Musings: Gone Missing

Kauai County Councilman Ross Kagawa missed eight of the 11 budget sessions that led to Friday's decision-making on the 2015-16 spending bill.

A review of budget hearing minutes and excuse memorandums showed that Ross skipped the departmental review meetings held on March 27 and 31, as well as April 2, 7, 9, 13, 14 and 16. And he left at noon on one of the three days he did attend.

Council Chair Mel Rapozo and Councilman Gary Hooser each missed two and a half sessions. Councilwoman JoAnn Yukimura missed about 90 minutes of one session. None of the other Council members missed any budget sessions, which typically last a full day.

The sessions include a revenue projection for the county and presentations by 18 county departments, where they defend their budget requests and discuss their objectives for the coming year. A review of the minutes showed that Councilmembers questioned department heads and staff at length about spending practices and upcoming needs.

Ross was present only for the sessions with the departments of finance and parks and recreation, and for the first of two sessions with the department of public works and its capital improvements budget.

Yet he participated vigorously in Council discussions on Thursday and Friday that led to adopting the county's budget. He also advanced what he described as a “bold” proposal to cut $1 million from a post-employment benefits fund.

That proposal died, with Budget Committee Chair Arryl Kaneshiro casting the swing vote against it.

Hooser, who recently launched his re-election bid with a promise to keep "property taxes for homeowners from going up once again,” failed to convince any of his colleagues to impose a property tax cut, which would've added $1.3 million to the budget shortfall.

Musings: Sound Familiar?

In the dubious “good news” category, we learn that tourism numbers — and spending — are up on Kauai.

This has Sue Kanoho, executive director of the Kauai Visitors Bureau, proclaiming:

What these numbers show is that we are starting to get back to peak-performance rates.

Peak performance? Only if you don't count the clogged roadways, the crowded beaches, the overflowing dump and cesspools, visitors staying in illegal, unsafe rentals, the out-of-control TVRs, the complete non-sustainability of the tourism industry, the soured locals, the disgruntled residents.

Sue goes on to gush:

Kauai is the Hawaii of old. The thing that people love about Kauai is that it is exotic and they can experience nature. Kauai is remote but still convenient.

Though not so convenient when you're stuck in the Kapaa traffic snarl, or the highway closes due to a crash and you miss your flight. And as a disgruntled Canadian visitor wrote in a letter to the editor yesterday, litter-strewn roadways, chicken abuse and being treated like shit is neither exotic, nor charming:

We found this experience to be very sad, the island that we had grown to love and respect had drastically changed, not by Mother Nature but by people that should know better and just take it for granted. Your culture is not for the tourists but is something you yourself own. Don’t be so quick to give it away.

Yes, you say if we don’t like it stay away, well, we have indeed made that decision. We will vacation where we are appreciated, not just tolerated. We get that the local people are frustrated, but it wasn’t us that sold your heritage.

It reminds me of a comment made by a man I met in India. He'd traveled the world, starting as a little boy. And the only place he was treated badly, he told me, was in Hawaii, where he'd been verbally abused for no reason he could ascertain, other than his white skin.

“I understand the colonialism thing, and why they feel unhappy with visitors,” he said. “But that didn't make it any easier to be on the receiving end of a really nasty tirade.”

And it was much the worse, he said, because he'd believed the tourism marketing myth about Hawaii's enduring aloha, extended to all. 

So 20,000 more people visited Kauai in the first three months of 2015 than the year before, and in keeping with the “more is better” mentality of the visitor industry, next year will be a success if it brings in 20,000 more than that.

Where does it end? Is the goal unlimited exposure, ever-growing numbers? How many visitors can Kauai support before it loses its exotic appeal and the stressed-out, priced-out locals lose their aloha?  Could it be we're already there?

Meanwhile, regular reader and frequent commenter Dawson sent me a link to a Los Angeles Times article that questions whether Santa Monica, or anyplace else, can enforce a ban on short-term rentals:

The explosion of tourist rental websites such as Airbnb is the latest challenge for governments struggling to keep up with technological disruption. With a unanimous vote of the City Council Tuesday night, Santa Monica set up a test case for how cities can rein in the so-called sharing economy.

Scott Shatford, who lists three units on Airbnb in Santa Monica, said he expects the more "entrepreneurial" short-term rental managers will find new ways to preserve their income.

"The profit margin is so great, and the demand is so great," he said. "If people recognize the dollars are there to do it, they'll figure out any possible method to make it work."

Santa Monica's restrictions aim to appease a coalition of irritated neighbors, affordable housing advocates and the hotel industry. But they are up against people and companies making good money renting out properties by the day.

Sound familiar?

AirBnB has even expanded to Cuba:

But the economic impact will be limited. Housing conditions in Cuba are particularly bad, and construction material difficult to come by, meaning only those who can afford it will be able to list, said Sebastian A. Arcos, associate director of the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University.

Sound familiar?

Congress is now starting to scrutinize this mushrooming industry, grilling AirBnB and Homeaway about "taxes, regulations and safety concerns,” the LA Times reports in a linked story:

"The sharing economy is here to stay and we should be working together on progressive rules that help regular Californians pay their bills and pursue their dreams," said Christopher Nulty, a spokesman for the [AirBnB] company.

Sound familiar? 

As Dawson astutely noted:

This movement has the potential to turn entire towns and regions into one giant hotel, disenfranchising huge numbers of locals.

If you live on the North Shore, or much of the Southside, that doesn't just sound familiar, it's the sad reality.

And finally, someone keeps trying to leave slanderous comments about Ka'aina, claiming he was not educated in planning and is otherwise unqualified for his new job as Deputy Planning Director. I checked with Director Mike Dahilig: 

Ka`aina graduated from U.C. Berkeley with a degree in Political Economy, which has an emphasis on Urban Planning. He was hired by the Department of Planning in 2007 as a Planner I. Over the past 8 years, he has worked within the Regulatory Division reviewing an array of different projects and plans. He has served as the lead planner on several zoning ordinances, including but not limited to the Farm Worker Housing Ordinance and currently the Homestay Ordinance. Over the past eight years, he has risen to a Planner V, and ultimately Deputy Director, a position for which both his educational background and years of experience qualify him.

The minimum qualification for the Deputy Planning Direction requires “A Bachelor’s degree in planning, engineering, architecture, or related field and a minimum of five years of training and experience working in a planning department.” 

So 'nuff already.

Musings: Biting the Dust

I feel sorry for the residents of Waimea who were plaintiffs in the lawsuit against DuPont-Pioneer.

Because what they got — money — apparently isn't what they wanted. The Garden Island reports Susan Arquette as saying:

The winning part is great, but they’ve got to change their practices. Otherwise, we won, but for what?

All we wanted out of this is for them to have ears. It is not the money. That is not why we did this. If you lived here, you would know what we’re talking about. It’s about people’s health.

So if what they wanted was for DuPont-Pioneer to change its practices, and pick up the phone when they call, why didn't they seek that specific relief? And if they wanted a definitive answer about health, why did they file a nuisance claim?

Could it be they were suckered by the attorneys — Kyle Smith, fresh from Las Vegas, and Gerard Jervis, not so fresh from the Bishop Estate suicide scandal — who were brought in by the anti-GMO groups looking for a way to ding the seed companies?

A 2013 Salon article riddled with the kind of bullshit — “growing cancer cluster,” “chemical oversprays twice closing Waimea Canyon Middle School” — that the anti-GMO movement feeds to gullible mainland writers includes this reference to the lawsuit:

In 2011 they retained Gerard Jervis, 64, a pioneering mass tort attorney in Honolulu, who recruited Kyle Smith, 37, an up-and-coming litigator from Las Vegas to join him. Before long Smith had moved his family to Honolulu to work on the case full-time.

So Jervis and Smith are going to split the usual 33 percent commission from the $507,000 award, which comes to about $150,000, or $75,000 each, and that's been enough to support Kyle and his family in Kailua for the past few years?

Something's just not adding up. Like who really bankrolled this litigation?

And if DuPont-Pioneer changed its practices of its own accord — even Susan Arquette says it's “way better,” except on the windiest days — and the health issue remains untouched, what really was the purpose of this lawsuit and its very limited verdict?

I mean, other than an opportunity for a certain politician and his red-shirted gang to trash talk the seed companies.

People are still so ignorant, like the reader who left this comment on the "Dusty and Dusted" post:

When did sugar plow/spray/water & fertilize a field three times after harvest? The major point here is that they are not typical farm operations sanctioned by GAAMP. There is far more dust the there ever was with sugar because the fields are bare. Just look with your own eyes and drive down to Mana on a windy day; the easiest place to watch. If there is a wind advisory they still plow. Sugar they planted the whole field until harvest.

I checked with a farmer who knows how sugar was grown on Kauai and got this:

My observation would be that sugar production created a lot more air pollution than seed production. While it's true that cane is a two year crop, the total area planted and the amount of uncovered soil at any given time greatly exceeded what is happening now. Also cane was burned along with the plastic drip lines.

The [seed companies'] plow/water/fertilize practice has to do with making sure that no volunteer seeds germinate before the next crop is planted so they get the left over seed in the ground to germinate by doing that. But again, on a much smaller scale than the old days. They could switch over to no-till which would involve more pesticide use.

Meanwhile, the argument brought forth in the Waimea litigation is somewhat moot, because the seed companies now plant cover crops and suppress dust with windbreaks, etc. That's why the jurors only found that Pioneer was not using generally accepted agricultural management practices for a very specific time period — Dec. 13, 2009 to Dec. 31, 2011.

There's also some irony in anti-GMO groups, which persistently preach the virtue of small farms, pursuing this sort of litigation. Large companies have the resources to suppress dust. Small farmers don't.

The multinational seed companies aren't going to fall because of dust nuisance suits. But the little guys with intolerant neighbors — or TVRs — in the ag district just might.

Musings: Sob Stories

Though The Garden Island has done a great job of printing B&B/homestay sob stories, it hasn't touched on the real tragedy: illegal TVRs trying to slip in under the wire and totally unsuitable B&Bs.

Take, for example, these AirBnB ads. One offers an airbed in a beachfront tent at Haena for $245 per night, while the other is a futon in a tent at Haena Beach Park for $40/night. So we've got folks pimping public beaches and facilities for profit.

Then there's simple greed, like the Haena house that offers two units, one of them an illegal B&B on the ground floor in the flood zone. The property is owned by Leila Kawaihalau and others. It's right next to a permitted TVR that made the Abuse Chronicles, and which Leila  also operates, so she can't exactly make like she never knew the rules.

Though she knew the county was no longer issuing TVR permits, Leila converted half of her house into one "B&B," then enclosed the downstairs to make a studio, with refrigerator, microwave, coffee-maker and separate entrance. 

While her ads hype the beautiful beach:

Tourists stay in this funky, illegal ground-floor enclosure:

Totally oblivious to the tsunami and wave inundation risks that come with being "less than 50 yards from the beach:"

And this is an area of big waves:

That do wash up onto the house lot:

Despite all the vegetation that's been planted on the public beach:

So is the Council, as it ponders the B&B/homestay ordinance, preparing to let stuff like this slide? 

Even as it endangers flood insurance for the entire island? Because the county is still under investigation by FEMA for allowing ground-floor bedrooms in the flood zone.

The Garden Island has portrayed the planning department as a heavy-handed bully destroying the livelihood of old folks and those simply pursuing a means to live on Kauai. 

But with its recent enforcement action, the planning department is doing exactly what the County Council ordered it to do when we exposed the TVR mess through the Abuse Chronicles. Though a Council majority declined to conduct an investigate, it directed the department to go after the “low-hanging fruit.” Or in other words, the guys operating illegally, with no permits.

The B&B/homestays were caught up in the sweep, prompting many of them to claim they'd tried to get permits, but failed because there was no process. But that doesn't jibe with the fact that some B&B permits were indeed issued in the past, though they're no longer in business.

And in reality, very few B&Bs were affected by the crack down. As of early May the county had issued just 93 cease and desist orders, of which only about 10-15 went to actual B&B/ homestays.

I discussed this issue with Beth-Ann Kozlovich on Hawaii Public Radio's “The Conversation” yesterday morning. She opened the segment with this:

When does your spare room become a business and who should regulate it? How those questions are answered on Kauai is splitting the community as they are debated in the County Council.

I reframed it to this:

The question many residents are asking is how much of the island should be in resort uses?

And this:

It all comes down to whether the Council has the political will to cut off all those illegal vacation rental owners. Many of them have a sense of entitlement since they've been paying the higher TVR property tax rate, even though they don't have TVR permits.

We'll just have to wait and see.

Musings: Dusty and Dusted

A federal jury has ordered DuPont-Pioneer to pay $507,090 in damages due to dust blowing from its Kauai agricultural fields. The money will be shared by 15 Waimea residents and attorneys Kyle Smith and Gerard Jervis.

The lawsuit did not address whether the dust contained pesticides or caused any health impacts.

But Councilman Gary Hooser wasted no time in posting a blog describing it as “vast amounts of pesticide laden dust.” He went on to write:

However, if the dust is bad enough to cause property damage then it surely must be causing damage also to health and environment.

The lawsuit was a snapshot in time, with the jury finding Pioneer failed to follow generally accepted agricultural and management practices between Dec. 13, 2009 and Dec. 31, 2011. 

It relied upon nuisance and trespass claims, with the seven-member jury finding that the plaintiffs had not given permission for Pioneer's dust to enter their property, and suffered loss of use and enjoyment.

Those awarded damages are Allan and Susan Arquette $69,853; Edwin and Kristine Dela Cruz $88,214; Eric and Shelby-Ann Erdmann $63,919; Mitsuko Hookano $42,208.50; Michael and Vivian Kunselman $50,632; Giuseppe “Jo” Gerek-King $55,900; James and Dionis McGihon $46,180; Dennis Okihara $35,507.50 and Gary and Ann Marie Underwood $54,676. The jury also found that all the plaintiffs had mitigated their damages.

Though Gary and anti-GMO activists are already hyping its significance in fighting the biotech companies, the verdict was actually quite narrow. You can read it here.

Meanwhile, Gary's truth-challenged visit to the Syngenta shareholder's meeting in Switzerland prompted Council Chair Mel Rapozo to send the company a letter distancing the Council from its anti-GMO colleague. Mel wrote:

Mr. Hooser's statements were not made on behalf of the Council body, and were not in any way officially directed or sanctioned by the Council.

Mel also clarified that Gary's plea for Syngenta to follow Kauai County's laws had no basis in reality. Judge Barry Kurren declared Bill 2491/Ordinance 960 invalid, and ordered the county not to enforce it, Mel wrote. That decision is currently under appeal.

[T]herefore the law remains invalid and has not taken effect. Accordingly, Syngenta could not possibly be in violation of the law.

Allan Parachini makes a valid point in today's The Garden Island that the anti-GMO movement essentially conceded the Hawaii legal fight by seeking Legislative action giving counties the right to regulate pesticides and GMOs. Because if the counties already have that right, as anti-GMO attorneys argue, why would they need the Lege to specifically give it to them?

At any rate, their legislative efforts failed entirely. None of the bills pushed by the anti-GMO movement survived the session.

Which is why the Hawaii branch of the mainland-based Center for Food Safety is returning to its time-worn strategy: fear-mongering. The anti-GMO group is releasing “Pesticides in Paradise,” a report that purports to “establishe[s] the relationship between pesticide use, genetically engineered field test sites and public health risks in Hawaii.

The report supposedly:

delivers a comprehensive review of published scientific and medical research examining the threats pesticides used in Hawaii pose to public health, especially the risk to pregnant women and young children.

Sounds like CFS is trying to get a jump on the Joint Fact Finding Group, which is due to issue a report on its independent review of what's really known about pesticides and GMOs on Kauai.

And finally, I saw this comment on a TGI article about ag awareness day at the UH-CTAHR extension station in Wailua, where kids are exposed to a range of agricultural activities:




kona posted at 8:11 pm on Thu, May 7, 2015. 


Teach our children the importance of organic farming. Teach our children that Chemical Corporations should not be in control of the world's food. Teach them that if you are not growing food on Kaua'i you are NOT a Kaua'i farmer. You are a toxic poison sprayer and you are hurting the island and its people.



 

Gosh. Doncha just love tolerance in education?

Musings: Damage Done

So once again Kauai has the reputation of being out of control, over the top, hot-headed, as yet another series of meetings — the proposed expansion of the humpback whale sanctuary, — is marked by contentiousness and rancor.

Only this time, one of the facilitators also mixed it up, with sanctuary superintendent Malia Chow getting into a heated exchange with westside fisherman Greg Holzman before the first meeting, which was held in Kilauea.

Malia, who admits she lost control of her emotions, probably shouldn't have continued to lead the meetings after they got off to such a rocky start. And though Mitchell Alapa later apologized for his profanity-laced diatribe at the same meeting, it set a certain tenor of incivility that is hard to erase.

Ugly outbursts, frequently fueled by alcohol, are nothing new at Kauai meetings. But it seems that folks can't get together to talk about anything controversial anymore without the meeting turning into a giant hissy fit.

Things really began to take a turn for the worse at meetings on the proposed Public Land Development Corp., with Councilman Gary Hooser encouraging the jackboot mentality through his January 2013 “million little fists” call to action:

A million little fists waving in unison can have a huge impact. Keep it waving. When you get tired of waving, pound it against governments [sic] door. Pound it in the face of corporate greed and abuse.

So he and his “fistees” waved and pounded and bullied their way through the hearings on anti-GMO Bill 2491, shut down a meeting on the horizontal drilling well before anyone got a chance to speak and have continued to foster a climate of shouting down and intimidation that now seems to characterize any attempts at public discourse on the island.

Yeah, people are frustrated and fed up, often with cause, but waving fists is not a good strategy, unless your a toddler throwing a tantrum. When meetings are continually characterized by acrimony andconflict, to the point where some folks are afraid to participate and the presenters end up feeling abused, well, then we've lost an important component of democracy.

Of course, this trend isn't unique to Kauai. Just this past weekend I was talking to a friend who lives in a small Massachusetts town that is now bitterly divided over a proposal to build a new library. When her husband started a group dedicated to civil communication, which included talking to proponents and opponents, he was branded as a sell-out, an enemy, a defector to the other side.

Since when is open communication an evil act, compromise a dirty word? Since when has "shill" defined a person who can see another point of view?

The problem is exacerbated in that Massachusetts town, and on Kauai, because of the smallness of the communities. On Kauai, it's compounded by the presence of so many perceived “others” — the seed companies, haoles, newcomers, PMRF, tourists, the federal government, even locals — all of which are blamed by somebody for destroying the place.

And when someone is dehumanized, or demonized as the "other," it's pretty easy to treat them with disdain, disrespect and disregard.

An article in The Garden Island today that outlines the petty beef between Chow and Holzman reports:

Anne Walton, the sanctuary’s program analyst, said the anger that dominated the public hearings is par for the course on Kauai — although not on the other islands — when any major change is proposed.

“I think people think that’s how you get heard,” Walton said. “The loudest and the most angry get heard, but there are many other voices and points of view that get lost.”

Anne has it right. People do think that's how they get heard. But in reality, the loud angry voices just turn people off — especially decision-makers.

So how do we change this trend? My friend, who lived on Kauai in the 1990s, recalled training environmentalists and others in meeting facilitation and mediation, with the intent of making them more effective at getting their voices heard.

A lot of those folks have gotten older, stepped out of the public arena, turned their attention to other things. Perhaps it's time to train a new group of young people in ways to rein in their out-of-control friends and neighbors when they start going off at public meetings.

Still when we talked about the ugliness that divided my community over GMOs, and her community over a library, neither of us felt very hopeful about the process of mending fences, building bridges or even striking an uneasy peace.

As she observed, and I tend to agree, “You don't come back from something like that. The damage has been done.”

Or to borrow a phrase coined by blogger Joni Kamiya-Rose, “the bleeding of aloha” continues unabated.

Musings: Interesting Twists

In yet another indication that Hawaii progressives have suffered under the influence of the anti-GMO movement, Kauai Sen. Ron Kouchi assumed presidency of the state Senate just two days before the session is set to end.

Those who voted against a resolution replacing Donna Mercado-Kim with Kouchi — Sens. Les Ihara, Gil Riviere, Russell Ruderman, Sam Slom and Laura Thielen — were among the most active in seeking to control the biotech industry and defeat Carleton Ching's nomination to the Department of Land and Natural Resources. [Update: To clarify, Sam Slom is not opposed to biotech or GMOs. My poorly phrased paragraph implied that he is, when I meant only to include him among those who voted against the resolution.]

As a result, Ruderman is likely to lose chairmanship of the Agriculture Committee to Clarence Nishihara, who supports biotech and general ag. Thielen is also expected to be ousted as chair of the powerful Water and Land Committee, while anti-GMO advocate Josh Green will lose control of the Health Committee.

In an interesting twist of fate, Kouchi replaced Gary Hooser when he quit the Senate to make an ill-fated run for Lieutenant Governor. Now Kouchi, a 22-year veteran of the Kauai County Council, is the powerful Senate president while Hooser is attempting to advance the anti-GMO movement from his position as last-place Council member.

As a quick related aside, Linda Estes has been nominated as the Kauai rep on the state Land Use Commission. She's slated to replace Dr. Neil Clendeninn, who has been serving as interim commissioner. Though Linda has no experience in land issues, she did donate $4,425 to the campaign of Gov. David Ige.

Returning to interesting twists, while Hooser was in Switzerland, unsuccessfully seeking to get Syngenta stakeholders to stop biotech operations and pesticide applications in Hawaii, the National Center for Public Policy Research was having better luck convincing Coca-Cola shareholders to do more to promote the safety and benefit of GMOs.

As Justin Danhof, a project director for the Center, noted:

The anti-GMO attacks come from Americans who have likely never missed a meal in their lives. Their campaign against GMOs is unscientific, fear-based and inhumane, but they are winning. One ABC News poll showed 93 percent of Americans think the federal government should mandate GMO labeling - a tactic they hope will elevate GMOs with taboo products such as tobacco and alcohol.

Danhof said large food and beverage companies have a “moral obligation to set the record straight” and asked Coca-Cola CEO Muhtar Kent to make himself and the company's health scientists and nutrition specialists available to the American and international media “to combat the unscientific activists and stand up for the promise of GMOs.”

Kent agreed to “recommit” the company's regulatory affairs and scientific executives to discussions with groups like Danhof's. Kent went on to say:

[W]e firmly believe that there is — that the only way that we can combat some of these matters that you've just talked about is again, that golden triangle of government — not relying solely on government though, business, and civil society organizations like yours, public policy think-tanks like yours, coming together and talking about how we have more sound science, how we can have better science and how we can collaborate more to make sure that consumers are better educated, government officials are better educated and that we can have a consensus of view forward on how to deal with some of these major issues that you have outlined.

It's interesting — and twisted — how activists have focused so intently on pressing fast-food purveyors like McDonald's, Starbucks and Chipolte to go GMO-free, instead of looking at the bigger health and environmental ramifications of fast-food, convenience food, processed food and single-serving cans and bottles.

Musings: Not Rocket Science

Though there's been quite a bit of hysteria about the Kauai County planning department's crackdown on illegal visitor accommodations, the numbers tell the real story.

The department began by reviewing records in the county's Real Property Division, where it identified approximately 320 properties that were assessed and paying taxes for a self-declared transient accommodation, without having the proper permits.

The planning department’s enforcement division then investigated the sites to determine if they were in fact operating without the required zoning permits. As of last Thursday, it had completed its investigation into approximately 160 of these properties, and issued approximately 93 “cease and desist orders.”

According to an email from Planning Director Mike Dahilig:

The vast majority of these operations are illegal TVRs. The Department is reviewing each case to determine the specific type of operation, but of the 93 cease and desist orders, a handful of these operations (we anticipate approximately 10 to 15) are homestays where the actual owner occupies the dwelling.

Besides the homestay/bed and breakfast operations, the Department is seeing many TVR operators (owners not living within the dwellings) attempting to apply under the CZO’s current definition of Homestay. Because of a loophole within the CZO’s definition of Homestays, we do have to process these applications; however, the Department is taking a firm stance against these types of applications before the Commission.

So the reality is exactly as suspected: Some 90% of the cease and desist orders have been properly issued to illegal TVR owners who can no longer get permits, but are trying to game the system.

Do they deserve mercy? Pity? Special treatment? A blanket grandfathering of each and every operation? Should they be allowed to bring down the legitimate homestay/B&B operations by slipping in on their coattails?

After my last two blog posts on the the issue, where I identified a number of questionable operations in Kilauea, I got some emails from owners who wanted to meet so I could explain the law to them, which is definitely not my kuleana. Others wanted to plead their case and have me visit their operations.

One of them was Hilary Ferris-Chandler, who operates the Kauai Retreat Center, which I characterized as a hotel because it has six bedrooms, each with “private outside keyed entrances.” It's on an ag CPR in Waipake, next to the ginger/tumeric farm operated by Hilary's brother, Ben Ferris.

Though it is listed on BedandBreakfast.com, it began life as an unpermitted TVR. Or as Hilary described it:

My father bought the secluded property and then built the house in year 2000 because his wife was an artist who wanted to have art groups accommodated for on the north shore and there was no art retreat accommodations around at that time.

I am the manager/owner and directly went to the planning commission for a permit for this use in 2001. I was told by Ian Costa the then planning director that there was no permit for this use available at that time and people “just did it”.  So we built specifically for this purpose and since it is very secluded with only family as neighbor and not bothering anybody we have offered it as a “retreat center” to many groups seeking seclusion with a venue to have group activities.

When the “grandfathering” permit for TVR became available, we were among the very first to apply. Our application was deemed complete. Then the planning commission added another condition that on Ag land 75% of CPR owners needed to sign.

They were unable to get 75 percent of their co-owners to sign, and so were unable to secure a TVR use permit. While appealing that decision in court, they have continued to operate.

Hilary then went on to say:

I believe that if our house was under ANY other use it would impact … the neighborhood far more. Again, please know that we try our utmost to be extremely sensitive PONO neighbors and believe that we do not bother anyone at all.

In my reply to her, I wrote:

I am glad to hear your story. But still, it troubles me, because you were essentially told you are not eligible for a TVR, since you couldn't get 75% of your CPR to agree (for whatever reason) but you have continued to operate it, knowing it does not have a permit, and are now treating it like a homestay/B&B, which it isn't, because you aren't there living under the same roof.

It does seem like you got bad advice from Ian Costa, who certainly should have known better, and I think it's great that your brother is farming. But it seems there is no denying that it is an unpermitted TVR on ag land. And given that it has six bedrooms, all with private outside keyed entrances, it does seem to function as a small hotel.

I'm not sure how all this will ultimately be resolved, but certainly you can see the problems that would start to arise, and the impact on agricultural land values, if everyone were allowed to open their own 6-bedroom resort-type accommodation.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on how you think this type of activity could be nipped in the bud in a fair way. Or do you think that there should be no restrictions on this kind of use?

Though she thanked me for my reply and “mana’o,” she did not answer my questions.

And this is where Kauai County now stands. It has 455 approved and active TVR certificates, hundreds of illegal TVRs and perhaps a few dozen unlicensed homestays/B&Bs.

According to Mike:

The Department currently has 14 accepted applications for homestay operations. Of the 14, 10 are owner-occupied and four are not. There are at least 20 more (a number that grows almost daily) that are in pre-application review with the Department. Of these, no applications have been officially accepted; however, the majority of them, it appears, are not owner-occupied operations. The Department is also receiving daily phone calls requesting information regarding the Use Permit process for homestays. The Department can only resolve this matter upon the submittal of an application, and pre-consultation with the applicant.

The department's response has been to submit an ordinance, approved by the Planning Commission and now before the County Council, that defines homestay/B&B as having a live-in homeowner. Mike writes:

This is why the proposed definition before the County Council is so important; it will essentially close the door on non-owner occupied transient accommodations from applying for homestay use permits.

Councilman Ross Kagawa has predicted that passing an ordinance will be a long, painful process. Of course, the longer it's dragged out, the more applications get in the hopper, and the problem just mushrooms.

If the Council just accepts that simple definition — a live-in homeowner — shouldn't it be pretty easy to separate out the real homestays/B&Bs from the TVRs that are masquerading as such?

And then wouldn't it be easy to say no to all those who don't meet the definition, regardless of their pleas and tears?

Musings: Admirable Activists

On a recent blog post about activism — especially hobby activism — a reader left a comment that read in part:

Support those who are leading the fight for sovereignty, pono, aloha ʻāina, and cultural respect. Spend more time supporting and encouraging people instead of putting them down?

Actually, I was only putting down cause celebre and social media activists. Over nearly three decades of covering controversial issues in Hawaii, I've met a few activists I really respect.

Like Dana Naone Hall, who has worked tirelessly on burial preservation and environmental issues, even during times of challenging health issues. She is someone who understands the law — and uses it when necessary — and does her homework scrupulously.

Andre Perez is active in a wide spectrum of issues — Hawaiian independence, burial preservation, anti-militarism, prison reform, the TMT, homelessness and more. He engages in direct action when necessary — I first met him when he and others locked arms, literally, at Naue — and is also hands-on in projects that make a difference, like restoring and planting loi, working with kanaka in the prison system, educating kanaka about political and cultural issues and more. He's also educated himself, earning a degree while raising a family. 

In short, he walks the talk.

Caren Diamond is an exemplary activist because she sticks with it, and does her homework. She also knows the law, and the political process. Besides her work on the vacation rental issue, she's made a real difference in shoreline protection and access. With the help of Harold Bronstein — who, with Dan Hempey, is one of my hero attorneys for doing socially conscious pro bono work — she took two cases to the Hawaii Supreme Court that resulted in decisions affirming the public trust in regard to the shoreline.

Barbara Robeson is another activist who does her homework and is in it for the long haul. She's been working for some three decades to protect the historical properties of the North Shore, including the one-lane roads and bridges, and has been an advocate for sensible planning. She's been a consistent voice in highlighting the abuse of the TVR issue. Barbara is another person who understands the process and does meticulous research. She's also a very classy lady who keeps her cool and treats people with civility and respect.

Just yesterday, in fact, I was talking with someone who shared my aspirations to be more like Barbara.

These are four activists who have managed to maintain credibility over many years, and that has directly contributed to their effectiveness. I think activists who are quick to spout nonsense, hyperbole and outright lies fail to realize that once they've squandered their credibility, they've lost power.

I also want to give props to Bronson Kaahui, largely because he's a person who had a strong opinion, but then changed it after getting more information. 

Specifically, Bronson used to be anti-GMO, but after seeing that movement in action, and getting criticized for asking questions, he educated himself on the topic and became a supporter of biotech. While he's still learning the activist ropes, I want to give him props for having the courage to question, even in the face of intense social pressure, and change his beliefs when confronted with factual data.

That, unfortunately is extremely rare. But it's also the mark of a thinking person. 

And we need a lot more thinking, persistent people among the ranks of the activists.

Musings: La-La Land

How does NOAA expect to build momentum for expanding the Hawaiian Island Humpback Whale Sanctuary when it's simultaneously proposing to remove that magnificent mammal from the Endangered Species List?

Sounds like it's time to scale back the sanctuary. There's just no way folks are going to support more federal control over Hawaiian waters, especially on the westside, where PMRF already exerts so much control.

Several folks have told me they want to scale back Kauai County Councilman Gary Hooser's political career. Or in other words, impeach him. 

They do have good cause. 

His publicity stunt in Switzerland caused him to miss two County Council meetings, for which he is nonetheless paid.

Gary also blew off a Council meeting to testify at the Legislature against the nomination of Carelton Ching. That makes a total of three Council meetings that he's missed this term while working directly on behalf of HAPA, his political advocacy group that masquerades as a nonprofit.

Gary has consistently represented himself to the Legislature and other bodies, including the people of Switzerland and the shareholders of Syngenta, as speaking on behalf of the Kauai County Council and even the entire community. He has done this even though he specifically promised that he was visiting Switzerland on behalf of HAPA and would be speaking as an individual citizen.

He's also shown himself to be of questionable moral character because he repeatedly and publicly misrepresents facts and lies outright — all to advance the cause of HAPA.

Unfortunately, Article XXVII of the Kauai County Charter makes it impossible to impeach Hooser, for two reasons:

1. Only elected officials serving four-year terms can be recalled (27.01). Council is a two-year term.

2. Even if politicians in two-year terms could be recalled, removal by recall cannot occur during the first six months of the term in which the recall is conducted (27.09). Gary is now entering his sixth month.

Perhaps it's time for the Charter Review Commission to visit the recall provisions in the Charter and ask the voters whether they'd like the opportunity to impeach Council members who engage in misconduct during their first months in office.

Meanwhile, Walter Lewis is keeping up the call for a city manager/Council form of government as his pal, Glenn Mickens, sings the praises of disgraced County Auditor Ernie Pasion in the newspaper's letters to the editor section.

While I've seen the manager system work well in other municipalities, there's a good reason why it will not succeed here: the County Council. That's the panel that hired Ernie, even though he wasn't qualified, and then bungled his firing, prompting him to file a lawsuit and take home a hefty settlement for spending his term first engaged in political vendettas, and then doing zip.

That debacle cost taxpayers $400,000 in legal fees and $300,000 in a settlement.

So why would anyone in their right mind think the Council would hire a qualified, competent, experienced city manager to run the county— especially one that might challenge them, as a good manager should do? If they couldn't manage an auditor, how could the manage a manager?

It ain't gonna happen, except in the fantasies of Walter Lewis, Ken Taylor, Glenn Mickens and a few others who harken for the good old days on the mainland they left.

But here is a smart move on the part of the Council: picking Jade K. Fountain-Tanigawa as the County Clerk of the County. A resolution appointing her is on the May 6 agenda, and she deserves to be approved.

Also on the May 6 agenda is the second reading of a bill that hasn't gotten much attention. Introduced by Councilman Mason Chock, Bill 2585 calls for slashing the percentage of real property tax revenue that's appropriated to the public access, open space and natural resources preservation fund. Rather than the 1.5 percent approved by voters, just 0.5% would be appropriated.

It's another budget-cutting measure, and it directly impacts the people of Kauai by making it harder to buy or otherwise acquire significant lands for public access and preservation. But then, the commission has never really been taken seriously, which is why it has $5 million just sitting there for acquisition.

Meanwhile, Fern Rosenstiel of Ohana o Kauai took to Civil Beat to tell how she, Gary and Malia Chun had “shared their [fabricated] story” about pesticides with the Swiss:

They are appalled to know that we are only asking for disclosure, so we can know when to shut our windows.

Surely Fern knows that all the companies disclose their pesticide use on the Good Neighbor website. And though it isn't required, they also provide pre-notification of pesticide applications to schools, KVMH and any residents in the area who have signed up for the notification. The only exception to the pre-notification is Pioneer, which isn't allowed to contact residents because some of them are involved in the dust lawsuit against the company.

So ya gotta wonder, is Fern hopelessly out of touch with reality, or simply telling tales?

Her piece prompted a number of comments, including one from Kilauea resident Cyndee Fehring, directed toward a UH researcher:

You sit in the ivory tower of U of H, which is in a cozy relationship with these corporations, while we grow food here ORGANICALLY and in abundance. I'll put up my experience as an organic farmer seeking organic solutions to problems against Syngenta's researchers and your university degrees, any day of the week.

Really? If you're such a successful farmer, then why must you supplement your income with an illegal TVR on ag land? If Kauai folks are growing organic food in abundance, why is nearly everything edible still imported? And do you truly believe that you, as a new hobby farmer, know as much about agriculture as Ph.D. researchers?

Yet another person with an exaggerated sense of self telling tall tales in la-la land.