Conditional Use Permit - Summit County: Fill & Download for Free

Bridge Street was laid out with a slight curve to the left, to give the Bavarian-village-inspired design, an infinite look. It was intentional, and as you cross the covered bridge over Gore Creek and walk up Bridge street, you really can’t see an abrupt end to the street. It was designed by the original land-planning architect to look much longer than if it were a straight shot to the base of the mountain. The execution was brilliant.The Vail-proper valley was home to three sheep-raising ranch families through the late 50’s. The mountain itself was and is still owned by the U.S. Forest Service, and is operated under a Special Use Permit issued by the USFS (very common in ski resorts in the USA).Nearly everyone who was a skier in America who had ever skied in Colorado, seemed to have claimed at some point (mostly after the 70’s) that they could have bought a lot in Vail for under $10,000. Kinda like “yeah, I was at Woodstock”.Pete Seibert, a WWII, 10th Mountain Division veteran, who trained at Camp Hale, halfway between Minturn and Leadville, originally named the operation the “Trans Montane Rod & Gun Club”. He and a native Coloradan, Earl Eaton, were the driving forces behind developing the ski area, starting in 1957. It opened finally in 1962. Long story, but Pete was an amazing visionary. He was an awesome fellow, and I still remember a New England-dialect joke he told me…which I won’t repeat here. I still occasionally retell it, but the punchline was “if she dies, she dies”.Vail was named after Vail Pass, which was named after Charlie Vail, an engineer with the Colorado Dept. of Transportation, who designed the roadway from the Summit County area to what is now the Vail Valley. Word is that Charlie Vail himself was disliked within the DOT, as he was a bit of a jerk. But his name lives on in the legacy of one of the greatest ski resorts in the world. Irony.The then-record setting day on Vail Mountain in late January of 1989 (something north of 28,000 skiers on the mountain on a single day), was an accidental perfect storm.First, the 1989 World Championships, first-time in 40 years that this major ski championship had been on US soil, was scheduled to start the following week. Charlie Myers, the ski writer for the Denver Post (someone who we considered a friend), authored an incorrect story about how “the mountain is going to mostly be shut down due to the ski racing event” during the 16-day World Championships to be held at Vail & Beaver Creek, which was published roughly two Sundays prior to the event starting…too late for us to mount a serious PR counter-offensive. The truth was, less than 1% of the terrain on both mountains combined would be closed for the World Championships. So there was this “buzz” in Denver and the Front Range, that if you wanted to ski Vail in much of February, you better get there before before these historic ski championships began, or wait til after they were over.Going back to the prior summer, Vail Associates’ (as the company was called back then…just Vail and Beaver Creek) then-Marketing Director, was in his office in Beaver Creek, analyzing the curious relationship between the Denver Broncos playing deep in the NFL playoffs, and realized that there was a direct correlation between skier visits and playoff days where where the Broncos played, particularly on Vail Mountain. Those days, regardless of snow conditions, would easily see a 20% drop in skier visits, which was a big financial hit. The John Elway-led Broncos had been to the Super Bowl the year prior, and were expected to be a strong contender for Coach Dan Reeves for the 1988 season. The Marketing Director analyzed the NFL playoff schedule, and specifically targeted aggressive price incentives on those three specific NFL playoff Saturdays or Sundays for January of 1989. Unfortunately, the Broncos finished 8–8 that year, and were out of the playoffs, so there was no compelling reason for the rabid “Orange Crush” fans to stay home for their playoff football parties.The last piece of the perfect storm was a wonderful 6 inch snowfall the day before, and Sunday was forecast to be be a perfectly sunny, epic skiing day, with temps in the low 30’s Doesn’t get any better, right? Thousands of people had the same idea….let’s go ski Vail before the World Championships, and since the market was literally blanketed with those discount coupons (cautiously distributed ONLY in the Denver market), there were pricing incentives to do so.By 8 am on that fateful Sunday, both parking structures (Vail Village and Lionshead) were filled to maximum capacity. People started parking on the South I-70 Frontage Road until there was no more room. Then people started parking on the North Frontage Road. Then people started parking on the side of the interstate on-ramps and off-ramps. Then people started parking right on the side of I-70. The Vail Police Dept (driving their trademarked Saabs) went ballistic. The Colorado State Highway Dept. blew a gasket. The US Forest Service had steam coming out of their ears for grossly exceeding the permitted capacity of the Special Use Permit.The next morning at the management meeting, the Mountain Operations Manager slammed his fist on the table and demanded “who in the hell in that Marketing Department decided to create this mess?”The marketing staff in attendance as well as the finance staff (a member of which recounted the dialogue in that meeting to me months later), both departments with whom the decision was made in full concert with in July of the previous year, all pointed to that since-departed Marketing Director, who had left the previous August to start his own marketing company. “He did it! It was all his fault!”Yup, I got thrown under the bus. Good times.

In Arizona our Supreme Court did a year long study and issued a report with recommendations that was sent to our legislature. A very reasonable report by serious, professional, credentialed people making recommendations that would make a significant impact in the system. Here is the executive summary so you can see it’s not frivolous in any way. Unfortunately it had no success in 2017. They will try again in 2018 but it’s a hard battle in our legislature.How long will it take? If we do not change our elected officials, it will take a long time. If there is no vested interest in reducing prison occupancy, it will take a long time. As Americans it is up to us to decide.TASK FORCE ON FAIR JUSTICE FOR ALL:Court-Ordered Fines, Fees, and Pretrial Release PoliciesChair – Mr. Dave Byers, Administrative Director, AOC Vice-Chair – Mr. Tom O’Connell, Pretrial Manager, AOCMr. Kent Batty, Court Administrator, Superior Court in Pima CountyHonorable Michael Robert Bluff, Associate Presiding Judge Superior Court in Yavapai CountyHonorable Maria Elena Cruz, Presiding Judge, Superior Court, Yuma CountyMr. Bob James, Deputy Court Administrator Superior Court, Maricopa CountyMs. Rebecca Steele, Deputy Director, Maricopa County Clerk of CourtHonorable Lisa Roberts , Commissioner, Superior Court in Maricopa CountyHonorable Dorothy Little, President, Arizona Justice of the Peace Association,Payson Magistrate CourtMEMBERSHonorable Antonio Riojas, Presiding Magistrate Tucson City CourtHonorable Thomas Robinson, Tempe Municipal CourtHonorable Don Taylor, Chief Presiding Judge Phoenix Municipal CourtMr. Doug Kooi, Court Administrator, Pima County Consolidated Justice CourtMr. Jeffrey Fine, Court Administrator, Maricopa County Justice CourtsMr. Michael Kurtenbach, Assistant Chief Community Services Division,City of Phoenix Police DepartmentMs. India Davis, Corrections Chief, Pima County Sheriff’s DepartmentMs. Mary Ellen Sheppard, Assistant County Manager Maricopa CountyiiiMr. Ryan Glover, Prosecutor, Glendale City Prosecutor’s OfficeMr. Paul Julien, Judicial Education Officer Education Services Division, AOC Judge Pro TemMs. Kathy Waters, Director, Adult Probation Services, AOC Liaison to Pretrial Advisory CommitteeMr. Jeremy Mussman, Deputy Director, Maricopa County Public Defender’s OfficeMr. Tony Penn, Arizona Judicial Council Public Member RepresentativePresident and CEO, United Way of Tucson and Southern ArizonaHonorable John Hudson, Presiding Judge, Gilbert Municipal CourtMr. Leonardo Ruiz, Deputy County Attorney Maricopa County Attorney’s OfficeMs. Dianne Post, Attorney, Arizona State NAACPMs. Alessandra Soler , Executive Director of the Arizona ACLUAOC Staff:Ms. Theresa Barrett, Court Programs Unit, Manager Court Services DivisionMs. Kathy Sekardi, Senior Court Policy Analyst Court Services DivisionMr. Patrick Scott, Senior Court Policy Analyst Court Services DivisionMs. Kay Radwanski, Senior Court Policy Analyst Court Services DivisionMs. Susan Pickard, Court Specialist, Court Services DivisionMs. Sabrina Nash, Administrative Assistant Court Services DivisionMs. Susan Hunt, Executive Assistant Executive OfficeivJustice for AllReport and Recommendations of the Task Force on Fair Justice for All: Court-Ordered Fines, Penalties, Fees, and Pretrial Release PoliciesExecutive SummaryTASK FORCE PURPOSEOn March 3, 2016, Chief Justice Scott Bales issued Administrative Order No. 2016-16, which established the Task Force on Fair Justice for All: Court-Ordered Fines, Penalties, Fees, and Pretrial Release Policies. The administrative order outlined the purpose of the task force as to study and make recommendations as follows:a) Recommend statutory changes, if needed, court rules, written policies, and processes and procedures for setting, collecting, and reducing or waiving court- imposed payments.b) Recommend options for people who cannot pay the full amount of a sanction at the time of sentencing to make reasonable time payments or perform community service in lieu of some or all of the fine or sanction.c) Recommend best practices for making release decisions that protect the public but do not keep people in jail solely for the inability to pay bail.d) Review the practice of suspending driver’s licenses1 and consider alternatives to license suspension.1 Throughout this report, the terminology for a driver’s license is used to reflect driving privileges or a driver license as defined in the Arizona Revised Statutes.This report describes the work and recommendations of the members of the Task Force on Fair Justice for All and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the members of the Arizona Supreme Court.1Justice for Alle) Recommend educational programs for judicial officers, including pro tem judges and court staff who are part of the pretrial decision-making process.f) Identify technological solutions and other best practices that provide defendant notifications of court dates and other court-ordered deadlines using mobile applications to reduce the number of defendants who fail to appear for court and to encourage people who receive citations to come to court.The Chief Justice asked the task force to file a report and make recommendations to the Arizona Judicial Council (AJC) by October 31, 2016. The report that follows consists of 53 recommendations, plus additional educational and training recommendations for the AJC’s review and consideration.TASK FORCE ABBREVIATED RECOMMENDATIONSThe annotated recommendations are set forth in more detail in the body of the report. Below is an abbreviated list with links to the full recommendations.Authorize judges to mitigate mandatory minimum fines, fees, surcharges, and penalties if the amount otherwise imposes an unfair economic hardship.Use automated tools to determine a defendant’s ability to pay.Create a Simplified Payment Ability Form when evaluating a defendant’s ability to pay.Use means-tested assistance program qualification as evidence of a defendant’s limited ability to pay.Seek legislation to reclassify certain criminal charges to civil violations for first-time offenses.Implement the Phoenix Municipal Court’s Compliance Assistance Program statewide.Conduct a pilot program that combines the Phoenix Municipal Court’s Compliance Assistance Program with a fine reduction program and reinstatement of defendants’ drivers’ licenses.Test techniques to make it easier for defendants to make time payments on court- imposed financial sanctions.Seek legislation that would grant courts discretion to close cases and write off fines and fees for traffic and misdemeanor after a 20-year period if reasonable collection efforts have not been effective.2Justice for AllAllow probationers to receive earned time credit without consideration of financial assessments, other than restitution to victims.Eliminate or reduce the imposition of the 10 percent annual interest rate on any Criminal Restitution Order.Modify court website information, bond cards, reminder letters, FARE (Fines/Fees and Restitution Enforcement) letters, and instructions for online citation payment to explain that if the defendant intends to plead guilty or responsible but cannot afford to pay the full amount of the court sanctions at the time of the hearing, the defendant may request a time payment plan.Authorize judges to impose a direct sentence that may include community restitution (service) and education and treatment programs as available sentencing options for misdemeanor offenses.Expand community restitution (service) to be applied to surcharges, as well as fines and fees, and expand this option to sentences imposed by superior courts.Implement English and Spanish Interactive Voice Response (IVR), email, or a text messaging system to remind defendants of court dates, missed payments, and other actions to reduce failures to appear.Modify forms to collect cell phone numbers, secondary phone numbers, and email addresses.Train staff to verify and update contact information for defendants at every opportunity.Provide information to law enforcement agencies regarding the importance of gathering current contact information on the citation form.After a defendant fails to appear, notify the defendant that a warrant will be issued unless the defendant comes to court within five days.For courts operating pretrial service programs, allow pretrial services five days to re-engage defendants who have missed scheduled court dates and delay the issuance of a failure to appear warrant for those defendants who appear on the rescheduled dates.Authorize the court to quash a warrant for failure to appear and reschedule a new court date for a defendant who voluntarily appears in court after a warrant has been issued.3Justice for AllConsider increasing access to the court (e.g., offering hours at night, on weekends, or extending regular hours, taking the court to people in remote areas, and allowing remote video and telephonic appearances).Develop and pilot a system that communicates in English and Spanish (such as video avatars) to provide explanations of options available to defendants who receive tickets or citations.24. Clarify on court informational websites and bond cards that defendants may come to court before the designated court date to resolve a civil traffic case and explain how to reschedule the hearing for those defendants who cannot appear on the scheduled dates.25. Implement the ability to email proof of compliance with a law—such as proof of insurance—to the court to avoid having to appear in person.26. Suspend a driver’s license as a last resort, not a first step.Make a first offense of driving on a suspended license a civil violation rather than a criminal offense.Provide courts with the ability to collect and use updated contact information, such as a database service, before issuing a warrant or a reminder in aging cases.Authorize courts to impose restrictions on driving—such as “to and from work only”—as an alternative to suspending a driver’s license altogether.Prior to or in lieu of issuing a warrant to bring a person to court for failure to pay, courts should employ proactive practices that promote voluntary compliance and appearance.Support renewing efforts to encourage the Conference of Chief Justices and the Conference of State Court Administrators to approach Congress about extending the federal tax intercept program to include intercepting federal tax refunds to pay victim restitution awards, with an exception for those who are eligible for the earned income tax credit.Promote the use of restitution courts, status conferences, and probation review hearings that ensure due process and consider the wishes of the victim. Provide judicial training on the appropriate use of Orders to Show Cause in lieu of warrants and appointment of counsel at hearings involving a defendant’s loss of liberty.Coordinate where possible with the local regional behavioral health authority to assist the court or pretrial services in identifying defendants who have previously been diagnosed as mentally ill.4Justice for AllRevise mental health competency statutes for expediting mental competency proceedings for misdemeanor cases.Bring together criminal justice and mental health stakeholders in larger jurisdictions to adopt protocols for addressing people with mental health issues who have been brought to court.Consider the use of specialty courts and other available resources to address a defendant’s treatment and service needs, as well as risk to the community, when processing cases involving persons with mental health needs or other specialized groups.Modify Form 6–Release Order and Form 7–Appearance Bond to simplify language and clarify defendants’ rights in an easy-to-understand format.Eliminate the use of non-traffic criminal bond schedules.Amend Rule 7.4, Rules of Criminal Procedure, to require the appointment of counsel if a person remains in jail after the initial appearance.Clarify by rule that small bonds ($5-100) are not required to ensure that the defendant gets credit for time served when defendant is also being held in another case.Authorize the court to temporarily release a “hold” from a limited jurisdiction court and order placement directly into a substance abuse treatment program upon recommendation of the probation department.Expedite the bond process to facilitate timely release to treatment programs.43. Request amendment of A.R.S. § 13-3961(D) and (E) (Offenses not bailable; purpose; preconviction; exceptions) to authorize the court, on its own motion, to set a hearing to determine whether a defendant should be held without bail.Encourage the presence of court-appointed counsel and prosecutors at initial appearance hearings to assist the court in determining appropriate release conditions and to resolve misdemeanor cases.Request the legislature to refer to the people an amendment to the Arizona Constitution to expand preventive detention to allow courts to detain defendants when the court determines that the release will not reasonably assure the appearance of the person as required, in addition to when the defendant’s release will not reasonably assure the safety of other persons or the community.Eliminate the requirement for cash surety to the greatest extent possible and instead impose reasonable conditions based on the individual’s risk.5Justice for All47. Eliminate the use of a cash bond to secure a defendant’s appearance.48. Expand the use of the public safety risk assessment to limited jurisdiction courts.49. Encourage collaboration between limited jurisdiction courts and pretrial service agencies in superior courts in preparing or providing pretrial risk assessments for limited jurisdiction cases.Establish information sharing between a superior court that has conducted a pretrial risk assessment and a limited jurisdiction court when the defendant is arrested for charges in multiple courts and a release decision must be made in multiple jurisdictions.Request the Arnold Foundation to conduct research on the impact of immigration status on the likelihood of not returning to court if released to ascertain whether it is good public policy to hold these defendants on cash bond.Encourage the Arnold Foundation to conduct periodic reviews to revalidate the Public Safety Assessment [PSA] tool as to its effect on minority populations.53. Provide data to judicial officers to show the effectiveness of the risk assessment tool in actual operation.Develop an educational plan and conduct mandatory training for all judicial officers.Create multi-layer training (court personnel and judicial staff) to include a practical operational curriculum.Develop online training modules for future judicial officers.Host a one-day kick-off summit inviting all stakeholders (law enforcement, prosecutors, county attorneys, public defenders, city council and county board members, the League of Towns and Cities, criminal justice commissions, legislature, and presiding judges) to educate and inform about recommendations of the task force and provide direction for leadership to initiate the shift to a risk-based system rather than a cash-based release system.Train judicial officers on the risk principle and the methodology behind the risk assessment tool.Educate judges about the continuum of sentencing options.Educate judges about available community restitution (service) programs and the types of services each offers so that courts may order services that “fit the crime.”Launch a public education campaign to support the adopted recommendations of the task force.6Justice for AllProvide a comprehensive and targeted educational program for all stakeholders (funding authorities, legislators, criminal justice agencies, media, and members of the public) that addresses the shift to a risk-based system rather than a cash-based release system.Request that the Chief Justice issue an administrative order directing the education of all full- and part-time judicial officers about alternatives to financial release conditions. Training and educational components should: Inform judges that cash bonds are not favored. Judges should consider the least onerous terms of release of pretrial detainees that will ensure public safety and the defendant’s return to court for hearings. Train limited jurisdiction court judges to more aggressively allow payment of fines through community service, as permitted by A.R.S. § 13-810.Provide focused judicial education on A.R.S. § 11-584(D) and Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure 6.7(D) about how to determine the amount and method of payment, specifically taking into account the financial resources and the nature of the burden that the payment will impose on the defendant and making specific findings on the record about the defendant’s ability to pay.Update bench books and other judicial aides to be consistent with court-adopted recommendations.INNOVATIONS ALREADY UNDER WAYArizona courts have a history of innovation. As pretrial release issues have arisen, local courts have already begun experimenting with initiatives that support fair justice to all in Arizona. Following are a few projects that highlight promising practices that can be considered for expansion to other jurisdictions.2Compliance Assistance ProgramThe Phoenix Municipal Court has recently implemented a Compliance Assistance Program (CAP) that notifies defendants who have had their driver’s licenses suspended that they can come in to court, arrange a new and affordable time2 See Appendix B for detailed project descriptions of Innovations Already Under Way.7Justice for Allpayment program, and make a down payment on their outstanding fine. More than 5,000 people have taken advantage of the program in the first six months.Interactive Voice Response SystemThe Pima County Consolidated Justice Courts and the Glendale and Mesa Municipal courts have each implemented an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system to notify defendants of upcoming court dates, missed payments, or the issuance of warrants. Each jurisdiction has experienced a reduction in the number of people failing to appear—up to 24 percent.3Limited Jurisdiction Mental Competency Proceedings PilotA pilot project coordinated through the Superior Court in Maricopa County authorized Mesa and Glendale municipal courts to conduct Rule 11 mental health competency proceedings originating in their courts on behalf of the Superior Court in Maricopa County. The program has reduced the time to process these matters from six months to 60 days.Justice Court Video Appearance CenterThe Maricopa County Justice Court Video Appearance Center represents the first phase of an initiative to significantly reduce the amount of time defendants are held in custody on misdemeanor charges pending appearance in the justice courts.Pima County – MacArthur Safety & Justice ChallengeIn May 2015, Pima County was selected as one of 11 jurisdictions awarded $150,000 from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation for Phase I of an initiative to reduce over-incarceration by changing how America thinks about and uses jails. The initiative is a competition to help jurisdictions create fairer, more effective local justice systems through bold innovation. Pima County was later awarded an additional $1.5 million to move forward with Phase 2, which involves creating an implementation plan for broad system change.

As someone who is keen on astronomy, I am of course keen on the Thirty Meter telescope myself. And I've heard those arguments of the astronomers, about how it is an ideal site for astronomy, about the value of the astronomy that can be done with this telescope and so on. But I've also heard the other side too.There are many telescopes on the summit already, so it's not like they are saying not to build telescopes at all up there.SIZE OF THE PROPOSED TELESCOPEWhat you might not realize at first is quite how huge it is - it's difficult to get a sense of scale from the images:It's higher than the Niagara falls.Niagara Falls - US SideIt's the same height as as seventeen story skyscraper. The same height as the Hill Building in Durham, North Carolina.JS051 - Historic Postcards of Durham - The North Carolina Collection - Durham County LibraryHill Building DurhamExcept, that unlike a skyscraper, it's wide as well, wider than it is high.And I felt that the native Hawaiians that were talking had a point, and then thought about how I'd feel myself if someone was going to build a seventeen story building on top of Ben Nevis.See those buildings at the bottom, they are several stories high. But a seventeen story building would be much bigger than those. Put the 30 meter telescope on the summit and it would be very obvious from miles away.Mount Kea is part of the distinctive silhouette of Hawaii. The other side of the argument talked about how it was the landmark they used to get back to Hawaii from their past long sea journeys. They talk about how it changes the appearance of the mountain.Yes, it's 13,000 feet high. But the telescope dome is 180 feet high and 217 feet wide. For instance if you had a photo of Mount Kea at 1080 p (HD) then it's180*1080/13000 = 14 pixels high217*1080/13000 = 18 pixels wideMOCKUP JUST TO SHOW THE SCALE OF THE TELESCOPE COMPARED TO THE MOUNTAINThis is a mockup I made by just adding an appropriately resized copy of a computer rendering of the telescope to an HD photograph of Mauna Kea. It's more like 10 pixels because of the space above and below the mountain in this photograph. And I haven't taken account of foreshortening. This is its height in pixels if you took a photo of the mountain from a long way away and it took up the same vertical area of the screen as in this photo - I couldn't find a creative commons photograph of Mauna Kea from the distance. And, I haven't tried to put it exactly in the intended location for it, it's just to show the scale of it, not its location.Still, it's enough to give a rough first idea.Detail of Photo of Mauna Kea by Prayitno, from Flikr. Combined with computer rendering from the Thirty Meter Telescope website resized appropriately.The dark blip at the top of the mountain shows roughly how big the TMT would be. Easy to see from a long distance away.Here is a zoom in on it as that image is reproduced rather low res hereIt might be quite noticeable from out at sea. And you can imagine that close up, if you climb the mountain, it would totally dominate the summit.TELESCOPE BELOW THE SUMMITThe plan is to set it back from the summit, so that reduces the impact quite a bit. As measured from its base it is far higher than any of the existing telescopes, but the top of it is going to be well below the top of the other telescopes. It's base is 150 meters below the summit ridge, and it is situated on the northern plateau. As a result it would be visible from only 14% of the main island.The height of the existing domes are:Subaru: 141 feet high, 13 stories.Keck 111 feet high, 10 stories,Gemini North 151 feet high, 14 stories.TMT design is 180 feet high, or getting on for 17 stories. And wider too in proportion.I got those figures from table 3.6 of the Environment impact survey.Here is a link to convert feet to stories - it is just a rough idea as it depends on what height you say a story is, so you get different figures for the heights of these buildings in stories.Here are some renderings:mikewong's astroblogSYMPATHETIC ASTRONOMERSMike Wong is sympathetic to the Hawaiians case, particularly some of the past behaviour of astronomers there, though he says others have shown respect.He writes"I would rather see the telescope built at an inferior site, rather than built without respect for native values as previous observatories were. But much has changed since observatories began popping up on Mauna Kea. No new observatories will ever be placed atop the summit or on/near sacred pu'u. TMT's construction/operations plan resulted from a process of respectful dialog, and this process also deserves respect."mikewong's astroblogHere is another renderingFull resolution version hereNEED TO ASSUME GOOD FAITHI don't think it helps for the astronomers to accuse the native Hawaiians of bad faith here. That's part of the very attitude that caused the problems in the past indeed.I think it's enough to just say that it is indeed a big building and anywhere in the world something as large as that on top of a mountain would be bound to involve a huge amount of public debate with people divided on whether to build it or not. For the Hawaiians their ideas of Mauna Kea as sacred are part of the mix, and their past history of the polynesian voyagers coming back to Hawaii on long voyages - which is probably why they thought of it as especially sacred originally. But focusing too much on that may not be helpful for the astronomers who don't share their religious ideas. I think it's enough to just acknowledge that it is a huge building and such buildings are likely to be controversial.And though I'm keen on astronomy and express my views, I have friends and relatives who are not especially interested in astronomy at all.And I feel that science shouldn't just kind of steamroller over other people's views. So I also feel it is very important to uphold those who are not so keen on science because they have a perspective too, and they can help keep us come to a more balanced view on those things.Keen though I am on astronomy and science, that doesn't mean I think science has a trump card that means it has to win every argument :).If I was living in Hawaii I can well imagine being excited about the telescope, wanting to go up and see how they are going with the construction, and keen for first light and wanting such a prestigious and forward looking telescope on my mountain. Same here if such a big telescope was proposed to be built on Ben Nevis, I'd probably be mustering arguments for it, and talking about how they used to have an observatory on Ben Nevis in the past etc. But I also have a strong feeling for mountains too. Not that I think they are sacred particularly. But I'm a keen hill walker, have been in the past especially more so, and some rock climbing, and there is something special about mountains I feel. So there's that side to it too. So I have some sympathy from that point of view also.Hope this helps. And if there was more meeting of the two sides and appreciation and especially if they followed due process carefully and scrupulously, I think maybe they can find a solution that works for both. Perhaps to do with the location on the mountain, perhaps some way it can be visually less intrusive - they've already moved it from the crater rim but perhaps more can be done in that direction, it doesn't have to be right at the very top to be still an excellent site for astronomy.And they have every right to reject the project if they decide it is not suitable, just as we would here in the UK to reject a project to build a similarly sized telescope on the summit of Ben Nevis.See The Heart of the Hawaiian Peoples’ Arguments against the Telescope on Mauna Kea"Enter the TMT. Now to say Hawaiians are opposed to technology or science is simply wrong. Hawaiians have a long and illustrious tradition of adopting Western technologies. King Kalākaua had electricity in his palace before the White House had it. And he is quoted as follows:" “It will afford me unfeigned satisfaction if my kingdom can add its quota toward the successful accomplishment of the most important astronomical observation of the present century and assist, however humbly, the enlightened nations of the earth in these costly enterprises…” ~ King Kalākaua, September 1874 as quoted in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser, upon arrival of a British expedition of astronomers to Hawaii"But that was when Hawaiians were in control of their own country, and before the devastating impacts of American rule. Now many are saying “enough.” The TMT, while not being built on one of the sacred puʻu at the summit, will be a much larger and more extensive project than any before, with a building 18 stories tall and an impact on five acres of summit. The project has gone through extensive reviews for its environmental and cultural impacts, and was originally supported by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) in 2009. But in an April 12 poll by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, 61 percent of respondents said OHA should oppose the TMT. As OHA Trustee Peter Apo points out, “Hawaiians are joined by ecological and environmental watchdog constituencies with natural resource management concerns about stewardship issues in the state’s management of the geo-cultural landscape of plants, native birds, rare insects, historic sites, and so forth.” "ALTERNATIVE SITE OUTSIDE HAWAIISometimes it may seem as if there is no other possible site - that by preventing it from being built on Hawaii they are setting science back a generation or some such. But there are other sites. And there's a larger telescope going to be built in the Atacama desert too.European Extremely Large Telescope - you can see how huge it is by the little person in the rendering. Is under construction in the Atacama desert and first light is expected in 2024.That's in the southern hemisphere so the astronomers would prefer the thirty meter telescope to be built in the northern hemisphere to complement it.Anyway, if the TMT can't be built on Hawaii, there's always the Mexico site San Pedro Mártir which has pretty good seeing conditions also, one of only a handful of sites suitable for it world wide, with no objections there as far as I know.The 1972 0.84m Telescope-SanPedroMartir Observatory-BajaCalifornia-MexicoAnd the Mexican site is actually further north than Hawaii, at 31.0456 degrees north, instead of 19.8330 degrees north, so it actually has advantages for sky coverage for the northern hemisphere. For details, see TMT candidate sitesFor more about this site: National Astronomical Observatory (Mexico)It must be a pretty good site as it's going to be the site for this 6.4 meter diameter infrared telescope:San Pedro Martir Telescope (SPMT)NOTE ON RELIGIONSI think there's a tendency amongst some to think of the Hawaiian religion as "primitive" which doesn't help. Headlines such as Superstition Wins Out as Hawaii Supreme Court Suspends Massive Telescope Construction don't help matters!Why should a belief in a more powerful god that creates a universe be less superstitious and more authentic than a belief in less powerful gods that are associated with places?It's not like believing in something more powerful makes it more likely to be true. It sometimes feels as if in religion they have the idea that the person who believes in the most powerful god can beat everyone else. Like a competition in imagining more and more powerful gods to beat everyone else's beliefs. Or more and more virtuous Gods, or kinder Gods etc.The critics so often talk about the Hawaiian beliefs here as "superstition". But they don't call Christianity "superstition". That's a kind of unacknowledged arrogance that "our religion is better than yours" that I think doesn't further the debate here. I know they aren't doing this deliberately and think they are being considerate, but unacknowledged unrecognized arrogance is the hardest of all to deal with, because you can't see it at all and are incapable of recognizing it as arrogance.For me, beliefs in ancestor worship, in local deities of places, shamanism, belief in many deities (polytheism), deities that live high in the sky, in deities that created the universe and then leave it alone, or created it and continuously intervene, in the idea of a divine nature in human beings themselves, in a Taoist balance of nature, in a "dream time" as for the Australian aborigines, the Confucian ideas etc, ideas of sacredness of human beings and the world - they are all on the same level.Any number of beliefs about the nature of the world we live in, our place in it, what counts as sacred, orwhat happens after you die. There is no way at all to decide between them.And there is nothing "scientific" about the idea that there is nothing more to this life and universe than what we have been able to discover with our scientific methods, or the belief that when you die that's it.For sure "scientific atheists" don't have a creed where you have to say "I believe in the power of the scientific method using experiments with physical objects to establish all truths, and I also believe that there is no other method of establishing truth unless it is verified by the scientific method". But that's just because they so take it for granted they don't even need to make it into a creed.To my mind that is more of a superstition than any religion, because it's unacknowledged, it's like a religion where the practitioners don't even acknowledge the validity of any other way of looking at things. Of course there are many scientists who hold many different religious ideas, or are agnostic, etc. It's just some scientists who subscribe to "scientific atheism". And it's for those particularly, especially when they argue aggressively against religious ideas - that I think - "this chap seems as superstitious or more so in his or her understanding of science as anyone in any religion".I'm a Buddhist myself, and we don't have a creed or a requirement to affirm belief in deities at all, not in that sense (the Buddhist "deities" are either ways of depicting supreme qualities such as unbounded compassion, wisdom or love rather as they might be in a poem, or they are though of just beings like us caught up in the cycle of existence but with longer lives).But do have an idea of a kind of sacredness you can contact in yourself and the world and a truth that you can see for yourself. You can use reasoning, philosophy, science to point at that truth, or you can point to it with poetry also, but at some point you have to see the truth directly for it to have any impact. A kind of truth that goes beyond what you can establish by scientific experiment and reasoning - because something you can see only through reasoning is something you can forget, as well. There's the idea of truths you can see directly that are transformative, that can't be forgotten in that way.For me that is the path to follow, but I don't feel anyone else should follow that path either.And you can't disprove any of those beliefs by pointing to violent actions by those who claim to be religious either, as if religion was a cause of violence. Atheists also are violent, many of them. Violence in the name of freedom, or in the name of human rights, or in the name of communism, or fascism, or violence just to grab resources, oil fields or whatever. We find plenty of excuses for violence. I think there's not the slightest shred of evidence that religion leads people to violence, as after all the central message of all the main religions is a message of peace. Though plenty of evidence that violent people often use religion as an excuse for violence.David Mitchell makes that point here:And me talking about the "scientific ideas" about life after death and why I don't think the mind is a computer program.Robert Walker's answer to Is there life after death?If a program can't undestand truth - ethics of artificial intelligence babiesAnd here Ringu Tulku who talks about Buddhist ideas with simplicity and clarity. He is a proponent of the Rime movement - "no boundaries" - that the Buddha said he taught many different methods for different people - can't say one is right or wrong or higher or lower. I think he has something useful to say to our modern world.Listen to what he says about the Tibetan Rime "no boundaries" movement (towards the end), and his suggestion that that same approach can be brought to the whole world, many paths, prophets, religious, non religious. and so on. And how differences are something good.I think applying this approach to the Hawaiian beliefs could help.Their beliefs need respect as much as anyone's. And the world is far richer for having these various religious ideas. For some people, this is the path they need.Here are a few videos of Hawaiians putting forward their views.In favour of the Thirty Meter Telescope:Against it:Here is a Hawaiian talking about Mauna Kea as his people's ancestor.DebateSUMMING UPAs astronomers and scientists, let's respect these beliefs, that these people are genuine. Let's not be over hasty to call them charlatans because they believe things that don't fit in easily with religions we are more familiar with. I think it is pretty clear that there are many Hawaiians for whom this is a big issue and surely they are genuine in their beliefs here, whatever we make of them.And please, let's not treat science as a "trump card" that beats everything else. It's natural to feel like that as a scientist. But I think it also helps to have some humility, to recognize that there are other perspectives. And that collectively we may come to better decisions when all perspectives are given their say. And as a default position we need to assume that others are also being genuine in what they say, just as we are, and to assume good faith unless there is clear evidence to the contrary.And in this particular case, to recognize that building a 17 story building on the top of a mountain is bound to be a matter of controversy, anywhere in the world, especially a distinctive exposed prominent mountain like Mauna Kea, whatever the reasons behind the various views. And so we have to follow due process, and see what happens.And the Hawaiians themselves also have to work through the ideas, and how it impacts on their beliefs and view of Mauna Kea as sacred. And perhaps they can find a way for the science and culture to co-exist and a way to build the telescope consistent with their views of the sacredness of Mauna Kea..And if the decision is not to build, well, we've got the backup location in Mexico, which has already been judged good enough for another large leading edge 6.4 meter infrared telescope, and is further north as well. So, it does have advantages especially since there is going to be a similarly large telescope in the Atacama desert to view the southern hemisphere.The Mexican telescope has more days in the year when you can't observe, or when seeing is poor, compared with Mauna Kea - but when you can observe, the seeing is often excellent, one of the best sites in the world. Astroclimate at San Pedro Martir and SITE PROSPECTION AT SAN PEDR O MARTIRAnd there would be less overlap between the two telescopes in the Mexican location. So it's not like this is absolutely the only place it can be built.In this answer, I am not taking any position on whether the telescope should be built or not. It's just affirming the need for due process as something that the Hawaiians also have to work through for themselves, just as would be necessary if they wanted to build it on Ben Nevis or anywhere else in the world.OPEN LETTERI'd also like to append the open letter written by the Mauna Kea Hui to Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, whose Palo Alto nonprofit Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation is one of the key funders for the project - gives some of the islander's perspective on it.Aloha pumehana Mr. Moore,We acknowledge your great contributions as co-founder of Intel Corporation, trustee of the California Institute of Technology, and philanthropic supporter of science, as well as natural resource protection around the world. You have given much to society, and for this, we thank you. We write today, however, regarding your financial backing of an aggressive campaign to build the world’s largest telescope—the Thirty Meter Telescope—atop Mauna Kea.The summit of Mauna Kea is protected by state and federal laws that support conservation over development because Mauna Kea is home to rare plant and animal species found nowhere else on planet Earth, some on the brink of extinction. Astronomy, including the search for life on other planets, is a noble endeavor, but it loses that nobility when its actions threaten life on Earth. Extinction begins the process of unraveling creation — it is forever, and it is unacceptable, especially in this day and age.Mauna Kea is one of the most sacred places in the Pacific. Islanders use the mountain as a place of spiritual contemplation, healing and recreation. National Geographic recently named it as one of the Holiest places on Earth. For Native Hawaiians, Mauna Kea is a temple dedicated to Aloha and peace. It is where our supreme being gave birth to all living things. It was the meeting place of Papa (Earth Mother) and Wakea (Sky Father), the progenitors of the Hawaiian people, and is the burial ground of the most revered of Hawaiian ancestors.Mauna Kea’s high elevation landscape is used for ceremonies that contain star and other knowledge essential to modern Hawaiian voyaging. Hawaiians used this knowledge millennia before modern astronomy to voyage to hundreds of tiny islands spread over ten million square miles of the Pacific. More than ninety-three astronomical sites are available in the world for doing astronomy, but Mauna Kea is the only place on Earth for conducting these ceremonies.The controversy over the TMT does not end with moral and ethical questions about culture and the environment. There are also legal issues. Caltech and the University of California (UC) have repeatedly built telescopes on Mauna Kea without complying with state and federal environmental laws, escalating the decades-long conflict between the astronomers and islanders.In the 1990s, despite public outcry about building more telescopes, Caltech and UC, together with NASA, campaigned to build as many as six more “outrigger” telescopes for the Keck observatory, and the people had to turn to the courts for justice. In 2003, a federal judge ordered the Keck project to comply complete a federal environmental impact statement, and in 2007 a state judge voided the Keck permit for Mauna Kea because it violated state law.Sadly, the TMT Project perpetuates this legacy of lawlessness. As this letter is being written the UH/TMT team have begun work on the TMT Project by grading, excavating and test drilling on the sacred lands of Mauna Kea. Aa group of Native Hawaiian cultural practitioners, environmentalists, and public interest advocacy groups are challenging state of Hawai`i’s permit for the TMT as a breach of the public trust in state courts, and University of Hawai`i students are protesting against the university’s lead in the desecration of Mauna Kea. Further, TMT officials have refused to comply with the law requiring a federal EIS, despite receiving millions in federal funds from the National Science Foundation. They’ve also ignored the legal limit on the number of telescopes allowed on the summit. Repeating the same errors the courts previously found unlawful is outrageous. Is this the legacy you wish to leave in Hawaii, Mr. Moore?Over and over, islanders have peacefully expressed—with aloha—our concerns, yet you and your colleagues continue to push this project without following the law. Aloha is not just a catchy phrase. It’s about truth which is meant to heal.Mr. Moore, you have a chance to hold the California observatories to a higher standard of Aloha. You and financial influence can help direct the TMT proponents to a peaceful solution, such as supporting stopping the current construction activities on Mauna Kea. You can make a significant shift be choosing not to build the TMT altogether especially since the European Extremely Large Telescope (EELT), a next generation telescope that is currently under construction in Chile. The EELT is considerably larger then TMT (TMT is 30 m in size and the EELT is 39 m). According to TMT’s own analysis, the no build alternative will cause less environmental and cultural damage than building it on the sacred mountain landscape and fragile ecosystem of Mauna Kea.It is time to Aloha Mauna Kea, Mr. Moore.Signed:Kealoha Pisciotta, Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, Kumu Paul K. Neves, Deborah J. Ward, Kalani Flores and Pua Case, the Flores Case Ohana, Clarence Kukauahi Ching and KAHEA: The Hawaiian-Environmental Alliancesee Intel founder, land board asked to stop new Mauna Kea observatoryThe environmental impact statement is here Land Use - section on the Thirty Meter TelescopeSPIRIT OF ALOHAIn that open letter they talk about aloha. Here is more about it, the peaceful approach that the Hawaiian protests on Mauna Kea exemplify:See also "The Meaning of Aloha"This originated as my answer to the Quora question:What does the rest of the world think about the controversy over the TMT (thirty meter telescope) in Hawaii?Have now made this into a science blog post here:A Telescope "Skyscraper" On Muana Kea In Hawaii - Should Astronomers Build It?UPDATEThough Mauna Kea is still their top candidate for the TMT, they are pursuing La Palma Spain as a second location if Mauna Kea falls through, with plans to start building in 2018. Thirty Meter Telescope