WE REGRET TO INFORM YOU: We’re still not ready to support- or oppose for that matter- any “county manager” proposal but one thing that was said at the televised “meeting on wheels” of the Charter Review Commission’s Special Committee on County Governance held in Hanalei recently caused us to go back to the drawing board- not only ours but theirs.
That’s because it made us question the legality of the “current” document.
We had received a copy of the latest iteration penned by retired Princeville attorney Walter Lewis- who still refuses to disclose his involvement in the drafting of the proposed charter amendment in his columns in the local paper on the subject- and were all ready to declare it not ready for prime time due to, if nothing else, its legally sloppy nature, leaving many “new” sections in conflict with the remaining portions of the charter
But that may not matter because according a statement made at the meeting by our friend, one of the three committee members, Jan Tenbruggencate:
“We as a committee sat down after receiving the proposed document from the ad hoc committee and we reviewed the charter from beginning to end and made numerous changes to what was proposed.”
Other than causing us to have to go back and read the “new” proposal
before we open our trap it brings up a matter we’d have thought Jan would have considered before, as a duly selected member of a government board, he and the committee apparently went behind closed doors to do the work of the committee.
Although the section of the web site dedicated to the committee doesn’t list agendas for open meetings of the committee we’re pretty sure that the confab where this work was done was not open to the public.
And that would make it a blatant violation of the state open meetings or “sunshine” law.
According to HRS 92-2.5 Permitted Interactions Of Members
(b) Two or more members of a board, but less than the number of members which would constitute a quorum for the board, may be assigned to:
(1) Investigate a matter relating to the official business of their board; provided that:
(A) The scope of the investigation and the scope of each member's authority are defined at a meeting of the board;
(B) All resulting findings and recommendations are presented to the board at a meeting of the board
So far so good. The committee is permitted to do this kind of fact finding. But the next provisions looks bad for compliance with the sunshine law
(C) Deliberation and decisionmaking on the matter investigated, if any, occurs only at a duly noticed meeting of the board held subsequent to the meeting at which the findings and recommendations of the investigation were presented to the board
Any meeting of a board in the state or county must be open to the public with the exception of matters listed under eight provisions under HRS 92-5. But drafting a proposed document- even if by an “advisory” board- is not included in those exemptions.
One person can do it- arguably two. But not three.
The “last” charter commission- the one that in 2006 proposed a list of amendments as part of the “every 10 years” provision in the charter, including one creating the current semi-permanent commission lasting 10 years- did all their work at meetings open to the public.
They had a special appropriation from the council that allowed them to hire an attorney specifically to write up any proposed charter amendments and then they deliberated upon those in open session.
We’d have though Tenbruggencate would know better having been a staunch defender of the sunshine law throughout his career as the Kaua`i Bureau Chief of the Honolulu Advertiser. And perhaps somehow we missed it and the meeting at which they drafted the ‘new” proposal- which we will read and review soon- was duly agendaed and open to the public.
But we suspect that this was a well intentioned oversight that will have to be remedied to be in compliance with state law.
--------
We’ll be traveling into the belly of the beast tomorrow and actually be appearing on “community radio” station KKCR on Jonathan Jay’s program at 4 p.m. as part of a series of interviews he’s been doing on media on Kaua`i.
We have been assured that we will be allowed to discuss anything we want to including, in that context, our thoughts on KKCR itself although we don’t expect to dwell on it.
We’ll be taking calls so if anyone has questions as to local media or county government and issues before the council and/or administration- as well as the history behind them- we’ll be glad to answer them- assuming we know.
We may get to post tomorrow but will not on Friday. If we get busy tomorrow with other things, we’ll see ya Monday.
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
DOLLARS AND NONSENSE
DOLLARS AND NONSENSE: Another day another attempt at journalism by our favorite punching bag Leo Azambuja, purported government beat reporter at the ever-downward-spiraling local newspaper.
But strangely enough his attempt included an effort at some context in describing some of the “legal issues” behind how, as Joan Conrow wrote today “Councilmen Tim Bynum and Jay Furfaro are giving the public the royal shaft with their support of a wholesale legalization of vacation rentals on ag land”.
The problem is that he failed to make any connection between what those who are actually serving the public interest- as opposed to the parade of self-interested, money hungry ag land transient vacation rental (TVR) owners and their shills- were trying to say.
What makes Azambuja’s lack of understanding even more unfathomable is that he actually quoted Caren Diamond saying what anyone watching the public hearing on Bill 2364 knew went to the crux of the absurd legal claims being made by Bynum, Furfaro and the ag land TVR owners’ string of shysters.
“To anyone who’s saying ‘we’ve been legal all along,’ where is the use permit?” she said. “There’s a procedure available, I don’t see why this council acts as if their hands are tied.”
As anyone who has followed the issue for the past decade knows the legislature many years ago set out the land use scheme for TVRs saying that the counties, which do the actual planning and zoning, were supposed to keep single family TVRs in designated “visitor destination areas (VDAs)”.
Since the state law said it, the law was written on Kaua`i to say that yes, TVRs were permitted in VDAs. Although there was no real enforcement it seemed clear enough until some wise guy in the county attorney’s office wrote an absurd opinion that said that although the law said where the TVRs were allowed, they didn’t say where they weren’t allowed- therefore they were allowed everywhere.
This bit of warped logic known as that “Kobayashi opinion” seemed just some off the wall idiocy from the office of Mayor Maryanne Kusaka’s County Attorney Hartwell Blake’s office- one known to write any-kine opinions requested by Kusaka who had been notoriously sucking up to ag land subdividers for contributions to her campaign and pet self-serving “charity”.
Years later the opinion began to be cited by illegal TVR owners to say they “depended” on the opinion to run their TVRs in non VDAs, state law notwithstanding.
But rather than just enforcing the law and letting the TVR owners sue if they wanted to- something that would have settled a matter hugely important to the future of the island a decade ago at minimal cost- the administration and councils refused to do so letting the matter get way out of hand.
When former Mayor and Councilperson JoAnn Yukimura returned to the council people expected her to continue in the “slow growth” bent she had been famous for. But instead of working to enforce the law she set up a “stakeholders committee” that not only delayed the matter for many more years but allowed the TVR owners to get a nose under the tent.
Finally, as the whole camel emerged, the council finally grandfathered existing TVRs in non VDAs in a supposed attempt to stop it there.
And, quite rightly they stated in the bill that no matter what, ag land TVRs were always fully illegal, as a recent attorney general’s opinion reiterates and as many opinions from various and sundry Department of Land and Natural Resources mucky mucks had said over the years.
But now of course after many attempts to somehow legalize the illegal ag land TVRs- including the infamous “non enforcement” bill which would have actually instructed the planning department to not enforce the law- they came up with a way to allow them under a section of law that allows for ag land owners to apply for “special use permits” under extremely restrictive rules- rules that actually were amended a few years back to state explicitly in so many words that, notwithstanding anything else, no overnight accommodations were permitted, in case there was any doubt about the matter.
So let’s go back to the claims that they relied on the Kobayashi opinion- also being claimed in the ag land cases- and so they paid they taxes and ran they TVRs over the years legally.
But if they really relied on Kobayashi and thought therefore they were legal- and legally relied upon that opinion- why didn’t they apply for special use permits which are and always have been available for ag land uses not defined by law?
They can’t have it both ways. If they claim they didn’t apply because they thought they were illegal, well, that takes care of that. If they claim they thought they were legal then they should have applied for a permit before they started using the dwellings for TVRs.
One way or another there’s something fraudulent about the claim that they relied on Kobayashi yet operated without a special use permit.
But don’t expect Bynum and Furfaro to give up. With Chair Kaipo Asing a definite “no” vote there are still four more votes out there and it may behoove the electorate to remind them all that November is just around the corner and for many this and the bill to gut the TVR in non VDAs ordinance is the last straw for “anything goes on land use” councilmembers who kow-tow to the invading money-grubbing-developer hoards.
But strangely enough his attempt included an effort at some context in describing some of the “legal issues” behind how, as Joan Conrow wrote today “Councilmen Tim Bynum and Jay Furfaro are giving the public the royal shaft with their support of a wholesale legalization of vacation rentals on ag land”.
The problem is that he failed to make any connection between what those who are actually serving the public interest- as opposed to the parade of self-interested, money hungry ag land transient vacation rental (TVR) owners and their shills- were trying to say.
What makes Azambuja’s lack of understanding even more unfathomable is that he actually quoted Caren Diamond saying what anyone watching the public hearing on Bill 2364 knew went to the crux of the absurd legal claims being made by Bynum, Furfaro and the ag land TVR owners’ string of shysters.
“To anyone who’s saying ‘we’ve been legal all along,’ where is the use permit?” she said. “There’s a procedure available, I don’t see why this council acts as if their hands are tied.”
As anyone who has followed the issue for the past decade knows the legislature many years ago set out the land use scheme for TVRs saying that the counties, which do the actual planning and zoning, were supposed to keep single family TVRs in designated “visitor destination areas (VDAs)”.
Since the state law said it, the law was written on Kaua`i to say that yes, TVRs were permitted in VDAs. Although there was no real enforcement it seemed clear enough until some wise guy in the county attorney’s office wrote an absurd opinion that said that although the law said where the TVRs were allowed, they didn’t say where they weren’t allowed- therefore they were allowed everywhere.
This bit of warped logic known as that “Kobayashi opinion” seemed just some off the wall idiocy from the office of Mayor Maryanne Kusaka’s County Attorney Hartwell Blake’s office- one known to write any-kine opinions requested by Kusaka who had been notoriously sucking up to ag land subdividers for contributions to her campaign and pet self-serving “charity”.
Years later the opinion began to be cited by illegal TVR owners to say they “depended” on the opinion to run their TVRs in non VDAs, state law notwithstanding.
But rather than just enforcing the law and letting the TVR owners sue if they wanted to- something that would have settled a matter hugely important to the future of the island a decade ago at minimal cost- the administration and councils refused to do so letting the matter get way out of hand.
When former Mayor and Councilperson JoAnn Yukimura returned to the council people expected her to continue in the “slow growth” bent she had been famous for. But instead of working to enforce the law she set up a “stakeholders committee” that not only delayed the matter for many more years but allowed the TVR owners to get a nose under the tent.
Finally, as the whole camel emerged, the council finally grandfathered existing TVRs in non VDAs in a supposed attempt to stop it there.
And, quite rightly they stated in the bill that no matter what, ag land TVRs were always fully illegal, as a recent attorney general’s opinion reiterates and as many opinions from various and sundry Department of Land and Natural Resources mucky mucks had said over the years.
But now of course after many attempts to somehow legalize the illegal ag land TVRs- including the infamous “non enforcement” bill which would have actually instructed the planning department to not enforce the law- they came up with a way to allow them under a section of law that allows for ag land owners to apply for “special use permits” under extremely restrictive rules- rules that actually were amended a few years back to state explicitly in so many words that, notwithstanding anything else, no overnight accommodations were permitted, in case there was any doubt about the matter.
So let’s go back to the claims that they relied on the Kobayashi opinion- also being claimed in the ag land cases- and so they paid they taxes and ran they TVRs over the years legally.
But if they really relied on Kobayashi and thought therefore they were legal- and legally relied upon that opinion- why didn’t they apply for special use permits which are and always have been available for ag land uses not defined by law?
They can’t have it both ways. If they claim they didn’t apply because they thought they were illegal, well, that takes care of that. If they claim they thought they were legal then they should have applied for a permit before they started using the dwellings for TVRs.
One way or another there’s something fraudulent about the claim that they relied on Kobayashi yet operated without a special use permit.
But don’t expect Bynum and Furfaro to give up. With Chair Kaipo Asing a definite “no” vote there are still four more votes out there and it may behoove the electorate to remind them all that November is just around the corner and for many this and the bill to gut the TVR in non VDAs ordinance is the last straw for “anything goes on land use” councilmembers who kow-tow to the invading money-grubbing-developer hoards.
Monday, June 28, 2010
IN THE HOLDING COMPANY OF THIEVES
IN THE HOLDING COMPANY OF THIEVES: Our Friday report on Mayor Bernard Carvalho’s revelation regarding the long delayed- and delayed again- siting of a new landfill didn’t try to make sense of why he was not taking advantage of the seeming lack of any real opposition in Kekaha to “hosting” the new one in the vicinity of the old one.
We wrote:
Despite the willingness of Kekaha to accept the new site- as long as the number of dollars contributed to the “community benefit program” currently designed to bribe them into not complaining over the existing landfill was increased- it may not get sited there afterall... despite what Carvalho said to many last April.
But that was before watching last Wednesday’s council meeting where the host community benefit (HCB) program was on the agenda with a “report” due soon from the citizens’ advisory committee (CAC) purportedly assembled to decide what to do with the $700,000 already in the “fund”.
We’d heard rumbling from the sovereign nation of the Westside that all was not well in dumpsville and that the community was doing what most people do when someone dumps a pile-o-cash in their collective laps- squabble over it.
But the fact is that there is so much confusion as to what CAC’s role is as opposed to that of the administration and Department of Public Works (DPW) that the whole matter seems, shock-shock, designed to fail.
Seems that among the mysteries has been just who is in charge- the CAC or the county. And, despite early assurances to the contrary, guess what the answer is.
Community members- and even some members of the CAC- were under the impression that the money had been “given” to the CAC and in fact they would decide. But the fact is that the money is just sitting somewhere in the budget for the DPW and a recent survey to produce a prioritized list of projects to be funded- controversial in and of itself- is only of an “advisory” nature. And guess who will make the final decision.
Not that it matters because the CAC was appointed by the mayor and is also stacked with county employees- albeit non-voting members- who have pretty much controlled the action and determined what the CAC can and can’t do, as these kind of “advisors” are wont to do.
The survey itself, according to some community members who testified, was anything but a democratic exercise to take a true poll of those who live in Kekaha.
Rather than being an open survey where those polled could decide what projects they wanted, a pre-approved list was distributed and residents were told to choose among the items listed.
But perhaps the most undemocratic part was the fact that the survey was distributed only to homeowners- by hand with CAC members going house to house- and then only one survey per household.
According to testimony that meant that only the head of the household, usually a kupuna, got to fill it out leaving keiki and young adults- the ones who might ask for recreational facilities like skate parks and other things to keep them off the streets- were given no input resulting in a list that was a bit heavy on senior services and mundane projects already requested long ago.
There were also allegations that the CAC had their thumb on the scale with one resident asking how it was possible that one project that wasn’t on the list- but was known to be a pet project of one of the CAC members- ended up on the final prioritized list.
Some councilmembers tried to defend the process with Councilperson Jay Furfaro saying that the county had the fiduciary responsibility so it was necessary that the money not be given to the CAC but held by the DPW.
Chair Kaipo Asing said there was “no problem” at all with anything after Councilperson Tin Bynum questioned why there was no definitive transparent process set up in writing even though the council appropriated money for and the administration hired a “consultant” who was supposed to design a fair and honest one.
According to CAC member Jose Bulatao the consultant merely acted as a “facilitator” at the meeting and in fact the confusion as to where the money was and who was in charge testifies to the lack of involvement of the consultant in setting up a clear and democratic methodologies.
Some suspect that the control DPW is exhibiting has been instrumental in the “first choice” of the CAC being a comfort station at Kekaha Beach Park.
That project has long been on “the list” of future capital improvement projects and that means that really the original comfort station funds will now be freed-up resulting in the use of the money for the next project on the list... presumably one not located in Kekaha.
Bulatao also questioned why t money has to be used for a capital improvement in the first place and not, say, for scholarships for Kekaha keiki- an idea Furfaro said might be possible in the form of a grant given directly to the CAC for a specific proposal.
According to many we spoke with they were originally given the distinct impression that the money would be going directly to the CAC, which according to Bulatao is set up as a 501(c)3 so as to be able to accept the money. As a matter of fact some came to the meeting thinking that the CAC already had possession of the cash.
Assuming the next landfill will be “centrally located” as Carvalho said last Thursday and so won’t be in Kekaha, will the next community to be designated for a landfill site stand for the kind of control the administration has demanded?
Wherever that is and whatever the outcome of this growing debacle, the next area selected would be well advised to “get it in writing” as to what real control they will have over any HCB bucks.
We wrote:
Despite the willingness of Kekaha to accept the new site- as long as the number of dollars contributed to the “community benefit program” currently designed to bribe them into not complaining over the existing landfill was increased- it may not get sited there afterall... despite what Carvalho said to many last April.
But that was before watching last Wednesday’s council meeting where the host community benefit (HCB) program was on the agenda with a “report” due soon from the citizens’ advisory committee (CAC) purportedly assembled to decide what to do with the $700,000 already in the “fund”.
We’d heard rumbling from the sovereign nation of the Westside that all was not well in dumpsville and that the community was doing what most people do when someone dumps a pile-o-cash in their collective laps- squabble over it.
But the fact is that there is so much confusion as to what CAC’s role is as opposed to that of the administration and Department of Public Works (DPW) that the whole matter seems, shock-shock, designed to fail.
Seems that among the mysteries has been just who is in charge- the CAC or the county. And, despite early assurances to the contrary, guess what the answer is.
Community members- and even some members of the CAC- were under the impression that the money had been “given” to the CAC and in fact they would decide. But the fact is that the money is just sitting somewhere in the budget for the DPW and a recent survey to produce a prioritized list of projects to be funded- controversial in and of itself- is only of an “advisory” nature. And guess who will make the final decision.
Not that it matters because the CAC was appointed by the mayor and is also stacked with county employees- albeit non-voting members- who have pretty much controlled the action and determined what the CAC can and can’t do, as these kind of “advisors” are wont to do.
The survey itself, according to some community members who testified, was anything but a democratic exercise to take a true poll of those who live in Kekaha.
Rather than being an open survey where those polled could decide what projects they wanted, a pre-approved list was distributed and residents were told to choose among the items listed.
But perhaps the most undemocratic part was the fact that the survey was distributed only to homeowners- by hand with CAC members going house to house- and then only one survey per household.
According to testimony that meant that only the head of the household, usually a kupuna, got to fill it out leaving keiki and young adults- the ones who might ask for recreational facilities like skate parks and other things to keep them off the streets- were given no input resulting in a list that was a bit heavy on senior services and mundane projects already requested long ago.
There were also allegations that the CAC had their thumb on the scale with one resident asking how it was possible that one project that wasn’t on the list- but was known to be a pet project of one of the CAC members- ended up on the final prioritized list.
Some councilmembers tried to defend the process with Councilperson Jay Furfaro saying that the county had the fiduciary responsibility so it was necessary that the money not be given to the CAC but held by the DPW.
Chair Kaipo Asing said there was “no problem” at all with anything after Councilperson Tin Bynum questioned why there was no definitive transparent process set up in writing even though the council appropriated money for and the administration hired a “consultant” who was supposed to design a fair and honest one.
According to CAC member Jose Bulatao the consultant merely acted as a “facilitator” at the meeting and in fact the confusion as to where the money was and who was in charge testifies to the lack of involvement of the consultant in setting up a clear and democratic methodologies.
Some suspect that the control DPW is exhibiting has been instrumental in the “first choice” of the CAC being a comfort station at Kekaha Beach Park.
That project has long been on “the list” of future capital improvement projects and that means that really the original comfort station funds will now be freed-up resulting in the use of the money for the next project on the list... presumably one not located in Kekaha.
Bulatao also questioned why t money has to be used for a capital improvement in the first place and not, say, for scholarships for Kekaha keiki- an idea Furfaro said might be possible in the form of a grant given directly to the CAC for a specific proposal.
According to many we spoke with they were originally given the distinct impression that the money would be going directly to the CAC, which according to Bulatao is set up as a 501(c)3 so as to be able to accept the money. As a matter of fact some came to the meeting thinking that the CAC already had possession of the cash.
Assuming the next landfill will be “centrally located” as Carvalho said last Thursday and so won’t be in Kekaha, will the next community to be designated for a landfill site stand for the kind of control the administration has demanded?
Wherever that is and whatever the outcome of this growing debacle, the next area selected would be well advised to “get it in writing” as to what real control they will have over any HCB bucks.
Friday, June 25, 2010
WHERE NEVER IS HEARD A DISCOURAGING WORD
WHERE NEVER IS HEARD A DISCOURAGING WORD: When we reported on April 7 that Mayor Bernard Carvalho said he would announce the siting of the new landfill by April 15th according to some- or by “the end of the month” according to the county’s spokesperson- we weren’t too surprised when the deadline came and went without comment by the administration.
It’s been impossible to find out what’s happening in hizzonah’s super-secret world since apparently his selection of the Kalaheo “Umi” site- one that sits smack in the middle of the coffee plantation- was received dead-on-arrival.
We reported that, to the surprise of many, a large number of people in Kekaha including prominent community leaders were actually, if not in favor of, at least resigned to, having the “new” site nearby the current one.
That’s what makes Carvalho’s statements last night on PBS’ Island Insights regarding the new siting even more perplexing and eyebrow raising than they would normally be.
After claiming that the Umi site was, so to speak, dumped in his lap when he came into office- an odd contention considering he made the announcement and took credit for making the long delayed decision at the time- he told of a new super-secret and faceless cabal that is re-reviewing the options.
“We collectively brought a whole team together to see how we’re going to do this” he told host Dan Boylan who asked a question from “Carol on the Westside” regarding when he would make a decision.
Who this “team” consists of is unknown but as anyone who has followed Carvalho’s tenure in county government knows, forming secret decision-making committees has been his modus operandi since his days as Community Assistance Director when he did the same for a few projects including the then nescient bike path.
But there were surprises a plenty from Carvalho last night.
He also said that the “team” was now talking about siting not just a landfill but what he called a “resource recovery park”.
Though he didn’t really explain it fully except to say it would include “education... composting (and) greenwaste”- features of the current and proposed landfills all along- it is presumed that it would include the materials recovery facility (MRF).
In the county’s typical cart-before-the-horse “fire, ready, aim” fashion the MRF will not be built before the new curbside recycling program goes into effect in September leaving the carefully separated recyclables without a destination for sorting, evoking visions of Honolulu’s long delayed trash-shipping bundles stacked up somewhere on Kaua`i awaiting disposition.
And, showing that we’re really no closer to a decision than we were in April- or even in April of 2008 when Mayor Bryan Baptiste was still alive- he announced two things.
First was that “what we really need is a willing land owner (and) a willing community”- something that has actually plagued the new landfill siting process for around two decades showing we’re no closer than we were in the ’90’s.
Then came the stunner. Despite the willingness of Kekaha to accept the new site- as long as the number of dollars contributed to the “community benefit program” currently designed to bribe them into not complaining over the existing landfill was increased- it may not get sited there afterall... despite what Carvalho said to many last April.
He told Boylan that he was seeking “a centrally located area hopefully where this park concept can benefit the island”.
Those who have followed the process lo these many years will remember that the only “centrally located” site designated in past consultant studies is in Kapaia where the decision to site it there in the 90’s blew up in Mayor Maryanne Kusaka’s face when the nearby Hanama`ulu resident claimed “environmental discrimination” based on the then-new power plant also sited in Kapaia plus the predominantly Filipino ethnic makeup of the town.
The upshot seems to be that since Carvalho apparently is facing no serious opposition to reelection this November the massive solid waste problems that have plagued the island since, well, seemingly forever, are now back on the back burner- a place they will remain for, most likely, another four years while we build Mt. Kekaha to the sky, probably spending the time begging the state Department of Health for another “expansion”.
Oh- and Carvalho also said he now favors reviving the interisland ferry concept but this time with “resonating positive energy- forget the negative energy”, describing his vision of a united island community with everyone dancing happily on the conga line to automotive invasion of our roads parks and facilities.
Keep dreamin’- We got ya positive energy right hea, B’nard.
It’s been impossible to find out what’s happening in hizzonah’s super-secret world since apparently his selection of the Kalaheo “Umi” site- one that sits smack in the middle of the coffee plantation- was received dead-on-arrival.
We reported that, to the surprise of many, a large number of people in Kekaha including prominent community leaders were actually, if not in favor of, at least resigned to, having the “new” site nearby the current one.
That’s what makes Carvalho’s statements last night on PBS’ Island Insights regarding the new siting even more perplexing and eyebrow raising than they would normally be.
After claiming that the Umi site was, so to speak, dumped in his lap when he came into office- an odd contention considering he made the announcement and took credit for making the long delayed decision at the time- he told of a new super-secret and faceless cabal that is re-reviewing the options.
“We collectively brought a whole team together to see how we’re going to do this” he told host Dan Boylan who asked a question from “Carol on the Westside” regarding when he would make a decision.
Who this “team” consists of is unknown but as anyone who has followed Carvalho’s tenure in county government knows, forming secret decision-making committees has been his modus operandi since his days as Community Assistance Director when he did the same for a few projects including the then nescient bike path.
But there were surprises a plenty from Carvalho last night.
He also said that the “team” was now talking about siting not just a landfill but what he called a “resource recovery park”.
Though he didn’t really explain it fully except to say it would include “education... composting (and) greenwaste”- features of the current and proposed landfills all along- it is presumed that it would include the materials recovery facility (MRF).
In the county’s typical cart-before-the-horse “fire, ready, aim” fashion the MRF will not be built before the new curbside recycling program goes into effect in September leaving the carefully separated recyclables without a destination for sorting, evoking visions of Honolulu’s long delayed trash-shipping bundles stacked up somewhere on Kaua`i awaiting disposition.
And, showing that we’re really no closer to a decision than we were in April- or even in April of 2008 when Mayor Bryan Baptiste was still alive- he announced two things.
First was that “what we really need is a willing land owner (and) a willing community”- something that has actually plagued the new landfill siting process for around two decades showing we’re no closer than we were in the ’90’s.
Then came the stunner. Despite the willingness of Kekaha to accept the new site- as long as the number of dollars contributed to the “community benefit program” currently designed to bribe them into not complaining over the existing landfill was increased- it may not get sited there afterall... despite what Carvalho said to many last April.
He told Boylan that he was seeking “a centrally located area hopefully where this park concept can benefit the island”.
Those who have followed the process lo these many years will remember that the only “centrally located” site designated in past consultant studies is in Kapaia where the decision to site it there in the 90’s blew up in Mayor Maryanne Kusaka’s face when the nearby Hanama`ulu resident claimed “environmental discrimination” based on the then-new power plant also sited in Kapaia plus the predominantly Filipino ethnic makeup of the town.
The upshot seems to be that since Carvalho apparently is facing no serious opposition to reelection this November the massive solid waste problems that have plagued the island since, well, seemingly forever, are now back on the back burner- a place they will remain for, most likely, another four years while we build Mt. Kekaha to the sky, probably spending the time begging the state Department of Health for another “expansion”.
Oh- and Carvalho also said he now favors reviving the interisland ferry concept but this time with “resonating positive energy- forget the negative energy”, describing his vision of a united island community with everyone dancing happily on the conga line to automotive invasion of our roads parks and facilities.
Keep dreamin’- We got ya positive energy right hea, B’nard.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
I’LL GIVE YOU A RED “S”... AND A BLACK EYE TOO
I’LL GIVE YOU A RED “S”... AND A BLACK EYE TOO: Apropos of this weekend’s “What does it mean to be a haole?” confab and our recent differentiation between the descriptive and adjective-preceded versions of the word, we happened to be perusing the comment section of the local newspaper’s letters to the editor section today and we found this, apropos of nothing.
“spiritualkauaian” asked:
How do you pronounce the name of (our) Island, Kaua`i, now? In the 50's, we (Ha`oles and kama`aina) all spoke 2 syllables: "Cow-eye."
But now the diacritic mark between the a and the i means you're supposed to pause, right? , 3 syllables: "Kau-ah-ee" ?????
Just curious. We'll be there in November and at the least we'd like to get the name of the island right per current Local speech.
Well, at least they’re trying.
But the answer was really trying- of our patience. “Kathmandude” replied:
Kauai is pronounced KA-'WY-EEE with the accent on the second syllable. See you in November!!
Arrrrrrgh.
No- there is only one “i” in Kaua`i. The “Kaua” part- as with any string of vowels in the `Olelo ‘Hawai`i (the Hawaiian language) is a diphthong, as it’s called in linguistics and the string of vowels is always one syllable.
All vowels in Hawaiian are pronounced- none are “silent”. The vowels are all pronounced with a “soft” sound so the “i” at the end is pronounced like the letter “e”.
“spiritualkauaian” had also asked about how to find the `okina on the keyboard was delighted with Kathmandude’s answer to that and the bungled answer to the question of the pronunciation of Kaua`i saying:
Kathmandude: It works! Thanks, er Mahalo. Now I can ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ in Ha‘ole, Kaua‘i and humuhumunukunuku‘apu‘a to my pu‘uwai's delight.
Nooooo- as we said before it’s haole not ha`ole and please stop the idiotic “no breath” explanation of the derivation unless you want to be a “stupid f-ing haole”. And stop using a possessive apostrophe “s” with Hawaiian words. The construction doesn’t exist in Hawaiian which has no verb “to have”.
If in doubt please- look it up. And if you want to learn more about the language it’s easy to do on line.
You don’t need a symposium for that. We haole will never be Hawaiian Supermen but you don’t need an “S” on your shirt to have some respect.
“spiritualkauaian” asked:
How do you pronounce the name of (our) Island, Kaua`i, now? In the 50's, we (Ha`oles and kama`aina) all spoke 2 syllables: "Cow-eye."
But now the diacritic mark between the a and the i means you're supposed to pause, right? , 3 syllables: "Kau-ah-ee" ?????
Just curious. We'll be there in November and at the least we'd like to get the name of the island right per current Local speech.
Well, at least they’re trying.
But the answer was really trying- of our patience. “Kathmandude” replied:
Kauai is pronounced KA-'WY-EEE with the accent on the second syllable. See you in November!!
Arrrrrrgh.
No- there is only one “i” in Kaua`i. The “Kaua” part- as with any string of vowels in the `Olelo ‘Hawai`i (the Hawaiian language) is a diphthong, as it’s called in linguistics and the string of vowels is always one syllable.
All vowels in Hawaiian are pronounced- none are “silent”. The vowels are all pronounced with a “soft” sound so the “i” at the end is pronounced like the letter “e”.
“spiritualkauaian” had also asked about how to find the `okina on the keyboard was delighted with Kathmandude’s answer to that and the bungled answer to the question of the pronunciation of Kaua`i saying:
Kathmandude: It works! Thanks, er Mahalo. Now I can ‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘ in Ha‘ole, Kaua‘i and humuhumunukunuku‘apu‘a to my pu‘uwai's delight.
Nooooo- as we said before it’s haole not ha`ole and please stop the idiotic “no breath” explanation of the derivation unless you want to be a “stupid f-ing haole”. And stop using a possessive apostrophe “s” with Hawaiian words. The construction doesn’t exist in Hawaiian which has no verb “to have”.
If in doubt please- look it up. And if you want to learn more about the language it’s easy to do on line.
You don’t need a symposium for that. We haole will never be Hawaiian Supermen but you don’t need an “S” on your shirt to have some respect.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
DARE I SAY IT?
DARE I SAY IT?: The stereotypical mad scientist of science fiction from Dr. Frankenstein to Dr’s No and Strangelove has always been an almost comic-bookish aberration.
Perhaps that’s why, no matter how much real scientists try to invoke the precautionary principle, the more insanely oriented researchers blithely make decisions that carry the seeds (pun intended) of calamity.
Today’s announcement that the
(t)he state Department of Agriculture is expected to release an environmental assessment today... seeking approval to release a Brazilian scale insect into Hawaii forests to control the spread of the popular but environmentally needy strawberry guava tree
casts Art Medeiros, a research biologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, in the insane “don’t confuse me with the facts” researcher who seemingly has never heard of species mutating.
In the case of the Brazilian scale, although presently it infects only the admittedly invasive strawberry guava, the plant is in the same family as the `ohia lehua an endemic and significant part of local forests.
Of course should the introduction of the scale actually make the guava scarce it doesn’t take a genius to envision a slight evolutionary genetic change that would enable it to decimate the `ohia.
It all pales in comparison with the unknowns of generically modified organisms (GMOs) being cranked out to allow companies like Monsanto to control our food supply- assuming they don’t eventually wipe it out.
But there is hope.
This week the first GMO case reached the Supreme Court and while the court didn’t rule specifically on the dangers of widespread GMO crops it did note that they- as a Center for Food Safety news release (thanks to Joan Conrow for the pointer) says-
recognized that the threat of transgenic contamination is harmful and onerous to organic and conventional farmers and that the injury allows them to challenge future biotech crop commercializations in court.
What’s interesting in reading the whole opinion is that it seems almost a given that irreparable harm can come from GMOs with statements throughout the opinion seeming to indicate that there is no doubt about it with nary a challenge to the contention.
It’s hard to put our hopes on a supreme court whose concept of justice is warped by corporate subservience but it may just be that they can recognize junk science when they see it.
Perhaps that’s why, no matter how much real scientists try to invoke the precautionary principle, the more insanely oriented researchers blithely make decisions that carry the seeds (pun intended) of calamity.
Today’s announcement that the
(t)he state Department of Agriculture is expected to release an environmental assessment today... seeking approval to release a Brazilian scale insect into Hawaii forests to control the spread of the popular but environmentally needy strawberry guava tree
casts Art Medeiros, a research biologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, in the insane “don’t confuse me with the facts” researcher who seemingly has never heard of species mutating.
In the case of the Brazilian scale, although presently it infects only the admittedly invasive strawberry guava, the plant is in the same family as the `ohia lehua an endemic and significant part of local forests.
Of course should the introduction of the scale actually make the guava scarce it doesn’t take a genius to envision a slight evolutionary genetic change that would enable it to decimate the `ohia.
It all pales in comparison with the unknowns of generically modified organisms (GMOs) being cranked out to allow companies like Monsanto to control our food supply- assuming they don’t eventually wipe it out.
But there is hope.
This week the first GMO case reached the Supreme Court and while the court didn’t rule specifically on the dangers of widespread GMO crops it did note that they- as a Center for Food Safety news release (thanks to Joan Conrow for the pointer) says-
recognized that the threat of transgenic contamination is harmful and onerous to organic and conventional farmers and that the injury allows them to challenge future biotech crop commercializations in court.
What’s interesting in reading the whole opinion is that it seems almost a given that irreparable harm can come from GMOs with statements throughout the opinion seeming to indicate that there is no doubt about it with nary a challenge to the contention.
It’s hard to put our hopes on a supreme court whose concept of justice is warped by corporate subservience but it may just be that they can recognize junk science when they see it.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
GOT UGLY?
GOT UGLY?: Not being a Democrat has it’s benefits.
The biggest perk is that while party members have to bite their lip in order to repress chuckles at the more buffoonish character traits and activities of some of their candidates we can partake in full fledged guffaws.
So we got a kick out of news blogger Dave Shapiro’s “exclusive” report on a leaked letter sent by Democratic Party Chairman Dante Carpenter to some party faithful detailing some of the more outrageous posturings of gubernatorial candidate Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann at the recent party convention.
Shapiro summed up the letter-before providing some side splitting details you’ve gotta read- saying that
In a 2 1/2-page letter to Hannemann, Carpenter complained that the mayor and his campaign committee decided not to sponsor a breakfast it was expected to host, “created turmoil” by hosting a competing campaign event that drew delegates away from Resolution Committee meetings, breached an agreement on the time for the mayor’s speech to the convention, ignored the time limit on the speech despite repeated warnings and tried to bamboozle hotel audiovisual people into playing an unauthorized campaign disc after the Hannemann speech.
Hannemann is the kind of “only in Hawai`i” pol whose political ambitions and tactics are so transparently ego driven and devoid of any sustaining philosophy other than increasing his own power that this election season promises to be what normally would be a hilarious skit if it weren’t for the possibility that he might actually win.
His clearly customarily-corrupt campaign-coffer-cramming has his war chest choke with corporate rail contractor’s cash and his chances in the September primary are subject only to the question of how dumb the electorate really is.
With the exception of his regrettable lock-step support of the military occupation of the islands- and the waste of billions in the process- his opponent Neil Abercrombie actually promises a tolerable administration if elected, especially after enduring the eight-year fiasco commonly referred to as the Linda Lingle administration.
While it’s a little too early for us to publicly endorse candidates- with some notable exceptions like our own Gary Hooser in the lt. governor’s contest and Lani Kawahara in our council race- the Mufster makes it easy to find the worse of two evil no matter who he’s running against.
So pop up some corn and enjoy the show. Unless of course you’re a Democrat in which case the best advice we can come up with for you is to duck.
-------
Clarification: Councilperson Lani Kawahara voted against the “Ako” rezoning in Waimea which we mentioned yesterday.
The biggest perk is that while party members have to bite their lip in order to repress chuckles at the more buffoonish character traits and activities of some of their candidates we can partake in full fledged guffaws.
So we got a kick out of news blogger Dave Shapiro’s “exclusive” report on a leaked letter sent by Democratic Party Chairman Dante Carpenter to some party faithful detailing some of the more outrageous posturings of gubernatorial candidate Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann at the recent party convention.
Shapiro summed up the letter-before providing some side splitting details you’ve gotta read- saying that
In a 2 1/2-page letter to Hannemann, Carpenter complained that the mayor and his campaign committee decided not to sponsor a breakfast it was expected to host, “created turmoil” by hosting a competing campaign event that drew delegates away from Resolution Committee meetings, breached an agreement on the time for the mayor’s speech to the convention, ignored the time limit on the speech despite repeated warnings and tried to bamboozle hotel audiovisual people into playing an unauthorized campaign disc after the Hannemann speech.
Hannemann is the kind of “only in Hawai`i” pol whose political ambitions and tactics are so transparently ego driven and devoid of any sustaining philosophy other than increasing his own power that this election season promises to be what normally would be a hilarious skit if it weren’t for the possibility that he might actually win.
His clearly customarily-corrupt campaign-coffer-cramming has his war chest choke with corporate rail contractor’s cash and his chances in the September primary are subject only to the question of how dumb the electorate really is.
With the exception of his regrettable lock-step support of the military occupation of the islands- and the waste of billions in the process- his opponent Neil Abercrombie actually promises a tolerable administration if elected, especially after enduring the eight-year fiasco commonly referred to as the Linda Lingle administration.
While it’s a little too early for us to publicly endorse candidates- with some notable exceptions like our own Gary Hooser in the lt. governor’s contest and Lani Kawahara in our council race- the Mufster makes it easy to find the worse of two evil no matter who he’s running against.
So pop up some corn and enjoy the show. Unless of course you’re a Democrat in which case the best advice we can come up with for you is to duck.
-------
Clarification: Councilperson Lani Kawahara voted against the “Ako” rezoning in Waimea which we mentioned yesterday.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
