HB2024 Supplemental Testimony
Aloha kākou,
We have been receiving messages from folks asking for more information and clarification about our position on HB2024, which proposes a new entity to manage Mauna Kea. We submitted amended testimony to our original opposition to HB2024 and offered additional amendments to supplement the concerns we initially raised.
“Because we strongly support removing the management authority from the University of Hawaiʻi who has caused irreparable harm to Mauna Kea, we rescind our opposition to this measure. However, we cannot, at this time, support HB2024 because there has not been sufficient time for community conversation about this important initiative. We stand by the concerns raised in our original testimony with the following additions.”
We strongly support the main idea of this bill – to take management authority of Mauna a Wākea away from the University and the Land Board who have done irreparable harm. However, we also feel the measure needs more conversation in the broader community. People have valid reasons to view legislation with skepticism as they can be co-opted and/or can have unintended consequences. Equally valid questions force us to zoom out further. How can we create solutions that bring more hope than fear? If we agree that what we want is a future where industrial astronomy and tourism are not the primary ways people interact with Mauna Kea, how can we get there? How do “we” maintain the integrity that created “us” in the first place?
HB2024 proposes a new management authority that could improve on the existing structure. It could also be worse. One of the reasons this bill is so complicated is because it is admittedly flawed – as is the system we currently live in/ under. In oversimplified terms, UH has been dismal in terms of care for the mauna as evidenced by the irreversible harm (like flattening the tops of pu’u) that has occurred; moving forward we should expect UH wants more of the same (like the construction of TMT). So in terms of getting what we need in the future, let’s say UH can provide 10% of what we need. Let’s say the bill can get us 50% of what we want/need. Is it better? Yes. Is it foolproof? No. Is it enough? Probably not. But, does it move us - all of us - in the right direction?
Whatever the outcome of this particular bill, the struggle continues. If approved, we will need to stay engaged to get the best people on to the authority. If it’s not passed, then we will need to continue to resist in the same places we have been, the University Board of Regents, BLNR, and in the courts.
Attending last month’s hearing on this bill, we had to reflect on having a position in alignment with proponents of industrial astronomy and commercial tourism on the Mauna. These folks oppose HB2024 because UH will allow them to continue business as usual. We agree that something has to change. But the fact that we and other longtime advocates landed in opposition to this well-intentioned bill, clearly points to the need for better collaboration and conversation before moving forward.
Click here to view our amended testimony – note that it was written prior to the release of HD1, so the amendments in that draft are not included in this analysis. Our original testimony in opposition can be found HERE.
