My apologies to Alex Frost (County R&D) and Tom DeWitt (UH- Hilo) who made the effort to introduce this approach to community business leaders but I found the end result of little value. If you wanted to attract those who really needed to hear what these well-paid consultants had to say, you  should have held the presentation during the day and provided an invitation-only free lunch to those doing the most damage; if you get a similar chance in the future, you’ll find a who’s who in that regard on Billy Kenoi’s list of top donors.

The Pilagos are in good spirits and looking great — well rested due to the immense relief of pressure and more time at the beach. Angel has been catching up on neglected domestic duties — by that I mean home repairs. Nita spent some time redecorating but much more time devoted to her blossoming designer clothing business. She has a new line due to arrive in the next few weeks and she has promised my readers first crack at viewing and learning about what’s new in the world of Wahine Toa. Word has it Angel’s got some of his own artwork on the pieces coming in as does their son Che. 

As for the politician in the family, he is already getting itchy and has confirmed he will run again for his old North Kona council seat. Meantime Angel is busy tracking politics at the county and state level. When I told him a story about Clayton Hee in the basement of the capital building wearing boxing shorts and gloves and punching at his legislative aide while Rocky music was blaring in the background, he was only slightly amused. “That is all very well and good,” he said, “but there are more important things to think about Kristine.”

True that, like the pending GMO legislation. So, bruddah may have taken a break but he hasn’t missed a beat.

Now if I could get him to write a column for the new media venture . . .

Sarme is one of about 90 people who have come out on this unusually chilly Saturday afternoon to protest a proposed rezoning of agricultural lands along this section of North Hilo coastline, just above the establishment known as “Pinky’s.”

“I live here all my life,” Sarme says before listing the reasons he is opposed to the rezoning. Although he expresses himself quite well, the spry septuagenarian needs no words to present his best argument. His bright smile, alert eyes and strong build are proof of a life well led — “I live the life of the land,” he explains — and he is here to protect that lifestyle not only for himself but for future generations.

“I could see if it is for planting,” says Sarme, “but this . . . no can.” He is referring to a pending request by absentee landowner Steve Shropshire to have the State Land Use Commission rezone most of the area for urban use. Shropshire hopes to subdivide just over 90 acres he owns makai of the highway and develop about 200 homes on it. If approved, the development would double the population of Papa’ikou.

A little further, past the main intersection in the direction of Honokaa, a group representing the younger generation holds their own signs. Jonah Kaaukai, Levi Medieros, Sui the dog, Aaron Abalos, Darren Abalos, Brittany Castro and Paul Desoto, all in the 18- to 21-year-old range, crowd around a banner that reads: “This aint the mainland.”

How do these youth judge the reaction from the people passing by? “Pretty cherry, choke people honking.” Why are they standing by the side of the road? “You’re never too young to make a difference.” Why do they oppose the rezoning? “It’s good the way it is already.”

It would seem the state agrees with this last comment anyway. According to the state, Shropshire’s land is not only good but prime in terms of its value as an agricultural resource. The other major chunks of land in question are zoned “conservation,” with a very small portion already designated as “urban.”

On the Hilo side of Sarme, an even greater number of protestors is lined up. Walking behind them one sees that many of the signs they hold say “Ken Fujiyama” on the back. Although no one here can verify if this well-known Hawai`i businessman is opposed to Shropshire’s proposed development, clearly Fujiyama is in favor of recycling the campaign signs from his failed bid for State House.

Craig Neff is one of the community members responsible for organizing the impressive showing and he is not surprised to see how many turned out, nor is he surprised to see how many of the people passing by are honking their horns in support. “It doesn’t stop in Papa’ikou,” he says. “This is about all of Hamakua, that’s why our shirts say Malama Hamakua.” Neff designed the standout shirts that identify members of what he is calling the Protect Papa’ikou Ohana. As a Hawaiian cultural practitioner, Neff brings this perspective to the opposition: “We are here to honor this land.”

Neff explains that while he and many others standing with him this day attended a public presentation given by Shropshire, they are using this opportunity to make their own public statement about how the community views the developer’s plans.

Judging by the numbers along the road and the responses registered by drivers passing by — Shropshire is headed for some stiff opposition.

At 41, Kalani Lyman looks like he is following in Manuel Sarme’s footsteps. He is a descendant of the famous Lyman missionary family, who like Sarme and many others speaking out against the rezoning, has lived in Papa’ikou a very long time. He claims to be a fourth-generation fisherman who depends on the land for his livelihood and as such bristles at claims made by the developer that those accessing the marine resources from this coastline can go someplace else. “I am not a recreational fisherman,” says Lyman. “I am a native gatherer.”

Lyman has already filed to gain status with the State Land Use Commission as an intervener in the case, and it is likely that his efforts to protect his gathering rights will provide the most thorny legal issue for Shropshire. In these tough economic times, Lyman’s argument is likely to find increased favor even if it’s only outside the system. Many local families are looking at how the land can sustain them as well. Keeping prime agricultural lands zoned for that purpose and protecting near-shore fishing resources from run-off are ways to increase, rather than diminish, local food supplies.

The Papa’ikou Point project will be just one of many testing Mayor Kenoi’s campaign assertions that donations from developers would not influence his politics. Shropshire supported Kenoi’s campaign and donated a total of $500 as of Kenoi’s last reporting. Also of note, a $1,000 donation from the man who helped prepare Shropshire’s petition — Carlsmith Ball attorney, Steven S. C. Lim.

As he makes his case for the rezoning before the state Land Use Commission, Shropshire relies heavily on the Hawaii County General Plan designation, which identifies the area in question as a preferred site for urban expansion. The county planning department is an automatic intervener in the case and given the cozy relationship between Kenoi and developers in general, as well as with Shropshire, and Lim in particular, a rubber-stamping seems likely.

Just days prior to this gathering, Hawaii Public Radio reported on Kenoi at the state legislature asking for increased funding for agricultural development on Hawaii Island (among other budget items). He stated that the support was necessary to keep prime agricultural lands from being lost to urban and residential developments. Surely the folks lining the highway this wintry day will be tracking the changes in Kenoi’s tune as the proposal crafted by donors Shropshire and Lim makes its way through the approval process.

If you want to understand how the Papa’ikou Point project might effect the community that surrounds it, by all means, do not read the recent petition submitted to the Land Use Commission by the developer. As it stands, what Carlsmith Ball LLP produced on behalf of Stephen Shropshire is a conglomeration of absurdity, unsubstantiated assertions and outright wishful thinking. All of which leaves simple folk scratching their heads but LUC staff acting as if such nonsense is worth expending taxpayer resources to process.

If you are the type who reads the Commission’s administrative rules and thinks that a requirement to demonstrate need for the project means prove the community will suffer without it, you qualify as far too simple to play the development game. Here’s how a real developer responds to § 15-15-50(c)(15) — the Assessment of Need requirement: “Reclassification of the Petition Area from Agricultural and Conservation to Urban is necessary in order for Petitioner to develop Papa’ikou Point.”

Translation for the simple folk: I am the one in need here and if you don’t change the zoning, I can’t build my subdivision.

“In addition,” the response continues, “the current Agricultural (A-20a) zoning does not allow for the proposed Papa’ikou Point development. Reclassification will allow residential development to occur in an area designated by the County for Low Density Urban uses, thus allowing other Agricultural District lands, located further from Hilo and existing residential and commercial uses, to remain available for agricultural uses.”

Translation: If you let me build my houses here, whether or not anyone needs them, then other people with agricultural lands farther along the coast will not have to rezone their land to build homes, whether or not anyone needs them.

Bert Saruwatari is the LUC staffer responsible for processing Shropshire’s petition. He says the disconnect between what the commission requires and what got submitted in this case is typical, although he can’t explain why developers are in the habit of providing such incomplete paperwork. “I can only say that it’s been the practice,” he said in a recent phone interview. Later, during the same discussion, he referred to it as a way for the developer to “get their foot in the door.”

Sarawatari confirmed that “the administrative rules are legal requirements,” but, like most of those familiar with how this particular game gets played, he didn’t want to say much more. The LUC staffer was the only person interviewed who was willing to be quoted on the subject at all; off the record comments proved much more informative. One attorney experienced at representing the public’s interests before the LUC criticized developers who are notorious for complaining about delays. “If they would submit the paperwork the right way to begin with, it would take far less time,” he said.

And cost far less taxpayer money.

In the Shropshire petition, the legal requirements are addressed with assertions followed by: “A detailed discussion of the (fill in the blank) will be provided in the EIS.” Whether the subject is how Papa’ikou Point might affect the school system, existing infrastructure (including the availability of solid waste disposal services), recreational resources, drainage, natural resources, flora/fauna, and visual resources . . . the tactic is the same. The petitioner dismisses a wide range of concerns by saying there is no problem because I say so and as for the evidence to support my claims, that will come later.

To be fair, in one instance Shropshire mentions “initial market studies” in response to the requirement that he demonstrate his 200 (plus or minus) homes can actually be sold: “Projected selling prices have not been determined, but initial market studies indicate that both market-level and affordable housing would be absorbed by buyers in light of Papa’ikou Point’s close proximity to Hilo, which allows for easy commuting to work and access to shopping and recreation.”

Oh, ye of simple minds look not at the multitude of homes unsold in Hilo with a much easier commute to work and better access to shopping and recreation. Consider not recent U.S. commerce department statistics indicating that construction of new homes and apartments plunged 15.5 percent to an annual rate of 550,000 units last month — this following a year in which the number of homes breaking ground was at its lowest level in 50 years, a 33.3 percent decrease over the previous year. Ignore the Federal Housing Finance Agency which reported that prices are dropping rapidly and that a survey of builders provided no indication that the situation would change anytime soon.

Shropshire says his homes will sell even though he doesn’t know how much they will cost, logic that fits quite well with his response to the requirement that he prove he has the financing to build them to begin with.

Condition IX of the LUC administrative rules, titled “FINANCIAL CONDITION AND FINANCING, § 15-15-50(c)(7),” calls for “a statement describing the financial condition together with a current balance sheet and income statement, and a clear description of the manner in which the petitioner proposes to finance the proposed use or development . . .”

Here is Shropshire’s response: “Prior to the Commission’s granting of the requested reclassification, Petitioner will secure the financial ability to develop Papa’ikou Point. Petitioner intends to finance the infrastructure improvements by obtaining construction loans, possibly through investor equity, and may also use proceeds from the sale of lots to fund later stages of development. Petitioner has not fully determined the estimated costs for the development of Papa’ikou Point, but will provide that information in the EIS. At that time, Petitioner will submit a statement describing its financial condition together with a balance sheet and income statement, with a clear description of the manner in which Petitioner will finance the development of Papa’ikou Point.”

In plain speak that would read: Don’t ask me that now! I don’t know how much it will cost. I am asking you to change the zoning even though I don’t have the money. I’m gonna get it, don’t you worry. And, by the way, never mind how I can know they will sell when I don’t know how much they will cost.

Saruwatari is not concerned about any of this. No decisions get made until the petition is complete and formally accepted. In the meantime, his role in the game is to point out the deficiencies and wait for the Draft EIS to come in. Then LUC staff will look at whether or not the legal requirements have been met, although no reality checks are performed at this stage. That comes later in what can be — and will certainly be, considering the opposition brewing to this project — a grueling process.

Commissioners will ask questions of the petitioner during the decision making but don’t expect anything tough. (See the LUC roster below.) Similarly, the County Planning Department as well as the Office of State Planning, who are both automatically part of the process, are likely to be in rubber stamp mode. Look to citizen interveners — who have the right to cross examine Shropshire’s experts as well as present their own — for true due diligence.

The recommendation from our off-the-record lawyer to those concerned about potential impacts from Papa’ikou Point — intervene.  Although they might have a hard time crossing over to the alternate reality where Shropshire’s initial market studies were conducted, the way the game gets played, citizen interveners are the only parties empowered to establish the simple truth as the playing field.

In times marked by grand speeches and historic firsts, by mass euphoria and star power it is easy to overlook the quiet heroes of our day. Unless you knew Fred Stoeber, that is, in which case the celebration of the changing of the guard on Capital Hill came both bitter and sweet. Yes, it was real and yes, Fred understood that change was at hand, but his passing on December 19 brought an end to the subtle power this quiet hero wielded. There on the grassy knoll before the Hilo Downtown Post Office on Fridays from 3:30-5 p.m. Fred Stoeber would sit summoning all the stillness he could muster as a counterweight to the rampant aggression in the world. Those who sat or stood with him, those who understand what it takes to turn hype into true change, those who are left to hold Barack Obama to his promises lament the loss of such a vigilant soul. In many ways, we need Fred now more than ever.

As I sit here before my keyboard to write about Fred, to honor him with a few words, I am wanting a cord that attaches to my heart on one end and my laptop’s USB port on the other. I am wanting the feelings I have for this man to stream from my heart and come out on the screen in perfect prose, purely and without effort. Why not, I am thinking. It was that easy to love him.

Before I go any further let me confess that I hardly knew Fred. We had, by any standards, a very limited relationship. I was formally introduced to him when I served as personal assistant to Aitken Roshi. Fred was a student of the venerated Zen master and a frequent participant at the zazen sessions held at Aitken Roshi’s home in Kaimu. During our introduction I recognized him as the guy at Miyo’s and came to know him, first and foremost, in that capacity.

This is how it was between Fred and I: I would walk into the restaurant that bears his partner’s name and if he happened to be working that day I would greet him.

 “Hi Fred!”

“Oh, hi, how are you?”

That was, for the most part, the extent of the verbal portion of the exchange. Although over the past two years, while I served as editor of Big Island Weekly, Fred would make sure to credit me for a job well done and complain that it was hard to find a copy of the paper each week. Then came the real substance of our connection — ‘the hug.’

Imagine Santa Claus as a Buddhist — with pure white hair and whiskers, full red lips, beautiful blue eyes and spectacles slipping down his nose, a striped apron tied around a wide middle — who delivers not presents but plates of udon and sushi and tempura, regardless of whether you are naughty or nice. Imagine this because it adds to the description of ‘the hug’ — the incredibly warm ursine embrace that drew you in and took you to a place where peace reigned and the madness of the world simply did not exist. Divine love and the hint of cooking oil, this was what I always found in Fred’s arms.

At Miyo’s his hugs were both appetizer and dessert, I would get one when I came in and another on the way out and no special treatment in between. The fact that I availed myself of his affection did not put me into a special class. His goodwill was there for anyone who had the sense to order it, just like the udon and the sushi and the tempura, and for the same purpose — to nourish body and soul.

If I might make another confession, I sometimes went to Miyo’s in need of ‘the hug’ more than the food. Which is not to say that Fred was any less friendly in other locales. He brought ‘the hug’ with him wherever he went, and sometimes we would perform our little ritual with less than five minutes lapsing from opening to closing, no matter how it appeared to passersby.

This was how I knew Fred, and this was enough to endear him to me forever. I can only imagine what he meant to those who knew him well. My own heart aches in sympathy, especially for his much beloved partner of 40 years, Miyo.

If you could find life’s dial and set it to ‘chill,’ that was Fred. He was a fine-tuned instrument at large in an existence marked most often by chaos, intent on edifying all that is good about humankind. While he is greatly missed and nothing can make up for the loss, I encourage those who knew him to take a quiet moment to reflect on their own memories of Fred Stoeber. I think you will be amazed, however simple these memories may be, at how powerful they remain.

Fred’s remains have been interred at the home he shared with Miyo in Waiakea Uka. He now rests beneath a bodhi tree cultivated from a cutting of the original tree under which the Buddha attained enlightenment.

As for what to expect, over the next month, improvements will be made to this site and then we will make one last (I promise) jump to our new home. Trust me, it will be worth it — classy digs with fun features, lots of eye candy AND opportunities for the business minded in our progressive news ohana for advertising. Of course, we are committed to attracting the best of the best, no selling out. 

Contact me if you want in, content or advertising wise. I will direct your query appropriately. And rejoice, we worked hard for this and now we have a truly local-based media outlet to keep us informed and connected. We may be KUBEHEADS, but we are not alone.

K

Be forewarned, wrapping your head around the dynamic situation evolving in response to the state’s push for biomass energy projects is going to take determination. If you are hoping to have a say about whether this results in a more sustainable future or in what one concerned citizen called a “biomassacre,” you’d best jump in now.

Recent interactions between those angling for a piece of the action and those in a position to determine their share indicate the decision making process is well underway. Ignore Laura Theilen’s public protestations to the contrary. The director of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources made two public appearances this week to convince Hawai’i Islanders that the process is wide open to all comers. First at a hearing held Wednesday at the UH-Hilo Campus and then at a town hall meeting at the Honoka’a People’s Theater on Thursday, Theilen downplayed recent Land Board decisions favoring two biomass ventures hoping to make use of public lands. She also went out of her way to assert that none of the competing entities has been given an advantage. As she and Joshua Strickler, the State Energy Facilitator, were grilled Wednesday night by a panel consisting of Senators Russell Kokubun, Clayton Hee and Dwight Takamine critical details emerged and the fast track set up for the early comers stalled. Take note that recently elected Representative Mark Nakashima did a fine job of occupying his seat and projecting a blank stare.

News of these approvals, however preliminary, came to most Hawai’i Islanders by way of the local newspapers. The outrage sparked by the roundabout notification is what sent legislators scrambling. Jeri Moniz took the mic to speak on behalf of lessees that would be dispossessed if and when the deals were done. Moniz cited previous losses to local food producers because of concessions made to expand Pohakuloa Training Camp on the Saddle Road, and she called these and similar actions taken by the DLNR an “unethical means of bringing an entire entity to its demise.”

Moniz represented ‘boots on the ground’ opposition to the use of Hamakua lands for fuel over food production. What remains to be seen is what form that opposition will take in the future and how forceful the argument will have to be made to ensure the best use of these public lands.

In her testimony, Moniz stated that the parcels requested by the biomass energy producers amounted to “a significant part of the lands used for beef and dairy” production here. She estimated that 10 percent of the beef cattle raised on Hawai’i Island (which produces 76 percent of the state’s beef) grazes that land. By the time Moniz shared these concerns, Theilen had announced that lands used by the two local dairies — the only dairies still operating in the state — were “off the table.” Statements made later also sought to ease these concerns, still it seemed that the efforts made by Theilen and Strickler resulted in few converts.

The biggest difference between the two public meetings was the missing legion of aloha shirts at the second. Here the most oft repeated sentiment amounted to recognition of County Councilman Dominic Yagong as the people’s champion and it was people not players who dominated the venue. With the Honokaa People’s Theater capable of seating 525 and the place full (if not packed) a clear statement was made that the public intends to be part of any decision making.

On Thursday, Theilen was as calm, focused and unflappable as she was the previous night. She delivered all the same assurances that the department and land board had done nothing more than open a dialogue with first one and then another biomass company on how they might partner with the state to implement their respective business plans. When asked to explain differences between her statements and online summaries of the agreements reached, she directed those concerned to consult the actual minutes of the meeting. Theilen pledged that, contrary to what the summaries stated, environmental reviews would have to be completed before the state could grant a lease for the purposes in question.

The most pertinent question asked on either night just so happened to be the only question the otherwise responsive Theilen dodged: What, if anything, will the public have to say about the use of Hamakua lands for fuel production?

Who exactly are these interests looking to develop biomass ventures on Hawai`i Island?  For those interested in sticking with the issue and hoping to participate in the next public forum (scheduled January 13 at the Honoka’a High School) with their heads wrapped around it, look for an upcoming series of reports on the players and the promises they are making.

No, Shon Pahio is the one who gets the award for having the guts to go public with his experience. Anyone who knows Pahio knows what an upstanding young man he is — the sort who represents everything good about Hawaii. Right now, he needs all the support he can get. Back him up by demanding access to the public records Flickinger has requested.

And just what is this truth that has dawned, way too late, on Flickinger? That Billy Kenoi has no regard for the rule of law. This was obvious to those who didn’t buy the snake oil, obvious to those who checked the contents of the package and strove to inform others rather than getting caught up in the frenzy to get the oil off the shelf before it went rancid.

Just wait until Kelly Greenwell and Guy Enriques hit their strides on the county council, that’s when we will realize the full extent of the damage Flickinger’s dangerous kingmaker ego wrought. 

Dear readers, this is just the beginning.

Read Flickinger’s editorial in West Hawai`i Today and stay posted.

Obama’s Use of Complete Sentences Stirs Controversy— Stunning Break with Last Eight Years

In the first two weeks since the election, President-elect Barack Obama has broken with a tradition established over the past eight years through his controversial use of complete sentences, political observers say.

Millions of Americans who watched Mr. Obama’s appearance on CBS’ ”Sixty Minutes” on Sunday witnessed the president-elect’s unorthodox verbal tick, which had Mr. Obama employing grammatically correct sentences virtually every time he opened his mouth. But Mr. Obama’s decision to use complete sentences in his public pronouncements carries with it certain risks, since after the last eight years many Americans may find his odd speaking style jarring. According to presidential historian Davis Logsdon of the University of Minnesota , some Americans might find it “alienating” to have a president who speaks English as if it were his first language.

“Every time Obama opens his mouth, his subjects and verbs are in agreement,” says Mr. Logsdon.  “If he keeps it up, he is running the risk of sounding like an elitist.”

The historian said that if Mr. Obama insists on using complete sentences in his speeches, the public may find itself saying, “Okay,subject, predicate, subject predicate — we get it, stop showing off.”

The President-elect’s stubborn insistence on using complete sentences has already attracted a rebuke from one of his harshest critics, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska: ”Talking with complete sentences there and also too talking in a way that ordinary Americans like Joe the Plumber and Tito the Builder can’t really do there, I think needing to do that isn’t tapping into what Americans are needing also,” she said.

I am reposting Chuck’s comment here for folks to read: 

Aloha Kristine,

Here’s a portion of the letter that I sent to the mayor today as efforts to remedy the county’s breach of the settlement agreement continue.

“With regard to the thoughts which were provided in your letter of November 5, 2008, please consider the following comments.

1. Breach of Section 10.1 of the Addendum to Settlement Agreement and Section 17.1 of Exhibit “A” of the Addendum to the Settlement Agreement.

Most of the items listed in your November 5, 2008 letter with regard to Chapters 10 and 27 simply reiterate prior law and, therefore, represent neither substantive changes nor do they accomplish the objectives of the settlement agreement. .

The state agency letters (SHPD, DBEDT, DOH) listed in your November 5, 2008 letter were not introduced into the county council as communications or otherwise made available to the general public. As such, please send me copies of these letters.

Also, please identify the Certified Floodplain Manager who is intended to spearhead public outreach and education. I note that this effort was not described in your letter as an on-going program.

I would like to provide you with a brief refresher history on these matters.

In 2001, Hokuli’a plaintiffs Charles Flaherty, Jack Kelly, and Michele Wilkins gave all of their damage awards from the ocean runoff to your administration to pay for a project to revise Chapter 10. These funds were matched by the county and the state.

The project did not begin until 2004 and was completed in December 2005. Yet the revision project was not released by Wilson-Okamoto (the same consultant who prepared the Kona Community Development Plan) until March 14, 2006, one hour after the Hokuli’a settlement agreement was approved by the Third Circuit Court.

If you will remember, this five year delay was the sole reason that I negotiated those terms which require revisions to strengthen regulations under Chapters 10, 23, and 27 and which required those revisions to be introduced into the County Council by September 14, 2006.

Representatives of your administration met with the former plaintiffs in May, August, and October 2006 to discuss revisions to Chapter 10, but refused to make any changes other than a requirement for grubbing/grading permit signs to be displayed on appropriate properties. They also refused in these meetings to consider revisions to Chapter 27 until Chapter 10 had been addressed.

In the October 2006 meeting, representatives of your administration promised that the Chapter 10 revision would be reviewed by Corporation Council and introduced into the County Council by February 2007. Instead, your administration introduced a revision to Chapter 27 in February 2007 without any notice to the plaintiffs. The Hokuli’a plaintiffs were never informed that the DPW was revising Chapter 27, even as we were meeting to discuss revisions to Chapter 10. Clearly, the DPW did not act in good faith.

Two years later, your administration finally delivered on its promise to introduce a revision to Chapter 10. Rather than strengthening Chapter 10, the proposed revision would weaken the current law.

As a result, I sent you a determination of breach of numerous terms of the settlement agreement.

Last month, the county council postponed consideration of your administration’s proposed revision of Chapter 10 and instructed your administration to give communities around the island an opportunity to tell representatives of your administration about the problems that they are having with the existing grubbing and grading ordinance and to present their ideas for changes to the law in order to make it better.

During the past eight years, illegal bulldozing has grown worse because it has now become common knowledge that your administration is not regulating grubbing and grading activities. In public testimony on proposed revisions to the county flood control law last year, even developers and their associates stated that the primary problem was the fact that the county was not regulating existing laws or taking action against known perpetrators.

When “we the people”, the government, deregulate good laws either through change or neglect, the lower forms of human nature, the outlaws, take over. And that is why we are now hearing about residents being threatened with harm when they attempt to stop or report illegal activities and why an increasing number of residents are experiencing unprecedented flooding.

It is important that you understand that your administration’s lack of regulation is ultimately responsible for a sometimes serious disintegration of civil behavior and “aloha” within our island’s communities.”