Monthly Archives: November 2017

About that boat aground in Kahala

Leave a reply

KITV reported on Tuesday that the owner of the boat that ran aground in Kahala earlier this week recently died, and the state Department of Land and Natural Resources “was in the process of impounding the boat and had issued a 72-hour notice on the boat which was docked at the Ala Wai as of Friday.”

Hawaii News Now followed-up yesterday, reporting DLNR now plans to hire a salvage company to remove the vessel.

Officials say the sailboat, named Koa’e, is normally docked at the Ala Wai Boat Harbor, and it’s unclear how the vessel managed to drift east.

If someone at DLNR really said that, it means they weren’t paying attention at all. On Tuesday, photos posted here showed the boat was hard aground in several feet of water, well inside the reef, and the sails were still up. Reportedly a hotel guest, also a sailor, waded out and lowered the sails. Clearly, the boat didn’t “drift”, it was sailed and then abandoned. I would guess it was stolen by someone who saw the state’s notice posted and figured it was fair game.

Here are several photos showing how the scene looked this morning.

On the beach

Privacy claim shouldn’t block disclosure of Airbnb contract

10 Replies

The Star-Advertiser’s Allison Schaefers reported today on attempts by Gov. David Ige’s to privately negotiate a contract with Airbnb to collect taxes and pay them to the state.

The article contains one startling statement jumped out of the story.

“Ige is working with Airbnb and other online retailers of short-term rentals to negotiate voluntary collection agreements,” said Ige’s spokeswoman Cindy McMillan in an email. “Ultimately, the state wants to collect the taxes it is owed without encouraging illegal activity.”

Mike McCartney, Ige’s chief of staff, said privacy laws prevent the state from releasing details of the agreement, which must be signed off on by Ige and Airbnb before it takes effect. McCartney declined to say when that might happen.

What? Did we just jump back in time to the bad old days of 1985, when the state was refusing to release copies contracts because public disclosure the names of those signing off on the contract was claimed to be a violation of their personal privacy.

That claim was one of the things that led the legislature to adopt Chapter 92F, which now governs release of government documents, including contracts.

The law recognizes that individuals have a significant interest in certain kinds of information about themselves. None of those provisions would apply to a state contract with a corporation.

The state law, like the federal Freedom of Information Act, also recognizes certain trade secrets and commercial or financial information which could harm the competitive posture or business interests of a company. But this kind of exemption typically comes into play when companies are regulated and have to disclose internal financial information. It seems unlikely to arise in this kind of contract.

This question really does require clarification, so that the public has a chance to evaluate whether there are legitimate reasons for refusing to disclose the contract, or whether this is just another instance of an imperial decision by a public official.

The article notes that the Star-Advertiser has filed a formal request, and I hope they’ll pursue the matter if they are turned down.