There were two articles in today's
Honolulu Star-Advertiser (Oct. 21) dealing with unrelated beach and ocean problems that
should be connected:
regulation of commercial use of our oceans, and
control over what can or cannot be done with our shorelines.
But if you read those two stories back-to-back, you'll start to get a
headache trying to track all the federal, state and county agencies that
have overlapping responsibilities. For instance, who is responsible for
addressing beach erosion? Under Hawaii's convoluted system, there is
split jurisdiction that is literally based on a shifting high water mark
-- and both the State and counties often cite the murky lines of
demarcation as excuses to not do anything about the very real threat of
rising sea levels and ongoing shoreline management issues.
Ever since I got involved with the public beach access movement a few
years ago, I have experienced firsthand the futility of attempting to
get State or county action on protecting beach rights of way and doing
something about shoreline "creep" by property owners on Oahu, who are
rebuilding oceanfront structures closer to the sea (I can't call them
"homes" because they look more like mini-hotels). I suggest
those"homeowners" (often out-of-state investors) take a good look at
what's happening on the North Shore before they decide to spit in Mother
Nature's face and erect mansions as close as legally possible to the
sea.
Anyhow, in today's beach erosion article about "regulatory woes" the reporter got some good quotes from
Dolan Eversole,
who works for Sea Grant and has done a lot of studies about erosion and
shoreline management options. His suggestion is there should be a
single coastal commission. It would have authority over the shoreline
and coastal waters, and eliminate split jurisdiction. Makes sense,
right? Except the article then goes on to quote various people from the
existing agencies/departments that are currently not doing a very good
job of addressing longstanding problems, and of course, those people say
a coastal commission would be a bad idea because it could add another
layer of bureaucracy. Um, I think they missed the point. THEY are the
added layers that need to be streamlined.
Okay, I'm not sure if the reporter phrased the question in the wrong
way, or these government employees are simply too dense to understand
the concept -- a coastal commission isn't meant to be an "added" layer
of anything. It would be done to eliminate or consolidate a myriad of
departments, agencies and ad hoc "advisory" groups that have been
meeting for years and years, in order to simplify the regulatory
process. It would create a single office that looks at the big picture
from molasses spills to beach access and whether commercial kayak
operations can be allowed on beaches in Hawaii. But if you broach the
subject with a government lifer, all they will see is a threat to their
individual jobs and benefits. Rarely will you ever hear a government
worker admit their job or department does stuff that is redundant or
could be eliminated to save taxpayer money, while making things more
efficient.
And this is why we wind up with people who distrust government or say
they want to dismantle Big Government... until their homes are
threatened by beach erosion, commercial development or global climate
change, and all of a sudden those same people are squawking that
government isn't doing enough. The real problem though, is
how government does things. They manage from crisis to crisis, instead of coming up with a long-range plan, then sticking to it.
BTW, in 2009 I asked
Rep. Chris Lee to introduce a proposal
for a joint State and counties task force to consider creating a Hawaii
Coastal Commission. At that time, testifying
against the proposal before State representatives was
Sam Lemmo (DLNR) and
Chip Fletcher, a UH researcher who is quoted
as now saying an "overall agency" to take charge of coastal land use should be "studied."
Apparently they thought the DLNR was doing just fine on its own. When
will all these different factions start connecting the dots, and see
that the ocean and beaches need to be treated as Hawaii's most valuable
resource -- not as some lines on a map or organizational flow chart to
be divvied up among the DLNR, CZM, MACZAC, DPP, EPA, even DOT (yeah, the
molasses spill was the Dept. of Transportation's jurisdiction, believe
it or not), along with each island's county councils and
zoning/planning/parks departments. It's a shame because there are many
well-meaning people trying to do their jobs... except they're like a
bunch of people on a canoe, each paddling in different directions.
