Drainage Plan requirement to include impact to Kaneiolouma is a “hard and fast requirement of development permit condition 26”.
  2. The developer is required to keep post development run off to the same standard as pre-development run off
  3. Covering the 28 acres of Pinkston parcel with buildings, roofs, parking lots etc. will increase the run off from that parcel.
  4. The MDP did not consider the cumulative impact. Rather, they attached the approved drainage maps from each of the nearby developments in the same project area without any determination of the total flow that will result once Pinkston’s parcel is covered.
  5. At 6:19:20, Wayne Wada, the engineer who prepared the MDP stated they did not consider what impact there would be to the heiau.
  6. At 6:22:40, the MDP suggested the County require Knudsen Trust to develop a detention basin to hold the increased water that they know will occur with the Pinkston development.
  7. At 6:28:45, Wayne Wada admits that for whatever was done by way of a MDP, they don’t know what the impact will be to the heiau post development, suggesting that the MDP is only “theoretical” (ignoring the detailed records NOAH has for the past 50+ years with the daily rainfall on the south shore and improperly relying on a 2 and 100 year storm event standard from the County engineering manual from 2001, a 20+ year old standard that does not provide for climate change and that 24 hour storm events are more frequent).

WE WILL BE FILING AN APPEAL AND WE WILL DO OUR BEST TO KEEP THE OBVIOUS CERTAINTY OF INCREASED DRAINAGE FROM FURTHER DAMAGING KANEIOLOUMA AND THE POIPU WAIOHI BEACH AREA! We have already experienced a floating car in the Waiohai Beach parking lot. There is no question that the County does not have the existing drainage from the developments/parcels already covered in concrete in this area under control. We have to try to keep it from getting worse.

We ask only that the County enforce their permit conditions that were designed to protect and preserve this environmentally sensitive and historic area. Please see the testimony we filed below with the Planning Commission objecting to the “MDP” because it was not a valid master drainage plan as required. We could not believe the Commission’s decision December 12, 2023 approving the “MDP” filed just one week prior, especially after the testimony of the engineer who prepared the “MDP” admitted that drainage to the Kaneiolouma Heuai was not studied in his “MDP”. He claimed that any such consideration could only be theoretical. Please see our testimony below and that of North Shore Hydrologist, Matt Rosener, who has a Masters Degree and extensive experience with drainage plans. He details the deficiencies in Pinkston’s “MDP”.

Pinkston’s claimed “Master Drainage Plan”

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, Jay Kechloian and Eileen Kechloian, Officers, FOM Board of Directors

——– Forwarded Message ——–

Date:Sun, 10 Dec 2023 21:57:46 -1000
From:Bridget Hammerquist <[email protected]>
Subject:Agenda Item H1 – Master Drainage Plan for Kiahuna Plantation Drive Development
To:Planning Department <[email protected]>
Cc:County Council <[email protected]>

Friends of Maha’ulepu                       friendsofmahaulepu.org                                                 12/10/2023

To: The Kauai Planning Commission

4444 Rice Street, Suite A473
Lihue, HI 96766
Phone: (808) 241-4050
Email: [email protected]

From: Friends of Maha‘ulepu

Subject:  Agenda Item H1 – Master Drainage Plan for Kiahuna Plantation Drive Development

Dear Members of the Kauai Planning Commission,

Friends of Maha‘ulepu (FOM) respectfully submits this comment in support of and to supplement our previously filed Petition to Intervene and/or the request for denial of the applicants request for approval of the December 5, 2023 Master Drainage Plan (MDP). This comment addresses the MDP dated December 5, 2023, for the 280-unit luxury condominium development on Kiahuna Plantation Drive, prepared by Esaki Surveying and Mapping, Inc. Our concerns are necessitated by the omissions from the MDP of critical information necessary to constitute an adequate MDP and rapid progression of events surrounding the MDP’s submission and approval process. This comment letter is supported by the Declaration of Matt Rosener, an experienced civil engineer with graduate level degrees in civil engineering specializing in drainage, water quality and erosion management with 22 years of experience in the State of Hawaii. As Mr Rosener details, the applicant’s December 5, 2023 MDP is void of essential and required information to comply with the County Engineering Manual and the Standards of Practice in the Industry. For the reasons set forth below, FOM respectfully requests that this agenda item be ordered to be heard by the Administrative Law Judge already retained pursuant to Planning Commission Order of July 18, 2023. That order was in response to FOM’s request to Intervene on applicant’s request that Condition 26 be modified, a condition that required a MDP be prepared and approved for all development parcels in the subject area mauka of Poipu Road to include drainage impact to Kāneiolouma Heiau. Now, the same applicant, Meridian Pacific and Gary Pinkston, have submitted a MDP to the County Planning Department completed  by Esaki Surveying and Mapping, Inc on December 5, 2023, and added to the Planning Commission Agenda for approval on the afternoon of December 6, 2023 for hearing December 12, 2023, 24 hours after the MDPs completion.

Pertinent Relevant Background For Agenda Item H1 December 12, 2023

The Commissions records will reflect that on July 11, 2023, the Kauai County Planning Commission addressed Agenda Item H a. and b.:

“a.      Subdivision Application No. S-2021-7
5425 Pa’u A Laka, LLC.
Proposed 2-lot Consolidation and Re-subdivision into 4-lots
TMK:    (4) 2-8-014: 032
K61oa, Kaua’i

1) In the Matter of Applications for (1) Preliminary subdivision extension request for application no. S-2021-7, 5425 Pa’u A Laka, LLC for proposed 2-lot consolidation and re-subdivision into 4-lots; and (2) Amendment to Class IV Zoning Permit (Z-IV-2006-27), Use Permit (U-2006-26), and Project Development Use Permit (PDU-2006-25} for modification to Condition No. 26 relating to drainage requirements for a development situation at the Pau A Laka Street/Kiahuna Plantation Drive, 5425 Pau A Laka Street, Tax Map Key: 2-8-014: 032, and containing a total area 27.886 acres, Petitioners Friends of Mahaulepu and Save Koloa’s Petition to Intervene and, Alternatively for Denial of Applications.

b.    Subdivision Application No. S-2022-6
Kukui’ula Development Company, LLC./
MP Kaua’i HH Development Fund, LLC.
Kukui’ula Parcel HH Subdivision
Proposed 3-lot Consolidation and Re-subdivision into 51-lots
TMK: (4) 2-6-109: 026, 029, 031
Koloa, Kaua’i”

FOM’s Petition to Intervene to modify Condition 26 was heard and the matter was Ordered to an Administrative Hearing via FOM’s request for a Contested Case Hearing. The Commission served all parties with its Order to the Administrative Hearing Process on July 18, 2023.

On August 9, 2023, Council for Gary Pinkston and Meridian Pacific filed a Complaint and Motion for Summary Judgement against the County before Judge Watanabe, asking the Judge to modify the drainage plan. The documents filed included a Declaration from Wayne Wada supporting the Complaint that claimed the MDP requirement/Condition 26 by the County was impossible to prepare. Pinkston’s lawyer told the Court that it was within the Court’s purview to make the requested modifications to Condition 26. The Court was not told that Pinkston had previously filed an application for modification of Condition 26 with the Kauai Planning Commission. The Court was also not told that the Planning Commission had already ordered the matter to a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge after granting FOM’s Application to Intervene. FOM was not given notice of the Complaint and Summary Judgement Motion, even though Pinkston’s lawyers knew that FOM was a party to the Planning Commission Order of July 18, 2023.

FOM learned of the Complaint when a friend happened to notice on the Court Filings that there was a new Complaint filed by Pinkston against the County. FOM was not a party and not given notice so we couldn’t file a Motion to Dismiss. Instead FOM filed a Motion to Intervene before Judge Watanabe and argued that Pinkston could not have a Complaint heard in the Circuit Court on a matter that was already before the Planning Commission and Pinkston’s administrative remedies had not been exhausted. The Court agreed, striking Pinkston’s Complaint, Dismissing the Complaint and Motion for Summary Judgement.

Just two weeks ago, the Administrative Law Judge set hearing dates for Pinkston’s request to modify the drainage plan requirement.

After all that, on December 5, 2023 Pinkston’s attorney submitted a “MDP” to the Kauai County Planning Director, also signed by Esaki Surveying and Mapping, Inc. on that same day December 5, 2023, which they had previously said could not be done.

Key Concerns and Requests:

  1. Accelerated Process and Lack of Comprehensive Review:

The MDP was released on December 5, 2023, and rapidly scheduled December 6, 2023 for a hearing on December 12, 2023. Between December 5, 2023 when the MDP was finalized and signed by Wayne T Wada, P.E. and the afternoon of December 6, 2023, the MDP was carried to the Planning Department by Laurel Loo December 5, 2023. From there the MDP was taken to Public Works for review by Michael Mole, P.E. who supposedly read, reviewed and approved the plan by 4:42 pm December 5, 2023. At that point the Planning Department was closed for the day. Thereafter, on December 6, 2023 the MDP was carried back to the Planning Department to be read, reviewed and approved by Ka’āina Hull and Dale Kua. That same day, both signed and submitted the MDP to the Planning Commission with a request for Agenda Item H1 to be reviewed and approved by this Commission.

This expedited timeline raises significant concerns regarding the adequacy of the review process, particularly in light of the down slope proximity of Poipu Beach Park, Poipu and Waiohai Beaches. Potential environmental impacts of such a large-scale development should not be so rushed that the sufficiency of the review is less than probable. The lack of adequate time for public scrutiny and expert analysis in such a hasty schedule is alarming, particularly when considering the long-term environmental and community impacts of a 280 unit luxury condo development that will add a lot of concrete and cover most of the Pinkston 28 acre parcel.

  1. Conflicts with Existing Contested Case:

There is an existing and ongoing contested case ordered July 18, 2023 after Pinkston requested a modification of the MDP requirement, Condition 26, which has not been resolved or withdrawn. This pre-existing case complicates the current situation and requires careful and thorough consideration to avoid conflicting outcomes.

The overlap between the new MDP submission and the ongoing contested case, recently scheduled for hearing dates by the Administrative Law Judge, presents a clear conflict, potentially undermining the integrity of the administrative process and the thoroughness of environmental safeguards.

  1. Incomplete and Segmented Drainage Analysis:

The MDP lacks a comprehensive, systematic approach to drainage planning, focusing on individual developments rather than the entire area. This segmented method fails to address the cumulative impact of the development on the surrounding environment, particularly on sensitive areas such as Poipu and Waiohai Beaches and the Kāneiolouma Heiau.

The absence of a detailed narrative and a hydrologic map detailing existing drainage facilities and flow patterns for the entire petition area is a significant oversight. This information is crucial for understanding the stormwater runoff interactions and is required per the County’s Stormwater Manual (Section 2.2.1).

The MDP’s failure to integrate drainage impacts from the broader area risks significant environmental consequences, underscoring the need for a more holistic and regionally aware approach to drainage planning. Please see the Declaration of Civil Engineer and Hydrologist Matt Rosener found herewith.

  1. Request for Detailed Review and consolidation with ongoing contested case:

In light of these concerns, FOM strongly urges the Planning Commission to consolidate the MDP review and consideration with the Matter already ordered to an Administrative Law Judge for a Contested Case Hearing. A consolidation of the MDP for review, study for sufficiency during the administrative hearing already set to commence at the end of February will allow a thorough and detailed review of the MDP with aid of expert testimony to assure compliance with Condition 26. This review should encompass all aspects of drainage, environmental impact, and community concerns to ensure a sustainable and responsible approach to development.

Given the serious nature of these concerns, we urge the Planning Commission to deny the requested approval of the MDP required by condition 26 and instead consolidate the request for approval of the very recently completed MDP with Applicant’s prior request to modify Condition 26, now scheduled by the hearing officer to commence late February 2024. For the safety of the beaches and the public’s right to a clean and healthful environment, (Article 9 of the Hawaii State Constitution), the MDP should receive an adequate and comprehensive review with the opportunity to obtain the information now missing from the MDP to assure protection of the down slope beaches and the Kāneiolouma Heiau. Please see the Declaration of Civil Engineer and Hydrologist Matt Rosener found herewith.

We appreciate your attention to these critical issues and trust that the Commission will prioritize the preservation of our island’s unique environment and the well-being of its communities.

[Declaration of Matthew Rosener]

Posted 12/10/2023

Aloha,

This one really doesn’t pass the smell test. Developers are really pushing this County and this island, maximizing luxury condos and resort developments. It’s amazing what lengths our County government officials will go to to further the developer’s goals. Last Tuesday, 12/5/23, Pinkston’s attorney, Laurel Loo walked into the Planning Department with a Master Drainage Plan (MDP) for Pinkston’s 280 unit luxury condo development on Kiahuna Plantation Drive. Her transmittal letter was addressed to the Planning Director, Kaʻāina Hull. Sometime thereafter on 12/5/23, the MDP was taken to Public Works. Our Traffic Engineer, Michael Mole prepared a letter the same day 12/5/23, signed 4:42 PM and approved the MDP, a 95 page document. On 12/6/23, within 24 hours from the time Pinkston’s plan was delivered to the Planning Department, our Planning Director, Kaʻāina Hull and Chief of Permitting Section, Dale Kua approved and signed Pinkston’s MDP and added it to the Planning Commission Agenda, recommending their approval this coming Tuesday morning 12/12/23 at 9:00 am. (See letters Pinkston attorney, Public Works and Planning Director)At some point, it would be great if we didn’t have to keep responding to these outrageous actions by developers and the County. The MDP wasn’t even finished until 12/5/23. That’s the date Wayne Wada of Isaki Engineering, finished and signed the MDP. How likely is it that the County had adequate time to really review the sufficiency or accuracy of Pinkston’s MDP where the potential impact from drainage is a short down slope distance to Poipu and Waiohi Beaches and Kaneiolouma Heiau, an archeological preserve, near the beach. Needless to say, we put it in high gear and filed the a Petition to Intervene before 4:00 pm 12/7/23. We are requesting the Planning Commission not grant approval of a rushed MDP for all the reasons stated below. Public comments may be filed for the Commission’s consideration and should be emailed to the Planning Commission on or before 9:00 am Monday 12/11/23: email to [email protected]. Please make the subject of your email “Agenda Item H1”. FOM intends to strongly oppose this “slam bam thank you mam” agenda item and request the matter be added to the Contested Case already granted by the Planning Commission 07/11/23 on the very same MDP. (See below for more details). If you can, please attend the Planning Commission meeting Tuesday at 9:00 am. The meeting will be held in the Planning Department meeting room 2A-2B, Lihue’e Civic Center, Moikeha Building, 4444 Rice Street, Lihue, HI (right across from the restrooms near DMV). Public comments in person are most effective. This rush job on a Master Drainage Plan that has potential significant impact for the south shore beach area is critical because of the size, a 280 luxury condominium unit development, which necessarily will require a lot of concrete and cover a 28 acre grassy area that up until now has been absorbing drainage from the following mauka developments that abut Pinkston’s acreage; Wainani subdivision, Kiahuna Golf Course, and Kiahuna Golf Village.BACKGROUND INFORMATION/POINTS FOR COMMENTS:1. Pinkston asked the Planning Department and the Planning Commission to modify the counties’ requirement that he prepare a Master Drainage Plan (MDP)  that called for him to include the drainage from the mauka developments that abut and drain onto his undeveloped parcel now. Rather than factor in that drainage he only wanted to include the direct drainage caused by run off created by the concrete that would be covering his 28 acre parcel once his condominium development was built. He covered the drainage culverts that ran from the abutting lands onto his parcel with rock. He did not want to include the water from those culverts when talking about the impact to the coastline down slope. The MDP has to be done and approved before Pinkston could receive building permits for his large condominium development.

“”
County of Kauai Permit Condition 26

2. FOM requested the Planning Commission Order the Matter to an Administrative Hearing for a detailed study rather than having the Planning Commission attempt to modify the above condition without help from experts in drainage because of the potential significant impact to the nearby ocean down slope. The Planning Commission granted FOM’s request and ordered the Matter to an Administrative Hearing on 07/18/23

3. On August 9, 2023, Laurel Loo filed a Complaint and Motion for Summary Judgement against the County before Judge Watanabe, asking the Judge to modify the drainage plan. The documents filed included a Declaration from Wayne Wada supporting the Complaint that claimed the MDP requested by the County was impossible to prepare. Pinkston’s lawyer, Ms Loo told the Court that it was within the Court’s purview to make the modification. She did not tell the Court, that Pinkston had already made the request of the Planning Commission. She did not tell the Court that the Planning Commission had already ordered it to a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. She also did not give FOM notice of the Complaint and Summary Judgement Motion, even though Pinkston’s lawyers knew that FOM was a party to the Planning Commission Order of 7/18/23.

4. FOM learned of the Complaint when a friend happened to notice on the Court Filings that there was a new Complaint filed by Pinkston against the County. FOM was not a party and not given notice so we couldn’t file a Motion to Dismiss. Instead FOM filed a Motion to Intervene before Judge Watanabe and argued that Pinkston could not have a Complaint heard in the Circuit Court on a matter that was already before the Planning Commission. The Court agreed, striking Pinkston’s Complaint and Motion for Summary Judgement.

5. Just two weeks ago the Administrative Law Judge, set dates for Pinkston’s request to modify the drainage plan requirement.


6. After all that, on 12/5/23 Pinkston’s attorney went into the Planning Department with the MDP signed by Esaki Engineering on that some day 12/5/23, which they had previously said could not be done.

7. FOM strongly believes that this latest “slam bam thank you mam” MDP should be made a part of the hearing that has already been ordered and set to commence late February 2024.

It’s hard to believe that a more outrageous manipulative disregard for our Counties’ Ordinances and Conditions could occur. Please let the Planning Department know how you feel about these development tactics… And why isn’t our Planning Department taking better care of our environment? (allowing blasting and grubbing and grading prior to permit approval and no protection of our endangered endemic blind cave spider and amphopod)

Feel free to share this email and if you send a comment, please know that we would like to receive a copy via BCC or otherwise.

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 12/9/2023

Testimony at the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) heaing on Wailua/Coco Palms, 12/8/2023. Video will begin with Bridget Hammerquist.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=V4xDtBo3ywU%3Fsi%3DHGWf4b4v3UCpEUEg%26start%3D31726

Testimony at the Board of Land and Natural Resources BLNR heaing on Wailua/Coco Palms, 12/8/2023. Video will begin with Felicia Cowden.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=V4xDtBo3ywU%3Fsi%3DhnLnLO3oV5LArEcI%26start%3D32243

Posted 12/6/2023

Aloha,

When we sent out the Agenda link for the upcoming Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) Meeting in our “Met our Match” email, we shared that the Coco Palms matter was going to be heard as item D6 on December 7, 2023. Since that email, the Board has advised that the Coco Palms matter will actually be heard Friday December 8, 2023, sometime after 11:00 am. Many have already submitted testimony which is great. There are 167 testimonies thus far posted on the DLNR website, accessible at DLNR.Hawaii.gov. It is not too late to submit written testimony. The Board advised they will receive and post testimonies received by 9:00 am Thursday December 7, 2023. You can email your comment/testimony and it doesn’t have to be long (check out some of the testimonies already posted) and send your email on Agenda Item D6 Coco Palms to [email protected]. If you want to want the meeting, you can watch it on the youtube live stream. If you want to give live testimony/an oral comment, you can call the Board or participate in a video Zoom meeting. The instructions for phone and video zoom are the following. If you plan to participate through video zoom, send your request in a timely manner to: [email protected] with your information, email address, and the agenda item you wish to testify on. If you haven’t already, help us get a flood of comments to the Board. They can be brief. FOM’s testimony was sent to you yesterday, please feel free to copy any of the points made in that testimony. It is important to let the Board know how Kauai feels about a luxury resort now at that location considering sea level rise, a seriously ailing wastewater treatment plant and congested traffic. If an emergency evacuation is needed, that area would be very problematic with the number of people in Wailua houselots and homesteads, all having to merge from Kuamoʻo Road and Halelio Road with Kuhio Highway… The only exit road for all of Kapaa and residents between Kapaa and Anahola.

AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCESDATE: December 7, 2023 (anticipated continuation on December 8, 2023, at 9:00 a.m.)
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
PLACE: DLNR Boardroom, Kalanimoku Bldg. 1151 Punchbowl Street, 1st Floor / & Online via Zoom Meeting ID: 883 8062 9451 ZOOM LINK: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/88380629451This meeting will be held using interactive conference technology under section 92-3.7, Haw. Rev. Stat. Board members, staff, applicants, testifiers, and the public can choose to participate in person, online via Zoom, or by telephone. The public may also view the live meeting via its live stream at: https://youtube.com/live/Ax0Vk65Bngs?feature=shareTo Provide Written Testimony
We encourage interested persons to submit written testimony in advance of the meeting, which will be distributed to Commissioners prior to the meeting and allow a timely review. Please submit written testimony via email to: [email protected]. Written testimonies can also be mailed to: P.O. Box 621, Honolulu, Hawaii 96809. Written testimonies may be posted upon the Board of Land and Natural Resources Meeting website; as a precaution, please be mindful with any personal information prior to submitting unless you intend it to be shared. Late written testimony will be retained as part of the record and distributed to Commissioners as soon as practicable, but we cannot ensure the Commission will receive it in sufficient time to review, prior to decision-making.To Provide In-Person Oral Testimony (masks are highly encouraged)
Attend in-person at: 1151 Punchbowl St. Room 132 (Kalanimoku Building), Honolulu, HawaiiTo Provide Testimony by Telephone
On the day of the meeting at the start of the agenda item you wish to testify on, dial: : +1 669-444-9171 (Zoom); input the meeting ID: 883 8062 9451 and follow the prompts.To Provide Video/Zoom Testimony
Send your request in a timely manner to: [email protected] with your information, email address, and the agenda item you wish to testify on. Once your request has been received, you will receive a confirmation email with pertinent information. You may testify without signing up in advance.We kindly ask that all oral/video testimony be limited to not more than three (3) minutes. We ask that you identify yourself and any affiliation before speaking, but you can choose not to do so.The Board may go into Executive Session pursuant to section 92-5(a)(4), HRS, in order to consult with its attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the Board’s powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities.If you need an auxiliary aid/service or other accommodation due to a disability, please contact Darlene, BLNR Secretary, at 808.587.0404 or [email protected] as soon as possible. Requests made as early as possible have a greater likelihood of being fulfilled. Upon request, this agenda and other materials are available in alternate/accessible formats.In some of the matters before the Board, a person may wish to request a contested case hearing. If such a request is made before the Board’s decision, then the Board will consider the request first – before considering the merits of the item before it. A person who wants a contested case may also wait until the Board decides the issue, then request the contested case after the decision. It is up to you. Any request must be made in writing within ten days. If no request for contested case is made, the Board will make a decision. The Department will treat the decision as final and proceed accordingly.This meeting may be continued onto a second day. If this meeting is continued, it will resume on December 8 th, 2023, at 9:00 a.m. in the same location and with the same telephone and Zoom information.

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 12/5/2023

Aloha,

Great news and thank you to all the supporters who answered our call that enabled us to meet our $20,000 anonymous matching donation. Needless to say, as we prevail on projects, others arise that need detailed attention and ultimately legal support to preserve our environment’s health and our quality of life on Kauai. We recently filed a Petition to Revoke the Coco Palms development permits issued by Kauai County. No sooner had we done that when the State sent out its December 7, 2023 Agenda with an Item to decide whether the State should give the current Coco Palms “would be” resort hotel developers permits and a coconut lease for the lands surrounding the fee simple parcels RP21 Coco Palms, LLC (RP21) claims to own. That ownership of the fee simple land is in dispute and there is an ongoing Appeal between RP21 and the last “would be developers” (Chad Waters and Tyler Greene). While it seems it never ends, we are doing our best to stay on top of it and appreciate all the financial support received. If you find yourself in a place to contribute before year end, and gain a tax benefit, don’t hesitate to keep us in mind for your annual charitable giving because there is no doubt we will be very busy in the months to come.

See below FOM’s Comment on the BLNR Agenda Item D6

Friends of Maha’ulepu      friendsofmahaulepu.org      12/5/2023

DLNR Director and Board Chair, Dawn NS Chang and
Members of the Board of Land and Natural Resources
State of Hawaii
Honolulu, HI

RE: Agenda Item D6 – Issuance of Term, Non-Exclusive Easements to RP21 Coco Palms LLC, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044 and (4) 4-1-005:por. 017; Issuance of Revocable Permit to RP21 Coco Palms LLC and Sale of Lease at Public Auction for Parking and Landscaping Purposes, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Key: (4) 4-1-003:017; and Immediate Right-of-Entry for Management Purposes to RP21 Coco Palms LLC, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044, (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:por.017.

Aloha DLNR Director and Board Chair Dawn NS Chang and Members of the Board of Land and Natural Resources,

Please accept this comment and the supporting documents filed herewith on behalf of Friends of Mahaʻulepu (FOM), a community based 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to environmental protection and preservation of the ʻ āina and waters of Kauai. On behalf of more than 1,000 members in our organization, we humbly request that the Chair and the Board defer any action on this agenda for the following reasons:

1. The State has an enforcement action pending that was served on Coco Palms Ventures, LLC and Stillwater Equity Partners, the management group that assumed management of the Coco Palms fee simple properties after Chad Waters and Tyler Greene who formed Coco Palms Hui, LLC allegedly defaulted on a loan from Stillwater Equity Partners and Reef Capital Partners. The latter two were then involved in the foreclosure action against Coco Palms Hui, LLC in 2019. There have been so many would be developers involved in the alleged effort to rebuild a luxury resort hotel on the former fee simple parcels that comprise the former Coco Palms hotel destroyed by hurricane Iniki September 11, 1992. Here is the timeline of the succession of owners since the genesis of Coco Palms. RP21 Coco Palms LLC (RP21) was incorporated and registered with the State of Hawaii in February 2021. The transgressions identified in the Notice of Alleged Violation were contractors retained by RP21. It is our understanding that that matter has not been concluded.

Some of our members have testified and will testify December 7, 2023 that viable coconut palms were unnecessarily feld on the coconut grove and from state conservation land by RP21’s contractors for which RP21 the following alternative explanations:

  • The coconut palms were not viable, a threat to public safety and needed to be cut down,
  • RP21 was asked by the Kauai Fire Department to widen an access road that required removal of coconut palms at the rear of the hotel, which RP21’s contractors graded after but the Kauai Fire Department could not corroborate when responding to a FOIA,
  • RP21 representative, Patrick Manning interviewed by the Garden Island (TGI), wrote a response published in TGI admitting felling healthy coconut palms to allow better access for demolition of the remnant hotel albeit without any notice or permission from the State: “It’s just we can’t get in to do the demolition if there are trees prohibiting us from getting into the concrete.” – The Garden Island News April 22, 2023
  • Mr Ritta told a member of our community that RP21’s contractor didn’t know whose land he was on when felling the healthy coconut palms,
  • In testimony before the Kauai County Council, Director Chang shared “Complaints of land-use violations by the developer, including failure to maintain the premises, failure to submit annual reports, failure to pay property taxes and cutting down palm trees without consent”. The Garden Island News June 8, 2023

The administrative action pending against RP21, at a minimum, must be fully concluded and should based on the foregoing acts should preclude the approval of any RPs or participation in an auction of the coconut grove lease. Our members and many on Kauai are very concerned about the control and damage that has been caused by RP21 on state land without the consent of the State. To spite the following clear exchange between Director and Chair Dawn NS Chang with the attorney for RP21, Chad DeCoursey, RP21 has continued to work on the site using the RP parcel and easement off of Kuamoo Road, with heavy vehicles observed on the site even though they acknowledged in April that they did not have any rights to the RP parcels or the state leased lands:

3:10:10 Director Chang “You don’t have approval? This is a factual question, you do not have approval by the Board of Land and Natural Resources on those assignments?”

Mr DeCoursey “That is correct”.

Director Chang “So factually, you do not have control of those, of the revocable permits or general lease”.

Mr DeCoursey “The permits are not assignable so those could be left aside”.

Director Chang “You are absolutely right Mr DeCoursey, the revocable permits are not assignable”.

3:12:24 Director Chang “The owner of the land, the general lease, is the Board of Land and Natural Resources. And you do not have consent for the assignment of the general lease from Coco Palms Ventures LLC to another entity. You do not have a formal assignment of the lease approved by the Board? Is that correct?”

Mr DeCoursey “That is correct”.

See BLNR recorded video of April 14, 2023 meeting


2. At its April 14, 2023 meeting, Attorney DeCoursey, John Ritta, and Mr Gibb all acknowledged they had no privity of contract with the State and no right to the RP parcels or state lease lands. The pictures below do demonstrate, not withstanding their acknowledgement, they have continued to work on the property, they installed a chain link gate anchoring to the RP parcel off of Kuamoo Road, locking out access to state land before they ever obtained a permit for same. Here is the Layton Coco Palms Waste Management Plan wherein Layton Construction details a plan to remove 15,000 tons (30 million pounds of debris). Are they going to use that locked gate to transport that debris out the locked gate depicted below and over the RP easement and paved parcel? Is this a use the State prefers as opposed to requiring the applicant to use their own fee simple land? When we attended the April 14, 2023 BLNR meeting one of the board members asked if the applicant needed the RPs as an integral part of their development plan, to which they responded that they did not need those parcels. They are certainly making regular use of state lands and have had workers over the past two weeks in the coconut grove lease land, albeit the fugitive dust cover precludes public monitoring.

RP21 chain link fence locked gate obstructing access to anyone other than RP21.

Locked gate, construction trailer and trucks on state land. (Access Easement and RP parcel)

3. We humbly ask that the Board take no action on any of the Coco Palms Agenda Items because this Board has not been presented with copies of the application for the RP parcels and coconut grove lease submitted by a 501(c)(3) community organization I Ola Wailuanui. Here is their April 13, 2023 application. It seems very unfair to have the Board to be asked to consider one applicant when there are two applicants for these same state lands.

4. It has been seven years since the State considered the potential environmental impact to the State revocable permit parcels. One of those parcels is on the ocean side of Kuhio Highway adjacent and under remnant portions of the old Shell restaurant, previously a restaurant for the Coco Palms Resort until the restaurants destruction September 11, 1992. Since that time, sea level rise has occurred and is obvious to residents in the area. The shoreline/beach has narrowed considerably and waves now regularly reach the vegetation that abuts the highway. The County has experienced adverse impacts to the shoreline bike path that was installed because of the rise in sea level along this coast. What remains of beach and land above the high water mark is part and parcel of the County’s Wailua Beach Park. At a minimum, the revocable permits should not issue without a shoreline management and assessment plan.

5. The US Fish and Wildlife National Wetlands Inventory identifies and depicts two wetlands near the Shell restaurant remnant, one described as a estuary and the other a marine wetland. It also depicts and identifies a wetland on the Coco Palms site that extends to State and fee simple land. Several endangered sea birds and the indigenous Koloa Duck has been seen and photographed on the parcel behind the remnant Coco Palms Hotel which calls for an environmental assessment at a minimum so that species that have taken up nesting on the site over the past 31 years are not unnecessary harmed.

6. Finally, FOM filed a Petition to Revoke all the developers permits for significant violation of several conditions of Kauai County’s last issued permits dated December 31, 2018 to Chad Waters and Tyler Greene former owners of Coco Palms Hui, LLC. Although Reef Capital Partners foreclosed on Chat Waters and Tyler Greene, the former owners filed a law suit alleging the foreclosure was improper and that matter is currently pending on appeal. The parcels up for consideration on the December 7, 2023 Agenda have been poorly or under utilized for the last 31 years. For all of the above stated reasons FOM requests that the Board defer Agenda Item D6 taking no action on extending the permits or auctioning the lease land until the Board is in receipt of the Applications filed by I Ola Wailuanui and until the Kauai County Planning Commission and Planning Director have heard FOM’s Petition to Revoke, Link to Petition to Revoke, filed with 8 Declarations

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 12/4/2023

Aloha,

As you well know, there has been a lot of controversy over the construction of a 350 room luxury resort hotel at the former Coco Palms site. In order to develop the hotel, the current would be developer, RP21 Coco Palms LLC (RP21), submitted plans to the County for building permits that show there intended use of State Crown Land, Conservation Land and 3 parcels covered by revocable permits (RP). RP21 even obtained building permits from our County to construct a wedding chapel on state land without first securing a lease or revocable permit from the State. In a meeting on April 14, 2023, Dawn Chang, the new Director and Chair of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, asked how such a thing could happen without notifying the State. There was a lot of controversy and many FOM members testified on April 14, 2023 because RP21 contractors had cut down at least 75 healthy coconut palm trees from state land without prior notice to or consent from the State. On April 19, 2023, the Office of Conservation and Coastal Land Management served RP21 with a Notice of Violation and Order requiring them to Cease the activity and answer for the trespass and damage to state property. That matter is still ongoing. On Thursday December 7, 2023, the Land Board will once again consider the issue of whether or not to extend permits to RP21 for the state land even though their violation action is still pending. We need as many as possible to submit written testimony to the Land Board no later than Tuesday December 5, 2023 at 9:00 am by directing an email to [email protected] . In the subject of your email, if you feel as we do, that this congested intersection near Wailua River and Kuhio Highway will not work for such a development without great adverse impact to the quality of life for those travel the roads nearby, for the nearby waste water treatment plant that is already ailing, for the safety of the ocean and river whose waters are very likely to be polluted with the demolition and construction because of a high water table and direct communication between the site’s drainage canal behind the hotel which runs under Kuamoʻo to the Wailua River. In the subject of your email please use the phrase “Strongly Oppose Land Agenda Item D-6 12-7-23”. We really need as many comments filed with the Land Board as possible. When we last were before them in April 2023, the Land Board members commented that they were impressed by the numbers in the community who sent in comments. Let’s do it again!

FOM supports I Ola Wailua Nui’s Application, filed under their 501(c)(3) community non-profit corporation, to preserve the Coco Palms site as a park and historic cultural center as it pertains to the State Lease and RP lands. Toward that end, they have applied for RPs to 3 parcels of land that the Coco Palms developers are also trying to obtain. The Land Board will consider whether to award the three RP parcels to the current would be developer, RP21 Coco Palms LLC, at its meeting next Thursday December 7, 2023 at 9:00 am.

Land Board Agenda December 7, 2023 and the Staff Submittal recommending Revocable Permits be issued to RP Coco Palms LLC

6. Issuance of Term, Non-Exclusive Easements to RP21 Coco Palms LLC, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044 and (4) 4-1-005:por. 017;

Issuance of Revocable Permit to RP21 Coco Palms LLC and Sale of Lease at Public Auction for Parking and Landscaping Purposes, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Key: (4) 4-1-003:017; and

Immediate Right-of-Entry for Management Purposes to RP21 Coco Palms LLC, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044, (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:por.017.

BACKGROUND FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Coco Palms revocable permits previously issued to Coco Palms Ventures LLC will expire December 31, 2023 pursuant to the Land Board’s Order of October 2023. Coco Palms Ventures LLC was a corporation that left Kauai in 2016 and failed to renew their DCCA registration or pay taxes or fees for the revocable permits from 2016 to present. Coco Palms Hui LLC was formed by Chad Waters and Tyler Greene who applied for all of the Coco Palms development permits after Coco Palms Ventures LLC had their corporate status involuntarily revoked by the State on December 4, 2017. As the Judge stated at the recent hearing on the AG’s Motion to Dismiss on November 9, 2023, she found it perplexing that the Land board continued to renew the Coco Palms Ventures LLC revocable permits from 2017 to 2022 when the renewal was for a “defunct entity”. 

On September 11, 2018, the County Planning Director filed a Director’s Petition to Revoke the Coco Palms development permits with the Planning Commission. The matter was moved to September 25, 2018 and ultimately heard on November 13, 2018. Rather than revoke the permits, the County Planning Director said on the record that he had worked everything out with the attorney for Chad Waters and Tyler Greene and so the Planning Commission granted his request to re-issue the development permits to Coco Palms Hui LLC with 26 conditions, signed by the current Planning Director, Ka`āina Hull, December 31, 2018. On November 22, 2023, FOM has filed a formal Petition to revoke the December 31, 2018 development permits for breach of several of those conditions. Director Hull has 60 days to respond.

In February of 2021, RP21 Coco Palms LLC was formed by the entity that had foreclosed on Coco Palms Hui LLC, Chad Waters and Tyler Greene, in 2019. In 2023, RP21 paid for the corporate renewal and began using the name Coco Palms Hui LLC as an affiliate of RP21 Coco Palms LLC.

The Land Board Agenda for their board meeting December 7 and 8, 2023 was just released. Per agenda item D6, the staff of the DLNR Land Division is now recommending the Board grant RP21 Coco Palms LLC’s Application for the three revocable permits on the three RP parcels, 2 mauka and 1 maki that would then be integrated in their development plans which already happen to show using those RP parcels for the development of their 350 room hotel resort even though RP21 has never had permits for the state lands incorporated in their building plans. The Board does not have to follow the recommendation of the staff of the DLNR Land Division and hopefully our testimony will help them decide not to grant RP21 Coco Palms LLC these permits since they have committed criminal trespass over and over again. They also have incorporated a wedding chapel on state land and received permits from the County to build it without permits from the State for the land the wedding chapel is to be constructed on.

Mahalo nui,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 11/04/2023

Aloha,

If you are near a television, Hawaii News Now told us they would be covering our effort to preserve the Old Koloa Sugar Mill and our rural community. HPM had been issued permits by the County Planning Commission earlier this year in February. The permits allowed them to do an industrial operation on Ag land that is not permitted by State or County Law. An appeal had to be filed with the Circuit Court and Judge Watanabe vacated the Planning Department Permits citing the fact that HPM’s operation on Ag land was illegal.

Please findcopies of an archeologist complaint and together with our testimony before the Planning Commission 9/12/2023 resulted in the Planning Director’s Notice of Violation and Order to Cease and Desist“immediately”. Rather than cease or worry about the $10,000 fine, the County advised HPM they would suffer, HPM continued to operate.

HPM Continues to Operate and Ignores County Notice of Violation and Cease and Desist Order

You may recall, an archeologist we had worked with on our dairy fight, weighed in with a letter to the County and the State, reminding them that the Old Historic Koloa Sugar Mill was on the National Registry and identified by the State of Hawaii as a site to be preserved. See archeologist letters attached.HPM’s flagrant violation of the County’s Cease and Desist Order, breach of State and County Ag laws will be the subject of a Hawaii News Now coverage this evening at 6:00 pm.Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

 Posted 10/31/2023

Grove Farm and HPM Cited

Aloha,

  1. Another Win for Our Community:On October 20, 2023, Kauai County Planning Director, Ka`āina Hull served a Notice of Violation and Cease and Desist Order on Grove Farm and HPM for their illegal lumber mill operation in the Old Kōloa Sugar Mill. Earlier this year, Kauai County Planning Commission issued special use permits to HPM who had applied to the Planning Department for the permits, intending to erect a large Cirque du Soleil style tent (100′ x 200′) for the construction of trusses and modular walls. The three acre parcel that HPM leased from Grove Farm shared a lot line with the residential Ag lots in Poipu Aina. Those residents, FOM, and many from Kōloa, objected to the permits HPM requested because of HPM’s improperly cited industrial operation that would involve large trucks as well as the noise that would be generated by air guns and saws operating daily by HPM. The Planning Department issued the special use permits and an Appeal was filed before Judge Watanabe. After review of our State and County Ag Ordinances, the Court, Judge Watanabe revoked the special use permits which the Planning Commission had issued to HPM. After they lost their permits, HPM and Grove Farm moved the operation into a portion of the old mill, operating without any permits.

We went back to the Planning Commission and supported a request for a Declaratory Order to stop the illegal activity. The attached is the result of that further hearing. The following are part of a press release that will be issued by a media group on behalf of Friends of Maha`ulepu and Save Kōloa.

“Kōloa doesn’t need and would not be helped by large double and triple axle trucks driving through our small town, loaded with lumber and forklifts headed for an operation on Ag land in the old sugar cane mill,” said Elizabeth Okinaka of Save Kōloa. “HPM has been illegally using this Ag land without any permits, operating saws and noisy air guns as they build trusses and modular walls. What we need is for Grove Farm to bring back our small farmers, who used to lease their land to increase our food sustainability after sugar ended.”

“One wonders if we are part of the wild west,” added Bridget Hammerquist, President of the community group Friends of Maha`ulepu. “HPM’s activities at the Old Kōloa Sugar Mill do not support agriculture and are considered illegal on land zoned for agriculture. Now that a Notice of Violation and Cease and Desist Order have been issued by the county’s Planning Department, we hope that all HPM illegal operations in Kōloa will end.”

  1. State Department of Land and Natural Resources Board of Directors Comes to Kauai for a Meeting to Hear Community Concerns (e.g. Violations at Coco Palms)
    West Kauaʻi
    Waimea High School’s Cafeteria
    9707 Tsuchiya Road, Waimea
    November 4, 2023
    9:00 am – 12:00 pm

East Kauaʻi
Kauaʻi High School’s Cafeteria
3577 Lala Road, Lihue
November 4, 2023
4:00 pm – 7:00 pm


Happy Halloween to all and don’t for our match end of year giving to a worthy 501(c)(3).

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Kōloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 10/28/2023

Aloha,

FOM Prevails in Court

1. Good News: Judge Watanabe Strikes Pinkston’s Lawsuit, Dismissing his Complaint and Summary Judgement Motion Against the County.It was an exciting day in Court Tuesday 10/24/23 at 1:30 pm. As you may recall, Gary Pinkston’s lawyers, a firm that he has paid $831,000 to since he began his Koloa developments, filed a Petition with the Planning Commission in June this year that sought to modify the County’s requirement that Pinkston develop a master drainage plan. That plan was to determine how the water currently drained onto his property would be handled once his property is covered with concrete and internal roadways covering what has previously served as a drainage lot for the Kiahuna Golf Course, the Golf Village and Wainani development. The drainage plan requirement is required to be complete and accepted by the County before Pinkston can obtain his permits to build. Pinkston doesn’t believe he should be made to account for or determine how the water will be handled once he covers his parcel in roads and buildings. He wants the drainage plan to be limited to the water runoff that his construction will create without accounting for what is already draining onto his parcel from the mauka parcels. The Planning Commission agreed with FOM that this is a complex matter that will need the help of hydro-logic engineers and drainage specialist. Part of Pinkston’s plan includes subterranean detention basins that will require more blasting to install. We asked the Planning Commission to order the matter to an Administrative Law Judge so we could introduce testimony from qualified experts.

The administrative hearing process will take many months to be completed because a hearing officer has to be appointed and a hearing date has to be set at a date that is available for all parties. 

Pinkston was not happy with this decision by the Planning Commission. He had his lawyers go into Court and file a Complaint and Summary Judgement Motion against the County of Kauai, requesting that the Court modify the master drainage plan requirement. Pinkston did not disclose to the Court that he had already put the modification request to the Planning Commission. He did not disclose that the Planning Commission had ordered to be heard by an Administrative Law Judge. It was only by chance that FOM was alerted to the fact that Pinkston was trying to get from the Court what he was unable to get the Planning Commission to do. FOM immediately filed a Petition to Intervene, putting the full story before the Judge and informing the Court that we were all now parties to an administrative process that was not disclosed to the Court. After hearing the arguments of all Council, we watched in suspense, as Judge Watanabe ruled that Mr Pinkston’s Complaint could not be heard in the Circuit Court because of the proceeding that he had already started before the Planning Commission. She dismissed his Complaint and Summary Judgement Motion over the strong objection of his attorneys. A real win for FOM and our community. There won’t be any building permits for his Pinkston’s Koloa developments anytime soon. Thanks to all of our supporters who helped make this possible with their donations. Please remember we have a $20,000 match that we are trying to meet by November 30, 2023. Due to our generous supporters we are now halfway there. Please help us reach this goal.

2. The email comment below was sent in response to the Wailua Waste Water Treatment Plant Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) that we received notice of 30 days ago. Many asked for a copy of our comment and we have included it below. Any questions give us a call.

Mahalo nui,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037 

Posted 10/23/2023

To Whom It May Concern,

Please accept this public comment on behalf of Friends of Maha`ulepu, its many members, and residents of Kauai. We offer the following as very concerned citizens. Hawaii is probably one of the very few if not the only state in the United States (US) that knowingly discharges waste water into the waters of the US. Our environment and particularly the environmental health of our ocean is probably the single most important factor in sustaining Hawaii’s economy and visitor attraction. If the health of our ocean continues to degrade as it has over the past 20 years, we will soon be no different than Mazatlan and Puerto Vallarta with thick foam bands that can be seen floating offshore.

The abundant deficiencies and problems that plant has been experiencing for more than 10 years are amply documented in this Kennedy/Jenks Preliminary Design Report from 2018. In 2018, the County had a report prepared that detailed what would be needed to reduce the incidence of the release of inadequately treated waste water to the ocean. Unfortunately, on review of the County’s current DEA, it is evident that the County is proposing to do a much more limited repair and improvements now than was proposed in 2018. Instead of making the golf course and vegetative areas the primary point of discharge for the partially treated waste water as planned in 2018, the County is now proposing to make the ocean the primary point of discharge. We believe that it is ludicrous to suggest this proposal has an anticipated finding of no significant impact.

Wailua WWTP DEA-AFONSI

The Wailua WWTP processes nearly 1 million gallons of waste water daily at a plant that is situated on the West Wailua Shoreline on the island of Kauai. We frequently have ocean storms that clog the outfall with sand, costing many thousands of dollars to clear. It is unclear what happens to that waste water in the interim. The plant has had an injection well for disposal of waste water and its third method for handling waste water in addition to the ocean outfall and injection well involves detention basins and distribution through an irrigation system on the Wailua County Golf Course. 

Rather than spend a proposed $20 million or thereabouts on the current plan, it would seem far more prudent for tax payer dollars to be used to relocate the plant out of the tsunami zone and across the street well mauka of the ocean. In 2018, the County clearly recognized that the better alternative is for disposal on land, e.g. the Wailua Golf Course, rather than disposal into the ocean off Lydgate Beach Park. In response to this comment, we would appreciate knowing how many times per year the ocean release of R2 water is blocked by sand and what percentage of waste water will be directed to the large County Wailua Golf Course if any, under the current proposal.

In the past, and up through the present, the plant has been plagued by noxious odors that are a near daily occurrence from approximately 1/2 mile west of the plant up to 1/2 mile east of the plant. The odors are clearly feculent and no doubt represent the known leaks that occur from the pump station plumbing and transmission lines. Those who regularly travel this corridor are well aware of the problems in this plant which not only include ocean contamination, beach closures, foul odors, but also an exploding sewer line cap that resulted in raw sewage being showered on cars as they crossed the Wailua bridge. A review of Google Earth will show the dead reef at the point of the ocean outfall discharge.

Due to the changes already evident on the coastline and the not infrequent elevated fecal bacteria found when the offshore ocean waters are tested, any plan that considers repairing and upgrading this plant should not be contemplated until a full EIS, Environmental Impact Study, is complete.

There are many millions of dollars of tax payer money to cover the cost of the proposed project and there seems no consideration for sea level rise, a fact that has already been documented and evident along the East and West Wailua Shoreline. This plant abuts State land, is adjacent to a popular public park frequented by many children whose health is at risk when the currents shift and the contaminated waters enter the lava rock pools where so many of Kauai’s children learn to swim. and directly impacts the safety of all children and adults who enjoy that coastline.

Rather than proceed with the project proposed in the Public Works DEA, our organization is willing to assist and complete grant applications for Federal Funds to raise the millions that will be needed to relocate and build a new Wailua Waste Water Treatment Plant, desperately needed to meet the increasing growth in the Wailua Kapaa corridor.

County documents in the Waste Water Division clearly establish abundant operational deficiencies that have resulted in the release of inadequately treated waste waters to the waters of the Pacific, the law is now clear after a recent Supreme Court Decision that inadequately treated waste water released to the waters of the US is a Clean Water Act violation, whether direct or indirect. So we implore you to not proceed with this stop gap upgrade/repair, doing far less than initially proposed in 2018, the great majority of which will be lost in less than 10 years time. How does the contractor justify the projected cost when the sea level rise in this area is already evident?

The existing treatment plant relies heavily on the ocean outfall, with roughly 60% of effluent being disposed of this way. This may be mostly R2 water, but during heavy rains partially-treated R3 water is discharged through the outfall under existing conditions. This would still happen after the proposed improvements, however the incidence of sand blockage of the outfall diffuser is to be less frequent. When this happens, the golf course holding pond is their only disposal option, and this doesn’t seem like a good option for R3 water (no disinfection).

Although the plan includes modifications and upgrades to equipment and facilities at the treatment plant, there are no obvious overall beneficial  impacts by the proposed transfer line improvements by cure-in-place liner technology. The project would improve disposal options (by making the ocean outfall more reliable), but these options aren’t great currently, and this leads to questions about whether discharge of partially-treated sewage at shallow ocean outfalls is appropriate in this environment.

While it might be convenient for the Wailua WWTP to take advantage of gravity flow due to its low placement, tsunami and sea level rise have become much more serious considerations than they were when this plant was built.

I spent some more time today looking at the report excerpt you sent me, as well as the EA document. It’s clear from the 2018 Kennedy/Jenks Preliminary Design Report (PDR) that the plan at that time was to move away from discharging from the plant directly to the ocean through the outfall system, instead using golf course irrigation as the primary disposal method for the R2 effluent and several new “surface spreading basins” as the backup. The reason for this decision seems to be the difficulty and cost associated with meeting nitrogen criteria for ocean discharges, and the PDR states that the ocean outfall would be abandoned and replaced by land application.

There is no clear explanation as to why the County reversed course and abandoned the Kennedy/Jenks PDR, but the surface spreading basins have been completely removed from the plan which is now focused on maintaining the current routing of R2 effluent to the golf course when they need irrigation water and routing all the effluent to the ocean outfall the rest of the time. From the Kennedy/Jenks PDR, it seems they report primary discharge to the outfall even during some dry periods when the golf course could use the water, just to keep the outfall diffusers from clogging with sand.

The PDR seems to acknowledge that improved nutrient removal is needed at this WWTP, and it describes several process changes that would be required at the plant to reduce nitrogen levels in the effluent (using the Ludzack-Ettinger Process). This process incorporates a sequence of aerobic and anaerobic treatment zones that biologically converts nitrogen from ammonia to nitrate (both can be harmful to the environment) and then to nitrogen gas (inert and not harmful). There is no indication in the DEA that the proposed process upgrades will provide this denitrification effect. Why didn’t the DEA include the County’s NPDES permit for discharges from the Wailua WWTP, which should have revealed the nutrient concentration or loading limits (typically N and P compounds)? Is there a current NPDES permit? If so can it be provided, before the County approves and finals this DEA?

In 2018, the plan to address NP discharge included a cost of $2M – $4.2M for the effluent disposal component to achieve a far less environmentally harmful release. In the current DEA, it sounds like the plan is to modify the ocean outfall diffusers by diving down, cleaning up the flange on 3 existing diffuser heads and fastening a 2 foot rubber extension to each one, to bring the discharge point up 2 feet vertically in the water column. It seems like this installation could be done in 1 day, and the cost would probably be minuscule compared to the several million dollars for the surface spreading basin option, however, the harmful contaminants released to the ocean would be worse than ever.

The 2018 PDR would have cost the county approximately $20 million. It is not clear from the current DEA, nearly six years later, what costs they are assigning to the trenchless connection to the holding ponds at the golf course and its irrigation system but it is probable for the DEA today is well in excess of $20 million and when the sea level rises and forces abandonment of this low level placed ocean WWTP, the County will have spent in excess of $20 million, a band aid and have little or nothing to show for it after the next 5-6 years. We’ve already waited more than 10 years since this plant became significantly operationally compromised with a poor track record of managing its waste water treatment and effluent. Wouldn’t it be more prudent to proceed immediately to obtain the funding needed to relocate the plant and eliminate the very likely reality that with little or no notice the whole Wailua Shoreline will be inundated with uncontrolled effluent as the plant suffers catastrophic failure from either sea level rise or a tsunami?  

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 10/23/2023

Aloha,

 1.     Planning Commission meets to discuss Coco Palms rebuild
        tomorrow at 9:00 am
        4444 Rice Street, Planning Department Meeting Room

  • Tomorrow at 9:00 am the Kauai County Planning Commission will receive a report back from the would be developers of Coco Palms Resort reconstruction effort. This is not scheduled to be an action item but rather is the result of an earlier requirement of the Commission that the Developer come in with their annual report. Unlike the developers’ meeting, there will be microphones and the Planning Commission will likely receive comments from those who attend.They will be set up for everyone to hear everyone else’s comments. Please practice Kapu Aloha because developers are characterizing those who attended the meeting last Wednesday as an out of control “vocal minority” opposed to their project. In reality, without the benefit of microphones the people in the back of the room could not possibly hear what was being said by the developers or their attorneys and the contributions from those attending had to be offered with raised voices in an effort to be heard. Hopefully from the comments filed and those who attend, the Commission will see that the people of Kauai are respectful, they just don’t like developers who perpetually spread falsehoods, fail to follow through, and who announce a “public meeting” that was a farce because they had no sound equipment and no real intent that their audience would be able to hear them. It’s no wonder the frustrations were high! Let’s all do our part to make tomorrow different to show the Commission that people of Kauai are courteous when courtesy is extended to them by a body that provides a sound system in a controlled organized meeting.

2.    Pinkston Hearing Tomorrow 10/24/23 1:30 PM before
       Judge Watanabe, 2nd Floor County Courthouse
        Kauai County Circuit Court, 3970 Kaana St, Lihue, HI 96766

  • Pinkston’s attorneys didn’t like the Planning Commissions Order that Pinkston’s request to modify the County requirement for a comprehensive drainage plan and was ordered to an Administrative Hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. Once his request was ordered to Administrative Hearing, that administrative process is suppose to be concluded before any party has standing to file a Circuit Court Case. Pinkston thought he would jump ahead and file a competing case in Court to spite the fact that we were all ordered to participate in an Administrative Hearing. In fact, when he filed his complaint for Declaratory Relief with Judge Watanabe, his initial filing didn’t even disclose that he had already engaged the Planning Commission with his request for modification of the drainage plan requirement.  FOM and Save Koloa filed a Motion to Intervene and we told the Court what Pinkston had failed to disclose. We had to ask to Intervene as Pinkston had not disclosed our party status before the Planning Commission and did not serve us with a copy of his filing. The hearing on whether FOM and Save Koloa will be made a party will be heard tomorrow at 1:30 pm. No attorneys will be in the Court Room, as Council for Pinkston that the hearing be conducted with the attorneys via Zoom but the hearing is open to the public. Court is not giving a Zoom link for the public so we need to be there in person to hear the argument of Council and the Courts Ruling.

3.     County Council Requested Coco Palms Report from Planning Director,
        Ka`āina Hull, will be heard Wednesday 9:00 am 10/25/23
        County Council, 4396 Rice St, Suite 209, Lihue, HI 96766

  • The County Council will hold a meeting Wednesday 10/25/23 9:00 am to receive a report on the status of Coco Palms development from the Planning Director. The County Council will also hear testimony from members of the public during that meeting. If you are unable to attend, your written testimony needs to be filed by 9:00 am tomorrow 10/24/2023 at [email protected]

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 10/20/2023

Aloha Chair and Members of the Kauai County Planning Commission,

On behalf of Friends of Maha`ulepu, many of whose members reside in or near the District of Wailuanuiaho`āno, please accept this testimony regarding the proposed development of a “350 room Resort” at the site of the former Coco Palms Hotel. This testimony is offered to assure that this Commission is informed of several important considerations as the Commission considers the annual report required of the Developer. As the Commission is aware, after its destruction by hurricane Iniki in 1992, the Coco Palms site has had many unsuccessful would be developers. See this timeline of the owners through 1992 and then the six owner/developers after 1992 who have all been unsuccessful in their alleged restoration efforts.

The Wailuanuiaho`āno district, including the lands where the former Coco Palms Resort has been, is a unique and sacred area that represents an important part of Kauaʻi’s history. This area was once the social, political and religious center of Kauaʻi. On behalf of our members, please consider suspending any further activity at the former Coco Palms site for the following reasons:

  • Despite the requests of this Commission and the Board of Land and Natural Resources on April 14, 2023, the current would be developer RP21 owned by Reef PCG made no effort to meet with the community until October 18, 2023 just days prior to their report back date to this Commission. Their notice of their 10/18/23 meeting was three days prior to the meeting, no doubt impacting the number of people who were available to attend. At their meeting, the developers had no microphone and their voices could not be heard by at least half of those in attendance. The public also had to raise their voices in an attempt to be heard. The developer claimed that those in attendance were “a vocal minority” of individuals opposed to the hotel. In fact, as public comments filed with this Commission will likely establish those in attendance represented a mere minority of a much larger majority of Kauai residents opposed to yet another Resort Hotel. When the Coco Palms was last in operation, 31+ years ago, Kauai did not have the number of Resort Hotels it does today, nor the many vacation rental options for the islands tourist visitors. The public who attended the developers meeting, planned last minute and without any sound system, were clear that another Resort Hotel was not what Kauai needs.
  • There is no current SMA permit that complies with State law. As the Hawaii State Supreme Court ruled, SMA regulations adopted in 1992 were applicable to a permit entitlement that was issued in 1982. The Court explained that the State interest in protecting the shoreline is sufficiently great that it is the Commissions duty to assure compliance with current regulations even when dealing with a pre-Iniki entitlement:
    “Because the Planning Department petitioned the Planning Commission in 1996, Chapter 12 was already in effect, and therefore, governed the Planning Commission’s authority to revoke, amend, or modify the 1981 SMA Use permit for changed conditions.Furthermore, the Planning Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure clearly authorized the Planning Commission to order compliance with the SMA Use permit… Indeed, in issuing its decision and order, the Planning Commission must fulfill its statutory obligation under the CZMA to “preserve, protect, and where possible, restore the natural resources of the coastal zone of Hawaiiʻi.” § HRS 205A-2. “ Morgan v. Planning Department 104 Haw. 173 (Haw. 2004, pages 186-190)
  • This developer has not conducted a Kapa’a Kai analysis, a condition that is legally required before permits are issued by the Planning Department for a development of this size. As such, any permits they claim to hold are not legally enforceable at this juncture.
  • The developer’s annual report should include but may not include the fact that they received a Notice of Violation and an Order to Cease any activity on the state leased or revocable permitted lands adjacent to the former Coco Palms site. The leased Wailua Coconut Grove (12+ acres) was leased to the former owner AmFac, a 65 year lease that commenced 8/18/1983 with expiration 8/17/2048 RP 21 told the public and reported to the County Council that they have a current lease to these lands. The following link to BLNR April 14, 2023 meeting contains the statements of the Director of the Department of Land and Natural Resources who informed the attorneys for RP 21 that they do not have a valid lease to the Wailua Coconut Grove. That lease issued by the State requires any attempted assignment to an entity other than the designated leasee, AmFac, would be invalid unless the attempted assignment was approved and rendered valid by the Department of Land and Natural Resources. The DLNR Director, Dawn Chang also advised the attorneys for RP 21 and Reef PCG that they do not have a right to the three parcels previously held under revocable permit by Coco Palms Joint Ventures LLC, an entity whose corporate status was involuntarily revoked by the State of Hawaii December 4, 2017. Meeting link and pertinent portions of BLNR hearing follow: 04/14/2023 Board of Land and Natural Resources Meeting
    Director Chang states (see above link at 3 hrs 6 min) RP21 attorney confirms they do not represent or have legal connections to Coco Palms Ventures LLC
    Director Chang states clearly (see above link at 3 hrs 8 min 30 sec – 3 hrs 10 min) and informs RP21 attorneys and owner representatives that any attempted assignment of the State lease is invalid until approved by the BLNR Board. Through questioning of RP21 owners and their attorneys, the BLNR Board establishes that whatever alleged assignment they hold has never been approved by the State of Hawaii Land Board.Director Chang establishes (see above link at 1 hr 27 min) that no one at the BLNR meeting has legal authority to speak on behalf authority of Coco Palms Venture LLC – Chad DeCoursey, John Gibb and John Ritta all said they do not have legal authority to speak on their behalf.
  • Any development permits should be suspended because this is without question a large development in a wetland area that involves State land, drainage to a nearby river and the ocean through a large canal at the rear of the hotel which runs under Kuamoʻo Road releasing directly to the Wailua River and there has never been an environmental assessment or EIS for this site. On November 9, 2023, there will be a hearing on a Summary Judgement Motion filed in the 1st Circuit, in an action filed for the HEPA violation and for the failure to review any potential environmental impacts from the planned restoration/construction: I Ola Wailuanui vs BLNR Civil No. 1CCV-22-0001495
  • Developer cannot proceed because their Army Corp of Engineers NPDS development waiver expired earlier this year.
  • Developer has failed to produce the traffic assessment report as a condition of their permits to spite the known Kapaa Wailua corridor traffic congestion.
  • The Wailua Wastewater Treatment Plant is already overburdened, currently emitting noxious odors at and near the proposed construction site and currently has reported inadequately treated sewage spills into the ocean. How can it possibly handle the addition of a 350 Resort when by its own DEA released September 23, 2023 1/3 of the plants operational capacity has been lost to malfunctioning equipment and disrepair.

We implore you, as the County of Kauai Planning Commission, to not let this project proceed further without completion of the above and without the unqualified assurance that our island environment and our quality of life will not be irreparably harmed.

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 10/19/2023

Development Happening Everywhere

Aloha,

Developers are really trying to take our wonderful Kauai to an Oahu or Maui look alike. Not only do we have Pinkston trying to add over 450 luxury vacation rentals to our small south shore beach community, but developers are trying to pressure the community to accept and support construction of a new 350 room resort at the site of the former Coco Palms. That site has been in disrepair and complete disuse since 1992. As of this year, there have been almost as many years without a hotel as the number of years Coco Palms was in operation. 

Recently, FOM was contacted by the owners of the Wailua property behind the middle school that was the plan site for Hokua Place. FOM supported Liko Martin, an intervenor, objecting to the size of the 769 unit development that would have been built just mauka of the Kapaa bypass. After putting in abundant evidence of our infrastructure and resource limitations, we presented a strong enough case to the LUC that the developer was forced to withdraw their application for a district boundary amendment that would have changed the acreage behind the middle school from Ag to Urban. Based on their recent contact of FOM, the property owners want to discuss another plan for development of that same site.

No doubt, in response to these two major developments just east of the Wailua river, those who want to expand our resort and vacation rentals are likely pressuring the County to upgrade the Wailua Waste Water Treatment Plant (WWTP). Anyone who drives across the Wailua bridge has smelled the noxious odor associated with the overburdened and poorly operating Wailua WWTP. Lydgate Beach Park has had to be closed because of fecal contamination in the beach adjacent to the Wailua WWTP on several occasions. There have been EPA fines for the Wailua WWTP waste spills into the ocean, a violation of the Federal Clean Water Act. The County has given notice of an intent to updated the Wailua WWTP. Their proposal is contained in the link below. Unfortunately, it does not propose to move the plant out of the tsunami zone even though its holding tanks are situated in the nearby ocean and whose operators have to report spills on a not infrequent basis to the State. If you can, please read the draft EA in the following link, which by the way claims to have an anticipated finding of no significant impact. Here is a report prepared by the County in 2018 of all the work needed to make up for deferred maintenance and restore the plant to its operational capacity, correcting for the 1/3 loss of function. Even assuming the Wailua WWTP odor and spill problems are solved and they restore their operating  capacity which was originally built to treat 1.5 million gallons per day, that will not eliminate the other infrastructure shortages; overburdened solid waste/landfill, overburdened roads, and shortage of potable water. These don’t even include the storm water and construction runoff that will negatively impact the Wailua coastline with the development of Coco Palms and another large housing area at the former Hokua Place site.
Wailua WWTP Draft Environmental Assessment:

Click here
All comments can be submitted by email no later than midnight of 10/23/23:
Email your comments to [email protected]
Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 10/15/2023

Aloha,

Bank Problems Hit Pinkston

On October 11, 2023, Pinkston filed a letter from his lender, American Savings Bank, with the Court. In it the bank informs Pinkston his loan maturity date has passed and the bank states they will not extend his loan unless he has building permits from the County of Kauai by October 25, 2023. 

Meanwhile, as you will recall from our earlier email, we objected to Pinkston’s request to modify the pre-building permit requirement that he prepare a drainage plan to study and reveal the drainage impact his 280 luxury condo/large concrete construction would have on the South Shore. His 27 acre parcel is and has been a drainage lot for the Kiahuna Plantation development, its golf course and Wainani subdivision. Pinkston asked the Planning Commission to modify the requirement that he study and submit a drainage plan that would consider the drainage his lot now handles and the additional drainage once developed, a drainage plan that is, according to the 2006 letter from the Planning Commission, to include the downhill impact as far as the Kāneiolouma archaeologic site right across the street from Poipu and Waiohi beaches. On July 11, 2023, the Kauai Planning Commission agreed with FOM and Save Koloa and ordered Pinkston’s request to modify the drainage plan requirement to an administrative hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. See the Kauai Planning Commission’s Order of July 18, 2023. Pinkston has not even poured a foundation on either of his South Shore developments. You will no doubt find the list of his claimed costs of development interesting. Those managing his developments allowed the time to lapse on his tentative subdivision approvals. As the links confirm, our Planning Director sent certified notices on August 21, 2023, informing Pinkston that his tentative subdivision approvals on both of his Kiahuna and Kukuiula developments are now “void as a matter of law”. In response to his problems, Pinkston filed a Complaint and a Motion for Summary Judgement against the County to be heard October 24, 2023. Then came the bankers letter. However, since the bank letter, the Judge has now moved Pinkston’s Complaint and Motion for Summary Judgement to November 28, 2023, well past the bank’s October 25, 2023 deadline. 

See the following email from our Hawaiian Aha Moku Poʻo for the island of Kauai. The email describes the 2006 permit letter which lists nine conditions that have to be satisfied before Pinkston can receive building permits from the County of Kauai. We gave Uncle Billy a link to our opposition to Pinkston’s court action because the administrative hearing ordered on Pinkston’s request to modify just one of those nine conditions, the drainage plan, has not been completed and our position is that Pinkston has no right to go to the Courts before the administrative remedy/hearing is completed.


FOM’s Request for Support Gets a BoostOn behalf of theFriends of Maha`ulepu (FOM) Board of Directors, please know that we genuinely appreciate all of the support we receive. We received a very generous offer from a donor that wishes to remain anonymous. A $20,000 match has been offered. We will be gifted  $20,000 by November 30, 2023 if we receive matching donations that total $20,000 from our supporters by that date. 

As Board President, I am proud that we have accomplished as much as we have to preserve the quality of life and the environment of the South Shore of Kauai. We have been able to do so only through the generous donations from our supporters. Per Pinkston’s cost breakdown, his lawyers have charged him more than $831,000 to date just on his Kiahuna development. We are ever so grateful for the reasonable billing of our dedicated and hardworking environmental attorneys, real assets to our team and our success.  We can really use your support to help us preserve our beloved rural beach community from greater over-development. Please know that as the year ends, every dollar contributed is a charitable tax deductible contribution. FOM is a federally approved 501(c)(3) corporation and we provide acknowledgement for every donation received. Please share this email far and wide.

Mahalo nui,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

——— Forwarded message ———
From: Terrie Hayes <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Oct 12, 2023 at 8:39 PM
Subject: Pinkston Problems on Kauai
To: <[email protected]>
Cc: Mayor <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>

Aloha Ms Nakamura,

My name is Llewelyn (Billy) Kaohelauliʻi. I was born and raised in Poipu on the island of Kauai. My father was born on the island of Niʻihau. I was appointed by the Governor and currently serve as the Poʻo for the island of Kauai, Manokalanipo. I also serve as the Moku for the Kona District that includes Koloa, Poipu, Kukuiula, as well as many other neighboring Ahupuaʻa. Gary Pinkston is asking the County to put three developments in the Koloa, Poipu and Kukuiula. One of Pinkston’s developments, 280 condominiums, is planned for 5425 Paʻu A Laka off Kiahuna Plantation Drive and the second is a housing development at Kukuiʻula for approximately 62 more homes. His third development in Koloa is a plan for 100 luxury condominiums. This was all reported in Hawaii Business News.

I live approximately 1 mile from the Pinkston’s Kiahuna development property. I serve as the Vice President of the Hui that are Stewards of the Kaneioloumu archeological site downhill from the Pinkston development, adjacent to my home. We are between his 280 planned condominiums and the beach. We are a short distance from his land and downhill. We are very concerned about the drainage that will flow onto our property from such a large development. One of the nine conditions that Mr Pinkston is required to do is to develop a drainage plan to make sure his development doesn’t cause drainage to come to our heiau on the Kaneioloumu archeological site which is right above Poipu and Waiohai beaches. Because his land was already a sponge for drainage coming from Kiahuna Golf Course and two other development areas, the County added the condition of a drainage master plan that included a study of impact to Kaneioloumu. His request to modify condition 26 was objected to by the community.

On July 18, 2023, the Kauai Planning Commission issued a Decision and Order sending his modification request to an administrative hearing because of the complex nature of the existing and additional drainage that is likely to occur with his planned construction. This condition which must be met before building permits are issued will not be decided by October 25, 2023.

When I saw the letter you wrote to Mr Pinkston, after his lawyer filed it with the Court, I felt you may not understand all the difficulties we are having with the Pinkston developments on Kauai. I attached a copy of your letter here and I want to share the following facts which I felt you should know because we do know that Mr Pinkston had a big lawsuit with Bank of Hawaii.

There are 9 conditions of development that Mr Pinkston has to meet before he can get building permits. He did not satisfy the conditions that are outlined on the permit letter from our Planning Director, September 15, 2006. I am attaching a copy of that permit letter for you. Please see conditions 2, 3, 4, 10, 11, 18, 19, 26, and 27.

In June, Mr Pinkston tried to get an extension of his tentative subdivision approvals for the Kiahuna Plantation Drive property and for the Kukuiʻula Property. He waited beyond the one year time for filing final subdivision approval or requesting an extension. Because he didn’t ask for an extension before the one year was up, our Planning Director determined that his tentative subdivision approvals for both the Kiahuna and Kukuiʻula developments are “void as a matter of law”. The two letters from the Planning Director dated August 21, 2023 include the County law and give Mr Pinkston notice that his tentative subdivision approvals are “void as a matter of law”, are attached.

Mr Pinkston disrespected our community, he didn’t have the meeting required by State law, Kapaʻa Kai, before he began using explosives, disrupting burial mounds and the underground Koloa cave system that runs throughout our community. I live about 1 mile from this property and I could feel the blasts from my sofa. After 8 months of blasting at 5425 Pau A Laka, we noticed that the fresh water which use to flow daily into into the the historic Kaneiolouma fish pond was gone. We believe his blasting and ground disturbance changed the fresh water springs found by Geolabs, Inc when they did drilling samples of his Kiahuna property in April 2021. After the County found his tentative subdivision approvals were void, his lawyer sued the County. A copy of her complaint and motion for summary judgement are attached.

In response to his request to modify condition 26, Mr Pinkston’s developments have been ordered to an administrative hearing as of July 18, 2023, which is a condition he has to meet before he can have building permits. Mr Pinkston has quite a few problems that have to be cleared up before he can have building permits. His tentative subdivision approvals are “void as a matter of law”. The lawyers for Save Koloa have also asked the County to revoke his grubbing and grading permits for each site because he no longer has a tentative subdivision approval. The conditions he has to satisfy are subject of law suits. Please see the attached Complaint filed against the County of Kauai by Pinkston’s attorneys and the opposition filed by lawyers for Save Koloa in the link that follows.

FOM and Save Koloa Motion to Intervene and request for Court Dismissal.

If you need anything further please don’t hesitate to call. I do not have an email address for Mr Pinkston. Please feel free to share my letter with him. I am also sharing a copy with our County officials because we are very concerned about the total disregard Mr Pinkston has for the environmental health and quality of life for our community. We are a rural beach town and adding all this concrete just above the ocean will cause drainage issues and this matter needs to be properly addressed by experts before building permits are issued.

Respectfully,
Llewelyn (Billy) Kaohelauliʻi
2249 Kuai Road
Koloa, Hawaii 96756

(808) 742-9575

Posted 10/5/2023

Aloha,

Latest on Pinkston intent to develop more than 400 new luxury condos/homes in Koloa/Poipu.

Court hearing October 24, 2023, 1:30 pm, Judge Watanabe’s Courtroom, Lihue

You are not going to believe the latest. In our effort to preserve Koloa, a small rural local beach town, we’ve been monitoring the activities of Gary Pinkston and his development company, Meridian Pacific. He reported to Hawaii Business News that he plans to build a 100 luxury condos in Koloa town, 280 luxury vacation condos on 27+ acres in the Kiahuna Golf Village development and 62 homes in Kukuiula development. Pinkston’s 27+ acre parcel on Kiahuna Plantation Drive and just malka of Pili Mai, has been the sponge collecting the water runoff from Kiahuna Golf Village, the golf course, and Wainani housing subdivision. On July 11, 2023, attorneys for Pinkston asked the Planning Commission to modify the requirement that he complete a comprehensive drainage plan, taking into account what would happen to runoff previously handled by his vacant parcel once concrete and 280 condominiums are added to that parcel. The county ordinance issued for Pinkston’s parcel required a drainage plan that would study the drainage from his parcel to the Kāneiolouma archeological site just malka of Poipu Beach. Pinkston told the Planning Department and the Planning Commission that he wants to modify the requirement to only study the drainage up to the intersection of Kiahuna Plantation Drive and Poipu Road.

FOM appeared before the Planning Commission on July 11, 2023, and offered that the water that previously drained to the parcel plus the construction runoff would not likely stop at Poipu Road and the study should be completed as stated in the zoning permit to protect Waiohai Bay and Poipu Beach. FOM presented the Commission with pictures that FOM took of the property that showed the large drainage pipes that have been and are draining onto this site already before any foundation has been poured or anything has been built. FOM hired attorneys to prepare a Motion to Intervene requesting an administrative hearing be ordered allowing FOM to introduce expert testimony before the Commission considered modifying the drainage plan requirement. The Commission granted FOM’s Petition to Intervene and ordered the matter to proceed to an administrative hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). Once that hearing is complete, the ALJ will advise the Planning Commission of his Findings. The Planning Commission issued its Order to assigning the Order to an ALJ on July 18, 2023.

Without any notice to FOM, a party to the administrative hearing process per the Order of the Planning Commission, council for Gary Pinkston filed a Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Summary Judgement Motion against the Kauai County August 9, 2023, claiming that Mr Pinkston is losing a lot of money because of the delay in his development. Please see the Summary Judgement Motion pages 5-8. FOM only learned on September 21, 2023, that Pinkston’s lawyers had gone to Court to have the Court decide the issue they had already put before the Planning Commission because of a random search of recent court filings that happened to reveal these actions of Pinkston’s attorneys. When we read the Pleadings, we couldn’t believe it. Legally when an Agency is in the middle of an administrative process, the Rule of Law as stated in many statutes and cases, requires completion of the administrative process before any party can go into Court to seek relief on that very same issue. Rather than complete the administrative process, which Pinkston began when he asked the Planning Commission to amend the draining plan requirement, his lawyers and he decided to go see if they could get a better ruling from the Court which they would no doubt take back to the Planning Commission to assert the issue before the Planning Commission would then be moot.

Not only is this highly irregular to have a Court take up the same issue that is already being processed by the appropriate agency, the Kauai Planning Commission, but it is highly probable that it would result in legal chaos which FOM would have to expend significant legal fees to undo.

Mr Pinkston and Meridian Pacific failed to meet with members of the community and those that live nearby to review his proposed development as required by the Supreme Court per the Kapaa Kai Decision of 2002. The Supreme Court and a statute require the community meeting to enable the developer to learn of adverse impacts his development may cause giving him an opportunity to modify his plan in response to community input. Absent such a meeting, the community had no hope of letting him know what adverse impact his development might have. He also detonated and exploded mounds that were described in the report of Cultural Surveys Hawaii as burial mounds. He bulldozed and crushed large Hawaiian blue rock that may have been part of a Heiau. They knocked down ancient rock walls that were still on the parcel. They detonated underground ignoring the mesocaverns their contractor, Geolabs reported were in the area. In fact, Geolabs gave them a specific warning advisory to hire a geologic engineer to make sure the subsurface could support the weight of the structure they plan to build. Per the Decision and Order from the Land Use Commission, no ground disturbing activity was to occur until a certificate from an archeologist and a qualified biologist cleared the parcel of cave habitat for the blind cave spider and the blind arthropod also requiring a clearance for their existence on the parcel because they had been seen and identified in pods in a cave immediately adjacent to this parcel. Pinkston did not obtain either certificate before ground disturbance as required. He allowed his tentative subdivision approvals for both the Kiahuna and Kukuiula developments to lapse. On August 21, 2023, Planning Director Kaʻāina Hull served letters on Pinkston’s agent for each of his developments informing him that his tentative subdivision approvals were void as a matter of law. Earlier at a hearing on June 27, 2023, the Planning Director and the Planning Commission had received complaints from FOM and other community members  advising the Planning Commission that Pinkston had allowed his tentative subdivision approvals to lapse and thus they should be deemed void per a county subdivision ordinance.

Pinkston and Meridian Pacific are responsible for their delayed development. They have disrespected and disregarded the community. They violated the zoning ordinance and conditions of development of both the County and the State Land Use Commission and now they’ve run into Court seeking a Court Determination of a matter they submitted to the Planning Commission when they know the Planning Commission has jurisdiction and is in the process of determining whether to grant Pinkston’s request for the drainage plan modification. Basically, because he has a lot of money and can afford lawyers he is doing whatever he can to dump his tons of concrete on our community, in total disregard for the impact to our ocean, our wildlife and our right to a clean and healthy environment.

We need your help.

We’ve hired lawyers to fight this unethical and illegal court action. The following is a link to the Pleading we’ve filed asking the Court to dismiss Pinkston’s Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Summary Judgement Motion. His attorney’s know that this latest Complaint and Motion should not have been filed because it will cause legal chaos as we are before the Planning Commission and that process has not been completed. Here is a copy of Pinkston’s Complaint for Declaratory Relief and his Summary Judgement Motion which we strongly objected to in the following link. When you click on the link you will find four files. The first file is our argument to the Court and files 2-4 are the Exhibits to that argument:

FOM and Save Koloa Motion to Intervene and request for Court Dismissal.

Our funds are being exhausted. I’m sure the billionaire would out-dollar us but we’ve been careful in managing our money and have achieved successful outcomes most of our campaigns, thanks to the generous support of this community committed to the preservation of our current quality of life. 

Please help us now.

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 9/25/2023

Aloha,

The Latest on Pinkston’s 280 Luxury Condos in Kiahuna and 60+ Luxury Units in Kukuiula Development

On September 12, 2023, we wrote and shared that the Kauai Planning Commission had received and accepted the Planning Director’s Determination that Gary Pinkston and his development firm Meridian Pacific had allowed their Tentative Subdivision Approvals to lapse. Based on his failure to timely request an extension of time on the Subdivision Approvals, the Kauai County Code states that the Approvals became “void as a matter of law”, preventing any further subdivision development at Kukuiula or Kiahuna Plantation in Koloa. On further review of the County Code, we learned that a developer is required to have a valid Tentative Subdivision Approval before they can obtain a Grubbing and Grading permit. FOM is committed to preserving the rural community in which we live. Therefore, we asked our attorney to prepare a demand to the Department of Public Works to rescind Pinkston’s Grubbing and Grading permits for both developments. Here is the letter from our attorney. Incorporated in her letter are the two letters from the Kauai Planning Director to Pinkston’s contractor informing him that both the Kukuiula development and Kiahuna development Subdivision Approvals are void and are no longer valid.

Koloa Historic Sugar Mill Illegally Hijacked for Industrial Lumber Mill Use Without Any Permits

Please find a copy of the archeological complaint that was served on both the State Historic Preservation Division and the County of Kauai by Deidre Encarnación, an archeologist that we retained when reviewing the features of archeological significance in Mahaulepu Valley. She has been on our mailing list since and when she saw the pictures of the HPM alterations to the Koloa historic sugar mill, she called to see if she could help. The first email in this the chain that follows is a copy of the complaint served on the State and the County by the archeologist. Ka`āina Hull, County Planning Director, responded. He thanked her for her complaint and said that is being added to the investigation the County has initiated against HPM. His response follows. Dei interned at the State of Hawaii Historic Preservation Division. She worked with Susan Lebo, the Chief Archeologist there. Dei has a Masters Degree in Archeology and we are hopeful that her complaint along with the one we filed will help to end HPM’s unpermitted use of the Old Mill which is, by code, suppose to be limited to the support of an agricultural operation.

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Kaaina Hull <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 10:54 AM
Subject: RE: Koloa Mill Violations
To: Dei Encarnación <[email protected]>

Thank you for your communication,

An investigation has been initiated for this site, and we will file this additional communication with our enforcement team for their review. Mahalo.

Ka`āina Hull

Director of Planning

County of Kaua`i

4444 Rice Street, Suite A473

Līhu`e, Hawai`i 96766

(808)-241-4050

From: Dei Encarnación <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2023 6:28 AM
To: Kaaina Hull <[email protected]>
Subject: Koloa Mill Violations

CAUTION: This email originated from outside the County of Kauai. Do not click links or open attachments even if the sender is known to you unless it is something you were expecting.

Dear Ka’āina Hull:

I am writing to you in order to address the unpermitted industrial activities that have been taking place within the former Koloa Sugar Mill on the island of Kaua’i (see attached photos). The mill sits on agricultural land that has been repurposed by HPM Building Supply for construction equipment-related purposes that are not agricultural in nature and that do not commercially support agriculture. HPM had recently been denied permits to develop on an adjacent parcel, and the move into the Old Koloa Sugar Mill has bypassed the environmental impact process and is completely without permits.

The Old Koloa Sugar Mill has been recorded as SHPD Historic Site #30-10-9302, and is a National Historic Landmark listed on the National Register of Historic Places (#66000296).  The primary features of the site are the Old Sugar Mill chimney and foundation located at the intersection of Koloa Road and Maluhia Road, however the standing ruins of the mill buildings are a contributing factor to the overall integrity of the site and are a feature on the Koloa Heritage Trail (Ka Ala Hele Waiwai Ho’oilina o Kōloa). Impacts to the former mill buildings result in an indirect effect to these primary features.

The lack of an archaeological inventory survey or other proper procedures prior to the commencement of work is in direct violation of Section 106 of the NHPA, which mandates effects of undertakings on “historic properties” and seeks to avoid, minimize, or mitigate any adverse effects on such properties (36 CFR 800.1(a)).

As you are aware, the use of the site without an AIS or proper permits is in further violation of Chapter 6E of the State of Hawaii Revised Statutes, which states that “before any construction, alteration, disposition or improvement of any nature, by, for, or permitted by a private landowner may be commenced which will affect an historic property on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places, the landowner shall notify the department of the construction, alteration, disposition, or improvement of any nature and allow the department opportunity for review of the effect of the proposed construction, alteration, disposition, or improvement of any nature on the historic property. The proposed construction, alteration, disposition, or improvement of any nature shall not be commenced, or in the event it has already begun, continue, until the department shall have given its concurrence or ninety days have elapsed.” The landowner has neither received permits from the Kaua’i Planning Department nor notified SHPD of the work currently being done at the site.

HPM has altered the appearance of the Old Koloa Sugar Mill site, by painting former sugar mill buildings and placing signs in direct conflict with the historical integrity of the property (see attached photos). To date, no assessment of the current condition or integrity of the mill site has been conducted, and the use of the site by HPM for industrial purposes continues. As an archaeologist and advocate for historic preservation, I am requesting an investigation into the unpermitted development and use of Site #30-10-9302, in an effort to protect the heritage of the town of Koloa and the State of Hawai’i.

Sincerely,

  1. Encarnación, M.A.

Posted 9/13/2023

Aloha,

Pinkston and his development company Meridian Pacific had a really bad day today!

At the Planning Commission meeting today, Kaaina Hull, Planning Department Director informed the Planning Commission that the Planning Department had indeed determined that the tentative subdivision approvals for each of Gary Pinkston’s Koloa developments, the 280 unit luxury condo development on Kiahuna Plantation Drive and the 51+ unit development in Kukuiula right above the boat harbor were “void as a matter of law”. Director Hull reported to the Commission that he had sent the developer a letter to that effect.

Background:

On June 27, 2023 FOM responded to two Requests from Pinkston and Meridian Pacific to extend the time for them to satisfy their subdivision deadlines. We argued then that they had allowed the one year time for performance to lapse and they were late in their requests for an extension of time on each of their Koloa developments. In response to our objections to any extension of time, the Planning Department recommended that the matter be referred to the County Attorney for a legal Opinion on whether or not the tentative subdivision approvals were void as a matter of law and not eligible to receive any extension of time. We argued that the tentative subdivision approval for the Kiahuna Plantation Drive 280 multi-million dollar units expired August 10, 2022, one year from the tentative subdivision approval. The tentative subdivision approval for the Kukuiula project expired February 23, 2023, one year after that Pinkston development received  tentative subdivision approval. The lawyer for Pinkston and Meridian Pacific does not dispute that they failed to timely request an extension of time on their tentative subdivision approvals. By County Code, they were required to do so before one year lapsed from the respective dates of approvals.

Determination:

Following the County Attorney’s Review and as a result of their failure to make timely requests, Director Hull in his report to the Planning Commission, also used the following phrases: “Their done”, “They’re dead in the water”, when discussing the status of the two tentative subdivision approvals. The lawyers for Pinkston and Meridian Pacific, requested a Contested Case/Appeal of the Director’s Ruling, which they have a right to do. It is an appeal that has to be heard if timely filed. The good news is, there are no grounds raised in their Appeal of the Director’s Determination that is claims any exemption or exception from the the County Code or its subdivision development timelines. None of Pinkston’s representatives offered any legal defense other than to say that Mr Pinkston had already spent a lot of money on these developments and that the Director’s Ruling will be a significant detriment to him. It is very unlikely that the Administrative Law Judge assigned to this Appeal would disagree with the Director’s Determination. They blew it. They allowed the tentative approvals to lapse and interestingly enough, you can’t have a grubbing and grading permit without a tentative subdivision approval. Consequently, we are now moving for revocation of Pinkston’s grubbing and grading permits which are no longer valid as a matter of law.

What was really disheartening today was learning that Attorney Laurel Loo who worked for the County when the development permits on Pinkston’s Kiahuna parcel were issued, negotiated an agreement with Housing Director, Adam Roversi, that afforded Gary Pinkston the satisfaction of his workforce housing requirement. At the time, the County required developers to produce affordable homes that represented at least 20% of the number of high-end homes being developed.

The $2.56 million dollar payment to the County to satisfy their affordable housing requirement, doesn’t even represent 1% of the proceeds anticipated from the 280 million plus dollar luxury condominiums Pinkston plans to develop on Kiahuna Plantation Drive.

Our community is at risk for major change! We couldn’t do this without your support. As the year end approaches, please remember Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3) non-profit community organization, and kindly donate so we can continue our work to Save Koloa.

See the email to Director Hull below regarding the HPM operation at the Old Mill Site. At the Commission meeting today, the Commission and the Planning Department confirmed that commercial operations on Ag land, that are not agriculture and do not support a current agricultural operation, are not allowed without obtaining a lawful permit.

“Aloha Kaaina,

No question your job is a hard one. I think you know that the testimonies offered today come from people who really care about this beautiful rural community. We just don’t it overrun with large multiple axle trucks on our narrow two lane Koloa roads. As you heard today, one of our long time Koloa residents was struck by a construction worker on his way to work a few days ago. The truck he was driving came around a curve on one of our narrow two lane roads and hit him head on as he was cycling on the side of the road. He is now in critical care in Queens Hospital on Oahu.

We don’t want over development that obstructs our ability to move around safely in our community. After the hearing today, I couldn’t help wondering why you feel it is necessary to send a code enforcement officer to inspect the HPM operation at the Old Mill. There is no question they are operating on Ag land in an old building that use to support an Ag operation, the processing sugar cane. HPM’s operation, however, is not an Ag operation and is not supporting an existing Ag operation here. HPM is industrial and designed to produce building supplies, trusses, modular walls, etc. So if they acknowledge they are operating and the paperwork filed by their attorney and the owner Declarations confirm they are operating without any permits, why can’t the County issue a Notice of Violation and a Cease and Desist Order now based on their own admission and your knowledge of zoning of the Old Mill property? Isn’t this a zoning violation as a matter of law based on the facts that are not in dispute? Please help us bring some law and order to our community. Residents of Koloa are looking to the Planning Department to enforce Kauai County and State Law.

Please accept this email as a formal complaint on behalf of our many members who live in Koloa and specifically on behalf of our members who live in Poipu Ina, now suffering from the disruption of their use and enjoyment of their adjacent homes. We look forward to your Notice of Violation and Order to Cease and Desist. Please advise us when action is taken.

Mahalo nui,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037 

Posted 9/8/2023

Pinkston’s Projects in More Trouble

Aloha,

You may recall, that FOM testified in strong opposition to Pinkston’s request for an extension of time on the tentative subdivision approvals for his developments, 282 units on Kiahuna Plantation Drive and 51 units in Kukuiula development right above the boat harbor.

According to Kauai County Ordinance, any developer who receives tentative approval is expected to submit final subdivision plans for approval within one year of the counties grant of a tentative approval. Pinkston allowed both tentative approvals to lapse without requesting an extension of time. According to the Ordinance, we argued that his right to proceed lapsed and that he had to reapply. When the Planning Department issued its agenda for their next meeting Tuesday September 12, 2023, we learned that the County Attorney agreed with FOM prompting the County Planning Director to recommend the Planning Commission to deem each of Pinkston’s tentative subdivision approvals as expired.  All of the housing Pinkston wants to develop in Koloa, including the 100 luxury condos to be built in Koloa are investor class or resort properties whose price point begins in excess of a $1 million, nothing for workforce and nothing affordable. We could use your help to tell the Planning Commission that we don’t need more visitor/resort destination properties in this community. We don’t need the 400+ cars that will be added to our small community traffic flow. Testimony should be prepared and emailed to the County Planning Director, [email protected] on or before this coming Sunday evening, 9/10/2023. The following is a link to the Planning Commission meeting Tuesday 9/12/2023 at 9:00 am. The second link contains an agenda packet where you can find the Counties position and information being provided to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Agenda

Planning Department Information Packet for Agenda Items

See flyer below for more details:

Residents statewide object to more development that is “not” housing for Hawaii’s residents/workforce.

On July 17, 2023, Governor Green signed an Emergency Proclamation declaring a moratorium on State and County laws that regulate the construction of homes. That moratorium predated the Lahaina fires but claimed it was necessary to address the housing shortage statewide which the Governor claimed constituted an “emergency”. Unfortunately our housing shortage has been many decades in the making and the moratorium does not require construction of affordable housing but rather gives developers, contractors, infrastructure (utility companies, highway contractors, etc.) an unregulated pass to develop with only a 22 person Governor appointed Board to give a thumbs up or a thumbs down for all plans filed with the State during the moratorium period. As the following link to today’s Civil Beat article reports, many throughout the state are opposed to the Governor’s action:

Hawaii’s New Chief Housing Officer Is Resigning

The Governor’s moratorium has also generated lawsuits filed by private petitioners as described in the press release below. A similar legal action was recently filed by EarthJustice on behalf of Sierra Club:

Court Issues Writ of Quo Warranto on July 17 Housing Proclamation

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASELahaina — West Maui kama’aina Leonard Nakoa III and Daniel Palakiko have joined with residents across the state in challenging the legality of the governor’s July 17 Emergency Proclamation on Housing.Earlier today, Second Circuit Court Chief Judge Peter T. Cahill found probable cause to issue a writ of quo warranto directed to Nani Medeiros, the so-called “lead housing officer” and the Build Beyond Barriers Working Group, both established by the proclamation. The writ orders them to appear in Maui Circuit Court to answer the petition.The governor’s proclamation states the century-long affordable housing shortage constitutes an emergency requiring immediate intervention. These interventions suspend a wide range of laws and introduced the governor-appointed working group and Lead Housing Officer to determine when they apply. Nothing in the emergency proclamation requires the production of affordable housing, rather it is one of several considerations. “Affordable housing” under the proclamation is 140% of average median income, or $118,950 for a single person household.The petitioning hui of local residents are very concerned by the governor’s use of emergency powers to legislate radical policy changes into law affecting everything from protection of iwi kūpuna and prevailing wages to ensuring payment of school impact fees.The petition has two counts. The first count asserts that that the century-long shortage of housing does not constitute an “emergency” within the definition of the emergency management law or that the emergency declaration otherwise violates the constitutional right that limiting the use of the martial law or the suspension of laws. The second count asserts that amending or modifying of various statutes exceeds the governor’s authority granted in the emergency management law or otherwise violates the constitutional separation of powers.Petitioners are Leonard “Junya” Nakoa III, Daniel Palakiko, Tom Coffman, Llewelyn (Billy) Kaohelauli’i, Val Turalde, Elizabeth Okinaka, Tom Keali’i Kanahele, Ellen Ebata, Rupert Rowe, and Jeffrey Lindner.”Protections put in place for our iwi kupuna over the last thirty years is not a reason why Hawai’i has had a shortage of affordable housing for the last hundred,” said Petitioner Leonard “Junya” Nakoa.”The proclamation usurps all government power into the hands of one unelected former lobbyist. It is a direct threat to our democracy,” said Petitioner Tom Coffman.Contact:
Lance D. Collins
[email protected]
808-281-3020

How are power lines in your area?

Power lines typically contain a top line with transformer which carries high voltage current and the lowest line strung between power polls are telecommunication/phone lines. In an article yesterday in the Star Advertiser, it was reported that those studying the downed poles believe they were weakened by the weight of the many telecommunication lines which tend to be added whenever a new development or housing goes in an area. We would appreciate hearing from you if you live near power poles. If you find there are a lot of lines between poles, feel free to snap a photo and email or text it to us at 808-346-1973.

Sharing a detailed timeline on the Lahaina fires which supports the need to get our potential for downed power lines and other causes of wild fires that can ignite dried grasses that are close to older at risk communities on Kauai. At a minimum our County needs to develop well constructed  fire breaks to protect housing near fallow grass lands:

Link for the Lahaina Fire Timeline Article by PBS

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 8/29/2023

Timeline of the Maui wildfires

Posted 8/17/2023

Choose Prevention, Prevent Destruction

Aloha Mayor Kawakami, Chair Mel Rapozo and Members of the Kauai County Council,

The recent disaster on Maui is heart wrenching. The findings by fire suppression specialists, that fuel suppression may have averted the extent of the disaster on Maui, concerns many of our members, residents of Koloa and Poipu. We have had wild fires that plagued this community when the dried grasses on fallow agricultural lands in Maha`ulepu began to burn with little or no warning. Over the past five years, there have been several fires erupt in Maha`ulepu which filled the Hyatt Resort and much of our community with thick smoke before the fires were brought under control. Because of the nature of the dry grasses and our trade winds, a rapidly spreading fire is a risk that could be equally deadly for the Koloa Poipu community. We have close dense housing near the soccer park and in the homes off of Kiahuna Plantation Drive. In the latter, there are now 1,200 residences, condominiums and free standing homes, all developed in close proximity where cars are limited to one lane in and one lane out.

While the wild fires from the fallow grass lands of Maha`ulepu did jump the eastern bypass road, causing damage to buildings on the makai side of the street as well as several homes that burned in Weliweli Tract, fortunately we were not having high winds at the time. Had we had hot August high trade winds, the fire that hit homes in the Weliweli Tract could have resulted in burning embers being blown into the Knudsen property structures and from there into the Kiahuna developments. As we know from Maui, it can happen all too fast. Please consider an ordinance requiring land owners with fallow acreage to reduce the fuel their properties contain and to create fire breaks that protect nearby structures and homes, particularly in areas of dense development.

The other disaster that threatens Koloa is rupture of anyone of our high hazard unlined earthen dams. The following links provide captioned photos that demonstrate and reflect the safety status of our Koloa dams. One of the particular concerns is that the dams mauka of Waita, earthen and old, are all aligned and if any one of them breach or rupture, dam safety studies have indicated they will likely have a cascading effect rupturing the lower dams. The Waita is the lowest of Koloa dams. It holds approximately three billion gallons of water and is reportedly the states largest earthen dam reservoir. It is reported to be a high hazard dam with existing seeps and fissures in its earthen walls.

Perhaps most troubling is the fact that the eastern Maha`ulepu facing side of the dam no longer has its spillway. Photos show that the spillway was removed, is laying on the side of the dam with dirt and vegetation now closing off that spillway. As we know from the Ka Loko disaster, closing a spillway on a dam increases the risk of break or rupture because of the weight of the water behind the earthen dam wall with no spillway to relieve the pressure. If the eastern spillway of the Waita had been maintained and not removed, it would have left an escape point to relieve pressure by releasing water into the Maha`ulepu Valley where there are no structures. Now, however, with the only remaining spillway facing Koloa Town, the potential for flooding and damage to our community is greater than it should be. If you read the well written Civil Beat article, and note the quotes and information obtained from the fire suppression specialists and groups that studied the risk to Lahaina, there is no justification for any public official to say that their recent disaster could not have been anticipated.

The captioned photos for the four Koloa dam reservoirs contained in the following links from the State dam safety engineers also provide ample information that our County Council and our county departments could and should act on to avoid a Ka Loko disaster on the South Shore of Kauai. If one studies the route, the billions of gallons of water are expected to take, much of Koloa and Poipu would be wiped off the face of the Earth and thousands would die.

Mauka Reservoir Images
Pia Mill Reservoir Images
Puu O Hewa Reservoir Images
Waita Reservoir Images

If either of these two potential disasters occurs, the result would be as or more catastrophic than what just happened on Maui. Please take action now to keep our community safe.

Mahalo nui,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 8/10/2023

You Won’t Believe It

Aloha,

Four months ago, FOM filed a Motion to Intervene on KIUC’s Application for an electric rate increase before the Public Utility Commission (PUC). FOM filed its Motion after many of our members received a notice from KIUC that the requested rate increase for electricity would result in an increase in the residential rate payers bill between 18-19.5%. The PUC finally issued an Order last Friday allowing FOM to participate in the rate hike proceeding. Our focus is to be on the West Kauai Energy Project which includes a large pump storage operation and a new separate hydro-power plant installation at Puʻu ʻopae. The pump storage operation is expected to have 2 large multi million gallon reservoirs with minimal water loss because solar panels are to provide the electricity to pump water from a lower reservoir to an upper reservoir during the day and the upper reservoir will then fall by gravity at night to create hydro-power. The new hydro-power plant at Puʻu ʻopae is projected to divert 11,000,000 gallons daily to run through its penstock and out the tail raceway to a dry gulch that will drain to the ocean until homes and Ag land are developed at Puʻu ʻopae. When the development is complete, it is estimated that 6,000,000 gallons of the 11,000,000 gallons of water diverted from the Wailua River be redirected to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) acreage at Puʻu ʻopae. Until that time, however, the 11,000,000 gallons a day diverted from the Wailua River represents a loss of 4.15 billion gallons annually.

In preparing our case, our attorneys have been evaluating the KIUC annual audited financial statements. We could use help from any  members with financial or accounting skills. The current long term debt of KIUC exceeds $260,000,000. KIUC’s cash on hand is $48,000,000 which KIUC needs to pay the annual interest rate on leases, loans and debt retirement. If we had to meet our debt obligation today, KIUC would be bankrupt. However, accountants have reported that KIUC is still a “going concern” because they have been paying the interest and they are retiring our debt at the rate set out in the financial schedule, paying $12,$10, $17 million etc each year depending on what is required to meet the debt that needs to be retired in that year. FOM, is very concerned, that because KIUC has only a total of 34,000 accounts (residential, commercial, resort, etc.), KIUC is risking becoming insolvent. As we are a co-op all members are financially responsible for the debt our utility creates.

As co-op members, we are all owners of KIUC and financially responsible for co-op debt. The West Kauai Energy Project is projected to cost $355,175,587.00. That development cost will double KIUC’s indebtedness. Our attorney’s are working diligently to prepare for the hearing before the PUC. We do not have a date for the hearing at present but expect it will be set soon.

The information about the West Kauai Energy Project can be accessed in the following five links:

2022-09-08-KA-2nd-DEA-West-Kauai-Energy-Project-Vol-I
2022-09-08-KA-2nd-DEA-West-Kauai-Energy-Project-Vol-II-Appendix-A-C
2022-09-08-KA-2nd-DEA-West-Kauai-Energy-Project-Vol-III-Appendix-D
2022-09-08-KA-2nd-DEA-West-Kauai-Energy-Project-Vol-IV-Appendix-E-J
2022-09-08-KA-2nd-DEA-West-Kauai-Energy-Project-Vol-V-Appendix-K-Q

It is particularly troubling that they report that his huge expensive project is going to cost more than $355,000,000.00, will tax the environment for more than 4 billion gallons of water per year while saving rate payers an average of $20 a month. To make matters worse, KIUC admits themselves “With KIUC’s already very high rates, the opportunities to increase rates to cover significant new expenditures is extremely limited” 2nd DEA, Vol 4 Page 96. To spite that statement to the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR), acknowledging that our rates are some of, if not, the highest rates in the nation today, they are in fact asking the PUC for a substantial rate increase. So when they sought approval of the project by the BLNR, they suggested that the project would be done without a rate increase. However, after they got their approval December 27, 2022, they waited one day to file their request for a substantial rate increase.

The following are quoted statements from KIUC’s West Kauai Energy Project documents relied on for this email:

““
2nd DEA, Volume 5 page 16 Exhibit 1

Basically, we are doubling our debt to save $20 a month for the average rate payer.

“The Project… is also projected to save rate payers $20 per month on average over the life of
the project (as compared to continuing to use oil-powered generators).” 2nd DEA, Volume 5
Appendix Q Page 948

Please contact us if you have any information you believe would be helpful for our challenge to the KIUC rate hike. Our legal team is working diligently and we could use your support to help cover FOM’s costs. It is nearing year end. Your contribution to our 501(c)(3) charitable organization, will receive an acknowledgement letter with our tax id information for your tax deductible contribution. Any questions, please email or call us. Please feel free to share this email. FOM is very concerned about our future electric costs and the burden it is certain to place on Kauai’s residential accounts.

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Mahaʻulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kiaʻ Wai o Waiʻaleʻale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808) 742-1037

Posted 8/7/2023

Coco Palms on DLNR Agenda Friday, Aug 11, 2023

Aloha,

The latest happenings in our environmental world impacting Kauai:

  1. The State Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) will once again address Coco Palms on their Agenda this coming Friday. Agenda item D7 will address the revocation of revocable permits for the access and use of State lands at the old Coco Palms site. There is a lease associated with the coconut grove that is not part the Coco Palms Agenda item D7 to be addressed this coming Friday.The testimony submitted by FOM follows below. We believe that the RPs issued to a now defunct corporation, which have been renewed every year for past 5 years, even though the corporation that held the RPs no longer exists must be revoked now. The State is proposing to revoke the RPs as of December 31, 2023. Since they were issued to an entity that no longer exists, since the States staff submittal makes it clear that the State can revoke the month to month permits at any time, we support revocation now. That would clear the way for the non-profit, E ola Wailua Nui, to apply for the permits and begin the process of conserving and securing the site as a park-historic cultural center.If you intend to submit written testimony, please do so by Wednesday August 9, 2023 and email it to [email protected]. If you want to testify at the hearing via Zoom, please make your request to Darlene S Ferreira at [email protected].You will find a copy of our testimony to BLNR and prior correspondence to BLNR Director, Dawn NS Chang below.
  2. If you want to follow and join the upcoming climate change forum, please see the attached flyer for details.


Friends of Maha’ulepu                       friendsofmahaulepu.org                                                 8/7/2023

Director Dawn NS Chang and the
Board of Land and Natural Resources
State of Hawaii
Honolulu, HI

RE: Agenda Item D7 – Termination of Revocable Permit Nos. S-7407, S-7444 and S-7613 to Coco Palms Ventures LLC, Permittee, Effective December 31, 2023, Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044, (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:por. 017. 

Aloha Director Chang and Members of the Board,

Please accept this emailed correspondence in strong support of the Boards Revocation of RPs S-7407, S-7444 and S-7613 for TMKs (4) 4-1-003:044, (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:por. 017 on Kauai, Hawaii. The subject RPs were last issued to Coco Palms Ventures LLC, a limited liability corporation whose corporate status in the State of Hawaii was involuntarily revoked 12/4/2017. Thereafter, the RP and tax payments were not received for six years.

At the last meeting where these RPs were reviewed by the Board, Director Chang confirmed that RPs are not transferable from one entity to another. The staff submittal in item D7 confirms that the subsequent application attempt by Coco Palms Hui LLC, Chad Waters and Tyler Green, was never finalized because they were never able to provide tax clearance.

We appreciate the Board terminating the subject RPs, a necessary and required legal action at this juncture. We were concerned that when this agenda item was taken off the July 28, 2023 calendar, the 45 comments submitted by people all over the State were no longer as likely to be reviewed by the Board. We strongly believe that those comments should be considered by the Board. For that reason, we have attached the 45 comments that people across the State took the time to write. Every comment offered is in support of termination of these RPs and preservation of this site as a historical area worthy of conservation not development.

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

——– Forwarded Message ——–

Content-Type:multipart/alternative; boundary=”————Kg7PvtT07emy3dtARPvztov1″
Message-ID:<[email protected]>
Date:Tue, 27 Jun 2023 21:35:24 -1000
MIME-Version:1.0
User-Agent:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.12.0
To:[email protected]
Content-Language:en-US
From:Bridget Hammerquist <[email protected]>
Cc:Ferreira, Darlene S <[email protected]>
Subject:Coco Palms
Reply-To:[email protected]

Aloha Dawn N. S. Chang, Director and Chair Board of Land and Natural Resources,

Re: Report to the Board of Land and Natural Resources the status of Revocable Permit Nos. 7407, 7444 and 7613 to Coco Palms Joint Ventures LLC Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044 por., (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:017. Hearing 4/14/23.

On April 14, 2023, several members of our non-profit group and myself appeared before you and testified on the above matter. We are not affiliated with A E Ola Wailua Nui. However, we are in support of what they are trying to do and recognize that it is beneficial to our island community. On April 19, 2023, a Notice of Apparent Violation and Order was sent by the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) to Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC via certified mail to Reef Capital Properties’ RP21 Coco Palms, LLC (RP21). During the April 14th DLNR meeting: 1) the attorney and representatives who testified for RP21 stated they had no legal relationship with Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC; 2) they also stated they had no relationship with and were not representing them in any capacity; 3) Hawaii State Records report the business license for Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC was involuntarily terminated in December of 2017; 4) Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC, to our knowledge, was not on island or doing business anywhere in the State of Hawaii since 2016; 5) Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC Coconut Grove Lease with the State was never assigned their lease with the required approval of DLNR and until recently, was six years in arrears on their real property tax obligation to the County of Kauai; and, 6) even though another entity has cleared the back taxes, the lease is still in the name of the non-existent entity and the RPs that were extended and renewed to that entity are not transferable.
We realize there are timelines for a response to the OCCL Notice. We are very appreciative that you took the time to appear in person before the Kauai County Council May 10, 2023 to discuss the administrative process. We also appreciate the detailed information of the current violations of the would be developer RP21 who has neither a lease to the Coconut Grove nor any RP for the Coco Palms site.

We have recently learned that the DLNR Land Agent on Kauai advised the non-profit, Kauai, Eola Wailua Nui, that the RPs were not available for application. On April 14, 2023, however, we heard your Land staff describe their assistance to RP21 with their submission of an application for the RPs at the Coco Palms site. We know that a non-profit on Kauai, Eola Wailua Nui, had also before our April 14th meeting completed their application for the same 3 RPs identified above.

If possible, there are many members of our organization and others that would appreciate any information as to when and if the RPs that were held by Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC will be terminated. Would you please advise of the next steps? It would seem that there is ample grounds to terminate the RPs because of the lack of communication between Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC and the State. Prior to your administration, a lawsuit was filed against DLNR because the Agency renewed Coco Palms Joint Ventures’ RPs, even though that entity no longer exists. The community also knew that there was no relationship between Reef Capital Properties its RP21 Coco Palms, LLC and the RP holder, Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC. As soon as those RPs are terminated, since they were extended and renewed to an entity that no longer exists, the lawsuit should become moot. This would help the community to move forward with its applications and efforts to conserve this very revered site. This is a genuine interest of many of our members and a large body of concerned citizens on Kauai.

Any information you can provide will be helpful.

Mahalo for your courtesy in this regard,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 7/12/2023

Doubly Bad Day For Developer

Aloha,

Good news. There wonʻt be permits to start construction of Pinkstonʻs 280 luxury condo development units on Kiahuna Plantation Drive anytime soon! We were on the news again last night. You can watch the coverage via the following link. Thanks to all our supporters who turned out to testify. Some of our local island residents made the news. FOM hired Bianca Isaki and Ryan Hurley, Oahu attorneys who did an excellent job putting a Petition to Revoke and a Petition to Intervene and a request for a Contested Case hearing to the Kauai County Planning Commission. The Petition to Revoke is now before the County Planning Director. The Commission granted our Petition to Intervene an our request for a Contested Case which will be heard by an administrative law Judge. We were successful! The Commission granted our Petition to Intervene. Attached is a Comment that describes why we filed these Petition.

https://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/2023/07/12/stop-it-now-frustrations-grow-kauai-over-property-development-poipu

Our Petition to Intervene and request for a Contested Case hearing before an administrative law Judge was joined by attorneys for PRP, Pacific Resource Partnership. PRP is the backbone of Hawaii’s construction industry, representing the Hawaii Regional Council of Carpenters and more than 240 of the state’s top contractors.

By way of update on Coco Palms, we are still awaiting the Stateʻs action. Please see our recent letter to DLNR Director Dawn N. S. Chang.

——– Forwarded Message ——–

Date:Tue, 27 Jun 2023 21:35:24 -1000
To:[email protected]
From:Bridget Hammerquist <[email protected]>
Cc:Ferreira, Darlene S <[email protected]>
Subject:Coco Palms

Aloha Dawn N. S. Chang, Director and Chair Board of Land and Natural Resources,

Re: Report to the Board of Land and Natural Resources the status of Revocable Permit Nos. 7407, 7444 and 7613 to Coco Palms Joint Ventures LLC Wailua, Kawaihau, Kauai, Tax Map Keys: (4) 4-1-003:044 por., (4) 4-1-003:017 and (4) 4-1-005:017. Hearing 4/14/23.

On April 14, 2023, several members of our non-profit group and myself appeared before you and testified on the above matter. We are not affiliated with A E Ola Wailua Nui. However, we are in support of what they are trying to do and recognize that it is beneficial to our island community. On April 19, 2023, a Notice of Apparent Violation and Order was sent by the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) to Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC via cerified mail to Reef Capital Properies’ RP21 Coco Palms, LLC (RP21). During the April 14th DLNR meeting: 1) the attorney and representatives who testified for RP21 stated they had no legal relationship with Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC; 2) they also stated they had no relationship with and were not representing them in any capacity; 3) Hawaii State Records report the business license for Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC was involuntarily terminated in December of 2017; 4) Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC, to our knowledge, was not on island or doing business anywhere in the State of Hawaii since 2016; 5) Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC Coconut Grove Lease with the State was never assigned their lease with the required approval of DLNR and until recently, was six years in arrears on their real property tax obligation to the County of Kauai; and, 6) eventhough another entity has cleared the back taxes, the lease is still in the name of the non-existent entity and the RPs that were extended and renewed to that entity are not transferable.

We realize there are timelines for a response to the OCCL Notice. We are very appreciative that you took the time to appear in person before the Kauai County Council May 10, 2023 to discuss the administrative process. We also appreciate the detailed information of the current violations of the would be developer RP21 who has neither a lease to the Coconut Grove nor any RP for the Coco Palms site.

We have recently learned that the DLNR Land Agent on Kauai advised the non-profit, Kauai, Eola Wailua Nui, that the RPs were not available for application. On April 14, 2023, however, we heard your Land staff describe their assistance to RP21 with their submission of an application for the RPs at the Coco Palms site. We know that a non-profit on Kauai, Eola Wailua Nui, had also before our April 14th meeting completed their application for the same 3 RPs identified above.

If possible, there are many members of our organization and others that would appreciate any information as to when and if the RPs that were held by Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC will be terminated. Would you please advise of the next steps? It would seem that there is ample grounds to terminate the RPs because of the lack of communication between Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC and the State. Prior to your administration, a lawsuit was filed against DLNR because the Agency renewed Coco Palms Joint Ventures’ RPs, eventhough that entity no longer exists. The community also knew that there was no relationship between Reef Capital Properties its RP21 Coco Palms, LLC and the RP holder, Coco Palms Joint Ventures, LLC. As soon as those RPs are terminated, since they were extended and renewed to an entity that no longer exists, the lawsuit should become moot. This would help the community to move forward with its applications and efforts to conserve this very revered site. This is a genuine interest of many of our members and a large body of concerned citizens on Kauai.

Any information you can provide will be helpful.

Mahalo for your courtesy in this regard,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 7/5/2023

Hearing July 11th

Aloha,

On July 11, 2023 the Planning Commission will hold a Public Hearing at 8:30 am at 4444 Rice St., s 300. They will be addressing Gary Pinkstonʻs request for an extension of time on his Tentative subdivision approval. By County rules a developer is expected to either ask for an extension or submit final subdivision plans within one year of the their Tentative subdivision approval. Pinkstonʻs Tentative subdivision approval was granted August 10, 2021. He he did not ask for an extension before the one year lapsed. One year and 10 months after his initial Tentative approval, he just now asked for an extension of time.

The County and Pinkston were served July 3rd with a Petition to Revoke all permits and a Petition to Intervene on the attempt to modify Condition No. 26 of the Project Development Use Permit relating to drainage requirement for Pinkstonʻs property at 5425 Pua A Laka St.. If you want to read our Petitions, click on the links. The Petition to Intervene is large because of its exhibits, the first 23 pages are the Petition.

Please share this email. We appreciate your support. We have retained a legal team to help us with this fight. My work on this and our other environmental projects is, as always, pro bono. If you are able to help us with a current donation, we can assure you it will be put to good use.

—

With Much Gratitude,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 6/29/2023

Bad Day for Developer

Aloha,

The email that follows will detail the misrepresentations and departures from legal requirements by Gary Pinkston and Meridian Pacific for his 280 unit condo development on Kiahuna Plantation Drive, the location of significant excavation, rock crushing and seven months of blasting, see Save Koloa YouTube channel with videos of explosions and serious environmental damage. We appeared before the Subdivision Committee of the Kauai County Planning Commission yesterday to object to any extension of time. The developer has violated conditions, failed to meet conditions and irreparably changed the parcel before ever evaluating it for habitat potential and/or the presence of the Koloa blind cave spider and blink cave amphipod, species endemic only to Koloa/Poipu, nowhere else in the world. They are endangered and their protection is mandated by Federal, State and County law. In addition to Pinkstonʻs unlawful practices described below, he was to return to the Planning Commission with the final maps for Subdivision approval within one year of the Countyʻs grant of the Tentative Subdivision approval on 8/10/2021. An applicant can seek an extension if more time is needed. However, Pinkston allowed the time to lapse and just came to the County yesterday one year and 10 months after. His Tentative approval expired August 10, 2022 and we argued that he cannot get an extension of an expired permit. We are arguing that he has to reapply. We have engaged attorneys and are currently preparing a Petition to Revoke his permits due to the transgressions identified below.

Based on the testimonies offered yesterday, the Subdivision Committee did not give Pinkston any extension of time. They differed his request to July 11, 2023 for a hearing after they had sufficient time to review what we filed and put before them.

Please share this email with anyone concerned about over development in the Koloa/Poipu area. You financial support of our actions which cover the costs of our attorneys supports our challenge of this ill planned development. If you can attend 8:30 am, July 11 and/or submit written comments on Pinkstonʻs 5425 Pa’u A Laka development, just mauka of Pili Mai on Kiahuna Plantation Drive, formerly known as Yellow Hale. It is important to let the Kauai County Planning Commission know how the community feels about this 280 unit luxury condo development. When submitting written testimony, please direct it to the Kauai County Planning Department at: [email protected], Kaaina Hull <[email protected]> and Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa <[email protected]> with subject Subdivision Application No. 2-2021-7.

You can view the Subdivision Committee link on Kauai.gov meeting webcasts to watch yesterdayʻs meeting. The Chair thanked those of us who testified and who put written comments before them like the one that follows, stating that “without the public input they would have no way of knowing much of what we shared with them yesterday.”

Mahalo nui loa,Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted6/26/2023

Subdivision Agenda Item 1. b.


Friends of Maha’ulepu                                 friendsofmahaulepu.org                                                 6/26/2023

@font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536869121 1107305727 33554432 0 415 0;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-469750017 -1040178053 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:””; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:8.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-font-kerning:1.0pt; mso-ligatures:standardcontextual;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-family:”Calibri”,sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}.MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:8.0pt; line-height:107%;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;}

To: Commission Chair and Members of the Kauai County Planning Commission

From: Friends of Maha’ulepu and Save Koloa

Regarding: 1. Preliminary Subdivision Extension Request

  1. Subdivision Application No. S-2021-7
    5425 Pa’u A Laka, LLC.
    Proposed 2-lot Consolidation and Resubdivision into 4-lots
    TMK:    (4) 2-8-014: 032
    Koloa, Kauai

Aloha Chair and Planning Commission Members,

This Comment is filed with the sincere request that it be read and considered before any action be taken on the part of the Subdivision Committee or the full Commission. There have been some very serious departures from the law with a failure to enforce Land Use Commission (LUC) Conditions. The outright misrepresentations from the applicant also warrants revocation of the tentative subdivision approval and the permits granted in 2006 and described in the 2006 letter on the Project Development Use Permit PD. U-2006-25, Use Permit U-2006-26, Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2006-27, copy attached.

Revocation of the subdivision approval and permits are called for in this case because there has been a complete disregard of the 1977 State LUC District Boundary Amendment Decision & Order, and the Orders that followed. Docket No. A 76-418. Each parcel was to receive a certificate of archaeologic and biologic clearance before any actual work commenced: (The J linked items below represent exhibits that have been admitted in the Circuit Court in the matter E OLA KAKOU HAWAII, ET AL., Plaintiffs, Vs. COUNTY OF KAUAI, ET AL., Defendants. Case #5CCV-22-000036).

If the Commission is unwilling to revoke the tentative approval and the 2006 permits for the development of TMK (4) 2-8-14:32, we ask that this body take no further action until all Court actions are final.

The following is a true and correct copy of the 1977 LUC Decision & Order, Condition 7, penciled on the Condition there is a note from the LUC to remind readers that the Condition was amended. Following Condition 7, there is a link, J-1, to the full text of the LUC Decision and Order:

J-1. 1977 LUC Decision and Order in Docket No. A 76-418

In 1978 the LUC strengthened Condition 7 by requiring that “no actual work on any portion of the subject property begins until the archaeological and biological study for that portion to be worked on has been completed.” The County failed to enforce LUC Condition 7. There was no action taken by the County of Kauai to access TMK (4) 2-8-14:32 the 28 acre parcel that is the subject of the subdivision application and the 2006 Planning Department permit, letter attached, before actual work commenced which involved rock crushing, excavation, burial mound leveling, construction of a staging area that required significant earth and rock movement. Truck loads of rock were delivered to the property and used to fill in voids that occurred after blasting began May 26, 2022. No biological survey was conducted until May of 2022, months after the County issued a grubbing and grading permit that allowed actual work to commence, a complete failure to enforce LUC Condition 7. The 1978 amended Condition 7 is set forth below. Following the Amended Condition 7, there is a link, J-2, which is the full text of the LUC Amended Decision and Order:

J-2. 1978 Amendment to LUC Decision and Order in Docket No. A 76-418

Revocation of all permits is the only reasonable action to be taken at this juncture. The County speaks to a desire to create affordable workforce housing. In practice, however, every subdivision application currently under development in Koloa is for the construction of investor vacation rental property with advertised prices for the smaller units in excess of $1 million. The public needs this Commission to take the demand for workforce housing much more seriously. Clearly, the County Counsel, per the attached resolution promised the LUC that when Kiahuna was redistricted there would be 140 units constructed for Kauai residents, and the target would be the workforce in the Koloa/Poipu area. That promise was not kept.

Instead, in 2006, the 28 acres that was to be 140 affordable homes per the map in the attached County resolution, was granted a permit for 282 vacation rental condominiums. Attached are 2 documents from the LUC records which detail the development of Kiahuna parcels from Moana Corporation to Kiahuna Mauka Partners (KMP) and Eric A. Knudsen Trust (EAK). After 1989, LUC Orders were applied jointly and severally to KMP and EAK. On Christmas Eve 2003, KMP and EAK sat with the Planning Director and Laurel Loo on behalf of the County Attorneyʻs office and agreed to a division of responsibilities for the remaining unsatisfied LUC Conditions. The 3 party agreement was signed by the Planning Director, a representative of KMP, EAK and the County Attorney. Laurel Loo was the County Attorney who signed the Christmas Eve agreement. Despite the fact that the LUC Orders were the joint responsibility of KMP and EAK, they sat with the County and agreed upon a division of the responsibilities among themselves but never put the matter before the LUC for approval. They modified the LUC orders without LUC consent. By its terms, the attached 2003 3 party agreement applied to TMK (4) 2-8-14:32.

When Gary Pinkston purchased TMK (4) 2-8-14:32, his escrow closed June 1, 2021. Former County Attorney Laurel Loo was now on the other side representing Pinkston with his negotiations, getting the best deal she could with the County to satisfy Pinkston’s affordable housing requirement, as yet unmet for that parcel.

Actual work commenced on the parcel without compliance with either archaeologic or biologic requirements of Condition 7.

In recent court testimony by Jodi Sayegusa and Kenneth Estes, both confirmed that the County received many complaints and had been receiving them before the August 10, 2021 subdivision hearing on this parcel. See their relevant testimony herein below:

“Q. There were public complaints – excuse me — made prior to August 2021, though; correct?

  1. I don’t know the exact dates, but there were a lot of complaints related to development in the Poipu area.
  2. And, in fact, you helped respond to some of those complaints; correct?
  3. There were a lot of complaints, so I can’t remember each and every complaint I was assigned to research or followed up with.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 5/25/2023 Testimony of Jodi Sayegusa Page 46
  4. And did you have any communications with Kenny Estes prior to February 3rd, 2022, about this project?
  5. We likely talked about — I mean, often some of the planners or the discussion in the office may discuss, you know, hot topics or things that are happening.Q. So was this a hot topic?
  6. Again, there were a lot of public complaints for over a year about various things including development in Poipu and including this particular development…
  7. Okay. But after the letter and the draft study came in, was submitted to the Planning Department on February 3rd, 2022, you had a meeting with Ka’aina Hull, Kenny Estes, and Dale Cua, correct, about this draft biological study?

A. Again, it was in response to a number of public complaints. The topic was the biological species, including the cave spider, and also we discussed LUC Condition 7.
E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 5/25/2023 Testimony of Jodi Sayegusa Page 65-66

“Q. To the best of your recollection, have you — with regard to this project, you received public comments and you turn those over to Ka’aina?

  1. MINKIN: For the record, the witness nodded his head up and down. So you need to answer out loud, sir.

THE WITNESS: Okay.

THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.

BY MR. MORIMOTO:

  1. And you turn them over to Ka’aina. Before turning them over to Ka’aina, did you read them?
  2. Yes, I did.
  3. And after you read them, did you make any determination as to whether or not there should be follow-up or further research done?
  4. With regards to this project, I believe that we were fielding a lot of concerns. There was a lot of public testimony submitted at the time of the subdivision going before the subdivision committee for their review. Because of those concerns that we fielded, it was determined after the subdivision committee meeting that we would contact the US Fish and Wildlife Service.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 2/3/223 AM session Testimony of Kenneth Estes Page32To this day, Ms Sayegusa testified that the County has never made a finding that LUC Condition 7 was complied with. In fact, the County cannot ever make such a determination because work commenced without compliance of LUC Condition 7, making it impossible for there to ever be a finding of compliance. The burial mounds were flattened, the ground was excavated, rocks were moved, and underground blasting occurred May 26, 2022 through January 2023. This commission, our County Council and the Public can view the detonation and destruction of burial mounds and the natural topography of this parcel on the Save Koloa YouTube channel which contains a chronology of photographs and videos that document the alteration of the parcel before any attempt to comply with LUC Condition 7. Unfortunately the ground disturbance was so severe that LUC Condition 7 and County Condition 1.k.(b) can never be satisfied as the following testimony from Ms Sayegusa suggests:

“Q. So when you were assigned to review the Montgomery report, were you also assigned to make findings about whether or not it satisfied Condition 7?

  1. The context of which I was provided the report and also requested to review it was so we can discuss together compliance with LUC Condition 7.
  2. And did you make any findings with regard to that compliance?
  3. It was more of a discussion, no like technical findings or conclusions or anything like that.
  4. So there was no written findings or no memorialization of any conclusions that you made in that meeting?
  5. For the purpose of the meeting —
  6. Yes.
  7. — or resulting from the meeting, there was no findings resulting from the meeting.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 5/25/2023 Testimony of Jodi Sayegusa Pages 98-99

In addition to Mr Estes failure to assure compliance with County Condition 1.k.(b), a requirement  called for in the tentative approval letter, and LUC Condition 7, Mr Estes testified he “did nothing” about his duty to enforce the County Code as it pertained to protection of the environment and flora and fauna in the area:

“Q. Now, isn’t it true that Section 9-2.1(a)(2) says that specific consideration shall be given to the preservation of natural topography such as drainage, swales, rock outcroppings, slopes, areas of natural beauty, particularly the areas of scenic or environmental importance or value and areas of historic or scientific interest, to the preservation of existing flora and fauna, to the retention of major land forms and to the preservation of important vistas?

  1. MINKIN: Objection; leading. Document speaks for itself. If Mr. Morimoto wants to show it to the witness, let him show it to the witness rather than having the witness go verbatim on — or basically try to recall what the code section reads based on Mr. Morimoto’s reading it into the record.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 2/3/223 AM session Testimony of Kenneth Estes Page 22

“Q. With regard to the Yellow Hale subdivision application, what did you do as a planner processing the application to give specific consideration to the preservation of natural topography and areas of scenic or environmental importance?

  1. I did nothing.
  2. What did you do to give specific consideration to areas of historic or scientific
    interest?
  3. I didn’t do anything.
  4. On the property, are there areas of environmental importance? Did you determine whether or not there were areas of environmental importance located on the property?
  5. I would need to review the documentation again.
  6. Did you include any conditions to protect areas of environmental importance or value?
  7. No, I did not include any conditions.
  8. In the — and when I’m talking about conditions, I’m talking only about the clearinghouse form, right. Did you include any conditions to address areas of historic or scientific interest?
  9. No, I did not.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 2/3/223 Testimony of Kenneth Estes Pages 75-76

Despite all of the complaints lodged, this Commission approved the applicant, Gary Pinkston dba Yellow Hale tentative approval and grubbing and grading commenced even though no grubbing and grading permit had been issued:

Planning Commission’s tentative approval August 11, 2021

In his Court testimony, Kaaina Hull stated that the Planning Department did not enforce Condition 7 because they “surmised” that it had been met earlier. He testified, however, that when they took a look at department records they could find no evidence of any biologic or archeologic review for the 28 acre Pinkston parcel, TMK (4) 2-8-14:32. He also admitted that the Planning Department was served with the following Petition to deleted Condition 7, based on the alleged satisfaction of that condition. In his court testimony, Mr. Hull stated that in 2014 the County was served with the developers Motion to Find Conditions 5 and 7 through 12 satisfied. Following the States opposition which included reports to the LUC that Condition 7 had not been satisfied for TMK (4) 2-8-14:32 as well as other undeveloped parcels, the developer withdrew their application to be relieved of Conditions 5 and 7 though 12. All of the documents in the following 2 links were in the County Planning Department’s files and there were multiple filings served on the County with efforts to delete Condition 7 multiple times leading up to the final effort in 2014. There is no question that Condition 7 had been an issue and its non satisfaction was addressed multiple times before 2021. Mr Hull also admitted that they never found any documents suggesting that  Condition 7 had ever been satisfied. The pertinent portions of Mr Hull’s testimony follows:

“Q. So with regard to Condition 7, what steps did the department take to ensure that it was complied with?

  1. Prior to the tentative subdivision application, no additional steps were taken after — after reviewing the case. So it was brought to our attention after the tentative subdivision approval that concerns were being raised about the LUC Conditions. At that time, it kind of got more elevated, I’ll say, to my review as opposed to my just tangential or cursory signing off of staff reports.

So while it was put on my radar that there were issues concerning Land Use Conditions, I pulled the team together to go over the Land Use Commission Conditions and that’s really where we started looking at all the conditions, in particular Condition No. 7, going through the files, seeing if it had been met. You know, in those discussions I can state that we surmised that the previous department heads as well as planners and attorneys had felt that the condition had been met, which is why — because when you look at Condition No. 7 and the LUC Conditions, this is not a condition that’s germane just to this property, right.

This property is 30 acres in size, but the LUC Condition is a LUC Condition of approval on a State Land Use Condition Amendment that had do with practically 450 acres, otherwise known as the Kiahuna area, and a number of applications had previously been reviewed and acted upon by the planning commission and department. And so when we reviewed the entire file, we surmised that previous — previous planners and attorneys had determined the condition sufficed, but understanding these concerns were being raised further, particularly as it was to Condition 7, ultimately it was decided that we should ask the applicant to halt work and provide an actual letter and communication from a biologist as well as an archeologist explicitly going over the conditions of No. 7 or — excuse me — the layout of Condition No. 7.

  1. As it applied to this particular property?
  2. As it applied to this particular property, correct.
  3. So you’re saying that you reviewed files?
  4. We reviewed the overall series of documents associated with the properties. Q. And you’re saying that there were — are you saying that there were documents from planners and attorneys that indicated that Condition 7 had been satisfied?
  5. No. I’m saying that within the documents that were in the file and the fact that the LUC Condition was established in 197–
  6. ’78?
  7. 1978. Since 1978 until now, dozens of discretionary permits, planning commission level permits, subdivisions, and hundreds of zoning permits have been processed in this area. And so understanding that the LUC Conditions would be particularly scrutinized in the very beginning, especially since it was so fresh, that with all those actions having occurred in this region and the fact that, I believe, there were — was like a flora and fauna study associated with the file, there were portions of Kiahuna that were designated as archeological preserves, there were portions designated as endangered species habitats, that with all that that happened in the past, that at some point during those actions, previous staff in consultation with the attorney’s office had made the determination.
  8. Was there any written finding to that effect?
  9. We didn’t find anything.
  10. So how did you make that determination?
  11. I wasn’t making that determination. I’m saying — like, I’m not making that an official determination that it had been met previously. What I’m stating is that from what we could surmise with all these actions in the past, that it appeared that previous — the previous administrations had acted and felt that that Condition 7 as well as all the other LUC’s Conditions had been met in taking subsequent actions on approval of zoning permits.

What was before me when being put on notice that Condition 7 is an issue is, has it been met under your interpretation, determination? And looking at the concerns that were being raised, in an abundance of caution, we again asked the developer to cease operations out there until a letter from a biologist and an archeologist could be provided.

  1. Mr. Hull, can you point to a particular document in your file that reflects what you just stated, that the previous commissions or previous planners or attorneys had concluded that Condition 7 was satisfied?
  2. I cannot.
  3. I’m going to direct your attention to Joint Exhibit 4 — excuse me. First directing your attention to Exhibit No. 3, J-3. So, Mr. Hull, in 2014, Kiahuna Mauka Partners, LLC, filed a motion to delete Condition 7, correct, in part, Condition 7?
  4. Correct.
  5. And turning your attention to Exhibit J-4, this was opposed by the Office of State Planning; correct?
  6. Based off of this document, yes.
  7. And is the County of Kauai or the planning department a party to these proceedings?
  8. Generally.
  9. And, in fact, when you look at the certificate of service, it appears that the planning department was served; correct?
  10. Where is the certificate of service?
  11. That would be page — the last page of Exhibit J-3.
  12. Of J-3?
  13. Yes. Do you see that?
  14. I do.
  15. And there’s — the planning department was served by hand delivery?
  16. It.
  17. And Michael Dahilig was the planning director at the time?
  18. Yes.
  19. And it was also served on the county attorney’s office; correct?
  20. Correct.
  21. Were these documents part of what you reviewed in making the determination that Condition 7had been satisfied?
  22. I want to be clear that I didn’t make a determination that it had been satisfied prior to —
  23. May 12th?
  24. May 12th or May 16th.
  25. 2022?
  26. Yeah. I’m not making that assertion.I’m just stating that in reviewing the statements, we could surmise that a previous director and staff had made that determination.
  27. But you could find no document?
  28. But I could find no documentation.
  29. And, in fact, when you look at this motion, it was filed in 2014; correct?
  30. 2013 I have.
  31. And this is some — well, 2013. So this was seven years after the use permit was granted?
  32. Correct.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 2/3/223 Testimony of Kaʻaina Hull Pages 21-26

“Q. Turning your attention to the next page. Based upon the opposition filed by the Office of Planning, Kiahuna Mauka Partners withdrew their motion; correct?

  1. Correct.
  2. Did you review this document?
  3. I don’t recall seeing this document.
  4. But it appears that it was sent to the planning department?
  5. It does.
  6. And how are these things filed, these Land Use Commission documents? Are they filed with — do you keep a file in the planning department?
  7. We do.
  8. And so would this motion have been in that file?
  9. It should have been.
  10. Was the file something that you reviewed?
  11. Restate the question.
  12. Did you review that Land Use Commission file?
  13. I did not.”
    E Ola Kakou et al Vs County of Kauai 2/3/223 Testimony of Kaʻaina Hull Pages 28-29The following are links to the full text of the 2014 application to be relieved of Conditions 5 and 7 through 12 that Mr Hull refers to in his testimony. He acknowledges that each of the following were served on the County Planning Department during 2014 which would have made the Planning Department aware of LUC Condition 7 and the lack of compliance therewith:

J-3. Kiahuna Mauka Partners, LLC’s Motion to Delete Conditions 5-7-12

J-4. State Office of Planning, maps, their exhibits and the developers Motion to Withdraw

Compounding the Countyʻs failures, the applicant deliberately misled the County and represented that they had satisfied County Condition 1.k.(b) pertaining to the need to protect endangered and threatened species, particularly the blind cave spider and blind amphipod. Gary Pinkston delivered a letter to the Department of Planning on February 3, 2022 claiming “On behalf of 5425 Pau a Laka, LLC, Iʻd like to update the Planning Department of our efforts to meet Condition 1.k.(b) and confirm that the project area is cleared of habitats for the Kauaiʻi amphipod and cave spider worthy of perservation.” (sic)

J-7. February 3, 2022 letter from Gary Pinkston to Kaaina Hull transmitting Tetra Tech draft study and USFWS letter dated October 27, 2021

Nothing could have been further from the truth. The report he submitted with his letter, and titled, “Kauanoe o Koloa Project Draft Biological Resources Survey Report” (Draft Report), was indeed an unsigned Draft Report and it did not make the finding he claimed in his letter. Not only was it not a satisfaction of Condition 1.k.(b), rather the Draft Report recommended that the biologic survey still needed to be done. Section 5.2.5 of the Draft Report specifically told the developer that the biologic survey was not yet done and needed to be before ground disturbing activity commenced:

“5.2.5 Listed Cave Invertebrates

Tetra Tech recommends the following based on USFWS’ (2019) avoidance and minimization measures

for the Kaua‘i cave wolf spider and Kaua‘i cave amphipod:

* Prior to ground disturbance, contract a qualified biologist to survey the Project Area for depth of

soil deposits and the presence of caves. Any areas with soil deposits greater than 12 inches (305

millimeters) are not likely to provide appropriate habitat or have the species present.” – Tetra Tech Draft Report page 14. Link to the full text of the Draft Report follows:

J-8. Tetra Tech draft study

The applicantʻs passing off an unsigned Draft Report and stating in his transmittal letter that they had satisfied Condition 1.k.(b) of the attached 2006 Planning Commission Conditions of Development, was blatantly false and meant to mislead the County into granting a grubbing and grading permit prematurely. They did extensive work on the property with large rock crushing, burial mound reduction, etc and never intended to check for the blind cave spider or its amphipod  or whether the parcel constituted suitable habitat for them.

For all of the above stated reasons, no further work should be done on this parcel. It currently borders right on Hapa Trail with no buffer for much of the adjoining trail. Attached hereto are copies of the requests for a Contested Case on this issue because of the serious and environmental transgressions that have been allowed to occur. This parcel should be returned to a natural state and it should be determined that the developer lost his right to develop this parcel because he lied to the County in his claim that an important legally required condition that was to be completed before any actual work/ground disturbing activity on the parcel.

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037
Elizabeth Okinaka
[email protected]

Elizabeth Okinaka
[email protected]

Posted 6/5/2023

A Win 4 Koloa

Aloha,

Court Revokes Permits for HPM operation in Koloa

You may recall that we shared that Hawaii Planing Mill (HPM) had a plan to construct a mill in Koloa adjacent to the old sugar mill just off the eastern bypass road. HPM had leased a 3 acre parcel from Grove Farm between the sugar mill and Poipu Aina, an adjacent residential Ag community. HPM probably chose Koloa for their mill to support builders who plan to add more than 600 new homes to the Koloa Poipu area. The mill would have produced modular/pre-fab walls and trusses/support structures for roofs. FOM was asked by the residents of Poipu Aina to help protect their environment and quality of life. Had HPM developed the mill, Poipu Aina would have been subjected to large trucks coming and going between 7:30 am and 4:30 pm daily, bringing lumber from Nawiliwili Harbor while other trucks would come and go to pick up and deliver  walls and trusses to construction sites. This was detailed in the HPM permit application  filed with the County Planning Department. In addition to the truck traffic, there would have been the noise from fork lifts beeping throughout the day, compressor powered nail guns, saws and other heavy equipment. The HPM mill structure would have been on an 800 ft long by 100 ft wide surface covered by a large “Cirque du Soleil” type tent open on both ends. Noise and the lumber dust would not have been contained.

We asked FOM supporters to comment on the project and many comments were filed with the Kauai Planning Department. To spite the comments and objections to the HPM commercial operation filed by our members and others, the planning commission granted HPM Special Use permit application to construct their mill on Ag zoned land.

What were we to do then? We helped them obtain legal representation. Poipu Aina filed an action against the Planning Commission challenging their decision to grant HPM’s Special Use permit. FOM worked with lawyers and we researched the issue further. We found a Hawaii Supreme Court case which held that the Hawaii Revised Statutes which defines the permitted uses for Ag land cannot be circumvented by a developer’s desire to do an unpermitted activity. Specifically, permitted use of Ag land has be Ag or Ag related. They can’t apply for a Special Use permit to get around the Ag zoning requirements. The Court agreed and revoked HPM’s Special Use permit. A win for Koloa, its environment and our quality of life. After all, it’s hard enough to get around this area without having to compete with long HPM double axeled flatbed trucks.

Trial on the Save Koloa case ended last week.

We are awaiting the Court’s decision which is anticipated in late July. The lawsuit was filed objecting to the County issuing permits for the 282 unit condominium development above Keokis (investor vacation rental resort property) and against Gary Pinkston and Meridian Pacific for beginning actual work on the Kiahuna Plantation site without first complying with State Land Use Commission Orders and County Zoning Ordinances. The State Orders and Zoning Ordinances required biological clearance and archaeological clearance from a qualified biologist and a qualified archeologist before any “actual work on the site”. That requirement was not met. In addition to the destruction of 3 burial mounds and at least 8 months of underground blasting, the removal and crushing of large rocks believed to be part of a Haiau, tear down of historic rock walls, the developer and the County never adhered to the requirement of meeting with residents in the area, and failed to do anything to assure preservation of the environment or its features of archaeologic or biologic significance. We will keep you posted after we hear from the Court. FOM filed the action in conjunction with Save Koloa, also a 501(c)3 community based organization.

Coco Palms

If you missed watching the County Council meeting May 10, 2023, and want all the scoop on what is really happening at Coco Palms, the following is a video link to the Council’s May 10th meeting. The Coco Palms issue consumed nearly 10 hours of the Council’s meeting that day. If you watch the first 1 1/2 hours you will hear the State of Land and Natural Resource Director detail the many violations committed by RP 21 Coco Palms LLC (RP 21), the latest “would be” developer. During the meeting it was  revealed that this latest in a string of developers has no intention of actually building the 354 room resort as they publicly claimed, contrary to representations made to the public by Patrick Manning in an article to TGI. Rather, the developer’s lawyer, Mauna Kea Trask, admitted to the council that RP 21 had been taking down Coconut Palms and clearing the property to enhance the sale of the property because RP 21 wants to recoup the 22 million dollars they loaned the last developer on whom they had to foreclose. Mauna Kea stated that the 22 million had been borrowed by Reef Capital Properties from Fire and Police Retirement Fund and they needed to get the money back to the fund. If you watch the last 1 1/2 hours of the following link you will hear our Council Chair, Mel Rapozo, discuss his regret that the County was duped by yet another developer. He also discussed a County Resolution that is in process whereby the County would exercise its right of eminent domain, taking the property away from any developer for purposes of conservation.

May 10, 2023 Kauai County Council Meeting
https://kauai.granicus.com/player/clip/2558?view_id=2&redirect=true&h=3adfd76fc2926a3b560a9bb229e4758b

TGI Refuses additional Guest Commentary/Letters to the Editor on Coco Palms

After Patrick Manning wrote his guest commentary in TGI that misrepresented RP 21’s true intent in removing Coconut Palms and clearing the property and prior to the May 10th County Council Meeting where his less than truthful statements were disclosed, FOM submitted a Letter to the Editor, copy attached. The Editor called and said he was cutting off Guest Commentary or Letters to the Editor on the Coco Palms issue. He stated the only articles that the paper would print regarding Coco Palms would be those written by a member of his staff.

Please see FOM email below confirming the discussion with TGI Editor Wyatt Haupt. His email address is included in case you want to write and express your opinion on whether or not the paper should stop the public from commenting on an issue of wide public interest.

“From:Bridget Hammerquist <[email protected]>
To:Wyatt Haupt <[email protected]>
Date:Mon, 15 May 2023 17:58:59 -1000

Aloha Wyatt,

Thanks for taking the time to call. I’m sorry that you missed the benefit of Guest Commentaries and Letters to the Editor. You stated that it would take too long to fact check our response to Patrick Manning’s Guest Commentary April 26th. Clearly, his facts weren’t checked by the paper. But then isn’t that what a Guest Commentary/Letter to the Editor are… the opinions of the author. In my experience, they are not fact checked but are required to be sufficiently courteous and an issue of public interest. My understanding is that they are an avenue for a community issue of great interest to be aired. If you, as the editor, chose to only allow news articles to cover an issue you restrict/eliminate public input or public voice. Isn’t that what the Guest Commentary/Letters for the Editor are for? The paper’s news articles to date have not been strong on or sufficiently clear that this developer has done immense ground disturbance on lands that they have no permission to be on let alone a permit to grade or to remove palm trees. Cutting off and limiting the people’s voice doesn’t serve the community or help the sale of papers. Really sorry you have chosen to restrict this issue. The public is being deprived.”

Regards,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 5/4/2023

Much to Share

Aloha,

Since our last Hui email, it has been a whirlwind for FOM. Not wanting to give you too much to read, I will give you the news via the following bullets:

  • FOM challenged DLNR and KIUC for the renewal of the water permits at Blue Hole which allowed water to be taken from Waiʻaleʻale and Waikoko streams for the years 2020 and 2021. Our challenge/court action was based on the damage to the ditch system preventing KIUC from using the water for any beneficial purpose. The diverted water could not get to their hydro-power plants. Rather, the streams were diverted and the diverted water was wasted while rate payers covered the fee charged by the State to KIUC. The Court on Oahu ruled in our favor and we recently won both cases.
  • We were asked to help with Coco Palms which involves preventing more waste into the Wailua stream and the Ocean from an already overburdened Wailua Wastewater Treatment Plant. FOM sponsored 6 community members, who attended the State Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR) meeting on Oahu April 14, 2023. Three of our group were  Hawaiian lineal descendants with ancestral ties to the Coco Palms property. The testimony given by all that attended was clear and persuasive. During the meeting, it was established that the current developer has removing coconut palm trees, grading and grubbing the property without permits or a lease from the State. Within 5 days of the meeting, the attached Cease and Desist Order was issued. The following link you can view the meeting and the fiery discussion on Coco Palms. You will even hear the new BLNR Director, Dawn NS Chang. as she informs the latest in the long series of developers that they are working on the property without permits or any lease from the State. The Director was not pleased.  Testimony begins at about 45 minutes into the meeting, agenda item D1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trRz9lHDQhI
  • The current would be developer, RP21 Coco Palms LLC, returned to Kauai after the meeting but did not stop working. FOM sent the email below asking the director to intervene because the coconut palms are still coming down. One of the BLNR board members informed the developer that cutting down trees on the land of another is viewed as an act of war by Hawaiians. Listen to the podcast of a KKCR show to hear more about the Coco Palms latest developer violations: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BoMDDPhigMZG1Yk5i8G2_uKPJCrTzJY1/view?usp=share_link
  • See also attached letter from our Kona Moku and now, Kauai island Poʻo, Billy Kaohelauliʻi to BLNR/DLNR Director.

——– Forwarded Message ——–

Content-Type:multipart/mixed; boundary=”————mjxEbut4hphrERthcgUVgUcq”
Message-ID:<[email protected]>
Date:Tue, 25 Apr 2023 19:17:40 -1000
MIME-Version:1.0
User-Agent:Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0
Content-Language:en-US
To:[email protected], Ferreira, Darlene S <[email protected]>
From:Bridget Hammerquist <[email protected]>
Cc:[email protected], Tsuji, Russell Y <[email protected]>, [email protected], Mayor <[email protected]>, County Council <[email protected]>
Subject:Intent of OCCL letter RE: Coco Palms

Aloha Chair Chang and members of the Board of Land and Natural Resources,

On behalf of the members in the organizations I represent, please accept our sincere appreciation for the opportunity to present Coco Palms information Friday April 14th 2023, Agenda item D1. We need your help. We just learned Friday, April 21st, that there are more than 75 coconut palms already down, and many more marked with an x for removal.

After your meeting, an OCCL letter, “Notice of Alleged Violation & Order” was sent to Coco Palms Ventures Llc. Unfortunately, Coco Palms Ventures Llc(Ventures) no longer exists and their corporate status was “involuntarily terminated” by the State December 4th, 2017. Ventures also failed to pay taxes on the RPs or lease.

The OCCL letter describes conduct , supported by photographs, describes work done by the current developer, RP21 Coco Palms Llc (RP21), not Ventures. The tree removal did not have State approval. RP21 is not on any lease or permit from the State. Their managing director, Patrick Manning, told the Garden Island (TGI) that their extensive coconut palm tree removal and vegetative clearing was an “oops” he claimed that RP21 was working with the State and would soon remedy the “oops”

Joseph Kamai, one of the lineal descendants who testified before you April 14th, and whose great great grandmother is buried on the State lands that are part of the Coco Palms site, identified the burial mounds in the photographs lodged with the Board that day. He returned to the property Friday April 21st and counted at least 75 coconut palm stumps and was shown many more that workers at the site told him they had marked with an x for their planned removal. Based on the following TGI quotes from Patrick Manning of RP21, which ran this past Saturday, April 22nd, we are very concerned that you and your department need to intercede as soon as possible to ensure that the remaining marked coconut palms are not added to the pile of those that have already been destroyed. In his statements to TGI, Mr. Manning it is unclear weather RP21 will protect the coconut palms now marked for removal. We realize the OCCL letter did not go to RP21 and based on the following Manning comments, RP21 needs direction ASAP:

“But Reef Capital Partner’s Managing Director Patrick Manning said that they are committed to resolving the issue and continuing with their approximately $250 million plan to reconstruct the 350-room(it was less than 100) resort over the next three years.”(If it were a reconstruction as Manning claims, it would only be 96 room, the size of the hotel when it was destroyed in 1992. )

“But Manning said that the situation was an honest oversight by his team, and they are working with the DLNR to receive the proper rights. ‘The problem is that we thought we had approval from the county. It was an innocent mistake. We were clearing, getting ready for demolition. We didn’t realize that, well, we missed a step,’ said Manning, adding that ‘receiving proper permissions is a complex process’.”(We question the credibility of a $250,000,000 developer that doesn’t know to get permit from an owner before accessing their land. )

“’We’re working closely with the DLNR to remedy that and just keep moving forward. It hasn’t changed our plans at all. Just having to fix an oops,’ said Manning in an interview with The Garden Island on Friday.”

“Manning wasn’t ‘100 percent sure’ what had been placed in the unauthorized area, … ‘We have removed palm trees for sure on our property. I’m not 100 percent sure if we removed palm trees on the DLNR property,’ he said, adding that they intend to replant any trees that have been cut down. ‘It’s just we can’t get in to do the demolition if there are trees prohibiting us from getting into the concrete.'(So this means they get to cut down trees that are in their way on State lands?)  https://www.thegardenisland.com/2023/04/22/hawaii-news/coco-palms-developer-responds-to-dlnrs-alleged-land-use-violation-letter/

RP21 only recently filed application for the following RPs. We understand that I Ola Wailuanui has also filed applications for the same following RPs and lease. They intend to conserve the site to honor the royalty, their traditions and cultural practices that were a significant part of the area’s historic past. From Mr. Manning’s remarks in TGI and those of the RP21 representatives that appeared before you on April 14th, it is unclear weather they know where State, Conservation, and Crown lands are. Someone needs to check the trees marked for removal, and they need to stop removing any vegetation from State lands. When Coco Palms was destroyed in 1992, it had less than 100 hotel rooms. Now they want to put 350 on that site, and they say they don’t know if the State’s land is an integral part of their plan.

RP7407 – 0.412 acres TMK (4) 4-1-003:044
RP7444 – 0.855 acres TMK (4) 4-1-003:017
RP7613 – 0.122 acres TMK (4) 4-1-005:017
State land lease – 14.8 acres Public Trust Land, Coconut Grove TMK (4) 4-1-003:005

In their current permit applications on file with the county, the RPs and lease are clearly an integral part of the development, because while the hotel rooms are on fee land that is currently the subject of a disputed court action on appeal, the State lands are being relied on for parking areas and access roads, as suggested in Mr. Manning’s above statements. We urge the State to get copies of their County permit applications.

On the YouTube recording of your April 14th meeting, the following is confirmed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trRz9lHDQhI):

  • RP21 Coco Palms Llc, does not have an RP for any State land on the Coco Palms site. 3:04-3:06
  • Chair Chang established that Mr DeCoursey and RP21 is not affiliated with and does not represent Coco Palms Ventures Llc. 3:06:40
  • Chair Chang established that the State is the land owner and the County failed to come to the owner before issuing building permits. 03:06:58
  • Chair Chang made it Clear that RP21 Coco Palms Llc is not on the lease. The lease is still in the name of Coco Palms Ventures Llc, the State is the lessor, and there can be no assignment without prior approval by the BLNR board. 03:10:00

Recent videos showing the extensive work being done at the site:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/17eN2o4VW6VhOFXd_xNxD76LH7p0vR71c/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ekg4etnNtgN1EntRBg_g2knCHQCohuYC/view?usp=sharing

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1czWJ_an2B7lxOz4nSHu4JDkyryCZh_jE/view?usp=sharing

Mahalo nui loa,

Bridget Hammerquist, President
Friends of Maha`ulepu, a 501(c)(3)
Kia`i Wai o Wai`ale`ale, Co-founder
PO Box 1654
Koloa, HI 96756
Donate
friendsofmahaulepu.org
[email protected]
(808)742-1037

Posted 3/29/2023

Posted 3/23/23

Aloha,

KIUC is proposing a large West Kauai pump storage hydro project and separate new hydro power plant which they told the State will result in as much as 400 million gallons of our Kauai water being removed annually from our streams and ditches. Basically, Wai`ale`ale, Alakai swamp and the Kokee ditch system will be tapped big time leaving Waimea River, Hanapepe and other streams seriously compromised. The serious risk and threat to our natural stream flow imposed by the West Kauai proposal prompted the recent filing of a lawsuit by Earthjustice.

The Shift To A Green Energy Future Is Renewing Plantation-Era Water Wars On Kauai
https://www.civilbeat.org/2023/03/the-shift-to-a-green-energy-future-is-renewing-plantation-era-water-wars-on-kauai/

As KIUC prepares to embark on the West Kauai power project, they are concurrently seeking to increase the Coop member power rates. Please attend the rate hike meeting in Hanamaulu before the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) March 28 at 6:00 p.m., King Kaumuali’i Elementary School Cafeteria 4380 Hanamaulu Road. Let your voice be heard! If you can’t attend, you can file a written comment by March 28, 2023:

All interested persons are invited to attend the public hearing to state their views on KlUC’s Application. Written statements may also be mailed to the Public Utilities or e-mailed to [email protected]. All written statements should reference Docket No. 2022-0208 and include the author’s name and the entity or organization that the author represents, if any.

Tuesday, March 28, 2023, at 6:00 p.m.
King Kaumuali’i Elementary School Cafeteria
4380 Hanamaulu Road
Lihue. Hawaii 96766

Linked below is the Notice of the Pubic Hearing for the KIUC rate increase which details the proposed power rate increases by category. KIUC’s Notice reports the overall impact of this rate increase will be a 9% plus increase to ratepayers. If you look at the Notice however, some categories like the charge for non-fuel based power propose increases between 33 and nearly 50 % per kWh in those categories. There are at least four non-fuel based rates that will be dramatically increased. So, While the overall impact considering all rate categories may be a 9% plus increase, Kauai island average ratepayers will likely see a much more significant increase to their power bill.

Notice of Public Hearing – KIUC rate increase
https://dms.puc.hawaii.gov/dms/DocumentViewer?pid=A1001001A23C07A94630G01098

KIUC could but doesn’t ever survey their Coop membership. If our non-fuel based rates have to increase so much, how is green power benefiting its ratepayers? Please attend the meeting in Hanamaulu before the PUC. Right now, David Bissell our KIUC CEO, stated that Kauai’s electric rates are only 17% higher than the rates charged to Oahu residents. Why should they be higher when we have so much non-fuel based power already being generated, the most of any County in the US. Really?

In the 2 links that follow, you’ll find the hundreds of pages of KIUC’s rate increase application. Talk about difficult to understand?

APPLICATION, EXHIBITS 1 THROUGH 10, ATTACHMENTS, VERIFICATION
https://dms.puc.hawaii.gov/dms/DocumentViewer?pid=A1001001A22L29B01050A00357

EXHIBIT 10
https://dms.puc.hawaii.gov/dms/DocumentViewer?pid=A1001001A22L29B01709J00360

Not as difficult to understand is the KIUC financial statement which shows on page 24 that our Coop is in debt already for more than $255 million. How much dept can Kauai’s 33k plus accounts handle? Where has it been shown that we need the West Kauai Water Project that is going to cost many millions? In the General Plan Update, adopted by our Council in 2018, a large engineering firm was hired to evaluate the Island infrastructure. They forecasted a shortage of potable water, wastewater service, solid waste and adequate roads to accommodate Kauai’s traffic. They did not report a projected power shortage at any time in the near future. So why does KIUC feel the need to spend our money when we don’t have a sufficient population base to handle the debt.

2021 KIUC Financials
https://www.kiuc.coop/sites/default/files/documents/audited_financials/2021-AuditedFinancialStatements.pdf

—

Mahalo nui loa,