Category Archives: Legislature

Racetrack still causing controversy as bill moves in legislature

5 Replies

There are lots of happy people out on the windward side and north shore following yesterday’s vote by the City Council Zoning Committee to strip all references to the proposed development of Malaekahana from Bill 47, the update of the Koolauloa Sustainable Communities plan.

It’s not a total win for those wanting to “keep the country country.”

The bill, as amended by yesterday’s changes, will still allow further development in Laie and expansion of the Turtle Bay Resort. But keeping the Gunstock Ranch from turning into a new suburban development complete with new commercial areas as well as residences is definitely a win for those who have worked for years to slow or block further development on our coast.

And this doesn’t end the issue. The bill is being put on hold pending approval of the latest version of Honolulu’s General Plan. You can be sure there will be lots of lobbying going on behind the scenes to reverse yesterday’s vote.

And here’s another bit of under-appreciated news flagged by Andrew Walden’s Hawaii Free Press, “Will Legislators Co-Sign $660M Loan for Evicted Racetrack Owner?”

He’s flagged bills to authorize $360 in revenue bonds to a series of newly registered nonprofit organizations affiliated with the “Paradise Ohana LLC“.

You wouldn’t know it from the name, but this is the latest round of the very longstanding set of issues surrounding attempts to resurrect a racetrack on Oahu.

This started back in the late 1980s with controversy surrounding a racetrack then located in Campbell Industrial Park.

I started writing about the racetrack issue in 1993, soon after joining the Honolulu Star-Bulletin (“Raceway Park got nonacid contract to use state land“), and continued for several years. There was lots of politics involved from Day 1.

The latest round has some potentially unsavory aspects, and Walden does a good job of outlining them.

You may notice that I’m often skeptical of Walden’s conspiracy theory view of the world, but he’s don’t a good job on this one.

HB 1329 is the racetrack related bill that’s moving through the House.

Just why the legislature would allocate a limited resource–there are limits in the total amount of these revenue bonds that can be authorized–to a group of newly created companies build around a central character with a checkered past is one of those questions that is looking for an answer.

State confirmation process lacks key information

6 Replies

If you’re interested in the scheduled March 11 hearing on the nomination of Carleton Ching to head the Department of Land and Natural Resources, you might want to check out the explanation of the Senate’s Advise and Consent Process that’s been posted on the legislative website.

In addition to a description of the process, it provides links for watching proceedings via online streaming or archived video, submitting testimony online, etc.

It also includes a link to a list of all the governor’s nominations requiring senate action, which indicates their current status, hearing dates, etc.

It’s modestly helpful, as far as it goes.

But there’s something important that’s missing–any information at all about the nominees, except for testimony presented at the nominee’s confirmation hearing, which isn’t available until after the hearing is over.

The governor’s messages that transmit the nomination to the senate contain just a very sparse stock message, followed by the nominee’s name and position.

In accordance with Article V, Section 6 of the Hawai’i State Constitution, I have the honor to submit herewith for your consideration and confirmation, the following nomination…

Not a bit of additional information accompanies it. No biography, no resume, no work or professional history. Nothing.

So the public is asked to weigh in by offering testimony, but has little to base that testimony on.

It really is a flaw in the system, as it is hard for the public to assess the qualifications of a nominee if those qualifications are not publicly available anywhere.

And it’s not necessary.

Consider how it’s nominations are handled across the street at Honolulu Hale, our city hall. It begins with a Mayor’s Message. Yesterday, for example, the mayor nominated Gary Nakata to serve as director of the Department of Community Services. Mayor’s Message 22 doesn’t have much more information than the comparable governor’s messages.

However, it is accompanied by two key attachments. First, there’s a nominee/appointee form, which includes info including the nominee’s age, occupation, employer, potential conflicts, education and work history. And then the administration attached the nominee’s full resumé.

It’s a world apart from the absence of information provided–or not provided–on gubernatorial nominees.

If there’s additional information made available to senators, including the chair of the committee that will review the nomination, it apparently isn’t available to the public.

This is likely one of those “we’ve always done it this way” situations.

And its one where change is long overdue.

Bill moving to add more disclosure of funding for independent expenditure committees

1 Reply

The Campaign Spending Commission presented some interesting data in its testimony on SB1344, which would require additional disclosure about contributions to “independent expenditure committees,” the groups that can accept unlimited amounts from donors, including corporations and unions, in the post-Citizens United world.

The bill moved out of the Senate Judiciary Committee with amendments, although the committee report is not posted, so I don’t know what the amendments are.

The testimony noted:

For the Committee members’ information, in the 2014 election, IE Committees received 25 contributions that were $10,0001 or more. Moreover, 13 of those contributions would be subject to the additional disclosure requirements.

The following table, which was attached, shows those contributors that gave $10,000 or more, along with the recipient independent expenditure committees.

Chart from testimony

Looking at that list, I have to wonder: Where are those big contributions from Monsanto and Dow made to Citizens Against the Maui County Farming Ban?

I also noted that there was no testimony from the Attorney General’s office, although the Campaign Spending Commission indicated it would be deferring to the AG’s position on constitutional issues.

Two informative items about the Carleton Ching nomination

5 Replies

Progressive activist Bart Dame has posted a couple of very interesting items this week about the nomination of Carleton Ching to head the Department of Land and Natural Resources. They are worth sharing.

First, he posted a graphic distributed by the Building Industry Association attacking the State Historic Preservation Division of DLNR. Until his nomination, Ching served on the board of the BIA.

Here is a logo the Building Industry Alliance sent out to its members and circulated to the public at trade shows.

Now, a member of the Board of the BIA, Carleton Ching, is seeking to become Chair of DLNR and to be put in charge of the State Historic Preservation Division.

You see why folks think he may be a bad choice for the job?

Distributed by BIA

And then he provided this thoughtful perspective on the political dynamics at work. I’m sharing this long post with his permission.

There is a lot of “inside baseball” stuff going on in the Senate which complicates understanding the reaction of the body. Two Senate leaders visited the Fifth floor to ask the Governor to withdraw the nomination. It is my understanding the Governor intends to stand by the nominee, an admirable attitude, since it was the Governor’s people who had sought out Ching in the first place.

While I can respect the Governor’s loyalty, he needs people around him to help him overcome those personal feelings and do what is best for both the state and his ability to function as Governor. Unfortunately, it was the people around him, his closest advisers, who apparently chose Ching in the first place. So the problems with the Ige administration appear to be much deeper than the Ching nomination.

Some senators may feel “they ought to be deferential to the governor” in his appointments. But they cannot so easily abdicate their responsibilities when a nominee lacks the qualifications for the job as Ching obviously does. Their “advise and consent” responsibility obliges them to protect the public interests when the Governor makes a serious mistake. For the good of the state, but also for the good of the Governor.

Many of the Senators have been laying low, dodging and weaving on the nomination. It is understandable most of them would wait until the hearing and the committee’s recommendation before committing to either support or opposition to the nomination. But there are also other, unseemly considerations which appear to be distorting the process. The administration has been offering financing for Capital Improvement Projects in the home districts in exchange for votes.

In addition, factional considerations have been at work as well, distorting the process. Senator Green is aligned with the “Chess Club” faction, the faction to which Ige belonged when he was their colleague. Despite their personal friendship with Ige, it is the senators aligned with the Chess Club who appear to be most concerned about the nomination, both as policy and for the damage it may do to the Ige administration.

The leaders of other factions, sensing the ill-ease of the Chess Club members, and not caring one way or the other about the Ching nomination, seem to be taking a “wait and see” approach, reluctant to help Ige, their Chess Club colleagues or to align with the environmentalists and cultural practitioners opposed to the Ching nomination. Who can offer them what? Do the constituents in their district really care about this to the point they have to act? Or will it all blow over?

Your editorial points out David Ige is an engineer. Yep, and I liked that in Ige the candidate. I expected it meant a pragmatic, problem-solving approach to the challenges we face, swayed by reason, after due diligence and consideration. But Ige is also a businessman, who apparently shares the Castle & Cooke, LURF, BIA attitude of Carleton Ching, that natural resources are there to be transformed into a revenue stream. And David Ige is also an honorable man, who feels bound to support Ching after his people talked Ching into putting forth his name.

While I would prefer Ige listen to his senate allies who are advising him to withdraw the nomination, or the calm, rational engineer who can see how destructive this will be for his ability to govern over the next four years, I expect this to unfold like a Greek tragedy, where the virtues and flaws of the protagonist lead, inexorably to a predictable result as the audience watches it unfold, feeling sad but powerless to intervene. I guess those of us commenting here have been assigned the role of the Greek Chorus.

Would this have played out differently if Senator Inouye were still alive, helping steer the ship of state to avoid running into shallow reefs?