Parties in the contested case hearing for the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope continued cross-examination of University of Hawaii at Hilo witnesses on Friday. ADVERTISING Parties in the contested case hearing for the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope continued cross-examination of University
Parties in the contested case hearing for the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope continued cross-examination of University of Hawaii at Hilo witnesses on Friday.
Parties in the contested case hearing for the proposed Thirty Meter Telescope continued cross-examination of University of Hawaii at Hilo witnesses on Friday.
Retired judge Walter Meheula Heen provided testimony for the university. Hearings are taking place at the Grand Naniloa Hotel in Hilo.
Heen, 88, was the first director of the Office of Mauna Kea Management and a former trustee for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. His written direct testimony addressed the history of the University of Hawaii’s management on Mauna Kea.
Heen said in his testimony that during his time with OHA, “we met and discussed the proposed telescope (the TMT) on Mauna Kea, and adopted a resolution in support of the observatory.” OHA has since rescinded its support.
During cross-examination by petitioners, Heen said that while with the Office of Mauna Kea Management, his only interaction with the proposed TMT was to insist an environmental impact statement be prepared. He said his primary aim with the office was curbing the authority of the existing observatories on the mountain.
“They had to understand that they were not owning the mountain, they were just lessees,” Heen said. “That was the most difficult part of my tenure.”
Heen’s extensive judicial and legal background was not part of the scope of his testimony, which prompted confusion throughout cross-examination.
Many petitioners asked Heen for legal opinions, and some attempted to address a ruling made by Heen in 1994 while he served in the Intermediate Court of Appeals of Hawaii.
That ruling, in State vs. Lorenzo, upheld a decision made in a lower court regarding the existence of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and stated the defendant had “presented no factual (or legal) basis for concluding that the Kingdom exists as a state in accordance with recognized attributes of a state’s sovereign nature.”
Hearings officer Riki May Amano, who also is a retired judge, reminded the parties on multiple occasions that Heen could not address questions that were not pertinent to the direct testimony provided because he had not come prepared to address other matters.
“That’s why it’s not appropriate to ask Judge Heen, although he is a lawyer and certainly an esteemed jurist, (questions) out of the blue,” Amano said. “So, I’m not going to allow him to answer legal questions outside his direct testimony.”
She later clarified that “when you ask a broad question, a good lawyer, a good judge won’t be able to answer that because you’re not giving sufficient facts (and) time to research.”
The contested case hearing is a quasi-judicial procedure regarding the issuance of a permit to UH to build the $1.4 billion telescope on Mauna Kea. There are about two dozen parties to the case, most of whom are representing themselves.
It is the second contested case regarding the project. The first began in 2011, but a permit to build was issued by the state Board of Land and Natural Resources before it concluded. The current case is the result of a state Supreme Court decision invalidating that permit because it was issued in violation of the opposing parties’ due process rights.
Hearings for the current case began Oct. 20. and took place throughout November, with a break for the Thanksgiving holiday.
Scheduled dates this month are Dec. 5-6, 8-9, 12-13, 16 and 19-20. Amano previously said it was likely more dates would be added in January.
The hearings take place from 9 a.m-4:30 p.m. in the Naniloa Crown Room.
Email Ivy Ashe at iashe@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
