Political

Friends Indeed

Friday, October 31st, 2008

According to an item in the Honolulu Advertiser (Wednesday, October 29), "Families with household income that falls within 80 percent of federal guidelines may qualify for payments of $20 per household member, up to $120 maximum per billing cycle. Payments are made directly to the utility company."

The same published report says that, "Consideration also is being given to residents who fall within 81 percent to 100 percent of income guidelines, with payments of $15 per household member up to $90 maximum per billing cycle."

For more information, contact Lyn McNeff at 808-249-2990.

That concludes the "public service announcement" portion of this column. What I am left with after hearing of the county’s action is a renewed sense that our community has not only the ability to help each other in times of need, but also the will. Of the two, the latter is probably the more important.

I imagine it would be easy for some people to see those impacted by the sudden surge in water rates as "them." As long as "they" have a problem and I don’t, the urge to take action is absent. The only productive response is to accept that the problems of the community are my problems, too. Maui County did that and, despite hard economic times, made it as priority to provide help.

I would contrast the county’s response to the Moloka‘i water situation with the state’s response to another situation developing in Oahu’s Kahana Valley. There, a group of tenants have asked the state to allow them to lease existing lots set aside for individuals who provide cultural resources to the ‘Ahupua‘a O Kahana Valley State Park, a "living park" that allows families with long-time ties to the valley to live there. Despite ongoing negotiations, the Attorney General issued an opinion in March that found that the new leases were not allowed under existing law. The Department of Land and Natural Resources is now evicting the affected families, while refusing to say why those evictions are necessary immediately. The DLNR has also refused to delay the evictions long enough to allow the State Legislature to address the shortcomings of current laws. It is a fairly involved story, but I encourage you to look into it.

When we see a family having a hard time, we help them. Maui county has not offered to pay the entire water bills of the families on Moloka‘i who will benefit from the Neighbors in Need program; they did what they could. Even if the DLNR can’t allow leases under the current law, the department should be willing—at the very least—to allow time for a solution to emerge. And for the DLNR to even address the question of why the eviction absolutely must proceed immediately? Clearly they are no friends of the public, indeed.

Love and hot air

Friday, October 24th, 2008

Aside from reminding us that Connie Lau is a bit of a romantic and Henry Curtis a bit of a punster, the competing views frame the gist of the discussion that invariably arises when we try to make big changes.

The basic outlines of the agreement would support wind-power generators on Maui, Moloka‘i and Lana‘i, with an underwater cable linking those islands to Maui,O‘ahu and even the Big Island. HECO estimates that the system could provide up to a third of O‘ahu’s power requirements, saving billions of dollars in fuel costs and significantly reducing our state’s dependence on imported oil. That money would stay in the local economy, instead of being sent overseas.

I would also hope that Moloka‘i residents will able to fill many of the jobs that accompany the task of managing a wind farm on the island, whether those jobs are technical or supportive in nature. And, as I’ve pointed out before, while the presence of wind generators will have some visual impact, they are more environmentally friendly than high-density hotel or residential developments.

So the agreement could mean environmental preservation, an economic boost, jobs, and cheap electricity. What’s not to love?

Experience shows that for every action, there is an opposite and equal criticism. An alternative always exists. The media quotes Mr. Curtis as saying that, "consumers will be a lot happier if they put solar panels on their roofs." He may be right. While the wind power proposal shifts HECO from being an energy producer to an energy broker, it still leaves them in command of the means of distribution; we will still have an electric grid to deal with. Individual power generation eliminates our collective reliance on centralized generation and the potential for market leverage and distribution failures.

Still, the best is the enemy of the good. A plan based on individual generation capacity assumes that everyone who wants to install solar panels will be able to pay for them, or will live in a location suitable for solar power. Those who cannot afford solar panels or cannot use them would remain at the mercy of centrally generated, fossil fuel-based electricity. In other words, those with the least economic leverage would face the greatest financial burden. That is unacceptable.