Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

[joshuatree]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

Good thinking as usual, JT, except that HSF has repeatedly said that Maui is crucial to their business plan, being a far more desirable destination than Kaui and the Big Island combined.

Well, would it be enough to break even at least? If so, then it's a possibility to at least weather out this quagmire.

And I didn't know this till recently but our Hawaii Senate and House is composed of part-timers? WTF?!?! No wonder our govt sucks. There is no such thing as a part-timer leader. I vote for another constitutional change for the State, a full time Senate and House.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

It sounds like you don’t like Hawai‘i very much, Aaron. You should try living on the mainland for awhile. You might be a happier person.

Hell no, this is home for me. I have no connection to the mainland whatsoever, despite the fact that's where my parents are from originally.

I find it interesting whenever I mention something controversial, the first thing out someone's mouth is "go back to the mainland." This very isolationist attitude
is a huge reason why Hawaii is archaic and backwards.

[Konaguy]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

The problem with starting service to the Big Island now is Kawaihae is nowhere close to being ready for HSF. The October 15, 2006 earthquake severely damaged the pier that HSF was going to use. The last thing I heard was the State was going to build a new pier on the Ka'u end of the harbor for HSF.

I'm not trying to make excuses to try to delay service here. It is just reality we have to deal with at this point.

I've heard the argument that they should service Hilo instead, since the infrastructure is in place. But it is my understanding the rough seas between Maui and the Big Island, along with the longer trip time make this unfeasible.

[Keanu]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

I'm clearly not going to name my sources, but they haven't failed me yet. (Go back to the second page of this thread, where in post #12 I predicted that 270 people would be laid off in the following couple of days. Three days later, 249 people were indeed laid off.)

Your numbers were off by 21, I'm not going to take your word for it.

[Miulang]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

If the law is the law, why were the crosses at Camp Smith and Kolekole forced down but the Japanese Torii Gates in Moilili still standing.

Fascinating history to that...the crosses were taken down because of lawsuits filed for the most part, it sounds like, by a group of aetheists (the Hawaii Citizens for the Separation of State and Church) and because the Army didn't think it worth the expense of going through the trial to keep them standing.

The torii in Moiliili is another interesting case, where your theory, Kam, about Asian plantation politicians rings true. The gate was supposed to be a cultural gift from the people of Hiroshima, but many Asian scholars believe it is also the most visible symbol of Shintoism. That same aetheist group that got the Army to remove the crosses also fought to have the torii removed from public property, but they were unsuccessful in this case.

Miulang

[Leo Lakio]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

And I didn't know this till recently but our Hawaii Senate and House is composed of part-timers? WTF?!?! No wonder our govt sucks. There is no such thing as a part-timer leader. I vote for another constitutional change for the State, a full time Senate and House.

No US state legislature is full-time. Here's how the states break down the work time (source is the National Conference of State Legislatures):

Red Legislatures --- Red legislatures require the most time of legislators, usually 80 percent or more of a full-time job. They have large staffs. In most Red states, legislators are paid enough to make a living without requiring outside income. These legislatures are most like Congress. Most of the nation's largest population states fall in this category. Because there are marked differences within the category, we have subdivided the Red states. Those in Red generally spend more time on the job because their sessions are longer and their districts larger than those in Red Lite. As a result, they tend to have more staff and are compensated at a higher rate. Within subcategories, states are listed alphabetically.
RED: California, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania
RED LITE: Alaska, Illinois, Florida, Ohio, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Wisconsin

White Legislatures --- Legislatures in the White category are hybrids. Legislatures in these states typically say that they spend more than two-thirds of a full time job being legislators. Although their income from legislative work is greater than that in the Blue states, it's usually not enough to allow them to make a living without having other sources of income. Legislatures in the White category have intermediate sized staff. States in the middle of the population range tend to have White legislatures.
WHITE: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington

Blue Legislatures --- In the Blue states, average lawmakers spends the equivalent of half of a full-time job doing legislative work. The compensation they receive for this work is quite low and requires them to have other sources of income in order to make a living. The blue states have relatively small staffs. They are often called traditional or citizen legislatures and they are most often found in the smallest population, more rural states. Again, NCSL has divided these states into two groups. The legislatures in Blue are the most traditional or citizen legislatures. The legislatures in Blue Lite are slightly less traditional. States are listed alphabetically within subcategories.
BLUE LITE: Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Nevada, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia
BLUE: Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming

[Creative-1]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

The dominant argument I hear from neighbor islanders opposing the HSF is about preserving their way of life. They don't want Maui or Kauai to become another Oahu.

That doesn't strike me as an environmental issue. It's a development issue.

So I have some questions about preserving what makes Hawaii special:
1) Given that our population is growing at about 10,000 people a year, doesn't that force us to develop housing and infrastructure?

If there is not enough development, won't the market force up the price of housing? That would force our children away and rich mainlanders and retirees to move in.

2) Can development be focused in Honolulu, as outlying communities and neighbor island activists seem to want?

3) Activists want to keep their areas the same. Is that possible? Or are we forced to choose between what might look like 2 evils?

4) Is there some way to allow development while taking steps to preserve what makes Hawaii special? In other words, is that specialness something other than small communities?

It seems that this makes up the core of opposition to the HSF. It's about development, not the environment.

BTW, in my research into Hawaii history, I've found complaints about losing what makes Hawaii special to be common 100 years ago, 50 years ago, etc.

Will Rogers said: "Things ain't what they used to be and never were."

Bob Sigall

[TuNnL]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

Any legislative solution which in any way would cause HSF to lose money is 100% unacceptable.
It boils down to two options. Option #1 is that the SuperFerry is allowed to operate as planned, and without any restrictions whatsoever, during the course of either an EA or an EIS, or option #2 -- the SuperFerry will leave.
Option #1 is a fantasy, so the only question remaining in my mind is if the SuperFerry will make a show of leaving Hawaii or whether we'll all simply wake up one morning and find that the SuperFerry quietly and permanently left Hawaii in the middle of the night.
Lawsuits (plural) against Hawaii to follow.

I agree with you that Option #1 is a fantasy, LikaNui. What’s in it for the legislature if they approve Option #1? They already got burned by Attorney Gen. Mark Bennett and gang. Why should they bend over backwards to fix a classic Lingle-esque mistake? Better to require a compromise bill that satisfies a majority of residents who polls show want the environment to be protected. Like you said, lawsuits against Hawai‘i — the state, to be exact. Don’t forget an independent investigation into how the deal came about.

[kamuelakea]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

I agree with you that Option #1 is a fantasy, LikaNui. What’s in it for the legislature if they approve Option #1? They already got burned by Attorney Gen. Mark Bennett and gang. Why should they bend over backwards to fix a classic Lingle-esque mistake? Like you said, lawsuits against Hawai‘i — the state, to be exact. Don’t forget an independent investigation into how the deal came about.

TuNnl, you talk like you KNOW Lingle lied or broke the law. Here is her comment from the Advertiser today. I don't know if she is lying or not but do you?

Under questioning from reporters at her news conference, Lingle again defended the administration's decision-making. The governor said she was not aware of any legal advice on Superferry from the attorney general in her file. She also said she was, and still is, a supporter of the Superferry project but had no role in the Department of Transportation's decision to grant the exemption.

Asked whether she has any responsibility for what has happened to Superferry, Lingle responded: "No, I don't. I think we made a decision based on the law at the time. The Supreme Court, for whatever their reason was, decided to wait over a year-and-a-half to reach a decision and to do it two days before this service was set to begin."

[Miulang]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

The dominant argument I hear from neighbor islanders opposing the HSF is about preserving their way of life. They don't want Maui or Kauai to become another Oahu.

That doesn't strike me as an environmental issue. It's a development issue.

So I have some questions about preserving what makes Hawaii special:
1) Given that our population is growing at about 10,000 people a year, doesn't that force us to develop housing and infrastructure?

If there is not enough development, won't the market force up the price of housing? That would force our children away and rich mainlanders and retirees to move in.

2) Can development be focused in Honolulu, as outlying communities and neighbor island activists seem to want?

3) Activists want to keep their areas the same. Is that possible? Or are we forced to choose between what might look like 2 evils?

4) Is there some way to allow development while taking steps to preserve what makes Hawaii special? In other words, is that specialness something other than small communities?

It seems that this makes up the core of opposition to the HSF. It's about development, not the environment.

BTW, in my research into Hawaii history, I've found complaints about losing what makes Hawaii special to be common 100 years ago, 50 years ago, etc.

Will Rogers said: "Things ain't what they used to be and never were."

Bob Sigall

The questions you pose are indeed a conundrum that will need to be addressed soon. On the one hand, everybody agrees that more infrastructure is required to support the existing population, nevermind any future growth. On the other hand, what does make Hawai'i so unique that the latest Conde Nash poll put Maui as the most desirable place in the world to visit, with Kaua'i close behind? Oahu is nowhere near the top 10 in the list. What does that say? If tourism wasn't one of the driving economic forces in Hawai'i, I think the solution would be different. But if enough tourists decide that Maui and Kaua'i are too much like Oahu and take their money elsewhere, what will that do to the economy of the State?

Each of the Neighbor Island councils is grappling with that question right now. There are all kinds of protests being launched against A&B and other developers of Maui to try to slow down the rampant development of former ag lands. The developers are in no way helping the situation because the projects that they propose appear to benefit the rich folk. Even though there are ordinances in place that require a certain percentage of any development to have homes for the working class, how can those people afford "starter houses" that cost over $500k?

The main consideration should be whether the land can support more growth. Central Maui is suffering from a drought and has been for a couple of years now. The County claims that one solution is to build more pipes to tap into the aquifers. The problem is, that work has not yet started, and yet the Planning Commission continues to allow developers to put up more houses. Individuals who want to build single family houses wait for years to get a water meter, and yet until recently, developers had no problems obtaining them. The developers for the most part are not local, so for them it's just make the money and run. The developers are not stupid. They use the laws to their advantage. There are now "gentleman farms" on Maui that are on ag zoned lots. The "farming" that is done would not qualify as farming anywhere else, because basically all the owners of the lots are doing is allowing someone else to put a few trees on them. No farmer could afford the price of those ag lots.

There's also the issue of soil contamination. There were all kinds of pesticides and fungicides used on the sugar and pineapple fields for years and years. What kind of abatement is being done to protect the new homeowners and their families from injury? Part of the Maui Lani development in Kahului is built on landfill. What did the developers do to ensure that all the toxic chemicals, etc. that went into that dump for years won't bubble up to the surface some day? Even if I had a million dollars, I wouldn't want to buy property on a landfill, but plenty of people who don't know the history of that area would think it was a great place to live.

Time to consult the kupunas and get some of their mana'o.

Miulang

[joshuatree]

No US state legislature is full-time. Here's how the states break down the work time (source is the National Conference of State Legislatures):

So doesn't it strike you as a bit odd that we continue to use a part time structure considering there is so much that needs fixing in our state's system? Also, doesn't it seem to be a conflict of interest to have someone serve as a legislative member yet work outside to supplement their income?

I'm all for a full time legislature with high paying salaries to attract qualified, dedicated members. But along with the carrot, comes the stick. Any violations of ethics comes along a severe punishment.

The questions you pose are indeed a conundrum......

Plenty of conundrums to ponder...

1) You don't want to rely solely on tourism since they keep drawing in the retirees and chasing out Hawaii's talented youth, yet people continue to chase away ideas that could generate other forms of economy, ie, this ferry.

2) Neighbor islands complain of overbearing representation in the state's gov't by Oahu. They don't want to become another Oahu but the fact that Oahu has the majority of the population will always mean Oahu has the overbearing representation.

3) One talks about lack of homes and any new homes built are beyond affordable. Yet everybody doesn't want to see high rise, dense development which permits affordable units and has a smaller footprint on the land, thus enabling preservation of open land.

4) People are so hung up on protecting jobs that they literally make the cost of business prohibitive thereby choking the growth of jobs, a downward spiral.

[glossyp]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

So doesn't it strike you as a bit odd that we continue to use a part time structure considering there is so much that needs fixing in our state's system? Also, doesn't it seem to be a conflict of interest to have someone serve as a legislative member yet work outside to supplement their income?

I'm all for a full time legislature with high paying salaries to attract qualified, dedicated members. But along with the carrot, comes the stick. Any violations of ethics comes along a severe punishment.

I prefer our legislators to be regular people with jobs or some other form of income. If they are paid high salaries and do nothing else but tell the rest of us what to do, how can they possibly understand what it is like to live in the community? The nature of politics is corrupting and a full time legislature would further the creation of a class of Mandarins dictating from positions of power. I would rather see term limits. Sorry for the topic drift.

[joshuatree]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

I prefer our legislators to be regular people with jobs or some other form of income. If they are paid high salaries and do nothing else but tell the rest of us what to do, how can they possibly understand what it is like to live in the community? The nature of politics is corrupting and a full time legislature would further the creation of a class of Mandarins dictating from positions of power. I would rather see term limits. Sorry for the topic drift.

I think that problem is resolved by limiting terms. I feel it's corrupting to be in the gov't and having another job on the side. Best example would be to serve in the Senate and to be in the real estate business. That would be outright conflict of interest on any land development issues. Or to bring the topic back on track, what if someone worked on the board for HSF and is serving in the Senate?

[TuNnL]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

TuNnl, you talk like you KNOW Lingle lied or broke the law.

I don’t know where you are getting this, but that’s not what I was trying to convey.

Here is her comment from the Advertiser today. I don't know if she is lying or not but do you?

I don’t. She might believe what she is saying to be true. Whether or not it is, will again, depend on the on the investigation into how the deal came about.

Today’s Honolulu Advertiser brings us closer to the impetus of this scheme.

[1stwahine]

Re: Hawaii Superferry - Chapter 7

heheheh

Slightly "OFF Topic!"

Now I know you gotta give "dong dong" to dee Politicians when you "Lobby" if you like your Bills/Resolutions pass.

Das cROOKED pOLITICS.

Auntie Lynn