BOARD
OF LAND & NATURAL RESOURCES MEETING
January 14, 2005
Transcript begins after State Parks’ presentation, including
comments by BLNR board members. Recommendation by Dan Quinn, Administrator,
Division of State Parks
Quinn:...Again, our recommendation is that the
board accept the draft master plan for Koke`e and Waimea Canyon
State Parks and endorse the preparation of an EIS and, two, the
board authorize the Division of state Parks to issue a request
for qualifications, request for proposals to find a master lessee
for the recreational residences; to follow the general concept
of option 4 which is the private management of rentals and short
term leases with details to be refined through the RFP and RFQ
process.
Chair Young: You mentioned in your introductory
comments that based on some of the testimony that came up last
night and other the testimony that had been submitted that the
evaluation of the lodge and the evaluation of the elevated walkway
as part of the master plan. So is that a suggested amendment?
So that we could evaluated as? So is that's
Quinn: That could certainly include that so it
would be clear. Otherwise it would be included in the EIS process.
But if its included in the discussions here it is clear that it
needs to be evaluated.
Chair Young: OK. Are there any other questions of staff?
Mr. Johns: No Mr. Chair, but before we go onto
further discussion or testimony I wanted to make a statement which
is a personal statement. I don't speak for the board but I have
some food for thought for my fellow board members. And it's based
upon the 3 _ hours of testimony that we had last night as well
as our review of these voluminous reports. I guess I just want
to put it out before we get to discussion, and before the public
input comes in. A couple of obvious things, as there more observations
than anything else.
First, Kokee
is clearly a very special place. There is no question about that.
It is a jewel. A jewel of the Pacific. A jewel of the world. And
anyone who has hiked, camped, hunted, fished or done research
up there or stayed in the cabins as all of have that sit up here,
realize how special a place it is. But, the other thing that became
obvious from last night from the testimony that we heard, is it
is a special place in need of more attention than it has received
in the past as far as management is concerned. And, I want to
thank Dan, you personally and board member McCroy, and Board member
Agor as well as your team for taking on a difficult job of looking
at Kokee and trying to plan for its future. It's not been easy.
A lot of tough questions, but I'm glad you guys were willing to
step up and tried to start wrestling with those issues. When I
say it needs more attention, normally that means it needs more
money. That's a harsh reality but its true. That doesn't mean
that my decision is going to be based on economics only, but it
is going to be based on a context of having sufficient resources
one way or the other to take care of this place the way it needs
to be taken care of. So, that being said, and understanding where
we are in the process, I would not personally be, and if the final
decision had to be made today which it's not going to be made
today; and I think that's something that needs to be made obvious,
that even if the board approved your recommendation, it's not
a final decision by this board to implement this plan. What it
is seems to me that you are asking for is the ability to go out
and investigate some of these options you have presented to us.
And to do an EIS. So that we have, we the board, has better information
to make a well informed decision about what to do about Koke`e.
That being
said, if I was asked to make a final decision today based upon
what we heard so far, I would not be in a position to support
a gated entry. And I would not be in a position to support the
changes in how the leasehold cabins have been dealt with. Now
the leasehold cabins are a little different, and to me I think
3 observations or major issues there are from my side is there
is one: accessibility, making sure this resource is truly accessible
for all Hawaii citizens of all economic classes. I am not sure
it has been that way in the past but that's something what I would
like to see investigated more. The second part about the cabins
is the cultural landscape. And I am not sure that the master plan
thus far gave sufficient weight to what that means with regard
to the people that have been up there over time. And the third
one are the revenues. So the economics, accessibility, cultural
landscape and what does it mean? Is it a revenue source? Should
it be a revenue source to take care of the cabins themselves or
for the rest of the park? So, I am glad, happy you let me indulge,
but I wanted to share that with the fellow members because obviously
we haven't talked about the issue; we are not supposed to be talking
about the issue; but those are my initial thoughts on what I've
heard so far and what we've read so far. So, no matter what the
board decides today if you can make sure to have those addressed
going forward I would be more comfortable.
(Applause)
Quinn: Thank you. As a clarification, the master
plan in your documents as we went over yesterday. The one on the
wall had two extra items included as it was continually refined.
That was a canyon trail and also extending down makai along the
highway. Additionally, the issue of the entry station is something
that is in a concept in here. Before we proceed with anything
like that. As I mention yesterday, our division doesn't have the
authority to ask the board even to charge entry fees for anyplace
but Diamond Head right now. We would have to go back through the
administrative rules amendment process which would include statewide
public hearings. Then come back to the board again for approval
of those rules. If the board chooses to approve any kind of fee,
then we have to go back to set up what ever fee schedule might
be established. Whether it includes a kama`aina consideration.
That would be a board call too.
Mr. Johns – Right. Conceptually though, if we don't have
the money, if we throw out things you guys have identified as
revenue sources everybody has to realize that the grand plan or
ideas about improvements to the road or restrooms or lookouts
or whatever, we are going to have to find alternative sources
for those. And if the legislature or the administration is not
going to generally fund that primarily out of general funds, then
people have to realize that what that means for their resources.
Is it going to be treated the way it has or are we going to look
for other ways to try to solve that problems. But yeah, I understand
if it moves forward today as presented that doesn't mean we are
going to be instituting.... you still have to come back to us
for final approval. You still have to come back for approve of
final fees. I understand.
Quinn: That's correct. And something else was
pointed out by several of the speakers last night was the impact
on the cultural activities. Through the EIS process there will
be cultural impact assessment too.
Chair: Thank you, Tim. I too share some of the
concerns you talked about. I was motivated by the part of the
discussion of the plan of the entry fee and gates because that
is an issue that is happening among many other states and other
jurisdictions. About how park managers can better manage their
park and deal with their parks. And I wanted to hear from people
about what they thought about that process. Should we be doing
that? Right now we are doing that again at Diamond Head. It was
never in the context of everybody just being charged when they
come through. There is a variety of models. I am aware of the
model at Hanauma Bay where if you are a resident and you show
them your drivers license, you don't have to pay anything. If
you are not a resident you have to pay a fee . So that kind of
model could apply. Not just at Koke'e but other state parks. Cause
I do agree that parks are typically funded through general funds
so all of our taxes go to maintain those.
It's clear to me in this community there is clearly a concern
about a gate. I agree that gates create barriers. And we are talking
about a place that people want to go to, and that we want them
to go to to enjoy. And maybe the gate is not the right way to
describe it. We need further review of this. And just to reinforce
some of the discussion, that Dan has presented and as well as
comments from Tim; while this process has been going on for a
while, this is very much the beginning of a process. If the board
moves with the recommendation, it doesn't mean there is master
plan, the gate is going up and everybody is going to be charged.
What it means is we're going to go through far more public comment,
public input, environmental, cultural, social, economic review.
And that's going to be important to all of us to have that background
information so we can make the right decision. So I want people
to understand we're at a beginning stage of a process.
That if the board approves the recommendations of staff, it means
were going to go through further public review. Further public
meetings. Further public input, further study about the issues
about the issues that are listed in the report as it's drafted
now as well as the issues that were raised during the public testimony.
So I view that as an opportunity for us to continue to hear from
the community about the right thing to do is at Koke`e. Just as
an aside, Wade, I don't know if he is still here...he was making
arrangements for me to stay up there again this weekend. I was
looking forward to that. Unfortunately I have to go back to Oahu
tonight. And I know how special that place is. I have heard how
special that place is to many of you. I share that. As a little
kid we used to go up there and experience it. I have had the opportunity
as an adult to continue to go up and enjoy Koke`e, which is a
special place to me too.
Mr. Agor: Thank you chairman. Mr. Johns. I concur with what the
gentlemen had to say previously. I would like to make a comment
too about some of the comments that have been made about this
being a done deal. We are far from this being a done deal. Before
us today is the draft master plan. It's just a draft. And it's
gonna trigger an environmental impact study, which I as a board
member really really need to render a decision on the final draft
plan, as well as my fellow board members. So, should this draft
master plan get approved today it is not a done deal with the
situation on the master plan. We have a long ways more to go.
We'll have more opportunities for public input. I went around
the room yesterday and literally asked if you had read the master
plan. And a lot my buddies didn't read the master plan, draft
master plan. Most of you know where my office is. I have a copy
there. I am very accessible. I am right next to the theater. Go
to the movies and stop by and see me. And read the draft master
plan. It's a good thing.
[Testimony by the public follows, then ….]
Motion to Accept Koke’e Master Plan on Agenda Item E2
(after final public testimony)
Chair: no more testimony
Mr. Agor: Mr. Chair, I would like to see this
process move on. I myself, as I stated earlier and I am sure the
rest of the board members, need a lot more information to be able
to render a decision on the final master plan. And by moving on
approving this draft master plan, it gives us the mechanism to
move forward with the environmental impact study which is very
important. It gives the time to allow the public to present the
testimony here to the consultants and to the staff, so that the
staff can reevaluate into consideration all of the testimony that
has been given in the last two days. So with that, Mr. Chairman,
I would like to move to approve the draft master plan with directives,
recommendations or amendments to the plan. I will start with
Page 6-4 on the feature summary, highlights include: to add the
elements of testimony of the Green Hart Conservation Company.
They've got some very good ideas to preserve the culture and the
environment.
Page 6-16: The statement of mission should include the preservation
of Native Hawaiian gathering and cultural access rights.
Page 7-10: Entry Gate – I personally recommend not having
a physical gate and I also recommend we take into consideration
Juan Wilson's proposal and testimony to be taken very seriously
and see how that can be worked out
Page 7-19: Where we talk about different public facilities. I
don't know if this is the right place to state this but I would
like to place it anyway. I would like the staff and consultants
to work with nonprofit organizations that rent cabins and provide
a substantial amount of public service and consider them separately
from individual cabin leases.
Page 7-20: I would like to explore the possibility of the construction
of a lodge with short term rentals.
Page 7-39: I would like to consider in terms of entry fees any
person holding a local drivers license would be exempt from paying
any fees and that staff and the consultant look at alternate ways
of collecting entry fees
Page 7-40: I don't have a handle or enough information to render
a decision on the way to go about the cabin leases. I would direct
the staff and consultants to really take to heart the testimony
by everybody and really evaluate it and come up with a workable
solution for everybody.
And with that, I move again to recommend the motion.
Mr. Johns: I will second that and for discussion
I would like to make sure that what I am going to call the Juan
Wilson alternative make sure that that's evaluated in the EIS
process, as well as the comments from Hui o Laka, Mr. Wayne Jacintho,
and Frank Hay with regard to the result. So that when the IES
comes back to us, the EIS process will have more creative solutions
for these problems when we look at it next time.
Chair Young: I am also assuming based on the things that Ron had
included, all of those are going to be subject to the review of
the EIS. Any further discussion? Just one other comment, and this
is not a condition but it will be a direction tot he review to
the consultant. I think the plan considered 5 public meetings
as far as providing input into the plan and in the development
of the final master plan as well as with the IES. I would ask
that they increase the number of public meeting. Because if they
would hold public meetings throughout the island of Kauai in places
and at times that are going to be convenient to the general public.
While this is Kokee and we have been focusing on it, its clear
it's an island issue, and so we would want to have some of those
public meetings in the area but also around the island. Any further
discussion. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion carries.
(applause)
[Chair Young continues the meeting …]
Entry Area showing changes in amended drawings that were voted into Master Plan by BLNR