Tuesday, September 22, 2009

Musings: Good Questions

It was a splendid evening, so Koko and I went walking beneath a golden wedge floating on a bit of fluff in a navy blue polka dot sky. As it got darker, and the moon sank lower, the polka dots got bigger and started to twinkle.

This fall equinox morning wasn’t too shabby, either. Towering columns of orange-hued cumulus teetered over the ocean, as pink wisps snaked upwards toward glowing Venus. Waialeale and Makaleha were perfectly clear, their faces flushing lavender as a fiery orb peeked up over the horizon.

And to think I almost slept in and missed it.

If you missed my radio interview with Caren Diamond last night, I’ll fill you in. We were talking about transient vacation rentals (TVRs) and former Councilman Mel Rapozo called in from Minnesota. He was on the Council when it passed the TVR bill, which specifically excluded such uses on ag land. Why? Because he and others — including Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, now the county prosecutor — felt it was clearly prohibited by state law.

Mel vowed to personally file an injunction against the ag TVR bill if it’s passed by the Council, which again takes up the matter at its meeting tomorrow. [Correction: It's been deferred until Oct. 14.]

The question raised by Mel and others, including my former neighbor Andy, is this: “Why is the county trying to do something that circumvents state law?”

Good question, to which I might add, why does the county circumvent its own laws? Remember the little huts that were built along the Kealia part of the bike path, without any permits? I’m sure you readers can think of a few more examples.

Speaking of the bike path, it looks like the Wailua portion is becoming Mayor Carvalho’s first hot potato issue. As I noted in my article in The Hawaii Independent, the mayor reportedly promised to move the path off Wailua Beach if that’s what OHA recommended. And sho’nuff, that’s what OHA recommended, in a switch from its previous stance. The rationale given for the reversal was poignant, and speaks volumes about the challenges involved in rebuilding a crushed culture:

“The connections to the past, and thus the direction for the future, are being made everyday as the pieces of the past are lovingly, gingerly, and humbly put back together in a race against time and irreparable loss from destruction and alteration.”

More than one observer noted parallels between the controversy at Naue, where Joe Brescia has capped burials in concrete so he can build a house, and the bike path at Wailua. Plans call for drilling into the sand with a two-foot-diameter screw auger in order to make concrete pilings to secure the wooden boardwalk, possibly damaging iwi buried there in the process.

"When are we going to stop covering Hawaiian burials with concrete?” a friend asked.

That’s another good question, one that will be taken up by the Kauai-Niihau Island Burial Council, which is supposed to meet on Oct. 8 now that Gov. Lingle has finally appointed the two people — as yet unnamed — needed to form a quorum on the panel. Will one be a developer’s representative?

In the months-long hiatus since the Council last met, and deadlocked on a motion to reject the latest burial treatment plan, Brescia’s house has gotten just that much further along.

But in other parts of the nation to which Hawaii supposedly “belongs,” the discovery of burials stops construction dead:

A man stumbling upon a human jaw while out walking his dog was the first sign something was amiss. Then officials uncovered something more: More than 600 sets of remains, long ago buried and forgotten, on the site where luxury condos were supposed to be built.

The remains, found on a site overlooking the Mississippi River in Dubuque, have left the nearly $60 million condo plan in limbo, and the developer has sued the nuns who sold him the property.

[The developer] said there are no immediate plans to develop the land, where he had hoped to build two 12-story towers.

''It's very unmarketable because who would want that responsibility?'' he asked. ''So we will proceed to clean up the entire area for remains.''


As blogger Andy Parx noted in forwarding me the link:

Don't see any "oh they're just old forgotten bones" arguments here....

Congressman and gubernatorial hopeful Neil Abercrombie, meanwhile, is arguing that the feds should pay double for a big construction project in Guam so Hawaii folks can do the work. As an AP article published in SF Gate reports:

His idea is to legislate high wages for a massive construction project in the federal territory of Guam, restrict the ability of foreigners to get those jobs and hope Hawaii residents, although 3,800 miles away, will flock there for the work.

As for criticism that he’s blatantly playing to the unions:

"Of course I'm playing to working people. The building trades and working people have been the foundation of my political career for 36 years," he said. "If I didn't do this, people would say, 'What's wrong with him?'”

Oh, nothing that can’t be explained by spending 36 years as a politician. A better question is what’s going to happen to Guam when 17,000 Marines relocate there from Japan? That’s a 10 percent jump in its population. But hey, that’s what happens when you’re a federal territory. You get what Uncle Sam wants to give you.

And finally, Chief Perry gave his wife, Solette, and the people of Kauai a big gift when he withdrew his name from the selection process for Honolulu police chief.

In a story reported in The Garden Island — and reprinted in The Advertiser, which used to cover such stories itself — the chief said that “family comes first.” I’d heard Solette did not want to move back to Honolulu, and it says a lot that he sacrificed the chance to be the state’s top cop at a really crackerjack department.

Perry also acknowledged “an outcry from the public about my application,” but didn’t elaborate. Who among us would have welcomed the prolonged and painful prospect of finding a new chief, much less a good one?

The last line in the story said it all:

"Time to roll up the sleeves," Perry said in his Sunday e-mail.

Sigh. Yes, there’s still a lot to be done to turn this sow's ear into a silk purse.

I know I’m not alone in asking, how long might that take? And is it even possible?

37 comments:

  1. "the mayor reportedly promised to move the path off Wailua Beach if that’s what OHA recommended"

    -- interesting. had not heard that. in any event, oha had at first said the alignment was fine (and understandably, as any other alignment would have way, way more "impact" and oahu knew this)


    anyways, every state (or most at least) has a statute that addresses unmarked graves. i looked some up once. they vary of course


    oh and who most loves the vocal retards now focusing on the wailua beach bikes path section? knudsen trust. takes attention away from their plowing hapa


    __save__hapa__trail..

    ReplyDelete
  2. whether it is Hapa Trail, Wailua Beach, or Naue being desecrated, it is the same lack of caring for our significant cultural resources, for Hawaii's history,and the same officials who could care less. No, I don't think bringing attention to the failures of planners to protect the sacred parts of our island detract from other other cause, it i really all one institutional failure, just taking place on all sides of Kauai.
    Notice they keep using the same tired arguments "other alignment would have way, way more "impact" , please tell us how you can have more impact than detroying sacred burials, and the beach at the same time? The beach is a big part of the culture.

    And why call them vocal retards, they expree what alot of us feel, but don't have the nerve to say. Actually, they are quite eloquent, and serve to educate .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Joan said: "And finally, Chief Perry gave his wife, Solette, and the people of Kauai a big gift "

    Since when is honoring a commitment to do your job considered a "gift"?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "And why call them vocal retards, they expree what alot of us feel, but don't have the nerve to say."

    -- well if you are going to shame me into taking it back by putting it like that :)

    i'll will gladly admit my information is second hand, but they are good sources. and with all of the sincerity and good judgment i can muster, i do believe the current alignment has the least impact. i take at face value the finding that as you move inland, the impact is much greater

    if i may: i know for a absolute fact (because i know many of them personally), that many people in anahola for example do NOT want that pathway coming by them or the nearby places they visit. and in my own unimportant opinion -- so be it, it should not go there then...but, not going near anahola will not kill the pathway

    but if there is a gap in wailua...yes, it might never reach lihue

    there needs to be some wailua connection

    anyways, my view is just one of thousands on the issue. and i am willing to be convinced that reasonable minds can disagree on it (but i am not yet so convinced)

    and i'll further disclose that i feel that the joe b. guy should be able to build some sort of home on that lot at this point, and at the same time feel that a perhaps a global-caliber series of ruins will be soon lost at hapa (viewing it from the trail does not really do it justice)

    just my $0.02


    __same guy

    ReplyDelete
  5. Note the article regarding the Iowa situation stated (CAPS added):

    "Iowa law requires property owners to pay for excavating a site for human remains, and [the developer] is seeking compensation for those costs, THE RELOCATION OF THE REMAINS and the lost use of the site."

    This, in my opinion, is the proper procedure. Don't bulldoze them or build over them if you absolutely know they will be under the building. Relocate them. Then carry on with whatever use you had for the property.

    Now, why can't we do the same here??

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Plans call for drilling into the sand with a two-foot-diameter screw auger in order to make concrete pilings to secure the wooden boardwalk, possibly damaging iwi buried there in the process."

    Above is wrong...

    Holes were much smaller and would only be used after testing and in a situations where they would not impact sensitive cultural material, if any was found.
    No concrete was to be used.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Don't see any "oh they're just old forgotten bones" arguments here...."



    Forgotten,yes, but you left out the part where, "the remains will be moved to a new site."
    How enlightened is that! Maybe there will be a condo aftr all.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I refer to the New York Times article cited where Joan wrote "But in other parts of the nation to which Hawaii supposedly “belongs,” the discovery of burials stops construction dead"

    Joan told less than half the truth. That same article explains that it has always been common practice, and still is today, to excavate old forgotten cemeteries and move the bones somewhere else in order to re-use the land for new development. And they're talking about a Catholic cemetery run by nuns; so if there were some sort of issue regarding desecration involved in moving bones, the nuns surely would have raised that issue. When haoles want to move Hawaiian bones, they are not treating Hawaiian bones in any way they would not also treat haole bones.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I long ago lost any stomach for the ultimately irrelevant fight over whether either side in any burial dispute can ever be said to be categorically correct (I've always rejected that notion but almost always ended up wishing I hadn't bothered to do so publicly). Nevertheless, I'll weigh in and say I took a different meaning from the Times article than did Joan. I thought it fascinating how similar the Iowa case is to the Hawaii cases we are familiar with.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "that many people in anahola for example do NOT want that pathway coming by them or the nearby places they visit. and in my own unimportant opinion -- so be it, it should not go there then..."

    YES. If the path must go any farther north keep it away from the coast.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "that many people in anahola for example do NOT want that pathway coming by them or the nearby places they visit. and in my own unimportant opinion -- so be it, it should not go there then..."

    That makes no sense at all. The coast by anahola does not belong to the people who live there. They shouldn't be able to veto a path there any more than they should be able to veto a public decision on where to put a road.

    ReplyDelete
  12. That makes no sense at all. The coast by anahola does not belong to the people who live there. They shouldn't be able to veto a path there any more than they should be able to veto a public decision on where to put a road.
    What crap that is, the people of Anahola have every right to decide. It is one of the few communities left where local people live.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "The coast by anahola does not belong to the people who live there."

    Your wrong. It is Hawaiian Homelands and they are the beneficiaries.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Forgotten,yes, but you left out the part where, "the remains will be moved to a new site."

    ========

    How do you suppose I left that part out??? What part of RELOCATED do you have trouble with???

    The only logical interpretation of that means "off the property and interred elsewhere in a place with no development possibilities".

    The article went on to say relocation to an existing cemetery.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I'm not Hawaiian and I don't live in Anahola, but if the community doesn't want it, that's the way it should be. On the other hand, they may want it. It would be nice to be able to ride a bike to Kapaa.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "That makes no sense at all. The coast by anahola does not belong to the people who live there. They shouldn't be able to veto a path there any more than they should be able to veto a public decision on where to put a road."

    -- point taken. the above was just my own gut view (plus i could care less if the path gets to princeville...i just care about kapaa to lihue). maybe they just aint pathway people...just like i aint a bike rider :)

    but when it comes to a "takings" or an "eminent domain" argument, good luck to the side suggesting the pathway is similar to or has the same "public good / need" as a DOT road. otherwise, i defer to people who know better "the rules" as to DHHL lots

    there does seem to be a mass there that almost uniformly does not want it (unlike the case in wailua, kapaa, or lihue)

    anyways - the anti wailua roadside pathway people still seem nutty. and nice job showing DOT we are totally unreliable, again


    __same guy

    ReplyDelete
  17. The article went on to say relocation to an existing cemetery

    Hawaiians do not bury their ancestors in cemetaries. . Leave the bones alone. Have some respect

    ReplyDelete
  18. To same guy who said
    anyways - the anti wailua roadside pathway people still seem nutty. and nice job showing DOT we are totally unreliable, again

    Seems more like the path people are nutty to put a path across a well loved beach that is culturally and environmentally significant.
    And the planners of this path who failed to consult with relevant cultural practioners, and instead consulted with the group that has Thomas Noyes in it, Mr. path.
    Failure of the state archaeolgist to require an archaeology inventory survey, failure to do a cultuural impact assessment, failure to protect the historical and cultural significance of Wailua. No, they just pushed the path through, acting like they did their job. How many projects are going on at Wailua right now? Did they do comprehensive planning, or segment each project? Why is the ADA component of the highway and bridge being satified with the path? How much money does Thomas make off of this project?
    Support the people working to protect the culture and the beach.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Hawaiians do not bury their ancestors in cemetaries. . Leave the bones alone. Have some respect"

    Correct. They are usually under the home / habitation area.

    ReplyDelete
  20. If everyone would look at this pratically, things would move along smoothly. Just imagine, for a moment, if that were your ancestors beneath the sands of Wailua Beach. Really, think about that. Imagine if you belonged to a culture, like the Hawaiians, and outsiders were considering contructing anything over your ancestors. Really, think about that. Imagine if your culture was being threatened by outsiders on a daily basis. Really, think about that.

    You see, the problem is that none of these outsiders really have a native culture. They are ignorant to the cultural values of Kauai. They are set on modernizing this paradise that we truly want to preserve. They came here for the beauty and culture, but they want to make it as close to where they came from as possible. That is the reality of this issue. This is not racism. This is cultural preservation and people better start listening.

    ReplyDelete
  21. More of a chance they are under the road and Coco Palms then the beach.
    Trenching along the highway found no one. Construction within the Coco Palms found many.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "Hawaiians do not bury their ancestors in cemetaries. . Leave the bones alone. Have some respect"

    Well, pardner, we ain't in "Hawaii" anymore. We're in the USA. Civilized people use designated cemetaries. We don't just leave our bones lying around anywhere.

    More efficient use of the land, you know.

    Don't like it? Then buy it all yourself so you can make the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well, pardner, we ain't in "Hawaii" anymore.
    Really? Wow, you are one deluded dude.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Bike path along the beach? Burials along the shoreline? Houses along the shoreline? There's a new reality coming and it looks like it'll be here much sooner than we thought.

    http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090923/BREAKING/90923025/NASA+data+show+ice+melt+worsening+in+Greenland++Antarctica

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Well, pardner, we ain't in "Hawaii" anymore.
    Really? Wow, you are one deluded dude."

    Think so? Then why the general outcry over the fact that Hawaiian culture in operation here is melting faster than the Greenland glaciers?

    Whose "rules" do you think are winning out overall and expanding..."Hawaiian" or USA?

    Kauai is becoming like Maui, which is becoming like Oahu, which is (becoming?) like California.

    Hawaiian cultural practitioners are becoming like the polar bear walking on ever-shrinking ice flows.

    Don't delude yourself.

    I, for one, am with the program, since being against the program is a losing hand.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Well, pardner, we ain't in "Hawaii" anymore. We're in the USA."

    Who the hell do you think you are? You are beyond rude. You are a disrespectful son of a bi*ch. I wish you would put your name when you make outrageous comments like that. You create the hatred that exists between locals and haoles like yourself. You are a PR*CK!!

    ReplyDelete
  27. "Kauai is becoming like Maui, which is becoming like Oahu, which is (becoming?) like California."

    And we all know how well California is doing. It's sad watching mansions burn or slide down steep hillsides. Water shortages, traffic, air pollution, water pollution, bankrupt government, etc. Yup, that's winning.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "When haoles want to move Hawaiian bones, they are not treating Hawaiian bones in any way they would not also treat haole bones."

    So that's supposed to make it OK?

    ReplyDelete
  29. "When haoles want to move Hawaiian bones, they are not treating Hawaiian bones in any way they would not also treat haole bones."

    So that's supposed to make it OK?


    It answers the "Don't see any "oh they're just old forgotten bones" arguments here...." canard.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Is there any hard evidence for bones on Wailua Beach? Just saying it is so does not make it so..

    ReplyDelete
  31. It is well known that Hawaiians guarded their bones because they were an excellent raw material for fish hooks, awls and ornmentation.

    ReplyDelete
  32. "So that's supposed to make it OK?"

    Yes, it is.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Well, my mother was pretty much a bitch. And I don't mind being referred to by my most outstanding physical attribute.

    As to being disrespectful, fuck it. I'm an equal opportunity abuser.

    ReplyDelete
  34. An HBO series was invented to give homage to such a physical attribute:

    HUNG

    ReplyDelete
  35. "It is well known that Hawaiians guarded their bones because they were an excellent raw material for fish hooks..."

    So I can now refer to an old Hawaiian's mother as a hooker??

    ReplyDelete
  36. how many bones under the vocal minority's beechfront homes at wailua and wainiha?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.