Save Kauai brings together current information about Kauai and web-based tools that allow you to take action. If we want to affect the future of Kauai in a pono way we must organize and begin implementing solutions, not just fighting the problems.
Aloha 'Aina, Imua Kakou!
The Ag Moratorium Bill was killed at Wednesday's Council meeting by way of Council Member Rapozo making a motion "to receive" and Kouchi seconding immediately (vote tally below).
How the Public Testified
Every person to testify during the public comment period was IN SUPPORT of the temporary moratorium bill. A council member later stated that there were 100 testimonies received in favor of the bill and only 1 was against. I don't think that included the additional 30 or so in-person and written testimonies submitted during the public comment portion of the meeting, but regardless, the numbers are significant.
Those that offered in-person testimony supporting the bill included:
The Mayor
Roy Oyama on behalf of the Kaua`i Farm Bureau
Diane Zachary on behalf of Kaua`i Planning & Action Alliance
Carl Imperato on behalf of the Sierra Club
Andrea Brower/Keone Kealoha on behalf of Malama Kaua`i
And at least 10 other community members representing themselves & their `ohana
Reasons Given for Opposing the Bill
There were several reasons provided as to why the majority of the Council decided not to approve this bill. However, these were the kinds of questions normally sorted out while the bill is in commitee. Based on the previous week's commitee action to kill the bill there without hearing any real discusion set the stage for this week's decision. Basically, some members had made up their minds before we even started and used the comment period and questions to public speakers to reaffirm their position rather then to really evaluate the points being raised by the public.
A few of the reasons to oppose by councilers included:
Not enough legal review
No "nexus" was provided
No "reasonable" end date
Needed scientific data to justify a moratorium
Without ag sub-divisions, CPRs would increase and become a problem (CPRs are already a problem and are already and option. If anything, it would restrict density by removing one of the components that provide more of it)
*As a side note, the Mayor was asked to do more on enforcing existing violations of inappropriate uses on ag lands. That is an important effort but let's not make that a basis for not considering this bill and its intention. It may take several different approaches to really fix this issue and this is one that we should be considering.
Trying to Keep the Bill Alive
The three options once the bill is out of commitee and back in open council is to [1]move to receive (kill), [2]move to accept (approve) or [3]move to defer (study more). In an attempt to keep the bill alive, a motion was made to defer, or have more time to discuss by putting it on the next open council meeting agenda in two weeks. If the Council would have voted in favor to defer that would have allowed for the extra time to answer all of the questions that were raised in today's meeting. However, rather than keep the bill alive to try and sort out a basic list of unknowns, it was not deferred in a 5-2 vote.
The votes to defer were:
NO Asing
YES Bynum
NO Furfaro
NO Iseri-Carvalho
NO Kouchi
NO Rapozo
YES Yukimura
The Eulogy
After some discussion, the motion to receive (kill) was voted on. Those votes were:
NO Asing
NO Bynum
YES Furfaro
YES Iseri-Carvalho
YES Kouchi
YES Rapozo
NO Yukimura
The moratorium died by a vote of 4-3.
Knowing the public had a "100 to 1" ratio of testimony in favor to support it was hard to watch the counciler vote to receive the bill and basically cut the people out of that decision. In my opinion, a move to defer and gain more clarity on the questions raised before moving to take such an important issue off the table was the most appropriate action.
Where do we go from here? We move forward on all fronts open to us as citizens and residents to be responsible as stewards of the `aina. It is persistance in numbers, it is finding common approaches, it is being insaciable for creative solutions that we'll figure out the route that works.
We encourage you to visit www.savekauai.org and post your comments on the homepage blog version of this email. Please share your thoughts on how you feel we should move ahead with more responsible management of ag lands.
Re: Ag Moratorium Bill killed despite unanimous community suppor
Also, see Joan Conrow's blog...it's great:
http://kauaieclectic.blogspot.com/2008/02/musings-dysfunctional-politics...
Re: Ag Moratorium Bill killed despite unanimous community suppor
All of the council-members seemed to acknowledge that something immediate must be done to preserve and protect agricultural lands, and that this is an issue critical to “sustainability” (people were having fun sliding that word in to defend every position they took). Yet, instead of talking about solutions, the council’s discussion was reduced to immature criticisms of the administration and the process by which this bill came before them. The bill did have flaws, but all of the justifications for killing it could have been dealt with through amendments. Instead of addressing growing public support for some kind of moratorium and re-thinking of zoning, planning regulations, and agricultural land development, councilmembers cut this conversation off. The vote to receive the bill was taken before Yukimura and Bynum could even bring forth their amendments that would have addressed most of the legality issues.
I do still have hope that our elected officials will step-up to the task of representing their constituents by looking for innovative ways to address these concerns. If council-members continue to ignore the public, I’m sure we will make our opinions known in the next election.