(Janice Palma-Glennie granted me permission to republish this letter to the editor on my blog. West Hawaii Today originally published it on July 6th, 2011)
If I had my way, I’d probably get rid of the (state) Land Use Commission,” said Hawaii County Planning Director Bobby Jean Leithead Todd when asked about the agency’s decision to enforce Bridge Aina Lea’s agreement with the state. Despite the company’s broken promise to taxpayers, the county administration’s support for the development has remained steadfast, just like it has for others, including Ooma, which also require state approval before moving on to the county for further rezoning and permitting.
In the same WHT story, the planning director scolded Land Use Commission (LUC) members for not fulfilling their mission, despite the fact the LUC, like all government agencies, is increasingly strangled for funding while asked to do more and more. Again grasping for straws, she blamed the LUC for Hawaii’s increased construction costs. That accusation seems absurd when the LUC has only denied or revoked zoning for a handful of projects in decades.
The real reason why the county administration gets its hackles up over the LUC doing its job (i.e., evaluating boundary amendments/development projects through an in-depth public process) is more about how the planning director views her own mission as a permitter, rather than an objective land use planner.
She was quoted by WHT as saying that her “… instruction from the mayor is that if I’ve got viable projects that would put people to work, I am to work overtime to make sure that the permitting and the approvals go through so that guys can start the construction and work.”
In the case of Aina Lea, the LUC held the real culprits’ feet to the fire, while the county administration was true to its mission, taking the back of the developers.
Why is it so important to protect the state Land Use Commission’s role in the land use review process? One reason is that the agency sometimes protects the land (Ooma). Sometimes it imposes important conditions on huge, potentially damaging projects (TSA’s project mauka of Kaloko-Honokohau National Park). Sometimes it prevents the county from making bad decisions (Keopuka), and sometimes it holds developers accountable (Bridge Aina Lea). But what it always does is give citizens the ability to take part in the land use process by intervening in contested cases and cross examining developers, which has proven to be very, very valuable.
Contrary to anti-government banter, the state’s public-inclusive process is sometimes all that stands between “anything goes,” mainland-style development and what remains of Hawaii’s natural open spaces, prime recreational areas, good water quality, crucial cultural resources, economic sustainability, and so many more of Hawaii’s critical and irreplaceable attributes. Though the movement to disband the agency is nothing new, the drumbeat by prodevelopment forces is growing, including at least two pending lawsuits against the LUC (Ooma and Aina Lea).
It’s bad politics for the county administration to support dismantling democratic agencies and processes that were created to give citizens a chance to weigh in on issues pertaining to the protection of their land and laws.
Rather than rebuke them, I applaud the members of the LUC who have used their votes and integrity to help residents get a grip on reckless land use planning and for facing down county officials in their zeal to help corporations develop our island.
Janice Palma-Glennie
Kailua-Kona
