Mike McCartney’s ham-handed, eleventh-hour move to cancel a $34 million contract for U.S. tourism marketing and management — between the Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA) and the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement (CNHA) — has left legislators, tourism industry officials and the public gasping with astonishment.
In his last few hours as director of the Hawaii Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism, McCartney on Monday attempted to wipe the slate clean in the face of an accumulating number of missteps and potential procurement violations. But his rescission of CNHA’s contract may have added one more potential inappropriate act to the odorific pile, created over the past year as he veered from one “solution” to another in efforts to avoid protest hearings and potential lawsuits over the lucrative contract.
McCartney on Monday announced that by fiat, he was canceling CNHA’s contract, despite suggestions from legislators he had previously briefed that the HTA board be involved in that decision.
The contract cancellation was precipitated by warnings from the State Procurement Office that McCartney’s efforts to broker a deal between CNHA and the Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau (HVCB) to split the contract money and responsibilities, outside of the procurement process, would violate state law.
McCartney’s efforts to “split the baby” were precipitated by a protest filed by HVCB, which had intially been awarded the contract. He had directed HTA to cancel that initial HVCB contract and start over, after CNHA had filed a protest claiming that award process gave undue weight to longtime awardee HVCB.
Both HVCB and CNHA have devoted much money and time to prepare bid proposals and maneuver for a winning position. But it should not be forgotten that all of this began with a mandate from the state Legislature, which questioned HTA’s value and even zeroed out its funding as popular sentiment about overtourism turned increasingly negative.
The most recent contract award to CNHA was meant to transform tourism marketing and destination management. But as a result of the delays and conflicts, HVCB has already been awarded two six-month extensions on its previously held contract, keeping its hand in the pie.
After McMcCartney’s Monday action, CNHA filed a formal protest to the rescission with DBEDT and HTA. On Wednesday, HTA’s board put off any official action on the controversial contract. Instead, it is seeking advice on the legal options available — a needed pause to consider the best way forward.
Calling McCartney’s decision “unlawful,” CNHA CEO Kuhio Lewis asked the HTA board to reverse it, stating, “We are ready to embark on this important kuleana (responsibility).” Trisha Kehaulani Watson, a legal expert and consultant on Hawaiian culture, called McCartney’s decision “arbitrary and capricious,” noting that it did not specify that anything is unlawful about the CNHA award.
The resolution of this matter now falls to the administration of newly elected Gov. Josh Green, who appeared at the HTA board meeting. Green said his administration would seek a resolution before March 31, when HVCB’s second contract extension expires.
If not legally prohibited, the cleanest move now would be to keep CNHA’s contract in effect. That would best reflect the will of Hawaii’s people, as expressed by legislative action and the HTA’s own request for proposals, which gave significant weight to the need for regenerative tourism.
Hawaii’s people have spoken. They seek a tourism industry that fuels the economy, but also improves the quality of life for Hawaii’s residents and preserves its resources. To do this, U.S. tourism must be managed in a new way. That fact must remain paramount as the new state administration takes action on this mess.
