Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7 [Archive]

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 12:15 PM

I don't understand why the Superferry people didn't bother to do the EIS for all islands it was going to ahead of the boats arrival or when they were being built or even before that.

It was really arrogant of the Lingle Administration and the Department of Transportation to give the green light on something with such a legal loophole when we are all going to end up paying for a ferry system that is operating in another state (taxpayers subsidized the building of the ships and the improvements to the ports).

If they had done the EIS and it was cleared, there wouldn't be much argument by opponents and people would be ferried back and forth now.

Also, the Superferry didn't help themselves by deciding to start early. It was a bad move I think. It probably helped to incite people.

The whole Superferry thing didn't seem well thought out or planned anyway. There was always a question about the ports not being ready to handle the traffic.

I grew up in the Seattle area, and on board the state ferries they usually have a police officer from the jurisdiction where the boat is headed in case there is trouble. They even have space on board to detain someone. I never heard anything about that either for the Superferry.

The only real solution for a ferry system in Hawaii is if it's an official state transportation system, and not a private enterprise because it's not always going to be a money maker. It was bound to fail anyway I think. If it was a state transport system, the Coast Guard would have had no doubts about protecting a public vessel instead of a private one. I think it was weird that a private vessel was protected like a public one. The Coast Guard should send the bill to Superferry. They wouldn't have to if it was public transit.

The bottom line is that there was plenty of time for all of the items to be addressed before they were going to start, and in the end the Lingle Administration and the DOT cut the red tape for the things that should have already been addressed/fixed/complete and green lighted the project anyway. We are all going to eat the bill for this blunder.

Leo Lakio

October 9th, 2007, 12:20 PM

I don't understand why the Superferry people didn't bother to do the EIS for all islands it was going to ahead of the boats arrival or when they were being built or even before that.As I read it, it was because the State said they didn't have to. As a business, why would they spend the time and money on that process, if the governmental department that has the authority over you says you are in the clear to go ahead?
I grew up in the Seattle areaOh dear - you shouldn't have said that. Shields up!

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 12:27 PM

As I read it, it was because the State said they didn't have to. As a business, why would they spend the time and money on that process, if the governmental department that has the authority over you says you are in the clear to go ahead?
Oh dear - you shouldn't have said that. Shields up!

I read somewhere that the Federal Government guaranteed the money for the Superferry being built provided that the State could assure that there would be no environmental concerns or hangups regarding the ports (sounds like an EIS was needed). The state screwed up big time, and we are going to eat it.

Why shields up?

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 12:33 PM

I'm kind of surprised that Judge Cardoza said no sailing to Kahului until after an EA was completed. I figured he would split the difference and say yes, it could sail, but the speed would have to be greatly reduced, and more had to be done to clean the undercarriages of the cars prior to boarding.

At this point, I fully expect that the Gov. will force the Legislature into special session. The travesty of it all is that this issue could have been settled during the regular session of the Legislature had not one politician from Maui decided to kill the bill before it could be voted on by the House. Now the taxpayers of the State will have to pay for something that could have been settled months ago, and that would have allowed HSF to sail while the EA was being conducted.

The hearing just ended (I was watching it on Akaku). The legal team for HSF/DOT will be filing an appeal, but I wonder if they can get through all the paperwork in the next few weeks. Didn't Garibaldi say something like he needed to know for sure by mid-November or he'd have to move the boat out of state?

And that still leaves the issue of Kaua'i. I think they've got an appeal filed in the HSC, but I don't know when that will be heard.

Given the huge fiasco that the State created through the misinterpretation of Hawai'i environmental law, I think the Gov's hopes for a Senate seat in 2 years are going the way of the Superferry. She really made a mess of the whole thing even worse by creating that Unified Command on Kaua'i.

Miulang

Leo Lakio

October 9th, 2007, 12:36 PM

The state screwed up big time, and we are going to eat it.Sadly, you are probably right.Why shields up?You'll have to wait for it...(or go back to read the earlier "chapters" - making a reference to perspectives from outside Hawai`i may not sit well with some participants.)

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 12:44 PM

Sadly, you are probably right.You'll have to wait for it...(or go back to read the earlier "chapters" - making a reference to perspectives from outside Hawai`i may not sit well with some participants.)

oh ok, I'll get my rubbish can lid ready heh.

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 12:44 PM

I think it was weird that a private vessel was protected like a public one. The Coast Guard should send the bill to Superferry. They wouldn't have to if it was public transit.

Why is it wierd? That's the Coast Guard's role, to protect maritime traffic amongst other things.

I'm surprised this thread is reopened. Of course, in a different category. :p

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 12:53 PM

Why is it wierd? That's the Coast Guard's role, to protect maritime traffic amongst other things.

I'm surprised this thread is reopened. Of course, in a different category. :p

I just thought it was weird, because it wasn't until the Superferry sailed to Kauai that they seemed to decide the "security zone" around the Superferry. I know it's just speculation, but I think if this was a state transportation system and not a private vessel it would have been figured out before the ship even sailed. I'm thinking the Coast Guard really didn't know what to do initially because all of this should have been in place by the Superferry and they (Superferry) didn't know what to do either because they weren't ready. It's so stupid that they didn't seem to plan things out or think through all of the possibilities. It's almost like they just said "Hey, let's build some ships and put some people on board and go between the islands. The end."

infinitypro

October 9th, 2007, 12:54 PM

It's disappointing.

LikaNui

October 9th, 2007, 12:56 PM

Personally, I'd love to see everyone just drop the "shields up" nonsense and stick to the real subject, before this thread gets closed too. Some of us worked very hard to just get this new thread allowed. Please don't ruin it for the rest of us who want to discuss the SuperFerry.

Back to the topic.
I agree with Miulang in being surprised that the judge totally denied SuperFerry to run at all during the EA.
Expect 270 employees to be laid off today or tomorrow.
There can also be no doubt that SuperFerry execs have already been talking to other states or even other countries to take Alakai (and the new boat under construction too) out of Hawaii, and HSF has said that likely will be permanent.
The world media will have a field day, and Hawaii will be deservedly reviled as a place to do business.

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 01:06 PM

I just thought it was weird, because it wasn't until the Superferry sailed to Kauai that they seemed to decide the "security zone" around the Superferry. I know it's just speculation, but I think if this was a state transportation system and not a private vessel it would have been figured out before the ship even sailed. I'm thinking the Coast Guard really didn't know what to do initially because all of this should have been in place by the Superferry and they (Superferry) didn't know what to do either because they weren't ready. It's so stupid that they didn't seem to plan things out or think through all of the possibilities. It's almost like they just said "Hey, let's build some ships and put some people on board and go between the islands. The end."

Well, I think it's the other way around. It's only when the Kauai protesters approached the issue by jumping into the water did the CG decide to kick in the "security zone". That rule has been in place for some time due to 9/11, just never put into action. Of course, the execution was horrible and a wake up call.

It's disappointing.

Agreed!!!!

Back to the topic.
I agree with Miulang in being surprised that the judge totally denied SuperFerry to run at all during the EA.
Expect 270 employees to be laid off today or tomorrow.
There can also be no doubt that SuperFerry execs have already been talking to other states or even other countries to take Alakai (and the new boat under construction too) out of Hawaii, and HSF has said that likely will be permanent.
The world media will have a field day, and Hawaii will be deservedly reviled as a place to do business.

Any bets on where it will go? At this point, I would say it's 99% over for the HSF. A company with such operating expenditures simply can't keep hemorrhaging like this.

So we are without water transport. go! looks like it's lined up next. Again, same old regressive status quo.

Leo Lakio

October 9th, 2007, 01:11 PM

I'm surprised this thread is reopened.Please note who reopened it. Not really surprising, since there was some real news to hash over.
Some of us worked very hard to just get this new thread allowed.While some were responsible for the previous closure, by severely flaming posters with opposing perspectives, rather than staying on topic. No need for high horses here.
Expect 270 employees to be laid off today or tomorrow.
There can also be no doubt that SuperFerry execs have already been talking to other states or even other countries to take Alakai (and the new boat under construction too) out of Hawaii, and HSF has said that likely will be permanent.
The world media will have a field day, and Hawaii will be deservedly reviled as a place to do business.Staying on-topic with you, how much room do you think Garibaldi will give to Lingle and the Legislature, to try to find a solution that will be beneficial to them? Lingle's been a huge supporter of HSF, and you know she's going to ask them to hold off on any dramatic responses - especially if Garibaldi said that mid-November was the cut-off date, another month away. The pressure will be intense on the Legislature now.

How many employees does HSF have at present? Those 270 you mention - what percentage of the total HSF workforce is that? What type of workers will those be, do you think, and who will be retained?

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 01:12 PM

Well, I think it's the other way around. It's only when the Kauai protesters approached the issue by jumping into the water did the CG decide to kick in the "security zone". That rule has been in place for some time due to 9/11, just never put into action. Of course, the execution was horrible and a wake up call.

Agreed!!!!

Any bets on where it will go? At this point, I would say it's 99% over for the HSF. A company with such operating expenditures simply can't keep hemorrhaging like this.

So we are without water transport. go! looks like it's lined up next. Again, same old regressive status quo.

They should refurbish the inside where the cars go and make it a floating casino so we the taxpayers can make our money back 12 miles (or whatever the international water boundaries are) out to sea. We paid for these boats, and we should at least use them!

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 01:14 PM

Das it! Dey going take the SuperFerry some place else.

Shame on Hawaii!:mad:

I say, Shame on Hawaii's Lawmakers.
They obviously did not give this adequate consideration before they jumped into it. As a result, they

a.) are responsible for putting Superferry owners in this position, and also ...
b.) show investors around the world how unprofitable it is to do business with Hawaii's Government Institutions.

Can anyone remember the freeway project where work was being done at two different ends of the freeway?
...and when it was almost done, the point at where the two ends were supposed to meet was on two separate planes?

How about the UH softball stadium that was "unsuitable" because the seating not only forgot to ALLOW for a view of the playing field, but it actually OBSTRUCTED the view of the field?

Add:

HNL airport contracts,
Ewa Villages Projects,
liquor commission inspectors,
a bunch of crooked politicians (Andy Mirikitani, Rene Mansho, Marshal Ige),
and a few ruthless union thugs ( http://starbulletin.com/2002/11/20/news/story1.html )

...then shake well, and pour contents into a bowl.

There, you have it:

Hawaii's public business environment!

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 01:16 PM

They should refurbish the inside where the cars go and make it a floating casino so we the taxpayers can make our money back 12 miles (or whatever the international water boundaries are) out to sea. We paid for these boats, and we should at least use them!

We didn't really pay for the boats, the feds did so the rest of America owns a piece of it too. We do however, own the barges. Maybe floating casinos 12 miles out?

LikaNui

October 9th, 2007, 01:20 PM

While some were responsible for the previous closure, by severely flaming posters with opposing perspectives, rather than staying on topic. No need for high horses here.

That does it. I'm out of here. :mad:

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 01:20 PM

We didn't really pay for the boats, the feds did so the rest of America owns a piece of it too. We do however, own the barges. Maybe floating casinos 12 miles out?

Floating barges 12 miles out to sea doesn't sound like my idea of a fun boat ride. A lot of people will get sick I bet.

If the Superferry was to leave the state, it could move homeless/non-homeless people who wanted to leave Hawaii really fast wherever it was going. Like the FedEx of boats!

helen

October 9th, 2007, 01:29 PM

If the Superferry was to leave the state, it could move homeless/non-homeless people who wanted to leave Hawaii really fast wherever it was going.
I don't think it could do that. It doesn't have the on-board facilities to handle a lot of people that are going to stay on board for more than a day.

Kittrick

October 9th, 2007, 01:34 PM

I don't think it could do that. It doesn't have the on-board facilities to handle a lot of people that are going to stay on board for more than a day.

Plus, if the SuperFerry ran out of toilet paper or coffee during the trip would seriously be a bad thing! Especially if they were going far.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 01:44 PM

Whenever seemingly "bad" things happen, I always think that they happen for a reason (same thing with "good" things). In this case, the good that is coming out of this is that the State has finally committed to do an EA on ALL the commercial boat harbors in the State, which means that the next enterprise that proposes a ferry system for the State (and I don't doubt there WILL be another one if not HSF, because the need has been expressed and demonstrated) will know what is expected prior to starting business. And best of all, passengers on all islands can be assured that the service is wanted and well planned for. I really don't think a big tent and Porta Potties is sufficient for a ferry terminal, I don't care which island you're talking about.

If the Legislature is called into special session (which I can almost guarantee) and if they approve the action that they should have approved during the regular session (to let HSF run during the EA process), I don't doubt that Isaac Hall on Maui will be before the Hawai'i State Supreme Court again with another request for a preliminary injunction, which will tie the whole issue up for god knows how long.

I really believe that Judge Cardoza did his best to be fair and to interpret the State laws in a fair manner. He sounded very tortured when he said that he realized what a huge economic impact his decision would make, but he also said no one---from the State, to HSF to the groups on Maui---disagreed that protecting the environment was important.

Miulang

P.S. Even after the State was told it had misinterpreted HRS343, they are still doing the same kinds of things in other places in Hawai'i. This Friday, there is a hearing regarding exempting Kukui Gardens from having to do an environmental assessment prior to any proposed redevelopment. When are the public servants going to learn their lesson?

zztype

October 9th, 2007, 01:46 PM

I don't understand why the Superferry people didn't bother to do the EIS for all islands it was going to ahead of the boats arrival or when they were being built or even before that.

Because the state told them they didn't have to.

And, I repeat, yet again, it is just another boat. Nothing different. Why should only ONE boat, among THOUSANDS be required to comply with the law? Why not the thousands, too?

If the judge ruled that everybody who uses harbor facilities (Hey, the state built those other piers, too.) had to do this, then there would be no room for criticism. But this is being applied to only one boat. The rest can continue to operate with impunity.

Not fair.

TuNnL

October 9th, 2007, 01:59 PM

If the judge ruled that everybody who uses harbor facilities (Hey, the state built those other piers, too.) had to do this, then there would be no room for criticism.That's a rediculous oversimplification of the issues, zztype. Not EVERYBODY has a Superferry that requires $40 million harbor improvements just to accomodate it. :rolleyes: (in fact most people don’t even have a boat half that size)

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 02:03 PM

If the judge ruled that everybody who uses harbor facilities (Hey, the state built those other piers, too.) had to do this, then there would be no room for criticism. But this is being applied to only one boat. The rest can continue to operate with impunity.

Not fair.
The problem is, he could only hand down a decision regarding Kahului Harbor and HSF. If HSF wants to sail, legally there's no reason why it can't go to Nawiliwili, except for incurring the wrath of the protestors, who, because of the Maui decision, will feel even more empowered and would turn out in greater numbers than ever. Oh yeah, and HSF saying it's all or nothing---no Maui, no Kaua'i either.

And I think the Legislature is finally getting it that they can't be loosey goosey about enforcing the laws anymore. They are commissioning a study on the impact of the cruise industry on Hawai'i to be conducted at the same time that they do the EA on the harbors. Next will come YB and Matson, unless the Legislature decides to revert to its passive/aggressive old ways. What the Maui hearing brought out was that yes, YB and Matson also need to be monitored more closely for the invasive species issue (whale strikes weren't an issue because the barges and cruise liners would never go as fast as HSF was proposing).

If the soon-to-be-laid off HSF employees are willing to leave the state for a job, I'm sure Hornblower (the company that actually hired most of the staff) would be able to find them good jobs on CONUS, since they are already trained.

Miulang

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 02:05 PM

P.S. Even after the State was told it had misinterpreted HRS343, they are still doing the same kinds of things in other places in Hawai'i. This Friday, there is a hearing regarding exempting Kukui Gardens from having to do an environmental assessment prior to any proposed redevelopment. When are the public servants going to learn their lesson?

Because HRS343 still permits it. :D

No good has come out of this at all. If a legislative session revised and cleaned up 343 of any ambiguity, then yes, some good came. But more bad occurred than good. You probably will not see any massive investment like go! or HSF for a very long time. It will still be the old boys club.

Does anyone know if the BC area of Canada can use these ferries? WA state? Otherwise, maybe the military? It be ironic if the Navy took possession and used them in the islands to move stuff.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 02:16 PM

Does anyone know if the BC area of Canada can use these ferries? WA state? Otherwise, maybe the military? It be ironic if the Navy took possession and used them in the islands to move stuff.
Last week, one of the people high up in Army procurement in Hawai'i said if HSF wanted to bid on a contract to ferry personnel and equipment to Pohakuloa and back to Honolulu, they would be welcome to do so. Currently, the Army apparently uses YB. If the Stryker Brigade does end up being permanently stationed in Hawai'i (it's one of 3 finalists), then it would make sense to use the boat for that. But like you said, it would be beyond ironic as one of the protestors' fears would come true after all.:D

BC State Ferries might be able to use it; they lost the Queen of the North (http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/11/24/FerryReport/)last year when it sank It wasn't a high speed ferry like HSF, but a huge ferry anyway. They've got this creaky ferry (I think it's the Queen of Prince Rupert) going between Prince Rupert and Skidegate in Haida Gwai'i that takes 8 hours (overnight) to cross the Hecate Strait. It would probably take half that long if HSF was operating up there and be way more comfortable.

Miulang

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 02:21 PM

But like you said, it would be beyond ironic as one of the protestors fears would come true after all.:D

It would become a self fulfilling prophecy as the HSF then would still ply Hawaiian waters and be less subjected to scrutiny under the protection of the military? Though it might make sense for HSF because then they already have the crews in place so you might avoid laying off the entire 270 staff.

zztype

October 9th, 2007, 02:22 PM

That's a rediculous oversimplification of the issues, zztype. Not EVERYBODY has a Superferry that requires $40 million harbor improvements just to accomodate it. :rolleyes: (in fact most people don’t even have a boat half that size)

Everybody, meaning ALL harbor users, makes use of facilities constructed and maintained by the state. The state owns the harbor, not the businesses that use it. Sure, the state made $40 million in improvements to one pier. But they made hundreds of millions of dollars in improvements in all the harbors so that commercial vessels could dock, load and unload cargo and passengers.

None of those other guys had to stop sailing while an ES was done.

It's just another boat. One among hundreds, maybe thousands, which uses all our harbor facilities, daily, year-round.

zztype

October 9th, 2007, 02:25 PM

Otherwise, maybe the military? It be ironic if the Navy took possession and used them in the islands to move stuff.

THAT, would be a HOOT! ROFL!!!

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 02:26 PM

It would become a self fulfilling prophecy as the HSF then would still ply Hawaiian waters and be less subjected to scrutiny under the protection of the military? Though it might make sense for HSF because then they already have the crews in place so you might avoid laying off the entire 270 staff.

Yeah, wouldn't that be a kick in the pants? A way for HSF to get around all that environmental law stuff is to have it be used solely by the military! Of course, I don't know whether that would be in conflict with the MARAD loan guarantee, though, because I think MARAD money is supposed to be for commercial passenger ferries that could be used in the VISA program in an emergency, not if they are dedicated to military use.

Wherever Alakai ends up, Lehman et al got what they wanted anyway: the trained staff and shipyard facilities in Alabama to build the next generation of Navy warships.

Miulang

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 02:30 PM

Yeah, wouldn't that be a kick in the pants? A way for HSF to get around all that environmental law stuff is to have it be used solely by the military! Of course, I don't know whether that would be in conflict with the MARAD loan guarantee, though, because I think MARAD money is supposed to be for commercial passenger ferries that could be used in the VISA program in an emergency, not if they are dedicated to military use.

Not if the HSF pulls the plug and goes into loan default. Then the military picks it up for pennies to the dollar, repaints it to camo colors, and contracts the crew back from Hornblower with necessary security clearance. Voila, MARAD obligations fulfilled and nullified.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 02:34 PM

Not if the HSF pulls the plug and goes into loan default. Then the military picks it up for pennies to the dollar, repaints it to camo colors, and contracts the crew back from Hornblower with necessary security clearance. Voila, MARAD obligations fulfilled and nullified.
Heh. WestPac2, here we come!:D

Miulang

helen

October 9th, 2007, 02:45 PM

Right now all of the Strykers (http://starbulletin.com/2007/08/02/news/story02.html) vehicles that used to be on Oahu are now in California and after that Iraq. They won't be returning until 2009. By that time whatever environmental studies that need to be done, would be done.

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 02:48 PM

I think it's a shame that with all of that space, no one even bothered to put fishing poles on the back of the ship.

I'll bet they don't even have a bar on-board.

What a waste!

[edit]
I was wrong. They DO have a bar.
http://www.hawaiisuperferry.com/the-experience/premium-lounge/default.html

...still, no fishing?

You would think that they could slow down long enough to catch a few Mahi.

pzarquon

October 9th, 2007, 02:57 PM

Wow. I really like the idea of the feds nabbing the Superferry for their own interisland transportation needs. Some folks would benefit (presuming at least service people and their families could use it), the military would largely benefit, and it would be a lovely stick in the eye of all the folks who protested its much more benign civillian use. Don't like Uncle Kimo bringing his '89 Datsun over to fish? Meet the Stryker brigade!

And as I've said in a previous thread, it'd make a nice dinner cruise vessel (with its own parking!).

But, I figure, it'll head off to Canada or Hong Kong or some other forward-thinking city and become the "Kowloon Superferry," and much more enlightened populaces will benefit from its many amenities.

Leo Lakio

October 9th, 2007, 03:03 PM

much more enlightened populaces will benefit from its many amenities.That may be the harshest outcome of this whole fiasco (if HSF leaves, that is) - not so much the loss of a service that a majority of residents seemed to want, but a huge reinforcement of the belief that Hawai`i is a crappy place to do business. Not just expensive or challenging - but downright hostile, which will discourage other companies and services from trying to make a go of it in the Islands.

I truly wonder how many businesses who may have been considering a move into the Hawai`i market at present will now say "forget it," due to the SuperFerry issue.

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 03:12 PM

Wow. I really like the idea of the feds nabbing the Superferry
... it would be a lovely stick in the eye of all the folks who protested its much more benign civillian use. Don't like Uncle Kimo bringing his '89 Datsun over to fish? Meet the Stryker brigade!

Yeah, I think there was a lot of unreasonable fanaticism on both sides of this issue.

I probably wouldn't have used it unless it was actually cheaper than flying airline & using a rental car, and with the way that things were shaping up, it didn't seem like rates were ever going to be that cheap.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 03:17 PM

That may be the harshest outcome of this whole fiasco (if HSF leaves, that is) - not so much the loss of a service that a majority of residents seemed to want, but a huge reinforcement of the belief that Hawai`i is a crappy place to do business. Not just expensive or challenging - but downright hostile, which will discourage other companies and services from trying to make a go of it in the Islands.

I truly wonder how many businesses who may have been considering a move into the Hawai`i market at present will now say "forget it," due to the SuperFerry issue.
It may not be completely doom and gloom, though. Suppose knowing that the State was concerned about the environment encouraged "green" companies to pursue business opportunities in Hawai'i? If they knew that the business climate was changing from an old boys' club where "money talks and bs walks" was going away? There are ethical companies out there who do want to do good for themselves and the communities they do business in, too. If every business was treated fairly (and it was proven to be true, not just with lip service), it might be appealing enough for some smaller companies to want to make their homes in Hawai'i. Maybe you won't get an IBM or other large corporation to make a beachhead, but the Hoku Scientific and other smaller industries that use few resources might like the idea of being in an environmentally friendly community. The companies that might have second thoughts now about starting business in Hawai'i are the ones who think that money and influence will allow them to circumvent the laws.

That Hawai'i 2050 Sustainability study is a good place to start envisioning things like this. Hopefully this one, unlike the one that was done 30 years ago, will actually have meaning to the citizens and its recommendations are followed.

Miulang

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 03:20 PM

Don't like Uncle Kimo bringing his '89 Datsun over to fish? Meet the Stryker brigade!

That would be an interesting sight. I think those vehicles use solid rubber tires so can't deflate them.

TuNnL

October 9th, 2007, 03:23 PM

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 03:26 PM

That would be an interesting sight. I think those vehicles use solid rubber tires so can't deflate them.
I don't know if I would call them the "next generation" Stryker, but I've seen pictures of the armored vehicles they use in mine sweepring operations now that deflect the impact of those IEDs (I think the ones I saw were being used in Mozambique). They don't even use rubber tires...their tires are 100% STEEL.:p

Miulang

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 03:31 PM

Superferry on 1,000 stolen imu rocks (http://starbulletin.com/breaking/breaking.php?id=6277):

“Superferry attorney Lisa Munger said the resources described by rural Maui residents were not Valley Isle resources, but state resources belonging to residents and visitors.”

What?! Since when? I better take Timkona’s advice (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=141761&postcount=59) and start carrying a concealed weapon. If visitors are laying claims to rocks of native cultural value, who’s to say they don’t start claiming my apartment, car, HD television, etc.?
Everytime I watched the hearing on Akaku, I kept hoping that the HSF team would at least provide a strong counter to Isaac Hall. But I was sorely disappointed not only by statements like the above, but the overall quality of the witnesses for their side. Their whale expert had virtually no experience with Hawaiian humpback whales (he was from Canada and studied whales in the Northwest but not Hawai'i); the Dept. of Ag woman couldn't provide any documented facts to prove her statements, the Chamber of Commerce representative admitted that her opinion was that of the Executive Board only and not the entire membership, and on and on. What's embarrassing is they had two attorneys on their side to the one on the other side, and Isaac Hall still came up with better witnesses and facts.

Miulang

Keanu

October 9th, 2007, 04:29 PM

The Army did not have plans to use the Superferry as a means of transport for the Strykers.

craig foo

October 9th, 2007, 04:37 PM

Keanu says: "The Army did not have plans to use the Superferry as a means of transport for the Strykers."

Yeah sure.

So you know the truth and this is all a lie:

'The Board of Directors of the Hawaii Superferry reads like a roster of revolving door ex-military officials. Like John F. Lehman, former Secretary of the Navy and founder of the investment firm JF Lehman, a company that specializes in investing in military industries with a controlling interest in the Superferry.

Lehman is associated with the Heritage Foundation, the notorious Right Wing think tank that intellectually and politically influenced such anti-Native Hawaiian and anti-environmental groups as the Grassroots Institute, Pacific Legal Foundation and Aloha for All. He is also associated with the Project for a New American Century, the folks that cooked up the illegal and catastrophic occupation of Iraq and a blueprint for U.S. Empire (well, they euphemistically called it “Pax Americana”).

Lehman proudly announced that the Hawaii Superferry would partner with the military as a “Westpac Express” to shuttle Strykers and other military personnel and equipment between islands and beyond. The first Westpac Express was a contract between the U.S. military and the Austal Corporation, makers of the Superferry, to move U.S. military personnel and equipment around Australia and Southeast Asia.

According to testimony from Sean Connaughton, Maritime Administrator of the U.S. Department of Transportation before the House Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces of the Armed Services Committee (March 15, 2007), U.S. taxpayers subsidized $140 million of the $180 million price tag for two Superferries through Title XI loan guarantees. ' ?

Keanu

October 9th, 2007, 04:43 PM

craig foo

October 9th, 2007, 04:50 PM

Kittrick: " I don't understand why the Superferry people didn't bother to do the EIS for all islands it was going to ahead of the boats arrival or when they were being built or even before that. ...

The bottom line is that there was plenty of time for all of the items to be addressed before they were going to start, and in the end the Lingle Administration and the DOT cut the red tape for the things that should have already been addressed/fixed/complete and green lighted the project anyway. We are all going to eat the bill for this blunder."

Superferry did not want to do either an EA or EIS because they knew that opposition would build against their enterprise and above all they wanted the federally guaranteed loan. The Lehman corporate gangsters have likely not yet spent one dime of their own monies. They hedge their bets from so many angles they never loose money; at worst they only make less money than they thought they would. Lehman has been in this kind of business for more than thirty years. He not only knows the ropes, he effectively owns a fair percentage of them, just as he owns Lingle and some Hawaii State legislators.

As for "eating the bill' for another round of corporate welfare fraud and political corruption: that's how America has been and is built. We are eating and we're going to eat the bill for this nefarious project anyway, thanks to Lingle, but we don't have to eat the creature Lingle has thrown onto our plates.

Keanu

October 9th, 2007, 04:51 PM

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. No law should be amended for the benefit of a single business. The Legislature as a whole lacks the fortitude to pass substantive legislation during the regular session but they have the politcal will do do this? :mad:

kamuelakea

October 9th, 2007, 04:59 PM

Hah hah. Gottstu juss laugh at this one. These frauds have done it again for Hawaii.

Must be the only island state, nation, city who actively works to elliminate just one alternative to an interstate travel airplane monopoly.

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. The Legislature as a whole lacks the fortitude to pass substantive legislation during the regular session but they have the politcal will do do this? :mad:

Yes they will because they know the state should have an alternative interstate travel option and because they already spent millions on the harbors.

So I think they will overrule this decision.

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 05:02 PM

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. No law should be amended for the benefit of a single business.

Ain't that just like them!

They could piddle away 30 years while H-3 was under construction, but now they consider it criticle to remedy the superferry issue in special session?

It reminds me of the time the legislature spent $1 million to "study" the aloha spirit ('94 session I think).

I would have loved to have been on THAT research team.

"OH, Look! There it is, over there."

"No, wait! it moved.
There it is. Quick, go catch it!"

Oyi! What a joke.

Lucky you live Hawaii, eh!

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 05:32 PM

The Lehman corporate gangsters have likely not yet spent one dime of their own monies.

Based on this link, the Lehman group came up with $71 million in equity financing and got the $140 million federally-guaranteed loan from ABN-Amro Bank. Then the $40 million loan from the state.

http://starbulletin.com/2005/10/29/business/story02.html

craig foo

October 9th, 2007, 05:34 PM

Keanu: " What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. The Legislature as a whole lacks the fortitude to pass substantive legislation during the regular session but they have the political will do do this? :mad: "

I just hope that during the past month enough Hawaii state legislators have been able to acquire a more appreciative understanding of how consequential Oahu's outer islanders believe this Superferry invasion is to their quality of life. Legislators are in a position to acquire such appreciation where many of the citizens in their districts are not in such a position.

Lingle, her administration, JF Lehman corporate gangsters and perhaps a handful or more of state legislators (where's U.S. Senator Inouye on this? he should be righting some wrongs pronto!, unless he wants to share in Lingle's legacy) created this crappy situation that has set so many Oahu residents against their neighbors.

A legislative special session may be just the opporitunity to bring out the truth about the Lingle administration's shenanigans, if not outright criminality, in this whole affair. We should demand to know exactly how far JF Lehman et al. have been able to breach the public's trust of our elected officials.

zztype

October 9th, 2007, 05:35 PM

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. The Legislature as a whole lacks the fortitude to pass substantive legislation during the regular session but they have the politcal will do do this? :mad:

They have the political will to do what the majority of their constituents want done, if it means their heads in the next election.

Keanu

October 9th, 2007, 05:39 PM

They have the political will to do what the majority of their constituents want done, if it means their heads in the next election.

Did each legislator poll their contituency to get their sentiments on the matter?

There are three types of constituents
1) Those that passionately support an issue
2) Those that passionately oppose an issue
3) Those that don't care either way

I'd say that the majority of voters within a legislator's district, on Oahu anyway, don't care either way.

kamuelakea

October 9th, 2007, 05:58 PM

I just hope that during the past month enough Hawaii state legislators have been able to acquire a more appreciative understanding of how consequential Oahu's outer islanders believe this Superferry invasion is to their quality of life.

Invasion? Where were you guyz in the 50s 60s and 70s when the Plantation Asian Democrats where running hui after hui in order to sell every last bit of beach front land to invaders who build hotels? Once in a while, at the end of the development boom, there were some protests. Except for Molokai, they mostly lost. Read Land and Power in Hawaii.

Now one little boat shows up. And it expects to dock and then LEAVE and it expects to PICK UP as many people and cars as it drops off and yet it is the devil to Hawaii and the environment.

You guys are 30 years too late for protecting Hawaii. It's already been destroyed by the Plantation Democrats.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 06:02 PM

Despite Lehman's comments, the Army does not or should I say did not, have plans to use the Superferry as a means of transport for the Strykers.

Craig, I'm on your side.

As an aside, the Army's draft EIS on stationing the 2/25 Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Hawai'i is still under review, although unfortunately, the EIS process is a mere formality.
An officer in charge of provisioning for the Army made a statement a couple of weeks ago to the Advertiser (http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071004/NEWS09/710040359/1019/NEWS09)that even though HSF was not currently in its plans, that wouldn't necessarily prevent the management from submitting a bid to ferry military personnel and equipment if HSF turned out to be available:

The Army's manager for the Stryker brigade said last night there are no plans to move the combat vehicles between O'ahu and the Big Island on Hawaii Superferry but said the Army could consider the ferry as a commercial contractor in the future.

Ron Borne, transformation manager for U.S. Army Garrison, Hawai'i, said combat vehicles would be moved from O'ahu to the Big Island for training primarily on military transport vessels or commercial barges such as Young Brothers. He said the Superferry could conceivably bid for such work if it becomes available but is not now part of the Stryker brigade operations
Miulang

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. No law should be amended for the benefit of a single business. The Legislature as a whole lacks the fortitude to pass substantive legislation during the regular session but they have the politcal will do do this? :mad:

No, the more irritating part is having the Legislature pass something that could have been passed during the regular session had it not been for Uncle Joe allowing the bill to die in the House Transportation Subcommittee. The Senate did its job and passed legislation that would have allowed HSF to sail while the EA was being done, but Uncle Joe thought it was "unfair" that one private company should be put under this special scrutiny. Heh. Guess what will happen during the Special Session?:p

Miulang

craig foo

October 9th, 2007, 06:16 PM

joshuatree: "Based on this link, the Lehman group came up with $71 million in equity financing and got the $140 million federally-guaranteed loan from ABN-Amro Bank. Then the $40 million loan from the state. http://starbulletin.com/2005/10/29/business/story02.html "

equity financing
Definition
Financing (http://www.investorwords.com/1960/Financing.html) by selling common stock or preferred stock (http://www.investorwords.com/3778/preferred_stock.html) to investors.

I wonder if such stock was sold under an Hawaii Superferry, Inc. banner? I wonder who bought it and with funding from where? With JF Lehman being a private equity cabal like the Carlyle Group I could wonder such thoughts until the Sun goes out.

Thanks for the link joshuatree. It's approaching the second anniversary of the article and it does shed a great deal of light on the false assumptions of many pro-ferryites about many of us opposed to Superferry. We did not just recently come to our position of opposition. The Superferry pushers have known for a very long time that they were pushing something onto a lot of citizens who would oppose their Superferry scheme.

' With financing secured, the company still faces legal challenges mounted by environmental groups that have filed two lawsuits.
Opponents of the service point to concerns over possible effects on migrating whales, conflicts with other harbor users and the transmission of invasive species.
Under a memorandum of agreement signed in September, the company said it would pay the state at least $2.3 million per year for the first three years of operation.
The state would receive $2 per passenger, $4 per private vehicle and $20 per commercial vehicle. However, John Garibaldi, chief executive of Hawaii Superferry, has said based on passenger projections, the company expects to pay much more than $2.3 million every year. Saturday, Oct. 29, 2005 (http://starbulletin.com/2005/10/29/business/story02.html)'

So the State plans to collect the "user fee" monies from Superferry and Honolulu's neighbor counties get the use, get the shaft. No wonder all of Hawaii's non-Honolulu county governments have to tax to death their property owners...it's the only revenue source such counties are permitted!

Keanu

October 9th, 2007, 06:44 PM

No, the more irritating part is having the Legislature pass something that could have been passed during the regular session had it not been for Uncle Joe allowing the bill to die in the House Transportation Subcommittee.

Miulang

I wish I could say more about this but I can't.

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 06:45 PM

Here's an August, 2007 (http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2007/Aug/30/ln/hawaii708300356.html)story about who the shareholders in HSF are:

Its financial backers have invested about $300 million, including $140 million in bonds that the company issued in April 2006.

...Hawaii Superferry's largest investor, J.F. Lehman, has invested more than $1.6 billion in companies in the defense, aerospace, maritime and other related industries.

The investment firm is headed by former Secretary of the U.S. Navy John Lehman, who also serves as chairman of the Superferry.

J.F. Lehman acquired a controlling share in Hawaii Superferry in October 2005 when it invested $80 million in the local company.

State Farm Life Insurance Co. is the company's largest bondholder with a 33 percent stake, according to Bloomberg data. Other bondholders include Raleigh, N.C.-based Stonewood Insurance Co., which owns less than 1 percent of the bonds.

Hawaii Superferry's minority shareholders include Maui Land & Pineapple Co. and Kaua'i-based Grove Farm Co. Executives with local retail developer the MacNaughton Group also are minority shareholders.

MLP and Grove Farm both invested $500,000 apiece (actually, MLP invested $1 million, but sold half the obligation to Grove Farm).

Miulang

Konaguy

October 9th, 2007, 07:47 PM

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 07:53 PM

Another concerning aspect of Judge Cardoza voiding that agreement is possibility that this may open the door for lawsuits against the State of Hawaii. According to John Van Dyke’s opinion here,the state carefully negotiated an agreement that protected them from liability. But now since that agreement has been voided,in my layman’s opinion, it exposes the state of Hawaii to some major lawsuits from HSF and their investors.

http://www.tdn.com/articles/2007/09/17/area_news/news07.txt
I thought the operating agreement with the State included a clause that HSF couldn't sue the State if the reason why it couldn't operate was for environmental reasons? I've seen that mentioned in several places now. Also, I think with the injunction, the PUC's certificate of conveyance may be void too, because one of the stipulations is that all State and Federal environmental laws are observed. So I think HSF may be back at square one.

Miulang

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 08:04 PM

I thought the operating agreement with the State included a clause that HSF couldn't sue the State if the reason why it couldn't operate was for environmental reasons? I've seen that mentioned in several places now.

So, basically, as a partner with the State, you can't sue the State if the State says that you're operating outside of State compliance?

Sounds like ample grounds for appeal based on conflict of interest; the State having superior knowledge.

In the private sector, this could be considered, "Bait-&-switch".

So, contractual or not, the state had superior knowledge and was in a superior position to affect resources and administration measures that directly affect the Superferry.

Leo Lakio

October 9th, 2007, 08:15 PM

If visitors are laying claims to rocks of native cultural valueFoolish malihini. Don't they know bad things will befall them, if they take rocks home from Hawai`i? :rolleyes:

Konaguy

October 9th, 2007, 08:30 PM

Below is a e-mail (http://thekonablog.wordpress.com/2007/10/09/special-session-e-mail-i-sent-to-the-legislature-governor-lingle/) I sent to Governor Lingle and the legislture supporting a special session to help the HSF.

Aloha,

I strongly urge the legislature to have a special session to deal with the Hawaii Superferry debacle. It will be a huge black eye for Hawaii is HSF is forced close up shop and leave Hawaii because of Judge Cardoza’s decision today.

Hawaii’s business climate is already very poor. With HSF being forced to leave Hawaii,it will make things worse. Future potential investors will think twice before investing money here.

What is even worse is the fact taxpayers will be on the hook to pay for the 40 million in improvements to our harbors and the 140 million in MADRAD loans given to the Hawaii Superferry.

Compounding the damage even more is the fact Judge Cardoza voided the HSF’s operating agreement with the Hawaii Department of Transportation. In my layman’s opinion since this agreement has been voided, it exposes the State of Hawaii to lawsuits from the HSF and their investors.

So I strongly reiterate, please have a special session of the legislature, which will allow HSF to operate while a environmental assessment is being done.

Best Regards,
Aaron Stene

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 09:03 PM

Hmmm....the HSF website was accepting reservations for Maui starting Sat. Oct. 13 yesterday. Now if you go to the website, the earliest date you can buy tickets for is Fri. Oct. 26. Wishful thinking on their part that the Legislature can get its act together and actually have a special session by then?:rolleyes: And the latest news release on that website is from Sept. 14.

Miulang

woodman

October 9th, 2007, 09:40 PM

I strongly urge the legislature to have a special session to deal with the Hawaii Superferry debacle.

Are you suggesting that the state legislature reconvene to manipulate the system to undermine a decisions reached by the state judiciary?

Hawaii’s business climate is already very poor. With HSF being forced to leave Hawaii,it will make things worse. Future potential investors will think twice before investing money here.

What is even worse is the fact taxpayers will be on the hook to pay for the 40 million in improvements to our harbors and the 140 million in MADRAD loans given to the Hawaii Superferry.

Those taxpayers will still be on the hook, even if the ferry stays and fails.

Compounding the damage even more is the fact Judge Cardoza voided the HSF’s operating agreement with the Hawaii Department of Transportation. In my layman’s opinion since this agreement has been voided, it exposes the State of Hawaii to lawsuits from the HSF and their investors.

I have not read his decision. I would like to.

Do you have a copy his remarks so we can explore the reason behind this decision?

Miulang

October 9th, 2007, 09:48 PM

Are you suggesting that the state legislature reconvene to manipulate the system to undermine a decisions reached by the state judiciary?

Those taxpayers will still be on the hook, even if the ferry stays and fails.

I have not read his decision. I would like to.

Do you have a copy his remarks so we can explore the reason behind this decision?
The printed transcript of today's decision isn't available yet, but if you go to www.akaku.org (http://www.akaku.org/), you can hear the closing statements directly from Judge Cardoza.

Miulang

joshuatree

October 9th, 2007, 10:57 PM

Does anyone here find it to be flip-flopping on Cardoza's behalf? In 2005, didn't he agree with the State that a waiver is justifiable? And now, because the Supreme Court threw its weight in the other direction, he pulls a 180 himself? It's not like there's any groundbreaking new evidence thrown into the courtroom.

Either way, the damage has been done for all parties. This is straight up a lose-lose situation for everyone.

GeckoGeek

October 10th, 2007, 12:59 AM

And I think the Legislature is finally getting it that they can't be loosey goosey about enforcing the laws anymore.

Enforcing the law that they write and pass? Your not making much sense here. Legally they could scrap the law completely (but then they'd probably face voter backlash.) So, they can do anything they want, as long as it doesn't outrage the voters.

That Hawai'i 2050 Sustainability study

Oh, please. I looked at it. It's nothing more then a omnibus bill for everyone to stick in their pet project regardless of how sound it is in hopes that together it will pass and become policy. And for the lawmakers to feel like they are doing something. It's political glitter.

What irritates me is the fact that the State Legislature will convene a special session to save the Superferry. No law should be amended for the benefit of a single business.

Except what's been done to a single business shows that the courts are not interpreting things the way the Legislature intended.

I just hope that during the past month enough Hawaii state legislators have been able to acquire a more appreciative understanding of how consequential Oahu's outer islanders believe this Superferry invasion is to their quality of life. Legislators are in a position to acquire such appreciation where many of the citizens in their districts are not in such a position.

Oh, I'm sure they do now, thanks to the Star-Bulletin (http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/08/news/story01a.html). Surprised? It appears even Kauai favors the HSF.

Are you suggesting that the state legislature reconvene to manipulate the system to undermine a decisions reached by the state judiciary?

The judiciary doesn't make laws. They interpret them. And if the legislature finds they didn't do a good job the first time around, they can go back and fix up the parts that were unclear.

Now, can someone explain to me what in the heck is so magical about the EA/EIS? It's nothing more then a piece of paper that at best talks about options to mitigating problems. It's not law, it's not binding. It's just information. Somehow, I don't think that would be enough to satisfy the protesters. They are just hiding behind it as a legal obstacle, but it's not their true aim.

Now for me, I think the only real questions left are:
- Can the state get it's act together before HSF sets sail?
- Will the protesters settle down once it starts sailing again?
The rest is just details.

Stay tuned for another episode of "As the stomach turns"

Kittrick

October 10th, 2007, 01:09 AM

If the legislature goes into special session and they vote to save the SuperFerry, they should add additional funds to fit the ship with a few water cannons. Maybe the people on board could plop quarters in it to keep water pressure up as they could spray anything within the "security zone". That would be better than the telescope.

TuNnL

October 10th, 2007, 04:27 AM

It's just another boat. One among hundreds, maybe thousands, which uses all our harbor facilities, daily, year-round....and I reiterate, less than 1 percent of those thousands need a $40 million ramp. :rolleyes:

Pomai

October 10th, 2007, 05:08 AM

Once again, here's another "Plan B" (LN!) option...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2114/1533076118_2467f48d65_o.jpg

Add parasailing, jet skiing, restaurant on the main upper deck, banquet hall/nightclub in the garage deck below and we've got ourselves the coolest (albeit most expensive) "activity boat" coming out of Honolulu Harbor! Change the name and logo to "Oahu SuperCruiser".

I still prefer "Plan A". ;)

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 07:28 AM

Except what's been done to a single business shows that the courts are not interpreting things the way the Legislature intended.

If the Legislature leaves a statute open to subjectivity in such a way, it is their fault, not the fault of the courts. Remember, EVERY word within the Statutes are there either by creation or amendment. Who's to say what the Legislature intended?

HRS section 343-5 seems clear enough to me.

Konaguy

October 10th, 2007, 08:34 AM

Are you suggesting that the state legislature reconvene to manipulate the system to undermine a decisions reached by the state judiciary?

Yes, for reasons I mentioned in my letter.

I have not read his decision. I would like to.

Do you have a copy his remarks so we can explore the reason behind this decision?

Look on the right side of this article http://starbulletin.com/2007/10/10/news/story01.html. The entire ruling is posted there.

woodman

October 10th, 2007, 11:40 AM

I strongly urge the legislature to have a special session to deal with the Hawaii Superferry debacle.
Are you suggesting that the state legislature reconvene to manipulate the system to undermine a decisions reached by the state judiciary?
Yes, for reasons I mentioned in my letter.

Doesn’t it bother you that this notion conflicts with separation of powers?

Would you prefer the rules of government be altered to dissolve this separation?

zztype

October 10th, 2007, 01:24 PM

...and I reiterate, less than 1 percent of those thousands need a $40 million ramp. :rolleyes:

Yep. But the YB needs huge facilities on each island, much larger than HSF. They benefit from all the money the state spent to build their piers and improve the area to make it fit for them to do business there.

Why don't we ask YB to stop sailing while they complete an ES?

The airports require hundreds of millions of dollars a year to build, operate and maintain. Why don't we ask all the airlines to stop flying whenever we do a $40 million terminal upgrade or parking garage?

We don't.

Konaguy

October 10th, 2007, 01:30 PM

Doesn’t it bother you that this notion conflicts with separation of powers?

Would you prefer the rules of government be altered to dissolve this separation?

No, it doesn't bother me. The judiciary interprets laws, the legislative branch
makes the laws. If the laws are unclear or have grey areas, the legislative branch should step in.

joshuatree

October 10th, 2007, 01:41 PM

No, it doesn't bother me. The judiciary interprets laws, the legislative branch
makes the laws. If the laws are unclear or have grey areas, the legislative branch should step in.

I really don't see any conflict in the separation of gov't. Law 343 is a pretty poorly worded law and exemptions have been done in the past so it's not like this is the first time. It's just that there hasn't been as much noise made over it as this time. So it is the legislative branch's role to fix it. The judicial branch merely enforces what the law is at that time. Why else do we have some courts making a decision in one way and courts in the other over similar issues? Because we have some bad laws or sometimes we have new laws that contradict old laws. There should be a fourth branch that focuses on simply cleaning up our law books.

jdub

October 10th, 2007, 02:36 PM

Forgive me for not studying this prodigious thread more thoroughly, but I've seen enough coverage of this debacle, this fiasco and this affront to the sensibilities of anyone willing to see both sides of an issue to actually read any more about it. I've been writing about it since day one.

I just want to say that I'm embarassed, and I mean that in the truest sense of the word. If I were John Garibaldi, I'd file a lawsuit against the State DOT, pack my bags and burn in a dumpster the corpse of what was once a fine idea. And I'd never look back. I've always been proud to have been raised in Hawai'i Nei, and I'm as close now to being ashamed of it as ever I have.

Auntie's absolutely right. Shame.

Leo Lakio

October 10th, 2007, 02:52 PM

Nicely summarized, Jamie, thank you.

helen

October 10th, 2007, 03:51 PM

If I were John Garibaldi, I'd file a lawsuit against the State DOT

Why? It wasn't the State DOT that was filing injunctions in Maui to stop it from docking there or it's workers jumping in the water on Kauai to prevent the ship from docking there.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 03:59 PM

From the comments I've been reading from the Neighbor Island legislators, most are loathe to consider going into special session just to bail out HSF. It sounds like the Gov. will have to be the one to convene the Special Session because the leadership of both houses of the Legislature don't sound convinced that this is a good idea.

If a Special Session is called though, some interesting alternatives might come out of it: one legislator was thinking about sponsoring a proposal to allow HSF to just be used to help ease the traffic congestion on Oahu while the EA was being done, so that the boat would stay in Hawai'i. A more likely resolution will be to allow the boat to operate, but under some restrictions, like a slower speed and more thorough inspection/cleaning of the undercarriages of cars. This is what I expected Judge Cardoza to order yesterday, but he didn't.

The big question is would HSF agree to travelling at less than 35 kts (like at the 15 kts NOAA recommends)? That would probably add a couple of hours to a trip, which would make being on a boat in the middle of the channels in the middle of winter an agonizingly painful trip for some. Another suggestion that has some merit (seems the major objection, other than the possibility of whale strikes, is the shipping of passenger cars which could transmit invasive species) is to allow HSF to sail but with no cars aboard. Would passengers and HSF be willing to do that?

The first whale has been spotted off Lahaina (ironic that it happened yesterday afternoon), so the rest of the whales should be in the area within days. If HSF is allowed to sail, at the very least, they need to follow NOAA guidelines about the speed they should travel at within the primary humpback whale breeding grounds.

Garibaldi wasn't kidding when he said it was a big disappointment for the people of Hawai'i. He's not too worried about the corporation itself: they have all kinds of alternatives: take the boat out of the state, let it be seized by MARAD, lease it out to the DOD...the major investor in HSF, John Lehman (http://www.marinelink.com/Story/ShowStory.aspx?StoryID=203841), got what he wanted: trained people and new facilities at his Alabama shipyard (which is next to Austal) to position his companies to build the next generation fleet of Navy cruisers (littoral combat ships (http://www.austal.com/go/product-information/defence-products/littoral-combat-ship-(lcs))).

Miulang

Leo Lakio

October 10th, 2007, 04:03 PM

If I were John Garibaldi, I'd file a lawsuit against the State DOTWhy?Was it the State DofT that told HSF they would not have to undergo an EA or EIS? If so, that's why.

Though, it doesn't really matter if it was the DofTransportation or the DofEcology or the DofWhateverthefook; if HSF sues, they will be suing the State overall - not just one division.

craig foo

October 10th, 2007, 04:20 PM

Was it the State DofT that told HSF they would not have to undergo an EA or EIS? If so, that's why.

Though, it doesn't really matter if it was the DofTransportation or the DofEcology or the DofWhateverthefook; if HSF sues, they will be suing the State overall - not just one division.

HSF is not going to sue the State. Neither Lingle nor Superferry want ALL of their doings to brought to the attention of a heretofore well-deceived public. But who knows, neither HSF nor the State executive branch (we'll see about the legislative shortly) has shown much good sense in this affair. They are each fully capable of, and obviously stupid enough to be, cutting their own nuts off... at least where there are such appendages.

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 04:29 PM

Leo Lakio

October 10th, 2007, 04:35 PM

Neither Lingle nor Superferry want ALL of their doings to brought to the attention of a heretofore well-deceived public.Craig (and the rest of you) - what do you think are the chances that there would ever be any kind of investigation into how this deal came together, fell apart, whatever? I don't seem to be hearing the voices calling for the State to open up and be more transparent.

I know that State government is a well-entrenched, highly self-protective, "old boy's network" in Hawai`i - doesn't matter if it's Dem or GOP - but I wonder if the newspapers would be the ones to dig the story out? I still remember how shocking it was to read the "Broken Trust" series a few years back - and that was another institution that many thought would be too insular to crack.

craig foo

October 10th, 2007, 05:25 PM

The Governor will not convene a special session if there is no concurrence by the House and Senate. However, I do believe the House and Senate will have enough votes to save the Superferry. Governor Lingle will be in debt to the Leg this upcoming legislative session.

Few people with money are going to babysit their Lexus, Mercedes, or high end vehicle for four or more hours on the Superferry from Kauai to Oahu, or from Oahu to Kauai just so they can use and park their lovely vehicle in a relatively foreign place...then babysit (ie, essentially spend another day above) their personal vehicle on a return trip.

Working class blokes like myself on Kauai are sure not going to be able to take more than a few days off from work to go by way of Superferry to Oahu, or to Maui via Oahu, or to Hawaii Island via Oahu. A round trip with personal vehicle would waste two days just preparing for, and doing transit on the ferry...and that would be if everything went smoothly!

All of the talk about a beautiful view from the ferry while traversing the channel is laughable, even if it were daytime, which it won't be if Superferry crosses the channel from Kauai to Oahu as they planned to do, arriving in Oahu from Kauai around midnight. Some view! Three hours of pitch black and 20 minutes of Honolulu lights...if all goes smoothly, of course....may as well sleep (somewhere?) in one's car until daylight a few hours later. Why keep relatives past midnight or pay for a room for the tailend of a day's worth of occupancy?

The point here is that there is next to zero reason for any socio-economic class of Kauaians to use the ferry, so Superferry would not be generating significant revenue from that angle.

When it reportedly costs the Superferry gangsters at least $650,000 per week when the boat is sitting idle, how much more will it costs when it is operating (r and m, and drinking fuel like a jet plane, but averaging far less than a tenth of a jet's speed) at less than capacity and paying user fees to the State?

For years to come Superferry could avoid paying State and Federal taxes given all of the write-offs they are amassing to date, including no doubt the interests on their loans and bonds. Taxes they don't pay, citizens and businesses have to make up for.

So, from the beginning Superferry has been a corporate/military welfare case, and if allowed to service itself in Hawaii, Superferry can only continue to suck its sustenance from an inexcusably gullible and misled citizenry. And marine Life? What does the majority of Honolulu residents care about that? Apparently nada, nothing.

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 05:45 PM

Garibaldi wasn't kidding when he said it was a big disappointment for the people of Hawai'i. Miulang

Only the people of the ISLAND STATE of Hawaii would want to restrict themselves to the airplane monopoly. No alternatives for small businesses, emergencies etc.

Hawaii is run by monkeys and the people who elected them deserve everything they got over the past 50 years.

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 05:48 PM

I know that State government is a well-entrenched, highly self-protective, "old boy's network" in Hawai`i - doesn't matter if it's Dem or GOP -

What matters is that it has been an essential one party town for 200 years. Hawaiian Monarchy to Republican Haole to Plantation Asian Democrat. No check, No balance, No problem for lucky you live Hawaii.

craig foo

October 10th, 2007, 05:51 PM

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 05:57 PM

So, from the beginning Superferry has been a corporate/military welfare case, and if allowed to service itself in Hawaii,

Wow, a "Working class bloke" from Kauai knows everything about the financial future of this huge business venture. You got it all figured out Craig.

So if you are moah smat then all the accountants and investors (who still could lose millions regardless of any govt. breaks), then just let them run their course like Seaflight and go out of business.

I see the "protestors" in this fight like angry (financially struggling) juveniles (immature) who are throwing a tantrum and not sharing their toys, not because they care about the sanctity of their toys but because they are little and weak and frustrated and angry and so want to take that out on someone bigger (superferry)

craig foo

October 10th, 2007, 06:01 PM

...what ... are the chances that there would ever be any kind of investigation into how this deal came together, fell apart, whatever?

Unless there is a lawsuit or a special session of the legislture, I doubt there will be an investigation. Sewage under the bridge...who's going to chase it?

Lingle, the Maui/Kauai AOL leftovers and their Supernefarious gangsters should be hoping it all blows over as soon as possible and we all get back to the pre-Superferry days of relative lawfulness and forgiveness. Should they want a legislative special session or lawsuits, then perhaps we may see some investigative revelations.

jdub

October 10th, 2007, 06:03 PM

Why? It wasn't the State DOT that was filing injunctions in Maui to stop it from docking there or it's workers jumping in the water on Kauai to prevent the ship from docking there.

Was it the State DofT that told HSF they would not have to undergo an EA or EIS? If so, that's why.
Yep. My understanding is that it was the St DOT that inked HISF into operation.

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 06:03 PM

Why should our State Democratic controlled legislature give a damn about Lingle and her wishes. She has proven herself to be a pawn of interests contrary to the well-being of too many of us.

You go girlfriend. Ass right. We need the good ole days when the Plantation Asians controlled the House, the Senate and the Governor. The good old days when nevah have disagreements in politics cuz everybody was on the same team. The good ole days when Hawaii was being bulldozed over while making Plantation Asians rich. The good ole days when HGEA was almost all Japanese. The good ole dayz that gave state workers the best benefits in the entire USA. The good ole days when most Hawaiians were still too ignorant to even know they been ripped off and so joined the Plantation Asians in the Haole Boogieman parade. The good ole days when stuff got done by who you know, not what you know. Nevah have red tape cuz my couzins bruddahs sistah work in the permit office.

Ahhhh, doze were da dayz.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 06:17 PM

You go girlfriend. Ass right. We need the good ole days when the Plantation Asians controlled the House, the Senate and the Governor. The good old days when nevah have disagreements in politics cuz everybody was on the same team. The good ole days when Hawaii was being bulldozed over while making Plantation Asians rich. The good ole days when HGEA was almost all Japanese. The good ole dayz that gave state workers the best benefits in the entire USA. The good ole days when most Hawaiians were still too ignorant to even know they been ripped off and so joined the Plantation Asians in the Haole Boogieman parade. The good ole days when stuff got done by who you know, not what you know. Nevah have red tape cuz my couzins bruddahs sistah work in the permit office.

Ahhhh, doze were da dayz.
Yeah, doze were da dayz when da politicians could trust that none of their constituents would meddle in their behind the scenes deals. Doze were da dayz when a politician would say, "Trust me" and by god, people trusted him!

Man, am I glad doze days are gone!:D

Miulang

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 06:24 PM

Why should our State Democratic controlled legislature give a damn about Lingle and her wishes.

There is always a give and take in government, Craig. The powers that be in the Legislature will assure the governor that they have the votes to enact legislation, in a special session, that can save the Superferry BUT there will be a price for the governor to pay. There are definite legslative initiatives that the governor will be expected to support during the next legislative session... you see, I scratch your back, you scratch mine. Politics at its finest.

I'm on your side Craig but those that oppose the Superferry (You and I) will be on the losing team for this battle.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 06:34 PM

There is always a give and take in government, Craig. The powers that be in the Legislature will assure the governor that they have the votes to enact legislation, in a special session, that can save the Superferry BUT there will be a price for the governor to pay. There are definite legslative initiatives that the governor will be expected to support during the next legislative session... you see, I scratch your back, you scratch mine. Politics at its finest.

I'm on your side Craig but those that oppose the Superferry (You and I) will be on the losing team for this battle.
Payback's a bitch, isn't it?:p Like selling your soul to the Devil. Besides the HSF question, what are some of the thorny issues that will face the Legislature next session that the Democratically controlled Legislature could get the Governor to cave in to?

I think the only way the Neighbor Island legislators (in the Senate, anyway) would agree to a special session is if some restrictions on the ferry's operation are also agreed to. And I'm not sure HSF is willing to make any compromises. From the very beginning with their management, it's always been "it's our way or no way at all". I suppose the willingness of Garibaldi to make concessions in order to run the ferry will be proof of the company's commitment to run a viable operation in Hawai'i. If he still pulls out of the deal after the Legislature has tried to save the company, who will look worse? The Legislature, the Governor, or HSF?

Doesn't HSF have to start from scratch again with another application to the PUC for a certificate of conveyance, because when the operating agreement between the DOT was voided yesterday, didn't that also void the PUC license too? And this is where it starts getting tricky: In order for the PUC to grant a license, it requires that all federal and state environmental rules are adhered to. Since the HSC already determined in Aug. that the DOT was at fault for allowing HSF to proceed without a proactive EA, wouldn't that automatically make HSF fall under HRS343 all over again? And since the HSC determined that the exemption the DOT used last time was faulty, then a proactive EA is required for approval of the license, right?

Miulang

helen

October 10th, 2007, 06:41 PM

All of the talk about a beautiful view from the ferry while traversing the channel is laughable, even if it were daytime, which it won't be if Superferry crosses the channel from Kauai to Oahu as they planned to do, arriving in Oahu from Kauai around midnight. Some view! Three hours of pitch black and 20 minutes of Honolulu lights...if all goes smoothly, of course....may as well sleep (somewhere?) in one's car until daylight a few hours later. Why keep relatives past midnight or pay for a room for the tailend of a day's worth of occupancy?

This much is true, it would appear that all the talk about scenic views seems to be for the Oahu to Maui route and it's return trip.

I'm on your side Craig but those that oppose the Superferry (You and I) will be on the losing team for this battle.
Are you opposed to it because of the concept of service it offers is flawed or because of how everything was done to get the service here?

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 07:04 PM

Yep. But the YB needs huge facilities on each island, much larger than HSF. They benefit from all the money the state spent to build their piers and improve the area to make it fit for them to do business there.

Why don't we ask YB to stop sailing while they complete an ES?

The airports require hundreds of millions of dollars a year to build, operate and maintain. Why don't we ask all the airlines to stop flying whenever we do a $40 million terminal upgrade or parking garage?

We don't.
Blaine: YB and the airport have both had EA/EIS done for some projects and not for others. This has already been shown in news stories. Both YB and the county airports were in service well before 1973 when the first HEPA laws were enacted. Since 1973, both entities have had EAs done on some improvements and not on others. The ones that didn't get the EAs were exempted by the DOT through their set of exemptions (each department of the State has a list of exemptions they can use). DOT tried to sneak HSF through using the same exemption, but the HSC said that that judgment was faulty because the DOT did not take into account what the potential secondary impacts of a minor modification to Kahului Harbor would be.

Judge Cardoza muddied the waters with his first ruling in 2005 when he affirmed the DOT's decision to exempt HSF from a proactive EA because Judge Cardoza was doing what the DOT did: he was only looking at who would be impacted by the minor modifications in Kahului Harbor alone, so he threw out the lawsuit brought by the Sierra Club and Maui Tomorrow, saying that they were not directly impacted by what happened in Kahului Harbor so they could not sue. Isaac Hall immediately filed an appeal with the HSC, but it took 2 years to finally make it to the court docket. The HSC in August said according to the statutes, any person or entity who believed they would suffer some impact could file a lawsuit. And that's where the trouble started.

I think HSF took a big gamble and lost. In 2005, when the first case was heard, they should have realized that they would need to do an EA eventually, and if they had begun that process at that time, they would have had it completed way before the ferry started service and none of this would have happened. They opted to save the cost of doing an EA (around $1 million, which is what the State is paying Belt Collins to do it now) for the more than $1 million it has probably cost them in lawyers' fees and loss of revenue with the boat tied up. When you undertake a project as costly as this one, why would you want to try to cut corners just to save a few bucks?:confused:

Miulang

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 07:09 PM

Payback's a bitch, isn't it?:p Like selling your soul to the Devil. Besides the HSF question, what are some of the thorny issues that will face the Legislature next session that the Democratically controlled Legislature could get the Governor to cave in to?

No comment, next question!:p

I've already said too much. :eek:

I think the only way the Neighbor Island legislators (in the Senate, anyway) would agree to a special session is if some restrictions on the ferry's operation are also agreed to.

I think it's a forgone conslusion that most of the Neighbor Island legislators (outside of the Big Island) will oppose a special session and I think some of the Niehgbor Island reps will have some support from Oahu but Majority rules. When leadership makes a request, most of the troops fall in line.

From the very beginning with their management, it's always been "it's our way or no way at all". I suppose the willingness of Garibaldi to make concessions in order to run the ferry will be proof of the company's commitment to run a viable operation in Hawai'i. If he still pulls out of the deal after the Legislature has tried to save the company, who will look worse? The Legislature, the Governor, or HSF?

Doesn't HSF have to start from scratch again with another application to the PUC for a certificate of conveyance, because when the operating agreement between the DOT was voided yesterday, didn't that also void the PUC license too? And this is where it starts getting tricky: In order for the PUC to grant a license, it requires that all federal and state environmental rules are adhered to. Since the HSC already determined in Aug. that the DOT was at fault for allowing HSF to proceed without a proactive EA, wouldn't that automatically make HSF fall under HRS343 all over again? And since the HSC determined that the exemption the DOT used last time was faulty, then a proactive EA is required for approval of the license, right?

Miulang

Not if the Leg amends the statute. An amended statute that allows the Superferry to operate without the EA would render the Judge's decision irrelevent.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 07:12 PM

No comment, next question!:p

I've already said too much. :eek:

I think it's a forgone conslusion that most of the Neighbor Island legislators will oppose a special session and I think some of the Niehgbor Island reps will have some support from Oahu but Majority rules. When leadership makes a request, most of the troops fall in line.

Not if the Leg amends the statute. An amended statute that allows the Superferry to operate without the EA would render the Judge's decision irrelevent.
But you also know that Maui Tomorrow and the Sierra Club are not going to let it end there. As in a chess game, there will be another appeal. Would it go back to the HSC, or could it go higher than that, like to the 9th Circuit in SF?

If the Legislature rewrote the law and allowed HSF to be exempted, wouldn't that send a dangerous signal to the business community? And I mean in a positive (for big businesses, anyway) way that if you play hardball, the Legislature will keel over and give you what you want? Is that why all the legislators are kinda wishy washy about going into special session?

Miulang

helen

October 10th, 2007, 07:18 PM

By any chance does the SuperFerry have to pay back the State of Hawaii for a loan? If so then a Special Session could make it so that the SuperFerry can delay paying back the state during the time the EA is being done. This is of couse assuming the SuperFerry is expected to stay for the long term and not pull out in a couple of months.

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 07:19 PM

But you also know that Maui Tomorrow and the Sierra Club are not going to let it end there. As in a chess game, there will be another appeal. Would it go back to the HSC, or could it go higher than that, like to the 9th Circuit in SF?

If the Legislature rewrote the law and allowed HSF to be exempted, wouldn't that send a dangerous signal to the business community? And I mean in a positive (for big businesses, anyway) way that if you play hardball, the Legislature will keel over and give you what you want? Is that why all the legislators are kinda wishy washy about going into special session?

Miulang

If this were a Chess game, the Sierra Club and its allies would be playing without their queen and a bishop... only a matter of time before the King is cornered...checkmate. Superferry wins.:mad:

If the Legislature rewrote the law and allowed HSF to be exempted, wouldn't that send a dangerous signal to the business community? And I mean in a positive (for big businesses, anyway) way that if you play hardball, the Legislature will keel over and give you what you want? Is that why all the legislators are kinda wishy washy about going into special session?
Miulang

I think this is an isolated issue so no, I don't think convening a special session on this issue sets a precedent or dangerous signal to other businesses. This is just cleanup work, and a brilliant opportunity for the powers that be at the Capitol to take the bull by its horns.

cynsaligia

October 10th, 2007, 07:25 PM

Working class blokes like myself on Kauai are sure not going to be able to take more than a few days off from work to go by way of Superferry to Oahu, or to Maui via Oahu, or to Hawaii Island via Oahu. A round trip with personal vehicle would waste two days just preparing for, and doing transit on the ferry...and that would be if everything went smoothly!

eric and i are definitely working class. unless we bought used (maybe a 90s LS400), even with the friend/family discount we could get since we have family working for servco, we wouldn't be able to afford even a lexus IS, much less a more expensive benz or beamer.

that said, we did a cost comparo back in july and i posted our findings here (http://www.hawaiithreads.com/showpost.php?p=154071&postcount=348). note that superferry's fares at the time were undiscounted:

eric and i did a quick compare of travelling to maui in september from a thursday to tuesday and found that if we were to fly go! on the $39 fare and grab the el cheapo econ car (we're talking chevy aveo sized car) on enterprise rental, we'd save about $150 versus riding the superferry and bringing eric's titan.

if we upgraded to a full-sized car with enterprise, we'd save about $60.

paying $150 more to drive the truck for five days on maui would have been worth it. last year, when we went to maui for a similar holiday, we rented a pontiac vibe. it sucked dookie on a stick, esp when negotiating the road to hana. if i remember correctly, if we were to take the mini cooper instead of the titan, the price difference would be even smaller. how fun it would have been to take a cooper to hana--that would have been a ride in itself!

of course, how long the $39 fares will last is anyone's guess. if go! goes, then definitely, for a trip as i described above, superferry would have been much more affordable compared to renting a an economy car plus paying the kind of fares aloha and hawaiian were charging pre-go! (you know, the kind of fares they'll probably charge if and when go! is gone).

*thumbs down*

moreover, i don't agree that we'd waste two days just planning/organizing our vehicle to take it on the superferry. to me, it takes more time to pack our snorkel and/or camping gear neatly in luggage so that it doesn't sully our clothes while making sure our total luggage doesn't weigh more than the limit to take on the plane versus just throwing it in our trunk or truck cab.

of course, you're on kauai; we're on oahu. *shrug*

by the way, on our last trip, the few times it came up that we were from honolulu, mauians were always saying, "right on!" never once did we feel unwelcome or unwanted. that's why i'm so saddened at all the anti-oahuan vitriol some neighbor island folk have spouted.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 07:27 PM

Uh oh...looks the the Gov. is preparing her unified command on Kaua'i to go beyond mano a mano with the protestors on Kaua'i. Ian Lind's blog posted this very interesting little requisition (http://hawaii.gov/spo2/emergency/attachments/emerg88.pdf) from the DOT Harbors Div. for all kinds of riot gear. The req was dated 9-18-2007 and was for "helmets, face shields, body shields, protective body equipment, protective gas mask, etc.":eek:

Combine this with pictures of a lot of CG zodiacs being hidden behind a bunch of cargo containers at Nawiliwili Harbor and it sounds more like the Gov. is planning for a riot like the one that disrupted Seattle during the WTC meeting a few years ago.

Miulang

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 07:29 PM

Are you opposed to it because of the concept of service it offers is flawed or because of how everything was done to get the service here?

Both

I also don't want to see Kauai, the Big Island, and to a lesser extent, Maui, become a surburb of Oahu.

1stwahine

October 10th, 2007, 07:31 PM

Ok..time foa me to get outta Depression! It's getting interesting!:p

BAZOOKAS? Weapons? OMG! :eek:

Auntie Lynn

cynsaligia

October 10th, 2007, 07:33 PM

But you also know that Maui Tomorrow and the Sierra Club are not going to let it end there. As in a chess game, there will be another appeal. Would it go back to the HSC, or could it go higher than that, like to the 9th Circuit in SF?
Miulang

:confused:

not sure how it would happen that this matter would go to 9th circuit. someone please correct me if i am wrong (i'm not a lawyer, but i worked with enough of em): before it would go to the 9th circuit appellate court in san fran for appeal, it would have to be heard in the USDC court in honolulu. in order for that to happen, federal law would have to have some sort of jurisdiction in this matter, and i'm just not convinced at this time that it could. my understanding is that a case can't just jump from hawaii state supreme court to the federal district court system...unless someone comes up with a plausible argument that barring the superferry is unjustly barring interstate commerce or something like that (intrastate commerce is, on the other hand, as far as i am aware, simply a state matter).

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 07:35 PM

Both

I also don't want to see Kauai, the Big Island, and to a lesser extent, Maui, become a surburb of Oahu.

I don't think the majority of Superferry supporters or Hawaii residents want that either. But stopping this boat is a waste of your good energy.

Stop the upzoning of ag land to houses. Stop residential and commercial development. Work with the council and the state. Be ready to fight your cousins cousins who stand to get rich of off the development by selling their land to developers. Be ready to accept that home prices will rise even further than they have been in the past. Be ready to accept that job opportunities will continue to be limited.

I am serious. This is not sarcasm. There are much better ways to stop the other islands from becoming another Oahu. I definitely support that. But people have to be willing to fight and suffer. Molokai is the only half successful model. It has not been easy for them and the fight never ends.

cynsaligia

October 10th, 2007, 07:38 PM

I don't think the majority of Superferry supporters or Hawaii residents want that either. But stopping this boat is a waste of your good energy.

Stop the upzoning of ag land to houses. Stop residential and commercial development. Work with the council and the state. Be ready to fight your cousins cousins who stand to get rich of off the development by selling their land to developers. Be ready to accept that home prices will rise even further than they have been in the past. Be ready to accept that job opportunities will continue to be limited.

I am serious. This is not sarcasm. There are much better ways to stop the other islands from becoming another Oahu. I definitely support that. But people have to be willing to fight and suffer. Molokai is the only half successful model. It has not been easy for them and the fight never ends.

holey effing cow. do any of you see pigs flying somewhere? or is hell freezing over? because, by god, for once i wholeheartedly and without reservation agree with kamuelakea!! aaaack!

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 07:42 PM

holey effing cow. do any of you see pigs flying somewhere? or is hell freezing over? because, by god, for once i wholeheartedly and without reservation agree with kamuelakea!! aaaack!

Correction honeygurl. Ass juss da firss time you admit in public dat u agree wid me. I can feel da energy sometimes an I know you agree but no PC to say.

I catch dat Kamuelakea is like one bad car wreck on H-3, no like look but kannah help.

Aloha Auntie

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 07:46 PM

:confused:

not sure how it would happen that this matter would go to 9th circuit. someone please correct me if i am wrong (i'm not a lawyer, but i worked with enough of em): before it would go to the 9th circuit appellate court in san fran for appeal, it would have to be heard in the USDC court in honolulu. in order for that to happen, federal law would have to have some sort of jurisdiction in this matter, and i'm just not convinced at this time that it could. my understanding is that a case can't just jump from hawaii state supreme court to the federal district court system...unless someone comes up with a plausible argument that barring the superferry is unjustly barring interstate commerce or something like that (intrastate commerce is, on the other hand, as far as i am aware, simply a state matter).
The catch might be the exemption from the DOT that allowed MARAD to give the $140 million loan guarantee to HSF without the required EA. MARAD, as a federal agency, does have the same environmental requirements that the State has under HRS343.

Miulang

P.S. Have you noticed how awfully quiet Dan the Man has been about the whole fiasco? Wasn't he just as big a proponent of HSF as the Gov. was?

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 07:47 PM

For the record. I was PRO PRO PRO "Save Sandy Beach" and "Save Our Surf". I bring that one up because I thought that saving the Ka'iwi Coast was an awesome "David and Goliath" story where the little guys took on the big guys (including Bishop Estate) and WON.

That was a real fight with a real goal and a real need and a real outcome. This one seems funny kine. No smell right.

Keanu

October 10th, 2007, 07:48 PM

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 07:53 PM

Very good points.

Mahalo Brah. Keep up da level headed discussion. Somebody gotta make up for my outrageous emotional outbursts. Serious kine.

craig foo

October 10th, 2007, 07:54 PM

This much is true, it would appear that all the talk about scenic views seems to be for the Oahu to Maui route and it's return trip.
Are you opposed to it because of the concept of service it offers is flawed or because of how everything was done to get the service here?
The concept of service HI Superferries offer is imperiously designed toward pefection, especially control, and, thereby, pathological to popular welfare of whatever county. The manifestation of HI Superferries via the dysfunctionality of the United State's Hawaii (unless its function is to serve corporate america) state government, especially the Hawaii Executive branch, is a forgivable crime of misrepresentaion, but not a tolerable one.

The islands of the Hawaii archipeligo should not be governed by "one man, one vote" Honolulu wins all. Had the states of the United States been set up in such a fashion as the State of Hawaii, the population of New York City would have decided all matters of the nation. Democractically speaking, it has to be apparent that the peoples of Hawaii, the indigenous people of each island, would be better served were Hawaii a nation, independent of, but hopefully able to on good terms with all Mesonorthamerican peoples.

cynsaligia

October 10th, 2007, 07:57 PM

Correction honeygurl. Ass juss da firss time you admit in public dat u agree wid me. I can feel da energy sometimes an I know you agree but no PC to say.

nope.

...and back you go to your usual modus operandi of taking a thread of truth and weaving it into a tapestry of crap.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 08:00 PM

The concept of service HI Superferries offer is imperiously designed toward pefection, especially control, and, thereby, pathological to popular welfare of whatever county. The manifestation of HI Superferries via the dysfunctionality of the United State's Hawaii (unless its function is to serve corporate america) state government, especially the Hawaii Executive branch, is a forgivable crime of misrepresentaion, but not a tolerable one.
Yeah, face it, Craig, Kaua'i, in this scenario, is being treated like the red headed stepchild compared to Maui. Did you notice how Garibaldi insisted that if HSF couldn't sail to Maui that it couldn't sail in Hawai'i at all? Wassup with that? You guys going take that kind of insult lying down? You guys get the most beautiful scenery in the world, good saimin and fried chicken, Tip Top restaurant...what else now? Oh yeah, gridlock on your one, 2-lane road:D

Eh, Maui get ROCKS! Yeah, the best grade for stone walls and imus. We get Krispy Kreme, we get Tasaka Guri Guri, we get Komoda Bakery cream puffs...oh yeah, and gridlock on our 4-lane roads (cannot call 'em highways like get on Honolulu because the speed limit only 50 mph though).

Miulang

helen

October 10th, 2007, 08:03 PM

I also don't want to see Kauai, the Big Island, and to a lesser extent, Maui, become a surburb of Oahu.

The commute times between islands via boat would make that prospect impractical.

So the real underling issue is having a service that allows a person with a car to travel between the islands. Is that your fear? Commuting between the islands is basically a bad idea?

The reason I bring this up is that even though the SuperFerry fails and leaves the state what is to prevent another company to offer the same kind of service? And this time they avoid the mistakes that the SuperFerry did. Do the EA/EIS before starting service, travel at a slower speed like 12 to 15 mph that way they can avoid the whales, make the cruise an overnight experience, be really careful with screening of incoming passengers making sure no invasive stuff comes through. And the real kicker is all the harbor improvements have been done already.

Konaguy

October 10th, 2007, 08:04 PM

I don't think the majority of Superferry supporters or Hawaii residents want that either. But stopping this boat is a waste of your good energy.

Stop the upzoning of ag land to houses. Stop residential and commercial development. Work with the council and the state. Be ready to fight your cousins cousins who stand to get rich of off the development by selling their land to developers. Be ready to accept that home prices will rise even further than they have been in the past. Be ready to accept that job opportunities will continue to be limited.

I am serious. This is not sarcasm. There are much better ways to stop the other islands from becoming another Oahu. I definitely support that. But people have to be willing to fight and suffer. Molokai is the only half successful model. It has not been easy for them and the fight never ends.

It boils down to sustainability. As it stands now there is glut of jobs on most of the islands. But they are all in unsustainable industries.

We need to clean up our business climate here to attract more sustainable industries. Currently it seems investors need to confer with tree huggers
before they invest a dime here.

kamuelakea

October 10th, 2007, 08:06 PM

nope.

...and back you go to your usual modus operandi of taking a thread of truth and weaving it into a tapestry of crap.

Gaaaaannn Fannit. I thought you was moah smat.

Nevah mind.

Miulang

October 10th, 2007, 08:12 PM

The commute times between islands via boat would make that prospect impractical.

So the real underling issue is having a service that allows a person with a car to travel between the islands. Is that your fear? Commuting between the islands is basically a bad idea?

The reason I bring this up is that even though the SuperFerry fails and leaves the state what is to prevent another company to offer the same kind of service? And this time they avoid the mistakes that the SuperFerry did. Do the EA/EIS before starting service, travel at a slower speed like 12 to 15 mph that way they can avoid the whales, make the cruise an overnight experience, be really careful with screening of incoming passengers making sure no invasive stuff comes through. And the real kicker is all the harbor improvements have been done already.

I think you hit the nail on the head, Helen. Very few people oppose the concept but many do oppose this particular entity and the way the situation developed. The need has been expressed by many people in Hawai'i for this alternative mode of transportation. If the playing field was levelled and end runs like what happened with HSF were not allowed to occur, I have no doubt that another entity would want to try to set up a ferry service in Hawai'i. And who knows? Maybe there will even be a LOCAL company that sets up a ferry line? I have a feeling that the EA that will be done for all commercial harbors is going to generate EISs as well.

For Maui, I really think building a brand new pier away from all the congestion in the current harbor would be the best solution. There is land on the west side of the harbor (Joshuatree and I discussed this here a long time ago) that could be developed. But it would take a significant bit of money to dredge that part of the harbor and build the facilities for the cruise ships and a fer