| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Larry Goldstein
Lokahi
267 Posts |
 Posted - 01/19/2008 : 07:02:18 AM
|
Deal restores 200 acres to Hawaiians
By Mark Niesse
The Associated Press
HONOLULU — More than 200 acres that belonged to the Kingdom of Hawaii before the United States took control a century ago will be returned to Native Hawaiians, according to terms of a $200 million tentative settlement announced Friday.
The agreement, which is subject to approval by the Legislature, is intended to end a long-running dispute over ceded lands.
The land to be turned over includes about 80 acres of the Big Island resort area on Banyon Drive in Hilo, which is occupied by several hotels and a golf course.
Under the deal, three commercial and industrial properties on Oahu and the Big Island worth $187 million would be transferred to the state agency created to look out for Native Hawaiians.
The state government also would make a $13 million payment to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA). The OHA, whose trustees voted Thursday 9-0 to accept the deal, would continue to receive $15.1 million in ceded land revenues each year, the same amount it now gets by law.
The pact would end the fighting, legal squabbles and inaction over ceded lands, said Office of Hawaiian Affairs Chairwoman Haunani Apoliona.
The properties at the center of the argument are lands that the U.S. government took control of from the Republic of Hawaii five years after the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom. Parts of the land dispute were settled in 1993, and this agreement is expected to resolve remaining issues.
Leases from hotels and other businesses on some of the Hilo properties would be honored at least until they expire beginning in 2015, said Jonathan Scheuer, director of land management for the OHA.
Two other properties on Oahu also would be turned over. They include about 100 acres at Kalaeloa Makai and 18 low-use acres in Kakaako Makai.
Only the Big Island property generates significant revenue, about $800,000 a year, said Attorney General Mark Bennett.
Copyright © 2008 The Seattle Times Company
|
|
|
Auntie Maria
Ha`aha`a
USA
1918 Posts |
Posted - 01/19/2008 : 4:48:02 PM
|
Here's today's article on the subject, from the Honolulu Star-Bulletin:
http://starbulletin.com/2008/01/19/news/story07.html |
Auntie Maria
===================
My "Aloha Kaua`i" radio show streams FREE online every Thu & Fri 7-9am (HST)
www.kkcr.org - Kaua`i Community Radio
"Like" Aloha Kauai on Facebook, for playlists and news/info about island music and musicians!
|
 |
|
|
ypochris
Lokahi
USA
398 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2008 : 5:21:44 PM
|
Let's see- 35,000 acres in Hamakua sold for 18 Million (Hamakua Sugar)
We bought a 2600 acre ahupua'a for 1.25 million.
Looked at a number of other large tracts similarly priced.
And OHA is accepting how many acres for the 187 million? A MILLION DOLLARS AN ACRE!!?! And the income is $800,000? Less than one half of one percent a year?!?!
This is one of the worst rip offs yet! A property that generates $800,000 a year is worth $10 million tops- ask any commercial real estate broker.
How in the world did these idiots in OHA ever get in control of Hawaiian finances? Do any of them have even a lick of business experience? Shouldn't they be hiring an independant financial advisor, and more importantly following the advice they are given? What is really going on here? Who benefits?
Certainly not you and me...
Chris
|
|
|
|
ypochris
Lokahi
USA
398 Posts |
Posted - 01/21/2008 : 5:45:56 PM
|
Thinking about this a bit more- wasn't there a proposal a while back to turn over a third of a million acres or so? And now it is less than two hundred?
This is not a done deal yet. The legislature has to approve. Of course, it is in the best interest of the State- but certainly not of the Hawaiians. Talk to your legislators. A million dollars an acre is far to much. Half of one percent return is far too little. The $200 million OWED could be invested far more wisely- just turn over the money, now. Or give back the land- all of it, or at least the 20% share promised. Not 193 lousy acres.
Chris
|
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
Posted - 01/23/2008 : 01:48:25 AM
|
Further details:
Deal draws debate
Ceded lands: Benefits of OHA settlement proposal in question
By Richard Borreca
rborreca @ starbulletin.com
State leaders are raising questions about the multimillion-dollar settlement between the state and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs over the use of so-called ceded lands.
Lawmakers predicted the settlement will not be liked by native Hawaiians. "I don't think the beneficiaries are going to be pleased with this settlement," said Senate President Colleen Hanabusa.
And former Gov. Ben Cayetano, who had worked for a settlement while he was in office, said the offer he made was a better deal for native Hawaiians.
"In 1999, we offered OHA $251 million plus 20 percent of the ceded lands (not the income), which I estimated at 365,000 acres," Cayetano recalled yesterday in an e-mail.
The proposed settlement announced Friday by OHA and Gov. Linda Lingle would resolve the OHA claims to the former Hawaiian monarchy lands used by the state by promising that the state would give OHA $15.1 million a year, plus nearly $200 million worth of state property including the resort property on Banyan Drive in Hilo and portions of Kakaako and Kalaeloa.
Cayetano said his offer was more generous, but it called for an agreement that OHA would not sue the state for future claims.
"I insisted on a global settlement because I wanted to protect the state from more lawsuits," Cayetano said, adding that OHA trustees were dismissive of the impact on the state, arrogant and greedy.
In reaction, Cayetano halted negotiations with OHA, and the talks stalled for nine years.
Yesterday, Haunani Apoliona, OHA chairwoman, charged that Cayetano's proposed settlement "unfairly sought to bar any future claim to title to state-controlled public lands such that the only remaining overthrow claim would be against the federal government."
Hanabusa also agreed with another criticism from Cayetano, that because OHA is a state agency, it should be monitored by the Legislature.
Cayetano said although money and land transferred from the state to OHA, it still belongs to the state.
"I think people should remember that OHA is a state agency. Whatever OHA gets from the settlement is still state property. For obvious political reasons, there is literally no oversight from either the Legislature or governor on how OHA spends its money," he said.
"The Legislature and governor should hold OHA accountable for its fiscal decisions -- it's their duty as elected officials to do so," the former governor said.
But Hanabusa (D, Nanakuli-Makua) added OHA should be afforded some degree of independence to monitor things for the narrowly defined beneficiary class, native Hawaiians.
The sovereignty question makes a decision on whether the Legislature should approve the OHA settlement even more complex because Apoliona says a future native Hawaiian government still could sue to get control of state lands.
"Only a native Hawaiian governing entity (and certainly not OHA) has the right to negotiate historic grievances over ownership of the crown and government lands that were illegally obtained from the Hawaii kingdom in 1893 and later ceded to the United States," Apoliona said yesterday.
She said if the Legislature approves the settlement, "the state will obtain a release of all of OHA's claims to income and proceeds from the public land trust" under the portions of the state Constitution that set up OHA.
"Going forward, OHA also releases the state of claims to future public land revenues as long as at least $15.1 million is annually paid to OHA," Apoliona said.
But the settlement does not address overthrow claims, according to the OHA chairwoman.
Article URL: http://starbulletin.com/2008/01/22/news/story03.html
© 1996-2008 The Honolulu Star-Bulletin | www.starbulletin.com
|
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
|
ypochris
Lokahi
USA
398 Posts |
Posted - 01/24/2008 : 5:46:03 PM
|
That is even worse than I remembered. I forgot about the money. So they turn down $251 million and 365,000 acres, then accept 193 acres and $15 million a year?
Even if they invested the $251 million and got a lousy 6% return they would as much income, and there is the minor detail of the 363,000 acres of land- which is what the Hawaiian people really need to restore their culture.
Do you really think the trustees are that stupid? I think they are very intelligent people. Doesn't anyone else wonder what is really going down here?
Chris
|
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2008 : 02:45:52 AM
|
Yes, I do. I also wonder what the charter of the OHA is. What are they supposed to be doing? From everything I have read, I believed Haunani to be a strong advocate for the Hawaiianpeople. Now I am not so certain.
Chris - what is your theory on the reasoning behind this? |
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
|
ypochris
Lokahi
USA
398 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2008 : 06:26:34 AM
|
I have no theory, only purest speculation so I won't go into it.
I can say one thing- I have had personal interactions with the Trask/Gibson ohana and as far as I can make out they are interested in what is good for them. In this case it had to do with water being stolen from Waipi'o valley kalo farmers- they saw potential benefit as the stolen water flowed through their land and fought bitterly against returning it to Waipi'o. I met with many members of the 'ohana at their ranch in Hamakua and while the kupuna at least were very sweet and polite the bottom line was that it was cheaper for them to use ditch water than drill a well, so they wanted the ditch to continue diverting Waipi'o water. NOT what was best for Hawai'i, Hawaiians, Hawaiian culture, or the environment; but it was best for them.
Chris
|
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2008 : 08:49:30 AM
|
Chris - perhaps you can speak to the issues brought out in this old newspaper article. I do recall reading that the water was being returned to flow in the Hi`ilawe falls. This is from March 2004 and speaks about your involvement in the issue. I mean, I ASSUME that is you.
Has the diversion ditch been dismantled and is water flowing to the falls once again?
http://starbulletin.com/2004/03/18/news/story2.html for entire article, including pictures of Chris and kalo.
Big Isle stream
to be fully restored
A landmark decision lets
Kamehameha Schools return
original flows to Waipio Valley
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Mary Vorsino
mvorsino @ starbulletin.com
Two Big Island streams will return to their original flows by this summer, ending more than a century of water diversion that diminished Hiilawe Twin Falls and left Waipio Valley taro farmers without their main irrigation source.
In an unprecedented decision yesterday, the state Water Commission invoked the 1987 state Water Code to restore the streams. The only similar case was the partial restoration of Waiahole, Waianu and Waikane streams in Windward Oahu in 1997, said Kapua Sproat, an attorney with the environmental nonprofit EarthJustice.
"It's the first time ever that a stream system will be fully restored," she said.
In 2002, landowner Kamehameha Schools requested a permit to abandon Lalakea Ditch, which diverts about 2.5 million gallons of water daily from Lalakea and Hakalaoa streams into an unused gully.
The commission granted permission yesterday, allowing a portion of the ditch to be dismantled and the streams to once again flow over the falls and into a stream that now irrigates at least four Waipio Valley taro farms.
"Right now the (Hiilawe) Stream's dry most of the time ... and so restoring the stream will be tremendous," Sproat said. "The benefits will be immediate."
Kamehameha officials said the diverted streams should be fully restored by the summer.
"The community is very pleased that Kamehameha Schools has recognized that ... the cultural practices, native species and scenic beauty that they (the streams) support are the most important and valuable uses of Hawaii's water resources," said Chris Rathbun, secretary of the Waipio Valley Community Association. "We're just very, very happy and excited to know that the waterfall is going to be restored."
The Lalakea ditch was built in 1900, decreasing the amount of water sent over the 1,000-foot falls.
Today, both waterfalls are present only after heavy rain. Meanwhile, water from the diverted streams goes unused, said Kamehameha Schools water resources manager Manabu Tagomori.
Kamehameha bought the ditch and thousands of its surrounding acres from Hamakua Sugar Co. a decade ago. The company used water from the diverted streams until it closed in 1989.
In 2002 the Water Commission fined Kamehameha for an improper diversion of water from the streams. The school filed a request to abandon the ditch later that year.
Some Big Island farmers had told the commission that the diversion was important as a backup should the lower Hamakua Ditch malfunction.
But Tagomori said Kamehameha "couldn't find any farmer stepping to the plate."
"We couldn't find any user for the water," he said. "We did open the doors for ... almost two years, trying to work out a situation."
EarthJustice joined forces with the Waipio Valley Community Association on the issue in 1998. The association has been fighting for restoration of the streams since 1988, Rathbun said.
Rathbun, who is also a Waipio Valley farmer, filed a citizen's complaint with the water commission in 1995, seeking a dismantling of Lalakea Ditch. But the commission took no action in that case.
Three years later, the Waipio Valley association, represented by EarthJustice, filed a similar complaint and again received no ruling from the commission. In 2000, EarthJustice filed another petition, which was never ruled on, to stop the Lalakea Ditch diversion.
"Abandoning the Lalakea Ditch and restoring the streams is necessary to support native stream life and the traditional and customary practices that rely on Hiilawe Stream," Sproat said.
"Kamehameha's decision is pono (proper) and demonstrates that Kamehameha is a responsible steward of our natural and cultural resources."
|
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
|
ypochris
Lokahi
USA
398 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2008 : 1:11:13 PM
|
In the mid 1980's, against the advice of their own experts, Francis Morgan conceived the idea of expanding Hamakua Sugar's acreage of sugar cane by bulldozing the Lalakea watershed forests and planting cane there. The water experts said it was an essential water source for Hamakua Sugar, and the agricultural experts said it was too wet and rainy to produce a profitable crop. In fact, the cane was left unharvested until the "final harvest" after the company failed- then an attempt was made to harvest the sugar but the cost was greater than the return and the damage to the equipment- which had already been sold- was incalculable due to the depth of the mud they were working in.
In order to ease access to the new fields, a road was "improved" by filling in a tributary gulch of Hi'ilawe stream, with a small culvert through the "dam" for the minimal flow that continued past the ditch intake. In the next big storm the culvert clogged, and witnesses saw a wall of rubble (the "dam") burst over Hakalaoa falls, the left side of the twin falls most know as Hi'ilawe.
The wall of water following the debris, from the broken "dam", impacted the cliff face half way down the falls where it makes a second drop with such force that the cliff face peeled away, taking with it a section of the Lower Hamakua Ditch which passes behind the falls. Needing the water to continue operations, Hamakua Sugar did a "quick and dirty" repair, building a wooden flume across the falls to carry the water taken from the back of Waipi'o by the Lower Hamakua Ditch. To protect the flume, a channel was dug from Hakalaoa stream to Lalakea stream, which feeds the other side of Hi'ilawe falls. A dam was built across Hakalaoa stream (the gulch was filled to the top with the material from the cut) so that all the water that would normally flow down Hakalaoa stream was diverted into Hi'ilawe stream.
The Waipi'o Valley Community Association immediately complained about the destruction of the twin falls (Hi'ilawe is the highest waterfall in the U.S. and has great cultural value). A meeting was held between the Association board and Francis Morgan, his son David, and various attornies, managers, and engineers representing Hamakua Sugar. From their side, the cost of restoring the tunnel was estimated at $180,000. From our side, they had illegally destroyed a major cultural site and tourist attraction. I will never forget Francis Morgan literally foaming at the mouth at the thought of having to spend the money to repair the falls, but in the end his attornies agreed that it was in fact an illegal act, and an agreement was reached to restore the falls within six months and avoid litigation.
Well, the falls didn't get restored, and my citizen's complaint to the Commission on Water Resource Management was ignored, so the Waipi'o Valley Community Association eventually initiated legal action, initially with the help of The Legal Aid Society of Hawai'i, and later with the help of Earthjustice, which at the time was called The Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund. Since we had to go to that extreme, we decided to address all of our water concerns together- the illegal diversion, the diversion of water from the Lalakea watershed by the Lalakea Ditch, and the diversion of water from the Wailoa stream tributaries by the Lower Hamakua Ditch. The Upper Hamakua Ditch was ignored as we felt we had little chance since the State had taken it over and put it to "public" use.
Our issue with the ditches was that every stream that feeds Waipi'o valley has at least one (and most have two or more) dams where ALL of the water in the stream is diverted into a ditch except during flood conditions. Below each dam the streams were dry most of the time, if only for a short distance before springs in the valley below the dams provided water to the streams. All of Hawai'i's fresh water stream animals are amphidromous (I know I misspelled that!)which means the larva live in the ocean and the young migrate back up the streams where they become adults and reproduce- kind of the opposite of salmon. Now, when a section of the streram is dry it is rather difficult for the fish to swim to the upper reaches of the stream, and in fact no native aquatic animals are found above the dams. The ecosystem of the valley streams completely crashed not long after the ditches were built.
The other serious issue is that the ditches take water that legally belongs to the taro farmers of Waipi'o- all of the water was being used in 1848, when appurtanant rights were granted along with the land to the farmers of the valley. When the ditches were built it was recognized that taro cultivation would be curtailed, but the ditch company provided a rice mill to the valley so the farmers could grow an alternative crop. However the price of California rice dropped below the cost of production in Waipi'o by the early 1930's and the farms in the front of the valley (where there was no longer sufficient cool water that Kalo needs) were abandoned.
In addition to this, during dry times when the water was needed in Waipi'o, the ditches took 100% of the flow at the elevation of the ditch- in fact, in the 1960's huge, multi-million dollar pumps were installed to suck an additional six million gallons a day from lower on the stream that was being "wasted" to the taro farmers during dry periods. But in flood times, all of the unwanted water was dumped in the valley (and after the great flood of 1979, huge, multi-million dollar pumps were installed to divert unwanted water that threatened a bridge by the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel INTO Waipi'o!). With so little flow most of the year, stream channels become overgrown with weeds and gravel accumulates in the river bed. Then, suddenly into this greatly reduced channel not only is there all the flood water that would normally come, but additional water dumped from South Kohala! Bye, bye lo'i; bye bye kalo, bye bye houses, bye bye roads- luckily no one has died in the floods since I have lived in Waipi'o (1976).
Now the final insult- all of this water is being taken from the vally, causing all this harm to Waipi'o, and no one is using the water- it is just being dumped into the ocean.
Honestly it is a really bad idea to get me started on Waipi'o's water- it is so complex and convoluted, and after spending so many years fighting for our water rights I can just go on forever, until everyone is either totally confused or just sick of the subject. So, jumping ahead a decade or so, kamehameha Schools has purchased Hamakua Sugar, which includes the Lalakea Ditch and the Lower Hamakua Ditch. The State has spent over $20 million fixing what Hamakua Sugar was going to fix for $180,000. After endless years of stalling, the Water Commission fines Kamehameha Schools almost half a million dollars and finally Hakalaoa stream has been restored. Unfortunately the watershed was bulldozed, so the stream now flows only intermitently.
Then one day Kamehameha Schools decides its purpose is to benefit Hawaiians, and totally unexpectedly the forces within KS that have been fighting for Waipi'o all along emerge triumphant. At what seems like the millionth Water Commission hearing on Waipi'o KS announces that they have done an about face and now want to abandon the ditches and return the water to Waipi'o. The commission and the politicians struggle to find someone who will use the water so they can keep the Lalakea Ditch open, but no one can come up with a reasonable use for it. Kamehameha Schools builds a cinder block dam across the ditch inlet and for the first time in almost a century Hi'ilawe Falls has all of its water flowing over it.
For a short time. Turns out there is a rancher who has been stealing water for his cattle from the system. Absurd to turn off a stream and fill a reservoir that threatens to breach and destroy a town to water a few cows, but some people only care about themselves- and this person, my grandson's other grandfather, is cetainly the epitome of that! So he goes up when things are quiet and breaks down the wall that keeps the water out of the system. Then KS rebuilds it. Then he breaks it down.
There are other problems at Hi'ilawe falls. The watershed was destroyed, and so the flow is very irregular. Nearly doubling the flow over the one fall broke through the bottom of the plunge pool near the top of the falls, and the water flows either directly into the aquifer or more likely into the Lower Hamakua Ditch. So unless there is a lot of flow the top 100 feet of the waterfall will be flowing beautifully, and the next 1000 feet will be dry. It looks very strange!
As I said, I can go on for days on this subject, so I'll just leave it at that. I did want to mention my previous post, which seems apropos of nothing- I guess I was saying all OHA trustees are not necessarily looking out for Hawaiian interests in general, but did not intend to imply that Trask was not in any particular instance as I have no idea whatsoever what motivates her. I decided to delete or edit it the moment I posted it, but couldn't figure out how to do so. I apologise, both to the readers and to the Trask/Gibson 'ohana, as this is a poor place to vent on something that happened long ago and it feels inappropriate and out of context in any case.
Chris
|
|
|
|
wcerto
Ahonui
USA
5052 Posts |
Posted - 01/25/2008 : 1:21:52 PM
|
| Chris - thank you for trying to educate us about this complex and confusing subject. I can see you are passionate about it, and I applaud you for that. Mahalo. |
Me ke aloha
Malama pono,
Wanda |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
