Even if the Public Land Development Corp. goes the way of the dodo bird, its lingering byproduct will be further abrasion of people’s trust in political leaders to do the right thing.
The black mark on the PLDC has already spread its stain to another of the Abercrombie administration’s initiatives, to set up an agency to develop the state’s harbors and parks through partnerships with private companies.
Though hardly the last words on the issues, two House committees’ unanimous approval of a bill to revoke the act that authorized the PLDC and rejection of the parks and harbors plan indicates lawmakers’ unwillingness to ignore public opposition.
Senate advancement of its repeal bill, however, provoked due skepticism. When the chairmen of two key committees, both of whom had championed tinkering with the broad land use and environmental exemptions of the PLDC law, instead moved ahead with repeal, members of their own caucus were suspicious. One senator who sought an explanation for the change of heart was told “things change,” and that leaders were simply “responding.”
The terse explanations do little to dispel the notion that something’s up, particularly because of the committee leaders’ earlier tactic to counter repeal by proposing revocation of regulatory exemptions for a number of other state agencies, such as the Hawaii Community Development Authority and the Agribusiness Development Corp.
Sen. Donovan Dela Cruz and Sen. Malama Solomon surely do not want to open more cans of worms, especially with tenuous public support of some of HCDA’s ventures. Rather the idea seemed to be a peevish reaction designed to introduce more conflict.
Opposition to the PLDC is also clouding the future of another of Gov. Neil Abercrombie’s proposals, this one labeled ostentatiously as the “21st century schools initiative.” What this entails is redevelopment of “underutilized” school land to reap money to pay for fixing and modernizing public schools.
The plan is that all the funds will go to that single purpose, but as has happened with other targeted revenue-raising initiatives — think transient accommodations tax, originally set up for a convention center and later to help counties pay for tourism impacts — the public cannot be assured cash won’t be diverted elsewhere.
At hearings on the PLDC during the weekend, the public’s lack of confidence and trust in state leaders came up repeatedly.
“We don’t trust you,” said a Hawaii County Councilwoman about the schools and parks-harbors proposals.
A Maui community leader, who justifiably pointed out that neighbor island residents are routinely left out of the discussion even though most of the public lands that could be affected by the PLDC aren’t on Oahu, told legislators people no longer accept the “trust me” appeals from politicians.
Big Island House member Cindy Evans said the reason the committee she leads voted for repeal came through “loud and clear” during the hearing: “Right now, people aren’t trusting.”
Repeal bills have a long way to go before final decisions are made, and what will emerge after political wrangling is unclear. What is unambiguous is that the public requires assurance that however state land is used — or left untouched — will benefit the whole.
———
Cynthia Oi can be reached at coi@staradvertiser.com.
