Clarifying her intended comments
Carolyn Lucas-Zenk did a good job of making some sense out of the state Land Use Commission meeting held Dec. 3 and I thank the paper for covering the meeting. I also appreciate the LUC’s coming to us in West Hawaii and bringing experts with them.
The article quotes me and says, I “also said instead of reverting land to its original classifications, other classifications should be considered.”
I might have said that but I sure failed to convey my intent, if so. I was trying to get across two different points: 1) possibly having more classifications of land. For example, It’s hard to consider a lot of what is classified as ag land when it’s mostly lava, some dust and no dirt. But I’m all for conserving lava. 2) What leverage does LUC have if it can’t revert the land? Apparently none as the county allowed the developer to continue permitted work.
When a project has failed to meet its obligations, I want the LUC to have some authority over what happens next, mainly, ceasing work on the project, cleaning up and going home. I don’t want the LUC to have greater flexibility in changing land classifications to whatever they might want. We just need handle “reversions” more carefully in the future. I’m sure the LUC has come to a similar conclusion.
Anika Glass
Waikoloa
Thank you for removing graffiti
As a frequent visitor to the Big Island, I send my gratitude to the people of Hawaii who have removed the graffiti from the lava on Highway 19. I noticed it immediately and think it restores the natural beauty of this island.
Carolee Hayes
Highlands Ranch, Colo.