Letters From Citizens
Dear Senators:
I was surprised on October 21 when reading the proposed Bill regarding Hawaii Superferry because there were absolutely no protections for the environment, and it placed the responsibility for incorporating any protections in the hands of the Governor.
I am now extremely disheartened with the Legislature regarding S.B. No. 1 S.D. 1, and I question how any legislator could take pride in this document. It completely ignores the facts that were presented in Judge Cardoza's courtroom, as well as judge Cardoza's warning that without an EA prepared prior to Hawaii Superferry beginning service, irreparable damage would most likely be caused.
I have stated in the past that I believe our Legislature did not perform due diligence with regard to Hawaii Superferry prior to allocating $40M for harbor improvements for them.
Over the past couple of years comments and observations by individual legislators have proved to me that I was correct. As recent as last Tuesday at the Kona Senate hearing, two legislators admitted that only within the past week had they looked at the fares and noticed that “the fares are expensive!" Those fares have been available for over 2 1/2 years to anyone caring to inquire.
And in a recent newspaper article, another legislator felt that since folks were concerned that Hawaii Superferry would be traveling too fast for the safety of whales while in the sanctuary, he recommended having them slow down from their slowest speed of 25 knots to 20 knots. Unfortunately, he apparently was not aware that NOAA recommends speeds of 13 knots or less. In addition, this gentleman recommended having a sort of scout boat travel ahead of the ferry itself. If this recommendation wasn't so sad (both for what this means to the whales, as well as for demonstrating the complete ignorance of an issue for which this legislator is responsible) it would be laughable.
As stated in the paragraph highlighted in red below, it appears that our legislators really have not listened during this entire process. Both sides of the issue have been voiced from the very beginning. The first comments I ever heard started with John Garibaldi's statement at the PUC hearing in Waikoloa on 11/18/04, and trust me ~ those were positive comments regarding Hawaii Superferry. I would suggest that the "negative aspects and potential impacts" have been focused on because of the very grave consequences we will face by ignoring them.
"Visiting the ohana", "shopping on Oahu", "increased business for local farmers", and "more commerce" are what I've heard are the positive aspects of Hawaii Superferry.
Well, Senators, the first three will be wiped out once folks face the reality of the fares and schedules.
So that leaves "more commerce": the exchange or buying and selling of commodities on a large scale involving transportation from place to place. That pretty much gets back to big business and leaves out the small farmer, doesn't it? And this is done at the expense of our environment ~ the very reason folks come to visit Hawaii.
West Hawaii Today - 10/4/07 BIG ISLAND ECONOMY SLOWING - TOURISM INDUSTRY CONTINUES TO FLOURISH - Will that be true if whales are killed, fire ants and coqui frogs are on the other islands, shorelines are harmed by Hawaii Superferry's wake, etc.?
It would be interesting to see how many Native Hawaiians testified and what their views were. The Native Hawaiians I heard testify care tremendously about this state, and they want to do what they can to preserve the aloha spirit and the beauty of the islands. They asked for an EIS before Hawaii Superferry begins service. Maybe we should put Mr. Clark in the same room with the Native Hawaiians I know. I guarantee you, there would be some very interesting and enlightening discussions going on. I'm sure we'd all learn a lot and would come away with some pretty remarkable solutions!
Taken from S.B. No. 1 S.D. 1
For all those involved in advocating their positions on this issue, as a starting point to heal the divisiveness, your Committees feel the need to restore the aloha that has made Hawai‘i a unique as a place of welcome, tolerance, and friendliness. To this end, your Committees believe that, to date, most of the discussion on this issue has focused on the negative aspects and potential impacts associated with the operation of the Superferry. Your Committees would like the focus to shift to the positive aspects and consequences that will result from the Superferry's operation. As stated by Mr. Kauila Clark, a testifier who is a Native Hawaiian cultural practitioner, this measure is in keeping with the spirit of aloha, as it will eventually bring families together. Your Committees were moved by Mr. Clark's explanation of how the meaning of the word "aloha" was taught to him by noted kupuna, Pilani Paki, through the use of the word as an acronym for all it encompasses. In Pilani Paki's teachings, the following unuhi laula loa was used:
"Akahai" Meaning kindness to be expressed with tenderness;
"Lokahi" Meaning unity, to be expressed with harmony;
"‘Olu'olu" Meaning agreeable, to be expressed with pleasantness;
"Ha'aha‘a" Meaning humility, to be expressed with modesty; and "Ahonui" Meaning patience, to be expressed with perseverance.
Your Committees believe that these are the true traits of character that express the charm, warmth and sincerity of Hawai‘i's people.
The Native Hawaiian I know would say:
Akahai - How was that shown when Governor Lingle went to Kaua'i with her Unified Command?
Lokahi - How can this be achieved when such a divisive issue such as Hawaii Superferry is being pushed through the Legislature in a 5-day period while the judgment in a legal court case that took over two years to decide and considered testimony from expert witnesses is being taken away from the Plaintiffs?
Olu'olu - How can citizens be agreeable and pleasant when one company and selected elected officials and legislators can have total disregard for the law and our three branches of government?
Ha'aha'a - A humble person would wait to be invited into someone's home (island); not break down their door and trample in.
Ahonui - Maybe the Legislature should step back and take their time to make this very important decision.
(6) Reserve to the Legislature the sole right to review the adequacy of any conditions or protocols imposed by the Governor, and to impose any other conditions or protocols it deems necessary and appropriate to protect the environment and communities to enable the limited operation of the large capacity ferry vessel while the environmental review under this measure is in process
The Legislature was given 29 Conditions that were compiled by folks knowledgable in their fields. Where are those in this document?
(7) Establish an environmental review process for state actions in connection with a large capacity ferry vessel in lieu of but consistent with the requirements of chapter 343, Hawai‘i Revised Statutes, relating to environmental impact statements
You are about to change a law that has served us well for over 30 years! What happened to AHONUI? PLEASE, if you are going to do this, do it in a regular session.
Talk to experts. Read the transcripts from the recent court case. TAKE YOUR TIME!!!! We have so much more to lose than we have to gain by rushing this process.
Mahalo,
Jeff Sacher
Kawaihae, Big Island
Why no showing of support?
Harry Boranian in his letter to the editor (“Majority favors ferry,” Letters, Oct. 23) gives weak excuses for the lack of support for the “super fiasco” at the public hearings and its proposed bailout on Sunday. If there is a great majority of the people in support of the ferry, I would imagine that there would have been more than just the brave two people there to give testimony.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not for or against the Ferry. I’m not an expert in environmental or cultural impact issues, nor do I have the facts to come up with a sound opinion. However, an assessment by independent professionals would clear away the haze surrounding the issue and give people the necessary information to come up with an educated opinion.
While many like me favor another mode of transportation, the issue at hand on Sunday was whether or not an answer to an injustice committed will be supported by further injustice by passing a shortsighted ferry bailout bill. It is our obligation as inhabitants of this planet to keep our governments accountable and in check for any irresponsible decisions they make. While I do not condone extreme and unlawful protests, I do believe in the adage, “When injustice becomes law, then resistance becomes duty.”
Dominic Acain
Kekaha
Reprinted from the Garden Isle News
MY POSITION: Please honor the Court's decision to require an Environmental Review of the HDOT Harbor project BEFORE allowing the Superferry to operate. If you pass this bill, please include the 29 conditions proposed by the Maui delegation (based on the court testimony during the recent trial.)
My testimony is to point out the following 3 separate items.
I. The administration’s bill is immoral, unethical and probably illegal.
For those of you intend to vote for the administration’s cynical bill to bypass the court system, you should be reminded that your vote would be in violation of the Hawaii State constitution which is modeled after the US constitution. Your vote would, in fact, support the administration’s effort to get around the separation of powers between the 3 branches of the Hawaii government and would relegate the court system to an inferior and secondary role to the other two branches. Your vote in favor of the administrations bill would be immoral, unethical and illegal.
I realize that you believe that the majority of Hawaii’s citizens - who live in Honolulu - favor the Superferry and could care less about things like the separation of powers and the supposed equality of the 3 branches of government. They are far more interested in temporarily escaping Honolulu, visiting their families on the outer islands, etc.
You may also believe that getting around restrictions on the Superferry would improve the climate for big business investing in Hawaii. You are probably correct in that all big business will have to do is make big payoffs to the right politicians and the laws will be bent in their favor.
You may also believe that the proposed law to get around the court decisions is just plain clever. I agree - but I respectfully ask you to consider that the concept of the separation of powers between the 3 branches is far more important than the small number of jobs gained by your catering to a single corrupt company like HSF –or even to a legitimate company.
Your passing this outrageous and cynical legislation would go a long way into turning Hawaii into a full-fledged banana republic.
And finally, I have been told that, if the administration manages to get this cynical bill passed, there will be all kinds of legal challenges and the accompanying publicity will make Hawaii look more and more like a banana republic - and those of you who vote for this legislation will be held at fault
II. The Superferry is different than any other vessel that has ever sailed in Hawaiian waters
Several people testified at the Kailoa-Kona meeting that it was discriminatory to require the Superfery to do an Environmental assessment and to not require an environmental assessment from cruise ships, vessels run by Young Brothers, etc. These people do not realize that the Superferry is an entirely different type of vessel than any that has ever sailed before in Hawaiian waters and should be treated as such because of its two bows and extremely high speed. The Superferry is a far greater threat to whales and other marine mammals than cruise ships, freighters, etc
III. Fast ferries - like the Superferry – have already killed lots of whales. A lady testified at the Kailua-Kona meeting that she had done research and could find no evidence that fast ferries had ever killed a whale.
This is totally wrong. Fast ferries have killed lots of whales and there is eye-witness evidence to prove it.
A. From a paper by Panigada, et al. published in 2006 about fin whales killed by fast ferries in the Mediterranean sea: “High speed ferries were introduced into the area in 1996. In the six years following that period they accounted for almost 50% of the total collisions.”
B. From a paper by Weinrich submitted to the International Whaling Comision in 2004. 24 collisions were witnessed during a 10 year period. 11 of these were with fast ferries.
C. Many collisions were witnessed in the waters between Japan and Korea between Jet-foils and whales. Jet foils are lighter and even faster than the Superferry: Collisions with whales have lead to injuries and death to both whales and passengers and lots of newspaper articles.
D. After the Introduction of fast ferries to the Canary Islands in 1989, death and strandings of sperm whales went up drastically. There were no witnesses but lots of bloody corpses at the water's edge.
I can provide detailed evidence on the above 4 items.
Lee Tepley, PhD Physics
Dear Legislators,
I appreciate this opportunity to share my views.
It is totally clear by now that O'ahu "has the votes", but the outer islands DON'T WANT HSF service without the full EA in place FIRST.
What amazes me is that HSF arranged for Legislators to get 4,000 emails supporting their cause, but what percentage of O'ahu voters is that, compared to the percentages of outer island residents who are so clearly NOT in favor of HSF sailing before the EA has been completed and accepted.? The numbers may look good, because, let's face it, HSF has 300+ employees, so all it would take is for each of them to get a dozen friends, and right there, you've got your 4,000 emails. But do they really represent an appropriate cross section of your constituency??
How can you, in good conscience, FORCE this operation on three islands worth of residents who don't want it? All the meetings this week were filled with SWEEPING MAJORITIES of residents against this operation.
250 years or so ago, Kamehameha The Great united these Hawaiian islands, but in one fell swoop, the Lingle administration is tearing us apart. This is SO OFFENSIVE.
Can you honestly say it is fair to let O'ahu FORCE this on us simply because it is that one island's will?? And is it really all of O'ahu's will, or just the noisy crowd of HSF employees and their family members? And yes, a handful of business people who are willing to risk "irreparable harm" for the sake of their own personal gain.
Two court cases have decreed that existing law be upheld, and still our Legislature pushes forth like a big bully with no scruples!!
If you are a member of the Legislature who feels "forced" by Lingle, you are having a direct experience of what it feels like to be a resident of Maui, Kaua'i and Hawai'i.
This is a TRAGEDY for our State that will not be forgiven or forgotten.
I beseech you…
Please do NOT let this be your, or our State's legacy just because the Governor chooses it as hers. Abandon this activity by adjourning any special session that may be called, and let the current law – (and the rulings which support it) - stand.
Mahalo.
Pamela Polland
Aloha,
Mysteriously,
Superferry seems to be getting more attention from Hawai`i’s
governor than homelessness, educational deficits, environmental
degradation, widespread infrastructural overload, affordable health
care, and foreign relations (a rigorously planned trip to south
korea, japan and china cancelled by Governor Lingle!) — all to
protect the bottom line of a corporate entity. For those who didn’t
think the military was the main thrust behind Superferry, the
governor’s ironclad commitment to an unnecessary ferry service over
critical environmental protection and rule of law puts doubt in many
residents’ minds.... Isn’t
it a bit ironic that Superferry has become the main focus of
Hawai`i’s lawmakers and media when so many other issues beg
government attention?
It’s not like
there aren’t enough airplanes to carry people back and forth
between the islands.
Who
asked for a mega-ferry service anyway?
If
Superferry had followed the law in the first place, it might be
sailing today (legally). Superferry
should not be awarded special, above-the-law (or “create-a-law”)
treatment.
Among
other shortsighted claims, Superferry says that the threat to its
employees’ jobs is too great to do an assessment. Well, the
livelihoods and quality of life of an infinitely greater number of
residents (including, the long-term employment of Superferry
employees) and integrity of natural systems depends upon the
protection of Hawai`i nei, its surrounding waters, and the rule of
law.
Will an
appreciation of core environmental and legal issues be overwhelmed by
deep-pocketed, greed-generated, mega-advertising? How
soon does Superferry have to sail for life to continue in Hawai`i
(since it seems like the survival of the planet depends upon them
sailing this week!)? Superferry’s
crocodile tears are like those of the automobile manufacturers in the
‘60s who claimed they couldn’t survive if cars had to be built
with seatbelts.
Already
the rights of law-abiding citizens who spoke out (or who would like
to in the future) for the protection of the environment, culture, and
social structure of Hawai`i have had their rights abridged (i.e., speech,
assembly, access to the shoreline, to name a few). Again,
the question: How
important IS Superferry, and to WHOM?
What
does Superferry have to hide that it so rigorously refuses to follow
the law? Like the
Hokulia development debacle in South Kona, Superferry and its
supporters (on both sides of the political aisle) seem more keen on
having a dragged-out legal battle than than going through normal
channels to do business. When
taxpayer dollars are at stake like they are with Superferry**, an
even stronger case can be made for full disclosure of the potential
harm and risks which the service might pose.
-
When you think of and comment on Superferry, remember the three trucks full of indigenous rocks that were illegally removed from Maui on Superferry’s “maiden voyage” ( discovered, not because of proper inspection procedures being in place, but because of the brave citizens who insisted Superferry follow the law). This theft should give pause to those who understand the potential for further environmental imbalance which particularly threatens Hawai`i Island. Ohia trees, hapu`u ferns, native rock and other natural resources that exist on Hawai`i Island are coveted and fetch high prices by the building and landscape industries of other islands.
- Even potentially more threatening is the introduction of invasive species that already does far more than disturb the sleep of residents. Invasive species introduction severely threatens the natural environment as well as the ecomony (agriculture and tourism) upon which so many depend for their livelihoods. Ants that sting humans and blind pets, frogs that “sing” all night, stinging caterpillars that fall out of trees, palm borers, and diseases that kill entire species of landscape and native plants...these introduced pests already plague some island areas and may be on their on the way to your neighborhood soon. Add boa constrictors, banana and palm pests that can leave Hawai`i istripped of entire species, and who knows what else when entire cars are allowed to pass between islands,.. you get the idea of how potentially critical this single issue is to all island residents.
And
what about Hawai`i Island’s most talked-about pest — traffic
jams?
If
Superferry sails without a full, proper Environmental Assessment,
these questions may not be answered until it’s too late.
Please
support Hawai`i law, and the integrity of the natural environment,
native culture and social integrity of the islands. Come
to Tuesday’s meeting, and write and/or call your government
leaders
Demand
that Superferry sail only after a
proper environmental review has been completed.
Mahalo
for your help,
Janice
I'm sorry that the Coast Guard has been put into the position it has with regard to Hawaii Superferry. I know you folks are there for us, but what took place in Nawiliwili harbor was to be a peaceful demonstration. The presence of uniformed personnel and guns created undue tension. I realize the Coast Guard was simply following orders, and I can respect that. However, since a new security zone is being proposed specifically for Hawaii Superferry in Nawiliwili, I believe the Coast Guard's offer to hold public hearings shows that the Coast Guard is open to hear from all parties concerned. I sincerely appreciate that.
Lt. Adams, our State Supreme Court and the Maui Circuit Court both, after many trials and much testimony, decided that an EA must be done prior to Hawaii Superferry beginning service. Very simply put, I believe the Coast Guard is being asked to break the law. In addition, your organization is being used, not for the good of the people - which is my understanding as to why the Coast Guard exists - but to assist one private business.
I believe the Coast Guard is there to serve the people. By setting up this new security zone, not only are the people being treated as terrorists, but their First Amendment rights are being violated. In setting up this new security zone the Coast Guard is not being neutral, but rather, taking the side of big business.
Hawaii Superferry has become a very divisive issue. Oftentimes issues such as this can be neutralized through dialogue. Your offer to hold public hearings is the opportunity not only for the Coast Guard to hear all sides of this issue, but to afford others a more objective view by also hearing all sides of the issue.
This is also a matter of folks being able to have a say about what happens in their communities. I believe the Constitution was originally set up so that only in something like four extreme cases would the Federal Government get involved; otherwise, State’s rights prevailed. This is the same thing, but on a much smaller scale. The Governor has decided that one business is good for all of Hawaii and that, regardless of what our Courts have ruled, she is going to make exceptions for that company. And in doing so, she is not allowing the neighbor islands to have any input.
It is said, “A body that has no ears to listen, has no head to govern.” Please listen to the concerns of the people so that you can make an educated and enlightened decision as to whether or not this new security zone is right and just.
I do hope you will hold hearings on the neighbor islands so that more voices can be heard in order to help you with your decision.
Sincerely,
Jeff Sacher
Kawaihae, Big Island
Folks, this Act is terrible law. I address the untruths first.
1. By stating that
"Such an occurance is not explicitly contemplated by chapter 343 Hawai'i Revised Statutes and as such the policy should be adopted under the law must be clarified"
you are basically removing all new projects from having to comply with HRS 343. Of COURSE, it wasn't explicitly contemplated - that is why the law was written - to make sure new projects were carefully looked at for potential problems and those problems solved PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF OPERATIONS.
This statement opens the door to every project that comes after HSF to flout environmental law.
It also whitewashes Gov. Lingle's culpability in trying to bypass HRS 343.
2. HSF "would also use technology that would use less carbon emissions than compared with an aircraft carrying the same capacity."
This is nonsense. It uses almost 10 times as much fuel (fuel consumption being related to the cube of speed) as a barge and thus emits 10 times the carbon for transporting freight.
It uses more fuel per passenger than if that passenger flew and thus emits more carbon.
Putting this statement in completely misrepresents the entire picture and leads to a false conclusion.
I address the faster shipping time next since they compare themselves to airfreight (nonsensically).
3. It claims it will assist neighbor islands in transporting produce to 'Oahu. Testimony at the many meetings from our farmers stated that the timing is no good for them (it arrives after the early morning market) and the cost is more since they have to pay a driver and truck to go over, stay the night and come back the next day.
This statement is FALSE.
4. The law is written so that it could be interpreted that ANY interisland ferry can operate without doing an EIS as long as it is really big. Hey -- why can't little ferries get an exemption? Oh yeah, this is a special interest bill that you are trying to disguise.
We all know it is special interest legislation for HSF only since it only lasts until 2009 but what if someone else were to come in before 2009?
5. The law completely takes the people and counties out of the loop in getting the HSF problems fixed, now that it is no longer governed by Environmental Law.
6. It removes the County's ability to require permits for harbor work associated with HSF.
7. The Task force is made up of mostly Lingle appointees except a small minority (3) from the neighbor islands. Why even bother to put those 3 neighbor island people on the Task Force? They won't have any power. They'll always be outvoted. But that doesn't matter because the Task Force has absolutely no power to do anything anyway. It s all for show.
I cannot believe you would pass this blatant special interest bill.
I cannot believe you want huge protest and acrimony between the neighbor islands and 'Oahu.
I cannot believe you want to be responsible for a "Kent State" incident which is so very likely when Lingle sends her "Unified Forces" against the neighbor island protesters. When armed military forces, trained to kill are sent against peaceful, unarmed protesters, the opportunity for a tragedy is all too likely.
I am begging you. This will lead to a very bad end if you act in such a disrespectful manner to the concerns of the neighbor islands.
You can do it because 'Oahu is bigger (populationwise) but that is called bullying. Remember how you didn't like being pushed around just because someone was bigger than you. Now, think how we feel on the neighbor islands.
Please think long term. Long term we don't want to gut our environmental law.
And I guarantee you, HSF is going belly up just like the Hydrofoil, so you'll have compromised your ethics for nothing.
But the environmental damage will have been done and there will be no solvent company to collect from. We'll be stuck fighting the invasive species. Remember California spent a BILLION DOLLARS fighting their invasive species.
At the very least make Lingle PERSONALLY responsible for the unmitigated negative effects. If she thinks it is so great, let her personally get a bond to insure against any negative effects. Or make the HSF post bond on its negative effects. Want to take bets that no insurance company will write the bond?
Please do not pass this flawed piece of legislation.
Sincerely,
Karen Chun
Aloha,
The Senate leadership (Pres, VP) decide which commitees a bill goes to, irregardless of who has jurisdiction. The House Policy Committee decides in the House. The bill may go to one joint commitee on each side. The lead committee decides everything. It is highly unlikely, at least in public, for the committee to buck the chair, or for the non-lead committees to have any say.
There are many ways the bill could die, but they are practically all behind closed doors.
Proponents want us to come up with a ''unified amendment''
Proponents want compromise.
Something that at least a third of the anti-superferry people can agree to. Otherwise, legislators from Maui and Kaui will either have to kill the bill or face the fact that 1/2 of their constituents are mad as hell.
There is on-going litigation. The courts ruled. They violated the law. The must pay the consequences. No amendments. No session. N0 COMPROMISE.
Henry
-- Henry Curtis, Executive Director, Life of the Land, 76 N. King Street, Suite 203, Honolulu, HI 96817. phone: 808-533-3454. cell: 808-927-0709. Web Site: http://www.lifeofthelandhawaii.org/ email:henry.lifeoftheland@gmail.com
Dear Representative,
The news reported back here on the mainland is that you may be contemplating a special session to permit the Superferry to travel between the Hawaiian Islands without an environmental review.
As someone who respects the political process, I am opposed to this for all the expected reasons. The suggested special session is a mockery of the deliberative process of government that people count on to make sure careful decisions are made by elected officials. Add to this a complete disregard for process and disdain for the judicial branch of government that has ruled an environmental impact review is necessary.
Although these are reasonable pleas that together constitute a strong argument for opposing this action, there are other questions I would like you to consider.
* If Judge Cardoza said there is a, "the real possibility of irreparable damage to the environment," shouldn't officials slow down the process, rather than speed it up?
* If Hawaii Superferry is permitted to service the islands, does this pave the way for other companies who will eventually compete with Hawaii Superferry to do the same? If the answer is yes, which it must be, then how much inter-island ocean traffic is this decision allowing and what are those consequences on marine wildlife?
* In addition to facilitating the transportation of people and cars, is it also reasonable to believe the Superferry and its competitors could also facilitate the arrival of species that could be detrimental to the islands, such as causing the mongoose or brown snake to be introduced to Kauai?
I know it seems presently intangible, but I am asking you to consider the future yet unseen, yet unknown consequences of your action. Every Hawaii guidebook tells the amazing tale of the millions of years it took for the islands to be formed and the hundreds of thousands of years it took for a few lucky birds and plants to survive the trans-ocean journey and become an integral player in the delicate island ecosystem. If what took millions of years to create and thousands of years to grow could be destroyed in record time, wouldn't you make the correct decision now to prevent that?
I am done accepting the "permit it now, study it later" rationale. In my opinion, there are too many current environmental tragedies that could have been improved or even prevented altogether with more planning, more studies, and perhaps even a little common sense. I know hindsight is 20/20 -- but what I am asking of elected officials is foresight.
As elected officials, people have entrusted you to make sound decisions for the future. In time, history will tell your story.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Western
Laws shouldn't be changed to suit whims
By Larry Lee, a Kailua resident, is a former member
of The Advertiser's Community Editorial Board and
an attorney. He wrote this commentary for The
Advertiser.
I can live with or without the Superferry, but either way, I do not think that a special session for the Superferry is appropriate or right. We are a nation of laws and not of men. This means that the law should not be bent or changed just to suit the current whims or sentiment of some people, even if they are the majority of people.
The law is intended to apply to all people, the minority as well as the majority. The ranks of the majority and minority constantly shift with each new issue. If each time the majority feels justified to change the law to suit its purposes and wishes, we are reduced to a nation of men, not of law. The law then ceases to protect the minority.
On one issue or another and at one time or another, we will all find ourselves in the minority. It will be a terrible blow to our confidence in our system of government if, as a minority, we felt that the law will not protect our interests because the majority could whimsically change it to suit itself at any time.
Everyone needs to step away from the emotion of the issue for a while and look at the big picture. Putting the Superferry aside, our environmental law was enacted after considerable discussion, work, time and compromise by our Legislature. It has served us well for many, many years and has protected our environment. To change it for the Superferry is a mistake.
A change in the law might suit the ferry now, but may fail our environmental needs in the future. Any change in this or any existing law should be made in regular session if at all possible, with ample opportunity for full input and deliberation and without any sense of immediate urgency. Only in this way can any law truly serve the public as a whole and protect the rights and interests of everyone. A special session, in this case, is very shortsighted.
The urgency surrounding the Superferry, while seeming real at the moment, is not urgent enough to violate our nation's legal principles. While millions of dollars and 308 jobs are important and not insignificant, they become insignificant in the big picture and in view of the damage a change in the law would inflict upon the integrity and public confidence in our system of government.
The money and the job loss will eventually be absorbed by our economy. As a nation, we have absorbed and adjusted to terrible natural and man-made events, which have cost billions of dollars and countless lives. As a state, we have absorbed and adjusted to terrible events as well - hurricanes, floods, strikes, recessions and scandals. These events have involved millions of lost dollars and touched many lives. Somehow, the people, the government and our economy have learned to adjust and move on. But, we survive and move on because of our faith and respect for our system of government and laws.
The Superferry could well have avoided the current situation if the spirit and intent of the law had received the respect and attention that it deserved at the start. The environmental laws, locally and nationally, were not enacted to merely be an inconvenience. They are intended to address very important needs and to cure serious problems that will affect us, in the long run, much more than the success or failure of the Superferry.
The problem, as I see it, stems from the Superferry's decision to use a federal loan guarantee that was conditioned on having no environmental assessment/statement because of the time it took to do those studies. The next problem was that the Superferry expressed this condition to the state and the state, in its haste to satisfy and support the ferry, failed to apply the law and instead sought to justify its exemption. The state's downfall was to believe that the end justified the means and that the apparent popularity and need for the ferry would overwhelm the applicability of the law. In the end, the Superferry and state lost the gamble and the law prevailed.
Holding a special session now to change the law to accommodate the Superferry could be potentially more harmful than beneficial. Once a precedent of changing the law on the spur of the moment merely to accommodate a popular cause or business has begun, it becomes easier to do each subsequent time.
We often complain that our system is too slow to get anything done. Yet the framers of our government deliberately fashioned a system of checks and balances with the executive, legislative and judicial branches. Even the Legislature, with its bicameral system, is designed to promote slow and deliberate decisions. Wisdom should control, not emotions and transitory feelings of urgency. Each branch of government should respect the other and not try to blatantly circumvent each other.
If the Superferry can work things out and operate profitably within the requirements of our environmental law, then we all benefit. If it can't, someday there will be a ferry or other mode of transportation that can.
Larry Lee, a Kailua resident, is a former member of The Advertiser's Community Editorial Board and an attorney. He wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.
Dear Legislators,
Why do we have to fight for what's right over and over again? HSF is so determined not to do an EIS. Is it because they know there is really no way to mitigate their damage and they don't want us to look too closely?
When you ask us to be the ones to suggest compromise mitigations, you ask the impossible.
I can't figure out how it can go screaming across the ocean 3 times as fast as any other ship plying our waters without killing whales.
I can't figure out how you are going to insure that invasive species are not spread and passengers don't loot our natural resources. It cost California a billion dollars to fight their invasive species. Are we going to ask them to post a billion dollar bond? But then how to we assign culpability?
I can't figure out where to put the passenger parking lots that they forgot to build.
I can't figure out how to load and unload 200x2=400 cars in a short period of time in downtown Kahului without turning it into a parking lot.
We could require them to rent or lease parking lots prior to re-commencement of service but the rest just boggles my mind and I can only say, until someone comes up with something better: no cars, no exceeding 13mph.
Karen Chun
We will fight forever if need be. Please be aware that allowing HSF to sail before an EIS and with cars and at speeds greater than 13mph will result in more protests. We will fight for our islands forever and the fight will ignite a whole movement as people get completely fed up with 'Oahu's bullying actions toward the neighbor islands.
This misuse of the 'Oahu power in the legislature shows we need to revamp our Senate. There should be 3 senators from every island so that the outer islands can at least veto 'Oahu centric legislation that harms them. Of course this will never fly because 'Oahu will kill it.
From Lanny Sinkin: Superferry's chief financier John Lehman last week told the Press-Register in Mobile, Ala., where shipbuilder Austal is located, that the vessel is in high demand because there are few like it anywhere else in the world. He said it could easily find work outside Hawai'i as a military transport or civilian ferry.
So there is no economic crisis for Superferry. The focus on money being lost and a corporation on the verge of bankruptcy is just misdirection of the Legislature's and public's attention.
Exactly what is the reason for a special session? Why are the people of Hawai'i supposed to offer up their environment to the Superferry God?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Aloha Legislators
First, please do not call a special session of the legislature to change the law for a private company which has done everything in its power to get around the law.
Next, congratulations to Judge Cordoza for enforcing existing law. Also congratulations to Attorneys Isaac Hall and Ron Sturtz and witnesses Greg Kaufman, Hannah Bernard and others for providing evidence to facilitate Judge Cordoza’s decision.
In his decision, Judge Cordoza pointed out that environmental concerns trumped the financial interests of a private company. Many of Hawaii’s citizens - especially those who reside in Honolulu - are either not concerned or are unaware of the environmental issues brought on by the Superferry. They are, in fact, looking forward to charging around the outer islands in their gas-guzzling automobiles.
However, most of Honolulu’s citizens are probably unaware of the problems involved in trying to minimize the transfer of invasive species. For example, if inspection of each vehicle took only one minute, it would take over 3 hours to load 200 vehicles aboard the Superferry. Would the taxpayers pay the salaries of the inspectors?? And how about the traffic jams when the 200 vehicles unload at another outer island?? Despite optimistic statements, the Superferry Company has made no realistic plans for these potential problems.
Next, an excerpt from a recent editorial in the Advertiser. I believe that this typifies the attitudes of many people who favor the Superferry.
“That's why the Legislature should convene in a special session to pass a law enabling the ferry to continue. There should be room for conditions to be set during the interim, while environmental studies are under way, that could minimize the risks to whales and other resources until the true impact of a full-scale operation could be better understood.”
But the risks to whales and other resources are already well understood. Of course, environmental studies should be made to elaborate and formalize these risks as part of the Environmental Assessment. This would help educate the public. However, the only way to minimize risks to whales during an “interim” period would be to require the Superferry to operate at a very low speed – probably below 13 knots - through it’s entire range. (more on this in a later e-mail) This is totally impractical because it would mean that any inter-island trip would take almost the entire day.
Therefore it makes no sense for the legislature to permit this new and dangerous method of transportation to operate and kill whales and other marine mammals while an environmental assessment is underway which will demonstrate that the Superferry will kill whales and other marine mammals.
To repeat, please do not call a special session to permit the Superferry to cause serious environmental damage while a study is being done to demonstrate that the Superferry will cause serious environmental damage.
Aloha,
Lee Tepley, PhD, Physics.
Article XI, Section 9 Constitution of Hawai'i Section 9:
Each person has the right to a clean and healthful environment, as defined by laws relating to environmental quality, including control of pollution and conservation, protection and enhancement of natural resources. Any person may enforce this right against any party, public or private, through appropriate legal proceedings, subject to reasonable limitations and regulation as provided by law. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978.
"The Court finds and concludes that the balance of irreparable damage favors the issuance of a permanent injunction in this case as Plaintiffs have demonstrated the possibility of irreparable injury with respect to the environmental impacts of Hawaii Superferry operations on natural resources, protected species, increased introduction of invasive species and causing social and cultural impacts." Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion to Enforce Judgment Requiring Environmental Assessment by Prohibiting Implementation of Hawaii Superferry Project, for Temporary, Preliminary and/or Permanent Injunction" Filed October 9, 2007 in The Sierra Club et al. v. The Department of Transportation, et al., CV 05-1-0114(3), In the Circuit Court of the Second Circuit, State of Hawai´i, Judge Cardoza.
One test for any legislation proposed to exempt Superferry from the requirements of environmental laws is whether such legislation can pass constitutional scrutiny in light of Article XI, Section 9 and the opinion of Judge Cardoza in the Sierra Club case.
The Legislature can change the law to give Superferry a free ride on Hawai´i's environment. In doing so, the Legislature will be acting to sacrifice the statewide environment for the benefit of one business project. Making such a decision may carry a high political price.
The Legislature cannot amend the Constitution through such legislation. To make a decision with a high political price, only to have that decision declared unconstitutional, does not sound like a sensible political calculation.
Certainly, those pesky environmentalists will look forward to filing suit challenging the constitutionality of any such legislation. With Judge Cardoza's opinion, such a suit should have a good chance of securing a ruling that the legislation is unconstitutional.
Perhaps the Attorney General and the Governor should be asked how their proposed legislation passes constitutional muster in light of the provision noted above and Judge Cardoza's ruling.
Thank you for standing firm against Lingle's outrageous proposal to allow the Superferry to run while doing an EIS (which might never get done because there is no time limit) and to absolve HSF and her from liability.
Judge Cardoza said,
"Plaintiffs have demonstrated the possibility of irreparable injury with respect to the environmental impacts of Hawaii Superferry operations on natural resources, protected species, increased introduction of invasive species and causing social and cultural impacts."
So an EIS is inevitable and their skipping the EA and going directly to an EIS is no compromise. It just gets things done faster.
Not only are Lingle and HSF proposing a reckless action but they know their action will cause harm and they want you to indemnify them.
If you go into special session, I think you should also thoroughly investigate how Lingle got us into the mess.
For instance, where is this supposed letter from the attorney stating the opinion that HSF was exempt from an EA?
If it exists, the attorney should be fired.
If it doesn't exist, the Lingle lied about something really important and conspired with HSF to break Hawai'i law.
I think in that latter case, impeachment proceedings might be appropriate.
She has spent our money on a shaky, poorly planned enterprise, harming the neighbor islands already and she is continuing - even in the face a a clear court ruling of irreparable damage, to push this project.
This is inciting great division in our State. My own aunties on 'Oahu were at first telling my mother-in-law "Stop your daughter-in-law from speaking out against HSF".
But then the relatives on Maui talked to them about WHY we want and EIS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF SERVICE and now they, too, oppose HSF (until EIS is done)
Those of us on the neighbor isles are outnumbered. We can't run the radio, TV and print ads that HSF runs. But little by little, person by person, we are winning 'Oahu over to our side. It might take a couple of years because we're doing it in person, but in the end most will see that this project needs MITIGATIONS.
So the focus of any special session should be first: "HOW DID LINGLE GET US IN THIS MESS"
As far as an acceptable compromise, you folks offered them one, they rejected it. But if we have to compromise (which I don't think is right but you have your political necessities) this is about the only compromise that won't cause the neighbor islands to explode into protest:
HSF doesn't go any faster than 12 knots during the time any humpback has been sighted in our waters.
HSF does not carry any cars until AFTER mitigations identified during the EIS are in place. (Because this is a complicated and difficult mitigation to design)
HSF buys, leases or contracts for parking lots by each harbor for their passengers and has them operational prior to their first run.
And why are WE paying for THEIR EIS?!
Thank you again for standing firm. I understand the difficult political position you are in what with all the HSF PR inflaming Oahu.
Please do what is right, not what people who really haven't got the facts have been manipulated into thinking they want.
My support as you consider this carefully and do what is right.
Dear Senator Hanabusa:
I appreciate your understanding of the situation and thank you for listening to all sides. Please continue to take your time to address the concerns of so many citizens.
I do hope that if anything is done with regard to Hawaii Superferry, it is done through the normal process and not through a special session of the Legislature. It appears that there are those who want to wipe out 30 years of legislation that has helped to protect Hawaii.
In reading what some of the Senators and Representatives have said, I sincerely believe they were caught up in the hype and excitement of inter-island ferry service. I am confident that they have not done their research. (I've attached an editorial that appeared in the 2/27/07 issue of The Maui News. It might answer some of the questions for which some legislators don't have answers.)
The fares and schedules alone should show everyone that this service is not beneficial to local families and businesses; especially those on the neighbor islands.
Senator Hanabusa, on the one hand folks might say that you're in a very difficult postion; but on the other hand, they might say, "It's no problem. It's a matter of law." Please. No special session and no special treatment for any business. We have laws to protect our beautiful state. Any business that will abide by those laws is more than welcome here.
Mahalo,
Jeff Sacher
Kawaihae, Big Island
To our representatives in the State of Hawaii Legislature,
You are in our thoughts and prayers as you carefully consider this important matter.
If the governor chooses to continue to divide the state by calling for a special session, we feel it is imperative that we let our lawmakers know that we do not want any weakening of our environmental laws. Regardless of what you may feel about the SuperFerry, the law that is in place is a good law for Hawai'i. Had the SuperFerry honored our law and the ocean and sea and people and creatures of our great Aloha State, they would have wanted to be pono from the beginning. They didn't and they still don't, so it is time for them to sail far, far away.
What the governor and some lawmakers are proposing is not just about the SuperFerry. It is about destroying the integrity of the process and diminishing the environmental law as written. This whole fiasco has been the result of rushed, unwise decisions, and it must stop now.
Judge Cardoza really got it right and his decision is chock full of good points. He was clearly a great listener and his discerning judgment is so profound. He saw the danger of this "new technology" in the evidence that was provided during the course of the Maui trial. He cautioned us all that allowing the SF to operate prior to full assessment could do tragic, irreversible environmental harm.
It would be a wondrous, amazing thing if Hawaii rose from the troubled waters of the past months as a beacon to the world announcing that we value our unique home above all else. That our message would be "Aloha. E komo mai. Come here with your ideas and your businesses and your enterprises, and come with your earnest desire to honor our laws, our land, our people, and our ocean in all that you do. Let the world know that we have beliefs that we have written into fair and equitable laws that will protect Hawaii now and for the future for all those who love her."
Please stand tall and proud when you stand for all of Hawai'i in the days to come.
Me ke aloha pumehana,
Louisa Wooton and family
Kilauea, Hawaii
Legislature should ask some questions first
The governor wants a special legislative session to fix problems her administration created by not requiring preparation of an environmental assessment for the Hawaii Superferry.
Before we spend public resources trying to save Superferry from the mistakes of the Lingle administration and Superferry's own mistakes, we should take a hard look at the history.
Two and a half years ago, two federal agencies tried to get Superferry to pay attention to potential environmental impacts from operating their large, high-speed boat. The Marine Mammal Commission and the National Marine Fisheries Service expressed concerns that Superferry was not consulting with federal agencies regarding potential impacts on marine mammals and on endangered species.
Superferry, however, stated that it had a plan. This indifference to federal concerns and their evading federal review fits the pattern of Superferry behavior in general.
Superferry knew in 2005 that there was environmental litigation pending, i.e. the appeal from the Maui dismissal. The possibility existed then that the state Supreme Court would reverse the Maui court and find an EA to be required.
Superferry chose to take that business risk. They again chose to ignore the concerns regarding the environment and attempted to evade environmental requirements. Their failure is their kuleana.
Their failure is also a garden variety business failure that happens every day when companies are wrong in their risk assessment. Just because Superferry happens to be bigger than most business failures does not mean that they deserve special treatment not given to other businesses that make the wrong decision.
How many dollars does a company have to lose through bad business decisions before they qualify for the law to be changed to save them from their own mistakes?
After evading federal and state scrutiny of its environmental impacts, Superferry finally got caught by the coalition that brought the Maui suit and the Hawai'i Supreme Court. Superferry has no one to blame but Superferry. Asking the public to absorb Superferry's environmental impacts after such a history is unfair.
And let's be clear about those impacts: If the EA shows that there are potentially significant environmental effects, then an environmental impact statement is required. Will the pressure to continue lead to another special session being called to allow Superferry to operate for years while an EIS is being conducted? How badly will Superferry damage the environment during those years? Why should the people of Hawai'i play Russian roulette with potentially damaging environmental impacts, just so a private corporation can make a profit?
The governor and the director of the Department of Transportation are responsible for the failure to make the correct decision regarding an environmental assessment. Now they want the Legislature to make it all right.
This legislative approach comes after the governor tried to use brute force and called for law enforcement agencies at the federal, state and local level to join in a plan that could have resulted in disaster on Kaua'i.
Now the governor wants to have a special session to break the rules legally.
Before the Legislature listens to the governor, it should ask her a few questions, among them:
How could the state let it get to this point?
Lanny Sinkin
To the State House of Representatives (When they decided not to call a special session)
Thank you, thank you thank you!!!!
Please continue to hold firm. Don't let Lingle shift this mess she made onto you.
In 2004 and 2005 I repeatedly told Mr. Garibaldi in many conversations, "Do the EIS". For the last few years he knew we were in court on 2 cases. He took a business gamble that we would lose. He made a business error in judgment.
It is not your job to bail out a faltering nonHawaii startup that has already made so many mistakes and cut so many corners.
Judge Cardoza in his ruling stated that:
"The Court finds and concludes that the balance of irreparable damage favors in the issuance of a permanent injunction in this case as Plaintiffs have demonstrated the possibility of irreparable injury with respect to the environmental impacts of Hawaii Superferry operations on natural resources, protected species, increased introduction of invasive species and causing social and cultural impacts."
Knowing this and having it in the public record as already proven, it is irresponsible of Lingle to ask the Legislative branch to overrule the Judicial branch - especially when there is a preponderance of evidence that irreparable damage could be done to our island.
On the issue of jobs:
When asked in court whether Garibaldi would still be collecting his $20,000/month salary when he lays off his workers he evaded answering.
Then it turns out 34 out of the 36 Maui workers are employed less than half time with no benefits. Granted, we here on Maui need to work 2 and 3 jobs just to make ends meet and any hardship on our friends and neighbors is bad, but these jobs are exploitive.
Superferry is the Walmart of maritime businesses.
Thank you again for resisting the Special Session. And my total support to you in standing firm against Lingle's irresponsible gutting of our excellent Hawai'i environmental law.
Karen Chun
Maui
To: All Senators; All Reps
Subject: Please Do Not Exempt Superferry From Environmental Law
The Superferry creates many problems for the neighbor islands. The EIS is our best chance of having these problems solved.
Making a special law to benefit a single business who got into this mess because they exerted undo influence on Lingle and played the Maritime Loan Administration against our State in order to get Lingle to break the law, sends a message that businesses can break the law if they spread enough campaign donations around and do a lot of PR.
Passing a law exempting the Superferry from doing an EIS prior to commencement of operations will ignite a full scale battle between the people of the neighbor islands and Lingle's "Unified Command"
I fear that protesters will die or be badly hurt, if you make an end run around the law and Lingle makes good on her threats against the people of the neighbor isles.
It is not sending a negative message about business in Hawaii to have the Superferry comply with Environmental Law. It is sending a GOOD message - do your project right, fix the problems and work in good faith.
The Superferry execs were the ones who pushed not to do the EIS. Lingle was corrupt in allowing it. Why bail her out? You Democrats WANT her to be our next Senator?
The people of 'Oahu think they want the Superferry because the Superferry has spent a ton of money on PR - misleading them as to the cost, misleading them as to the experience.
This project was doomed to go down just like the Hydrofoil. You exempt them from an EIS, and I will guarantee they'll be back in a year asking you for a subsidy.
Although Maui has worked hard to create legal, peaceful demonstrations and put our faith in our judicial system, I fear that if the Legislature were to show such complete disregard of the neighbor islands' expressed desire for an EIS as demonstrated by the County Council Resolutions, that we would see more civil disobedience as happened on Kaua'i.
If Lingle's "Unified Command" with their machine guns, disguised identities and violent approach to our peaceful citizens were to attack the protesters, citizens could easily be injured or even killed.
The most important reason for you not to interfere in Environmental Law is that it will inflame the people of the neighbor islands and the resulting battles will make our state look even worse and make all of you folks the bad guys - especially if a life is lost because one of the "Unified Command" with their finger on the trigger of a machine gun reacts just a little too aggressively.
The Legislature is not the bad guy now. Don't make yourself responsible for what could be a dangerous and possibly deadly confrontation between the neighbor islands and Lingle's "Unified Command".
Dear Senator Hooser and Rep. Morita,
Thank you so much for taking the stand to let the Court's decision run it's course, and to not call a special session. I appreciate the fact that you understand that, after weeks of testimony, Judge Cardoza was convinced that "there is a real possibility of irreparable damage to the environment, to the way of life in this community" if the vessel sails before the study is done.
Hawaii Superferry has done everything in its power to avoid an EA; one must ask "Why?"
If, and that is a very big "if", any changes are going to be made to our environmental laws, they must not be rushed through. They must be made with much thought and consideration, as well as with input from experts in their respective fields and with input from people from each island who will be affected by any changes.
We have a beautiful state, and our environmental laws will help us maintain that beauty.
I would hope that any business that was interested in operating in Hawaii would have respect for our laws and would do everything in their power to help preserve what we have.
Please know that there are many who appreciate and respect the work that you're doing with regard to this issue.
Mahalo,
Jeff Sacher
Kawaihae, Big Island
The actual letter Warren Woodward sent to the Advertiser (which got watered down)
Your editorial call for a special legislative session for the ferry was irresponsible. The ferry and the Lingle administration broke the law. They were told they broke the law years ago but did not listen. Now the legislature is supposed to hold a special session to write law especially for these scofflaws?!
You who are worried about 'what kind of message' halting the ferry sends to the world, what kind of message does a special legislative session send? It sends the message that if you are rich and connected Hawaii will make laws especially for you--just like in banana republics.
And stop calling the ferry a business. It is a corporate welfare queen.
Sincerely,
Warren Woodward
Ku i ka mana o Hawai'i nei. (The mana of all Hawai'i is rising.)
aloha sister representative mina-
as you are an especially good woman, and as you are chair of the house environmental protection committee, and as you are representative of precious rural districts of maui and kauai, including my own,and as you are sister of alberta, and as you have identified yourself at your most sincere as wanting to embody and serve that which is genuinely pono,* it really honestly does behoove you to step up to the plate as lanny sinkin is suggesting.
it's true.
the governor has been so extraordinarily far out of bounds in her insistent, persistent continuous choice of highly inappropriate actions on behalf of a rogue private corporation while simultaneously refusing to uphold the essential role and sworn responsibility of governor of the state of hawai'i to protect the 'aina and people of the 'aina first and foremost, the truly responsible choice of any state legislator sincerely committed to the spirit of the true law of this land, including and especially at the highest level of our state government, in our highest elected office, is to impeach this "governor."
this "governor" is brazenly disrespectful of the laws of this land. she has wasted much of our time and life force, has wasted our financial resources, and worst of all has poisoned, polarized and divided our state community in an unprecedented, shameful way.
her personally politically motivated unlawful attempt to force the horror of unnecessary change onto our neighbor islands that don't want an "H4" ruining our communities' quality of life, has been conducted regardless of the consequences and without respect.
we are already under siege enough at home with unsustainable, unbridled development.
the last thing we neighbor islanders need is to be invaded by plunderers from overpopulated oahu let loose in their own vehicles in addition to all our other woes.
we have been pointing this out clearly for years.
the lawlessness of this administration has been outrageous and astounding. hawaii superferry should never have been allowed to proceed at all, from the start. the company and the lingle administration has been crooked crooked crooked every step of the way. as lanny writes, all along the line there has been lawbreaking, willingness to do so confirmed especially with the administration's insane insistence that the superferry sail anyway even after the supreme court's ruling in august, and even with armed force installed against the free and independent people of hawai'i.
somebody must stand and call for impeachment IMMEDIATELY. that someone must have courage rooted in a strong foundation of love for the aina. that person must have MANA.
you are the person i have described, if anybody is or ever will be.
as committed daughter of the 'aina, mina, your duty is spelled out.
as the chair of the environmental protection committee you also have an obligation. this administration is an integral and extraordinarily willing party to a massive assault on the same environment that it is your special sworn kuleana to protect.
while no doubt you will be misperceived by some, those who are ignorant of the history of this place on earth and who also have had the wool pulled over their eyes here in present time, who just want to have their way with hawaii even if it means destroying the place, and quickly, your courage and integrity will stand out for many generations to come.
the ancestors of this place will be pleased with you as well; they will smile with pride and gratitude for the willingness of one sister mina morita acting forcefully, resolutely, in the name of that which is pono.
aloha mina.
Dear Senators and State Representatives,
As a citizen of this great state of Hawaii I am deeply disturbed by the events that are unfolding. It is hard to imagine how the average citizen will have any respect for the law and our legal system if a special session is convened to overturn the courts ruling regarding the Superferry.
We all know that businesses come and businesses go. The are somewhat like roaches, when one dies two more hatch to take their place. Conversely, the environment and endangered species do not enjoy the benefit of continuous rejuvenation. When they are gone they are gone forever. We have proven this to be true over our rich history.
So the question is:
What is more important, the survival of a mismanaged business or the preservation of our unique environment? I will submit that we cannot afford to jeopardize our environment at any cost. There are reasonable laws in place that all business must comply with before being allowed to conduct business in Hawaii. If a business decides to proceed without fulfilling those obligations they do so at their own peril. (regardless of what they were promised)
It seems that a special session should only be available in times of crisis, national security, or in the case of a public works project. To suggest that our legislature convene a special session to retrofit the law to accommodate a private company is irresponsible and bad public policy. Doing so opens a door that all corporations will demand access to. What will keep other businesses from wanting the same treatment? Will Aloha Airlines get a special session? Young Brothers? What about another Cruise Ship Line? Where will it end?
Anyone who is concerned about the future of our economy should be concerned about this special session. What message will we be sending to the business community if we proceed on this tract? If our state is to attract businessmen and women with solid businesses and high moral character we will have to assure them that we have a dependable business environment to work within.
Please demonstrate to your constituency and the rest of this great state that you have the moral courage to place our environment, our communities, and the rule of law ahead of the need of a mismanaged business. Vote against a special session for the Superferry and demand that the Superferry comply with the laws that have served this Great State of Hawaii for over 30 years.
Mahalo in advance for your support
Yours truly,
Scott Mijares
Kilauea
Dear Gov. Lingle, Senators and Representatives -
The environmental law calling for an EA/EIS before a business can operate is not only clearly spelled out but it represents a higher vision for the citizens of Hawaii - a vision that values and honors our precious environment. We count on our elected representatives to support and protect that higher vision.
Gov. Lingle and the DOT have supported and valued a private business rather than upholding our environmental laws that represent our love for our beautiful island environment, especially including the ocean and its inhabitants. Calling a special legislative session would send the message to citizens of Hawaii and to businesses around the world that the rule of environmental law can be swept aside when inconvenient or when it cuts into the profit of a private business or is in opposition to the wishes of a few people who have political power.
The Superferry, Gov. Lingle and the DOT have worked very hard at ignoring and sweeping aside our environmental law. Perhaps they were worried that an EIS might reveal that the size and scope of the Superferry operation was inappropriate for the Hawaiian Islands and might be turned down? Perhaps money was the overwhelming factor in their decision making? Did John Garibaldi have an affair with Gov. Lingle? Perhaps we will never know.
Allowing the Superferry to leave the islands to find their appropriate place in the world would be the right thing to do. We have plenty of transportation and the departure will not be missed in any significant way.
Thank you for allowing the Superferry to go elsewhere in a peaceful way. We are convinced that it would be a major mistake to call a special session with the purpose of eliminating or changing our environmental laws so that the Superferry could operate before an EA and EIS is completed - the result of a special session could well be very dark and perhaps even bloody days in Hawaii's history. And the Superferry would most probably end up leaving anyway.
Sincerely,
Sylvia Partridge, Princeville, Kauai
Merilyn Liggett, Princeville, Kauai