Three of the five albatrosses must be having a meeting of some sort after gliding all around Laniloa Point. We think they came from the Kahuku Federal Wildlife Refuge. It was a rare sight. Five Laysan Albatrosses decided to check out Laniloa Point Wednesday morning.
I decided to do a quick google-search and here are some of the fun facts list below! Click on this site and you can also know the age of probably the oldest albatross “on record”.
Did You Know?
An albatross has the largest wingspan of any living bird
They can go years without touching land
They can live and raise chicks into their 60s
They mate for life, with some wiggle room
They court each other with elaborate mating dances
They can smell food in the water from 12 miles away
Flight
Albatrosses can sleep while flying.
It takes about two months for a Laysan albatross to fly once around the earth.
An albatross is known to fly 49,700 miles without touching land. Its long and narrow wingspans are used to ride the ocean winds.
They perform specialized gliding techniques in order to minimize the use of muscles and energy.
Before taking off, an albatross needs a run up to allow enough air to move under the wings to provide lift. It is the most energy demanding part of a journey.
Albatross uses their massive wingspan to travel long distances without using their muscles.
These birds can fly for many days high in the sky and do not flap their wings once.”
Someone told me a long time ago that, in the 1970s, developers were given quick permits to build in the business center of Honolulu without much thought for needed parking. This commerce center is obviously more congested today but I think that piece of information about not being cognizant of future needs is probably very true.
I had to go to a building yesterday for an errand and sure enough, there were no parking spaces connected to that tall building. All customers have to find their own parking elsewhere. It’s not convenient when there are bulky items to carry around. But I usually end up at Ali’i Place at 1099 Alakea Street, Honolulu, 96813 for my parking needs. It is a good place to know for those who are not familiar with Downtown Honolulu.
This is the place where I find inexpensive parking because it has a quasi city county parking at a good rate. It’s clean and safe. There are usually some spaces available. It also does not have a 2-hour limit; I can’t count the number of tickets I’ve gotten for expired limits. Ali’i Place is my ‘launching point’ to visit the State Capitol, Honolulu Hale, and the District Court, which is just across the Street.
Wishing you a happy, healthy, and prosperous NEW YEAR!
I missed January 1, 2022! So this is my second chance to start a “NEW YEAR” resolution to highlight or share issues that affect us. I resolve to write something useful every day on this blog!
So much have happened since the advent of COVID19 in 2020. Here we are on February 1st, 2022 and we’re still struggling with this pandemic. COVID19 has brought out the worst and the best in humanity.
I will share this testimony below as my first post since I’ve just submitted it to the Hawaii State Legislature. If you feel this is an important issue, please write a quick testimony to let your senators know what you think. We should let them know of our expectations. Click on this SB 1357 to submit a quick testimony.
It’s very obvious that this SB 1357 is created to shut down citizen participation and involvement in Hawaii. There is no quarrel that Democracy can be messy, loud, and unpleasant, especially to authorities who are being resisted against.
Free speech, the freedom to protest, and to assemble with expressions must not be shut down through this thinly-veiled facade of “ Traffic violations to PROHIBIT display of any material that distracts, obstructs the view of, or affects the safety of other drivers, including but not limited to flags, towels, sheets, and cloths, on vehicles being operated or moved on a public street, road, or highway, except when required to be displayed for loads that extend beyond the vehicle. Sets a fine.”
The public knows this SB 1357 is targeted at the recent displays of protests and discontent amongst many Hawaii residents. The displays of civil discontent have been displayed through banners and flags options that are available to the people. There have been no raids or violence or vandalism.
Instead of trying to shut down citizenship participation and discontent, it would be more democratic and effective to figure out how the government can improve to lessen this growing discontent.
SB 1357 is too over-bearing and tyrannical. It violates the basic fundamental rights of a citizen to express oneself in a free society. This SB 1357 not only tries to stamp out dissension, it also wants to punish those who participate through their expressions.
Please defer Bill 1357. It’s over-bearing and tyrannical to say the least. No elected official in the Hawaii State Legislature should think or behave like they are akin to the Community Party of China – to crush and shut down public participation through various means.
I was a young mother with a 2-year-old boy living at Wymount Terrace on the BYU Provo campus in Utah. I was doing laundry with Robbie when a tall dark man walked into the laundry room.
I don’t know what his nationality was. He could have been a black-American citizen or a “foreigner”. But he did have a particularly dark pigment.
When Robbie saw him, his quick response was to point to him and said loudly, “Mom, what is that?”
That was awkward.
But I immediately told Robbie that he was our friend who had a darker skin than us. I said it loud enough so our visitor could hear it. Our new friend and I smiled at each other .
Our kind visitor understood a child. He did not get offended. He did not get angry. He did not blame me for my child’s actions. He did not start lecturing me.
I think about that incident once in a while. Someone who had no exposure to a black person could naturally react the way he did. I appreciate that good man with a kind understanding nature. It makes life less complicated.
I consider myself fortunate to grow up in Singapore till I was seventeen. We lived happily and peacefully with so many different races, cultures, customs, languages, religions, cuisine, and so forth.
My childhood friends were Chinese, Malays, Indians, Tamils, and others. Some of my best childhood friends were Muslims. A neighboring Malay mother nursed me in addition to her own infant when my mother fell ill for a time and could not lactate.
My father’s drinking buddy was a Hindu Indian who spoke the Hokkien dialect. When Chandra died, mother was mad at him; she said that he did not cry his heart out for his own parents like he did for Chandra.
It was not that there were no racial conflicts or unrest. I remember the Malays and Chinese tensions headlines. (But there was no friction in our own community.) I’m guessing it was during the Singapore merger with Malaysia in 1963 or thereabouts. We were living on a farm off Holland Road area. I recall one night witnessing the menfolks together with their changkols. They were building underground pits with grass-top covers to prepare for possible raids from the outside.
All in all, with the Singapore government’s concerted efforts to unify and achieve racial harmony and equality, those racial tensions dissipated to a minimal.
I can’t recall any politician in my youth in Singapore stoking the flames of racial disruptions or exploiting one race or group against another. The message was always clear and precise: We were Singaporeans first. We must live in harmony, respect each other, and focus on the meritocracy of the individual.
So it was easy for me to live a simple life with a basic philosophy – to always respect others. Racial peace, respect, and understanding must begin with me.
Certainly, Hawaii is a wonderful place to be living in . Aloha abounds. A few mainland states may explode but let us always be anchored in the spirit of aloha in our island home.
Judge Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed on October 26, 2020 Monday night by the US Senate voted 52-48. It was strictly along party line. None of the Democrats casted a vote for her. Susan Collins (R) from Maine opposed.
“The oath that I have solemnly taken tonight means, at its core, that I will do my job without any fear or favor, and that I will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. I love the Constitution and the democratic republic that it establishes, and I will devote myself to preserving it
Putting the partisanship aside, Justice Barrett’s advice to young women during the hearings is memorable and applicable to all:
“You shouldn’t let life just happen to you. Make a deliberated decision of what you want to be.”
Here are a few of my personal takes of the nomination process:
There was an overload of partisanship and showmanship. So many were playing to the camera and their targeted audience rather than focused on the subject matter at hand. I watched part of the process on C-Span to escape those relentless talking heads from both parties.
There is no guarantee that the 48-years-old Justice Barrett will live to be 87 years old. Or she may live longer than that. Will she retire early? Who knows? Who can see into the future?
Remembrance of history could tame some divisiveness. Did the nomination process seem fast and unfair today? Blame it on Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada who was Senate Majority Leader in 2012. Reid championed the rules to prevent the minority party from slowing passage of legislation and nominations. The table turned in 2020 for the Republicans.
It’s not surprising that a sitting POTUS will nominate a Justice who reflects his ideology. The opportunities to nominate have opened to both Democrat and Republican Presidents.
Supreme Court Justices have proven that they can “surprise” legal observers with their decisions. After all, their job is to implement the rule of law and the US Constitution.
This is not easily over-turned. Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in which the Court ruled that the Constitution of the United States protects a pregnant woman’s liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction. How can we as a Society help our women improve their social and economic standing to prevent unwanted pregnancies?
Whether we agree with Justice Barrett or not, her scholarship, intellect and keen recollection of cases and laws are noteworthy and remarkable. The American Bar Association (ABA) has rated Supreme Court nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett as “well qualified,” based on her integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.
We are deeply disappointed that we
have received the silent treatment from Governor David Ige at this point.
“The most affected people and the most affected community have been opposing these additional eight (8) industrial turbines for over ten (10) years. The answer to the authorities had always been ‘no’ to the Fortune 500 Corporations, HECO and also those involved in the Environment Review Process.
However, their voices have
consistently been ignored and dissed.
Kahuku already has twelve (12)
industrial turbines. It is already bearing the disproportionate burden of wind
energy. Its residents have already been
suffering the health impacts from these existing turbines.
The PUC action of December 31, 2014
was a blatant violation of Hawaii’s renowned Environmental Laws specifically
contained in the HAR Chapter 343. Consultation with the affected community is
the first of several elements of public participation in the environmental
review process established under Chapter 343.
The centrality of public participation to rational environmental
management has long been recognized as good policy, and it is explicitly
identified as a founding principle in the legislative findings that preface the
EIS law.
§343-1 Findings and purpose. The legislature finds that the quality of
humanity’s environment is critical to humanity’s well being, that humanity’s
activities have broad and profound effects upon the interrelations of all
components of the environment, and that an environmental review process will
integrate the review of environmental concerns with existing planning processes
of the State and counties and alert decision makers to significant
environmental effects which may result from the implementation of certain
actions. The legislature further finds
that the process of reviewing environmental effects is desirable because
environmental consciousness is enhanced, cooperation and coordination are
encouraged, and public participation during the review process benefits all
parties involved and society as a whole.
To further violate the standing
environmental laws to the face of the most affected people, the Public
Utilities Commission further violated the laws by approving the contract
between HECO and then Champlin/GEI in order to assist the corporations in its
federal tax incentives deadline.
Recently, a former PUC Counsel revealed that he counseled against the December 31, 2014 decision because the EIS for this project was pending and NOT completed yet.
Furthermore, the Hawaii Consumer Advocate at the time, Jeffrey Ono, also advised for
PUC to wait for the environmental review to be completed before approving the
wind farm. Mr.Ono’s opinion was that the “EIS
could inform a decision on whether the project was in the public interest:
specifically whether its benefits outweighed its negative impacts on the
community.”
Because of the flawed process, there continues to be controversies. Approximately 200 residents were arrested in resistance to this process.
Keep the North Shore Country has filed a lawsuit challenging the Hawaii
Board of Land and Natural Resources’ acceptance of a conservation plan and
license to kill certain numbers of endangered Hawaiian hoary bats as an
incidental side effect of the project.
Life of the Land’s challenge focuses on the PUC’s approval of the
contract between the wind farm and HECO, which the PUC approved.
Governor Ige’s
statement by his communications team that “we were told
Despite all the known facts about
this flawed process, the AES COO, Mark Miller continues his arrogant and
robotic PR answer to all compelling concerns:
“We remain in close touch with people throughout the North Shore
community – including those who have lingering questions about our project. We
are here and ready to talk to anyone interested in learning more.” But he
pushing onward and forward and not taking “no” for an answer.
On October 16, 2019 to the Star
Advertiser, “The company planning to
build a wind farm in Kahuku “should be allowed to proceed,” Gov. David
Ige’s office.
We call on Governor Ige to take
care of his primary kuleana – to put the public interest nor the well being of
his constituents’, including the children, interests and well-being. The
industrial turbines will be too close to the Kahuku Elementary School, the
Kahuku High School, residential homes, hospital and farmer’s dwellings, and
also the Bobby Benson Center.
What are residents supposed to do
if the very government regulatory agencies that must protect the process and
the public interest violated its very laws and rules on the books?
When residents exercise their
desperate protests to be heard, they are met with the strong force of the HPD
and arrests.
We call on Governor Ige to implement
pono leadership on these irreparable damages being done to his constituents
today.
1. To allow the citizen’s various
legal pending processes to be heard before allowing further deliveries to the
sites.
2, to direct the Attorney General
to expunge the approx.127 arrests made thus far. The people were simply trying
to be heard because the very agencies that are supposed to protect them broke
its own laws and regulations.
Hawaii has one of the best
environmental laws in the nation. If all state and county agencies had adhered
to the laws in the books, these acrimonious and actions could have been easily
avoided.
Kahuku residents cannot continue to
be guinea pigs. Green Energy is important for our island home but environment
justice and social justice must integral parts of this movement.
NOTE: HAR 11-200-9(C) requires
agencies proposing an action to analyze alternatives to the nominal project
proposal in the environmental assessment.
Consideration of alternatives is a
core element of the environmental planning process and offers one of the key
tools available to achieve the purpose of environmental impact
minimization. The OEQC Guidebook
includes specific instructions regarding the discussion of alternatives.
Consider alternative methods and
modes of your project, and discuss them in the draft EA. Select the one with the least detrimental
effect to the environment. Alternatives
to consider include:
•
Different sites: is one site less
likely to infringe on an environment
that needs protection, such as a wetlands or an historic district?
•
Different facility configurations:
is one configuration less likely to intrude on scenic viewplanes?
•
Different implementation methods:
can a rocky area be cleared by backhoe removal rather than blasting?
Alternative analysis should include
input from the community. Community
members may be aware of concerns and impacts that make a particular alternative
more or less desirable. [OEQC Guidebook, p.15]
The Guidebook also offers insight
into what’s expected in an EA in the way of alternatives analysis in its
discussion of questions to ask when reviewing an EA.
Are alternatives to the proposed project (including no project at all) adequately explored? Are there other ways to carry out the project which may be less damaging to the environment? Are different designs or approaches discussed sufficiently? What basic improvements can you suggest? [OEQC Guidebook, p.9]
Thus, alternatives to discuss include not just the no action case, but also actions of a significantly different nature that would provide similar benefits with different minimal impacts, different designs or project details, different locations, different facility configurations, and even the alternative of postponing an action pending development of a more viable proposal.
Local Kupuna (elders) insisted on taking the front line to block the TMT construction crew access to the Mauna Kea summit on Day 1 – July 14, 2019 PC: Nate Yuen
The latest proposed 18-story $1.4 billion telescope addition to the Mauna Kea Summit was bound to create a tipping point in Hawaiian history.
It’s no secret that Hawaii residents constantly have to protest against the intransigence (unwillingness to listen) of big government and/or private corporations who have the backing of big government in many projects.
Yes, the State of Hawaii has significant and purposeful checks and balances in its environmental review process – Environmental Assessment ( EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) – for major projects. But adherence to the entire prescribed rules and regulations and process is inconsistent.
Project owners get to choose and compensate their own environmental review company. Environmental review processes are regularly pushed through the status quo food chain despite public concerns over multiplier negative impacts like traffic, loss of fertile farm lands, social upheaval, fiscal impropriety, cultural damages, and so forth.
“Consultation” and “Public Participation” with the most affected parties are mandated core requisites in the environmental review process, but often ignored and subverted in real life.
Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Section 11-200-5 requires an agency to “assess at the earliest practicable time the significance of potential impacts of its actions, including the overall cumulative impact in light of related actions in the region and further actions contemplated.”
HAR §11-200-9(1) explicitly states
that the agency must also consult with “those
citizen groups and individuals which the approving agency reasonably believes
to be affected.”
The intent of the term, “consult” in the context of the Hawai‘i EIS Law is clear. The clarification is found in the 1997 Guidebook for the Hawai‘i State Environmental Review Process, prepared by the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC):
Pre-assessment Consultation
Prior to preparing your draft EA it is important to consult with the community regarding your proposed activity as well as agencies. [emphasis in the original] Groups, individuals and organizations that have expertise in the field, have an interest or will be affected by the activity you are proposing should be consulted. Immediate neighbors or neighboring landowners must be contacted. Consultation with the local planning department is required. The local planning office can also direct you to other necessary agency contacts. [OEQC Guidebook, p.13]
“Consultation” with the affected community is the
first of several elements of public
participation in the environmental review process established under Chapter
343.
“Public participation” is the core value to rational
environmental management and has long been recognized as good policy. It is
explicitly identified as a founding principle in the legislative findings that
preface the environmental review law:
§343-1 Findings and purpose. The legislature finds that the quality of humanity’s environment is critical to humanity’s well being, that humanity’s activities have broad and profound effects upon the interrelations of all components of the environment, and that an environmental review process will integrate the review of environmental concerns with existing planning processes of the State and counties and alert decision makers to significant environmental effects which may result from the implementation of certain actions.
The legislature further finds that the process of reviewing environmental effects is desirable because environmental consciousness is enhanced, cooperation and coordination are encouraged, and public participation during the review process benefits all parties involved and society as a whole.
Both the Rules and the Guidebook provide that consultations with the community should occur at the outset of the process, prior to assembly of the actual draft EA. This assures that both concerns of the community and its intimate knowledge of the site of proposed actions are understood and incorporated into the planning process.
Furthermore, HAR 11-200-9(C) requires agencies proposing an action to analyze alternatives to the nominal project proposal in the environmental assessment.
Consideration of alternatives is another core element of the environmental planning process and offers one of the key tools available to achieve the purpose of environmental impact minimization. The OEQC Guidebook includes specific instructions regarding the discussion of alternatives:
Consider alternative methods and modes of your project, and discuss them in the draft EA. Select the one with the least detrimental effect to the environment. Alternatives to consider include:
• Different sites: is one site less likely to infringe on an environment that needs protection, such as a wetlands or an historic district?
• Different facility configurations: is one configuration less likely to intrude on scenic view planes?
Alternative analysis should include input from the community. Community members may be aware of concerns and impacts that make a particular alternative more or less desirable. [OEQC Guidebook, p.15]
The Guidebook also offers insight into what’s
expected in an EA in the way of alternatives analysis in its discussion of
questions to ask when reviewing an EA.
Are alternatives to the proposed project (including no project at all) adequately explored? Are there other ways to carry out the project which may be less damaging to the environment? Are different designs or approaches discussed sufficiently? What basic improvements can you suggest? [OEQC Guidebook, p.9]
Thus, alternatives to discuss include not just the no action case, but also actions of a significantly different nature that would provide similar benefits with different minimal impacts, different designs or project details, different locations, different facility configurations, and even the alternative of postponing an action pending development of a more viable proposal. (Bold added for emphasis)
The Mauna Kea’s 18-story telescope’s environment review process and other related procedures inevitably became more complicated through the years.
Opponents were forced into the courts to be recognized. Conflicts of interests relating to the State Hearing Officer relating to permit issuance were fought over. and so on. Yet, the powers-that-be continued its intransigent behavior. Subsequent elected officials continued the same intransigent pattern.
History shows that in August 2008, Star Advertiser’s Kevin Dayton reported:
“U.S. Sen. Daniel K. Inouye is pressing to have a huge new telescope project built on Mauna Kea that is almost certain to be controversial among Native Hawaiians. But he is also proposing steps such as scholarships for Hawaiian students as part of an initiative to garner public support for the project.
The loss of the TMT project to a competing site in Chile “would not bode well for us as a nation, and could very well signal an end to any major astronomy investment on American soil,” Inouye wrote in the letter.
TMT Observatory Corp. — a partnership between the University of California, California Institute of Technology and an organization of Canadian universities — selected Mauna Kea and Cerro Armazones in Chile as the two potential locations for the telescope it hopes to build by 2018.”
Kevin Dayton further reported a significant piece of information about the review process then:
“Sierra Club’s Mauna Kea Issues Committee Co-chair Nelson Ho said no one knows the “carrying capacity” of the mountain, or the point at which the development overwhelms the natural resources there.
“I think the senator is ignoring a lot of widespread sentiment that Big Islanders don’t want more telescopes on the mountain, let alone the TMT,” Ho said. “It’s a huge monstrosity at a time when there are still too many unresolved issues on the table.”
Obviously Nelson Ho, an informed and local activist’s
opinions were insufficient to be acknowledged as part of the “consultation” and
“public participation” review process.
A stream of public concerns from various groups and peoples would continue. Unfortunately, the TMT site had been pre-selected and pre-determined. Big government would steamroll the project through no matter what.
It’s time for the oligarchs of Hawaii to play fair, not strong-arm politics. The Mauna Kea project is not the sole irritation in Hawaii.
The Mauna Kea Project’s history of intransigence- – ignoring “consulting” and “public participation” during the review process also does not adequately address many other unanswered questions about Hawaii’s crown and ceded lands, the cultural, historical and social impacts, the “conservation” zoned land use and management and so forth
Yet, on July 14, 2019, there was an orchestrated display of force by Hawaii’s Oligarchs. In addition to DOCARE police, sheriffs, and National Guards, more police presence would be deployed from Oahu and Maui. The presence of LRAD, or “sound cannon,” tear gas, raid gear, batons and so on were also present as reported by observers.
Subsequently, on July 17, 2019, law enforcement arrested 38 peaceful opponents of the Project. The Governor then issued a State of Emergency through his media communications team:
HONOLULU – Gov. David Ige today issued an emergency proclamation to protect the health, safety,
and welfare of the people on Hawai‘i Island and across the State of Hawai‘i, to
also ensure the execution of the law, prevent lawless violence, and the
obstruction of the execution of the law.
The emergency
proclamation gives law enforcement increased flexibility and authority to close
more areas and restrict access on Mauna Kea. This will allow law enforcement to
improve its management of the site and surrounding areas and ensure public
safety.
“Our top priority is
the safety and security of our communities and the TMT construction teams. This
is a long-term process and we are committed to enforcing the law and seeing
this project through,” said Ige.
The Resistance,
practicing fortitude and Kapu Aloha,
has been peaceful and non violent as all visiting observers have attested to.
A fair-minded person should be extremely concerned with the chronic intransigent pattern in undermining values of “consultation” and “public participation” of the most affected parties, the flaunting and abuse of big government powers and resources towards the Mauna Kea Resistance thus far.
What may be deemed legal may not always be just or pono.
Choon James has been a community advocate for decades. She has also been a real estate broker for over 30 years. She can be reached at ChoonJamesHawaii@gmail.com Photos by Nate Yuen. Special mahalo to John Harrison, PHD UH Manoa Environmental Center (Retired).
Honolulu Mayor Kirk Caldwell obviously has a public Face Book page. Like a typical politician, a reader can see spin and disinformation. As case in point is the above post on Kuly 10, 2019 by the Mayor’s Communications Team.
But Honolulu residents has their own opinions. See some of the comments.
