The letter protests how the Economic Development Committee hearing on Council Bill 2491 was noticed and conducted. Specifically, opponents of the bill were not notified in a timely manner about expert witnesses invited by the chair or the focus on pesticide impacts. This precluded opponents from arranging their own expert testimony to provide different viewpoints, while the chair ensured experts supporting his views could attend. The letter argues this discriminated against opposing viewpoints and did not allow the committee to make a fully informed decision.

1.
August
20,
2013
Councilmember
Gary
Hooser
4396
Rice
Street,
Suite
209
Dear
Economic
Development
Committee
Chair
Hooser,
On
behalf
of
the
members
of
the
Hawaii
Crop
Improvement
Association
(HCIA)
with
farms
on
Kauai,
I
write
to
strongly
protest
the
manner
in
which
the
hearing
of
your
Committee
on
Economic
Development
(Sustainability
/
Agriculture
/
Food
/
Energy)
&
Intergovernmental
Relations
on
Monday,
August
5,
was
noticed,
particularly
the
failure
to
notify
those
in
opposition
to
Council
Bill
2491
in
a
timely
manner
regarding
the
actual
content
of
the
hearing
agenda,
the
experts
who
would
be
invited
by
the
chair
and
the
nature
of
the
testimony
that
was
sought.
The
late
unofficial
notification
from
the
chair
to
a
representative
of
the
seed
farm
delegation,
which
took
place
after
noon
on
the
Friday
prior
to
the
Monday
hearing,
precluded
the
seed
companies
and
other
opponents
of
the
bill
from
contacting
expert
testifiers,
identifying
which
ones
could
be
available,
and
arranging
transportation,
lodging
and
other
logistical
considerations.
Yet
the
chair
gave
his
own
experts
ample
time
to
make
all
the
necessary
arrangements
to
ensure
his
panel
of
testifiers
from
the
mainland
would
include
a
full
complement
of
handpicked
organizations
with
a
track
record
of
opposition
to
biotech
agriculture
and
opposition
to
the
use
of
pesticides
on
which
modern
commercial
farming
depends.
This
lack
of
notice
was
clearly
discriminatory.
Had
the
hearing
been
properly
noticed
and
adequate
time
provided
to
all
parties
to
allow
a
reasonable
period
to
prepare,
the
ostensible
purpose
of
the
August
5
hearing to
fully
inform
the
members
of
the
committee could
have
been
achieved
in
a
way
that
would
best
serve
the
members
of
the
committee,
the
council,
the
public
and
the
legislative
process.
The
hearing
notice
only
indicated
there
would
be
18
minutes
provided
at
the
outset
for
public
testimony
before
the
committee
went
into
executive
session.
There
was
nothing
in
the
notice
about
subsequent
briefing
of
the
committee
by
experts
and
no
indication
that
the
focus
of
inquiry
would
be
on
the
ostensible
impacts
of
pesticides
used
by
Kauai
farmers.
This
type
of
obfuscation
is
reprehensible
and
has
no
place
in
the
public
hearing
process.
With
regard
to
the
agenda,
the
specific
areas
of
interest
(i.e.,
medical
and
scientific
considerations
of
pesticide
use)
were
only
disclosed
at
the
eleventh
hour
to
a
representative
of
the
farms
whose
operations
stand
to
be
most
affected
by
the
provisions
of
bill
and
came
much
too
late
to
allow
adequate
preparation
for
the
briefing.
Adequate
preparation
would
have
included
arrangements
for
attendance
by
the
experts
in
the
topics
to
be
considered
to
counter
the
mainland
experts

2. invited
by
the
chair.
As
it
was,
only
one
expert
testifier
was
able
to
attend
on
behalf
of
those
opposed
to
the
bill,
but
his
expertise
and
credentials
were
not
primarily
in
the
areas
that
were
the
focus
of
the
hearing.
He
was
a
geneticist
and
only
able
to
address
the
GE
portion
of
the
bill,
and
while
he
did
address
questions
related
to
that
portion
that
was
not
the
focus
of
most
of
the
It
appears
the
orchestration
of
the
hearing
and
the
invitations
sent
by
the
chair
to
selected
mainland-­‐based
organizations
were
designed
to
provide
the
committee
exclusively
with
the
opinions
of
only
those
experts
on
one
side
of
the
issue.
This
did
not
give
the
members
of
the
Kauai
Council
Committee
on
Economic
Development
a
360-­‐degree
view
of
the
issues
raised
by
the
bill
and
the
benefit
of
hearing
experts
representing
a
variety
of
viewpoints
on
the
subject
matter.
Instead,
the
manner
in
which
the
hearing
was
noticed
and
then
conducted
could
only
strengthen
the
position
of
those
who
support
the
ordinance.
This,
too,
is
discriminatory
and
has
no
place
in
a
democratic
process.
One
would
presume
that
the
commitment
to
a
fair
and
open
forum
in
which
all
sides
receive
an
equal
opportunity
to
fully
participate
and
provide
their
views
and
analysis
of
the
measure
at
hand
would
be
the
norm.
In
addition,
the
chair
invited
representatives
of
the
seed
companies
to
attend
the
July
31
hearing
to
provide
their
input
on
questions
raised
about
pesticide
use
and
the
related
provisions
of
Bill
2491.
However,
after
clearing
their
calendars
and
spending
considerable
time
and
effort
preparing
information
for
the
committee,
the
chair
never
called
on
the
company
representatives
to
participate,
thus
providing
another
example
of
the
stage-­‐managed
nature
of
the
council
proceedings,
which
were
apparently
designed
to
exclude
factual
data
and
research
that
ran
counter
to
the
intent
of
the
bill.
To
add
further
insult
to
those
opposed
to
the
bill,
the
video
tape
of
the
testimony
posted
to
the
county
website
left
out
the
testimony
provided
by
those
in
opposition
to
Bill
2491.
It
is
the
responsibility
of
the
council
to
ensure
that
th proceedings
on
the
county
website
accurately
reflect
what
transpired
at
council
meetings.
This
incomplete
compilation
created
the
misleading
impression
that
the
majority
of
testifiers
supported
Bill
2491,
which
was
clearly
not
the
case,
as
those
who
attended
the
hearing
could
see.
This
officially
sanctioned
use
of
partial
public
testimony
was
inaccurate,
in
addition
to
being
discriminatory.
We
are
extremely
disappointed
in
the
way
the
hearing
process
has
been
manipulated
and
we
hope
the
chair
will
refrain
from
practices
such
as
those
described
above
in
future
hearings.
Sincerely,
Alicia
Maluafiti
Executive
Director
Hawaii
Crop
Improvement
Association
cc:
Jay
Furfaro,
Chair
Ross
Kagawa
Nadine
K.
Nakamura,
Vice
Chair
Tim
Bynum
Mel
Rapozo
JoAnn
A.
Yukimura