...A maddening resistance to change
by Rob Parsons
 |
 |
 |
Four
separate assemblages last week showcased the bewildering extent to
which Maui's leaders are still marching in step with the old saying,
"The more things change, the more they stay the same."
In spite
of multiple signs indicating the decay of long-standing institutions
and practices, failure to heed the handwriting on the wall is hindering
substantial progress, while overseers cling to the status quo like a
frayed security blanket.
From the thundering surf sent as a
reminder of human-induced climate change to foundation-rattling
economic temblors, one would think the omens would evoke timely
corrective measures from our utilities, plantations and politicos.
Tourism,
sugar, pineapple, fossil fuel, planning strategies—all ripe for change.
But due to entrenched thinking, denial, lack of vision or plain
ineptitude, vital retrofits are continually put on hold. "Please listen
to the music and the next available operator will assist you shortly."
Tuesday Evening—Velma Santos Community Center, Wailuku
About
thirty people have gathered to offer testimony to the Board of Water
Supply at the first public hearing on the long-awaited Water Use and
Development Plan (WDUP) for Central and South Maui. With broad
implications for the future of urban development and agriculture alike,
the soiree is also a prelude for the state's final judgment on
allocation for Na Wai Eha, the four great stream waters of the West
Maui Mountains.
Native Hawaiians, taro growers, smart growth
advocates and Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar employees all have their
say, though with few questions asked by water board members. Chair
Michael Howden finally expresses his frustration with the Department of
Water Supply for not providing requested updates on the proposed Waiale
Treatment facility. If approved, that plan could divert Na Wai Eha
waters for more urban uses, with HC&S parent corporation Alexander
& Baldwin retaining half of a potential nine-million gallon per day
allotment—though details aren't finalized. "It's embarrassing,"
exclaims Howden, clearly discouraged at the lack of information from
the administration.
Planning Director Jeffrey Hunt, however,
does have something to offer—his opinion that the WDUP should wait
until the County Council completes its review of the General Plan
revision, which it may not tackle in earnest until after its yearly
budget deliberations are finished next May. "We need to have planning
based on planning [criteria]," says Hunt, "not based on water."
Yet
he must know that the two are inseparable, and that intelligent water
resource guidelines are essential to sustain an agricultural component
capable of feeding our residents, as well as anticipating new urban
growth. Both the WDUP and the General Plan update are years overdue.
The Water Board recommendations to the Council, by law, must be sent
within 180 days, while the Council's review of the Maui Island Plan
must hear a final vote by October 2010. And it's a sure bet that where
water is available, development money will follow.
Wednesday Evening – Maui Waena School, Kahului
The
state Public Utilities Commission makes a rare appearance on the Valley
Isle, conducting a public hearing required when Maui Electric Company,
Inc. announced its request for a 9.7 percent rate increase, the first
such adjustment in three years. According to a short blurb in the
November issue of Consumer Lines, the newsletter and recipe sheet
accompanying the monthly bill, the proposed increase would raise as
much as $28 million more in 2010 than the current rate, to be put
toward more than $122 million in "new capital projects to improve
service reliability."
Among costs cited are more frequent
inspections of utility poles and lines, upgrades for the Maalaea diesel
generating units and "increased tree trimming around power lines for
greater reliability." But the large rate increase request—enough to add
$13-$15 to the average monthly residential bill—leaves many unanswered
questions. For instance, would this increase fund the proposed 70-foot
tall steel poles and overhead high voltage transmission lines proposed
to march from Maalaea to a new substation in South Maui?
However,
this isn't a public forum or question-and-answer session with MECO—it's
a hearing on their 577-page application submitted to the PUC, bolstered
by another 7,622 pages of supporting documents. Moreover, MECO didn't
publish the meeting date and time in the December issue of Consumer
Lines, and thus only a handful of citizens attended. (Alas, apparently
the Christmas tree lighting advice and the croissant bread pudding
recipe were more important than alerting rate-payers of meetings
scheduled on three islands.)
West Maui resident and County
Council candidate Elle Cochran asks the PUC to withhold their decision
until MECO has made good faith efforts to help the public understand
the details of their plans. MECO president Ed Reinhardt responds that
he has an open-door policy and is glad to talk story with members of
the community.
 |
|
|
Brad Albert of Rising Sun Solar and the Hawaii PV
Coalition expresses his concern that, although MECO has touted their
integration of renewables into the grid, solar homeowners within five
areas on Maui may be saddled with additional costs or may have their
photovoltaic system denied if current net-metering ceilings are
surpassed. Rule 14H stipulates that any circuit in excess of 10 percent
distributed generation may necessitate a line study, paid for by the
homeowner, to determine if his new system can be safely brought online
without compromising the grid.
Albert reports that his customers
have felt discouraged and helpless. "In addition to the financial
hardship," he writes, "there is a moral injustice for those who want to
offset their carbon footprint with a solar system and are denied
access. We should do our best to provide equitable access to Hawaii's
solar resource."
Thursday Pau Hana – Hoaloha Park, Kahului
Creeping
down Kaahumanu Avenue at afternoon rush hour, as the sun slips low in
the sky, I see a big white tent set up across from the Old Kahului
Shopping Center, where Ah Fooks once stood. Is it a canoe club
gathering? No, season stay pau. A Christmas tree sale? Nope—no
fresh-cut spruce or Douglas firs in sight.
Yet a steady stream
of cars drives in, and the crosswalk funnels many more to the
gathering. As it turns out, it's the A&B/HC&S/ILWU rally to
remind workers to turn out at County Council the following day, where a
resolution to support agriculture water allocations will be discussed.
The tactic is perhaps as old as the sugar mill itself: bring people
together with the lure of food, and make a show of force sure to
convince elected officials. The formula has often been repeated by
developers, construction unions and building contractors.
But a
critical thinker might question how a bean counter—in this case Chief
Financial Officer Chris Benjamin, now appointed to plantation
manager—can justify the expense for the tent and kau kau after
projecting losses in excess of $20 million this year in A&B's
agricultural sector. It's apparently part of an unwavering strategy of
pitting plantation jobs as sacrificial lambs versus any talk of
diminishing A&B's stranglehold on surface water diversions for
sugar cane irrigation and processing.
Letters to the editor of
The Maui News claim that stream restoration could mean the end of
sugar, and 700-plus jobs. That notion is strongly refuted by Alan
Murakami, attorney with Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation, representing
kuleana users and taro growers who have petitioned for restoring East
Maui streams.
"We need to debunk this notion that the root cause
of HC&S's economic problems is the threat of taking its diverted
water away," Murakami writes. "HC&S lost $13 million in 2008 and
will lose $27 million by the end of this year—and while they have the
water!
"Its problems are more with the global markets and the
lower costs of producing sugar elsewhere, especially in Asia," he
continues. "That's what all the other major plantations found out in
the past three decades. HC&S wants the water so it can later
convert its lands to whatever alternative developments it will pursue."
Friday Morning – County Council Chambers, Wailuku
In
a move that many deemed politically motivated in support of A&B and
the sugar plantation, County Council hears testimony for and against a
resolution that would urge the state Commission for Water Resource
Management to "consider the importance of agricultural uses," while
setting instream flow standards for Na Wai Eha surface water
diversions. Some felt the plantation's influence had reached beyond the
opinion page and the rally of the previous night, all the way to the
8th floor of the County building.
Chair Danny Mateo defends the
resolution, calling it beneficial to both small farmers and the larger
struggling sugar cane operations. 'Iao Valley taro farmer John Duey
says the resolution was after-the fact, since the CWRM has studied the
matter for three years, already considered current and potential uses
and issued preliminary standards in October that could restore nearly
half of the current diversions.
Other testifiers remind the
Council that healthy stream flows greatly recharge the overtapped 'Iao
aquifer, the primary source of potable water throughout Central and
South Maui. Community watchdog Lucienne de Naie, draws upon her years
of water studies to propose several new "whereas" sections and to add
several "missing facts" to the resolution.
In the end, the Council sends the proposed matter to committee, where it will likely be rendered impotent.
In
the absence of visionary leadership to help bridge the gap from the
withering status quo to a new "Green Economy," local residents must
look elsewhere to fulfill the promises for local food security,
renewable energy and a revitalized, diversified economy. Indeed,
grassroots community efforts and entrepreneurial undertakings might
prove more effective than slow-paced government initiatives. And
frustrated citizens might get off their okoles to vote in new
leadership in 2010. It could happen.