From a Maui Resident (if this is you and you want credit email the webmaster)
Well, my husband and I got there half an hour early, and we were #60 and 61 to sign up to testify. Although the meeting started right on time, and we were told in advance that it would take about an hour per 20 people, we got up to testify around the 4 hour mark, and the legislators had to leave an hour later to catch the last flight out to Big Island. So my guess, is that of the nearly 200 people who signed up to testify, probably only 70 or 75 were going to get to. Fortunately, the majority of those who DID testify were incredibly eloquent - many were well researched in both the law, the cases and the various impact issues at hand.
Of the 65 we heard first hand, SIX were Pro-ferry, and of those 6, at least two were ferry employees. One was a native Hawaiian who pulled the "you're all transplants" card - but after him came MANY native Hawaiians and generations long residents who wanted more respect for the "aina. Isaac Hall gave a very impassioned speech, as one might expect of the man who has dedicated the last few years of his life to this issue, has won TWO court cases, and who is about to be swatted like a fly if this Bill, or any semblance of it, is passed.
One thing I feel sure of, the Senators who were present today were not there as a "dog & pony show". I saw real sincerity in their eyes, and a deep appreciation of the testifiers who had done their homework. They rarely cut anyone off - many spoke for at least five minutes. Although each senator took at last one break, each of them was mostly present and attentive for the bulk of the 5 hours spent, and other than calling out the names on the list, they mostly listened, took notes, and listened, and listened.
There were a few points brought up that we found particularly compelling, which I will address in a moment. The bulk of the testimony was centered around the issue that the courts have spoken and the law should be obeyed, not circumvented. There were a few who spoke passionately about the military connections, the transport of depleted uranium, but other than the issue of the law itself, the sham of this ill-conceived bill, and the dangers of the precedence it would set, the bulk of the rest of the concerns were about invasive pests, traffic concerns and the pillage of natural resources on an island that still has some.
Here were some points I was thrilled to hear brought forth since I didn't think of them myself:
#1) Since the Whale Avoidance Policy is based on two guys with binoculars (and a 300 foot blind spot in front of the boat), how will that be effective AT NIGHT, and in the rain and fog?
#2) In order for an EA to be truly authentic and effective, it has to start with a BASELINE - that baseline being things like the traffic assessment, etc., of conditions on these islands BEFORE the introduction of this new transportation business. How can any MEANINGFUL assessment be done once the operations of HSF are underway, and the various "impacts" are already taking place?
#3.) With only two days of operation under their belt, HSF already clearly proved that their "inspection process" was barely in existence when ferry riders who brought their cars reported that their cars were not inspected, nor were those of several cars in front and behind them. The whole "imu rocks" fiasco was a perfect case in point, in that ferry officials were not even the ones who discovered or reported this illegal pillaging. That was the act of a Maui citizen, and not one associated with HSF in any way. How can we possibly expect any kind of trusted oversight of the inspection process?
#4) HSF, Inc. claims the ferry will benefit the business of local farmers. Why then, were there a dozen full time farmers who testified in favor of the law being upheld, and NOT ONE FARMER who came forth to testify on behalf of this alleged "benefit"?
#5) The DNLR is already understaffed and cannot keep up with the demands of resource management on our island. How then will they be able to oversee increased impact of beaches, camping areas and precious natural resources?
And lastly - an issue that came up over and over again, including the testimony of middle school and high school students: How do parents represent the value of the law to their children, and how do children perceive the value of the law, and why should adults obey ANY law, if our own government seeks to circumvent it for the sake of their own special interests?
I have to say I was disappointed, (as I suspected in advance that I would be), at the *number* of people who turned out. My guess would be we had about 300 people show up - and for an island this size, that's a gnat's ass. BUT, the quality of the testimony was outstanding in most cases, and the patience and sincerity of the Senators was moving.
Oh - one last comment: many spoke about how "civilized" Maui residents had been about this issue up to this point. "We followed the law and the process of the law" were words heard again and again.
But you could feel the "unrest" at the thought that Mauians had followed due process, got their day in court and eventually WON - and if Lingle & Co. were going to rip that "win" away by "breaking the law", then they would be equally forced to take the law into their own hands - ie, follow suit with Kaua‘i and use more drastic and possibly even UNlawful tactics. A very cute little 77 year old woman wearing an "impeach Lingle" sign on her head, said to the Senators, "Don't make me have to jump in the water......."