http://kauaiworld.com/articles/2008/05/19/news/news02.txt
Women’s caucus debates a ‘con-con’

by Rachel Gehrlein - THE GARDEN ISLAND

Representative Mina Morita, D-District 14, spoke yesterday at the Kaua‘i Democratic Women’s Caucus meeting about whether a constitutional convention should be held in 2010.

The constitutional convention, or ‘con-con,’ is a process that allows revisions to be made to the state’s Constitution. Voters will decide this fall if a con-con is needed to review and possibly revise the state’s founding document. The Constitution calls for voters to be polled every 10 years on whether to call a con-con. The last one was held in 1978.

“It is my personal belief that a con-con is not warranted,” Morita said. “I don’t believe there are any pressing issues that can’t be resolved on the ballot.”

Morita wondered what was so flawed with the Constitution to need a review in 2010.

As an example, she pointed out that in the 221 years the U.S. Constitution has been around, not too many changes have been made to that document.

“I just haven’t heard too many compelling arguments as to what is wrong with our constitution,” Morita said.

“We have to ask, ‘What needs to be fixed that goes beyond putting a question on the ballot?’ If it isn’t broken, what is there that needs to be fixed?”

Equality of rights and the right to privacy are articles in the constitution that Morita sees as “take away.”

Posted on: Monday, May 19, 2008
SB 2646 encourages urbanization of ag land

Island Voices

An urbanization bill passed stealthily by the Legislature threatens to dramatically change the landscape of Hawai'i, exposing farmlands statewide to unbridled development. Cloaked as an incentive for "agricultural protection," SB 2646 would encourage land speculation and sprawling development on existing agricultural land with little public input. Legislative leaders in the House, knowing how unpopular this policy would be, had to resort to backroom political games to get their way. True farmland protection does not come from giving away the farm, but from genuine leadership, promoting sustainability and food security for Hawai'i.
Advertisement
Living In Paradise

Senate Bill 2646 allows large landowners to fast-track reclassification of 15 percent of agricultural lands to the urban or rural districts in exchange for labeling 85 prcent of lands as important agricultural lands. This contradictory 85-15 "incentive" formula opens the floodgates for rural developments with little regard for community input or state and county land-use planning. Private landowners can dictate public land use policy by simply requesting a declaratory order from the Land Use Commission, short-circuiting government oversight and denying local communities the ability to protect their rights.

Agricultural land bill a betrayal of principle

Since when does giving away the farm equate to saving agriculture?
That's the farce our legislative leaders consider one of their
"accomplishments" this session.

Instead of important agricultural lands protection, the Legislature
gave us the "big-landowner big-payoff" bill. It greases the wheels for
large landowners to urbanize any 15 percent of their farm land, in
exchange for labeling 85 percent of their land as "important." The
"important" designation then grants landowners the privilege to feast
at the public trough on millions in tax credits.

Then what happens when the landowners feel the 85 percent portion
isn't so important anymore (or developing it is more important)? They
just ask to redesignate the land.

Think for a minute who, besides the landowners, benefits as farm land
is converted wholesale to developable land. The average kama'aina
can't afford the luxury developments invading rural Hawai'i. How does
a rural real-estate bonanza help local residents, let alone farmers?

The state Constitution in 1978 mandated the protection of important
agricultural lands. Thirty years later, the Legislature has twisted
this into a license for big landowners to fatten their wallets and
develop rural Hawai'i for the rich.

Future generations will end up paying for this betrayal of principle
and failure of vision.

Isaac Moriwake
Sierra Club, Hawai'i Chapter

http://www.haleakalatimes.com/News/story2997.aspx
Green bills that save green bills
May 06, 2008

In honor of Earth Day last week, the tax deadline the week before, and the coming end of the legislative session next week, I’m offering this list of the best customer-friendly environmental legislation of the 2008 session. And all of them not only help the planet, but save consumers either time or money.

New houses with solar

This is a pioneering bill that makes the building industry justifiably nervous, because for the first time, it would mandate that all new private homes be built with solar hot water heaters, starting in 2010. This should give us all pause, because it’s a bit creepy and controlling for the government to tell architects and developers what a structure should include besides basic safety requirements. But in this instance, the idea is worth considering, for the sake of consumers and the environment. Here’s why: The increased additional cost of the solar package on a house is around 3500 bucks but in a 30 year mortgage at six percent, that’s about 21 bucks per month. The average monthly energy savings with solar hot water heating is more than double that. So everyone can benefit from this new law.

• Average annual household savings – $600 to $1,000 per year.

Making the bottle deposit law work

Could you make a call today to help us pass a critical recycling bill? A joint House-Senate conference committee will be deciding TODAY (Apr 25) whether or not to pass a measure to require large stores to participate in taking back HI-5 bottles and cans. Your call can make a difference.
Please ask Rep. Kyle Yamashita, a key vote, to support this policy today:
Rep. Kyle Yamashita: 586-6330 (Maui toll-free 984-2400 + 66330), repyamashitaCapitol.hawaii.gov">repyamashitaCapitol.hawaii.gov
Tell him that you support requiring stores to take back bottles and cans, just like every other bottle law state. The bill number is either HB 639 or SB 651--either bill could contain the policy.
You can also send an email to the entire conference committee on both bills here.
More info about in-store take back:

http://kauaiworld.com/articles/2008/04/16/news/news02.txt
Ag use limit may face state gutting

by Nathan Eagle - THE GARDEN ISLAND

A resolution moving forward in the state Legislature threatens to undermine county ordinances regulating vacation rentals on agricultural land, but may clarify an ambiguous state law affecting hundreds of landowners, officials said yesterday.

Critics ranging from county councils to farm bureaus submitted testimony last week strongly opposing the proposed legislation and questioning the abnormal process by which it was submitted.

They say vacation rentals raise ag land prices and the resolution is an inappropriate vehicle speeding to address a controversial issue that needs thoughtful deliberation.

Supporters, including the Kaua‘i Board of Realtors and Maui Vacation Rental Association, are pushing to pass the measure — which could carry some weight but not the full force of a law.

They say state statutes do not prohibit vacation rentals on ag land and farmers need the supplemental income to survive tough financial times in a declining industry.

The resolution, which morphed from unrelated legislation, has been amended to ask the attorney general for a legal opinion on whether vacation rental uses in single-family and farm dwellings in state agricultural districts are prohibited by law. It crossed over to the Senate on Monday, but has not been scheduled for a hearing.

Power in the workplace

Governor Linda Lingle presents her veto of proposed right-to-organize legislation as if she were doing a favor for working people (“Lingle announces plans to veto union voter rights,” A5, April 14).

Yet the wonderful “secret ballot election” process now imposed on workers is anything but an exercise in democracy.

Most often, these elections take place in a context controlled by the employer, in which the employer has subjected workers to months of mandatory anti-union meetings and other intimidation tactics which may or may not cross the line of illegality. The National Labor Relations Board offers flimsy protection to union-supporting workers who are fired during organizing drives. The penalties for employers who are rarely caught by the NLRB for violations of organizing rights are insignificant and do not offer a deterrent to anti-union employers.

By contrast, right-to-organize legislation offers workers the autonomy to decide, free of intimidation and fear of job loss, if they would like to belong to an association of workers which grants them greater power in the workplace than they would have by going it alone. Employers understand the value of belonging to associations — for that reason, most are dues-paying members of business associations and chambers of commerce. As far as I know, employers are not required to undergo months of campaigning by their employees to dissuade them from deciding to join these organizations — it is assumed that they are capable of making intelligent decisions on their own.

Honolulu Star-Bulletin Breaking Headlines
Posted on: Thursday, April 3, 2008 12:54 PM HST

Lawmakers reach agreement on genetic modification of taro

5-year moratorium falls short of taro farmer demands

Associated Press

Lawmakers have agreed to a five-year moratorium
on genetic modification of the sacred Hawaiian
taro plant.

The moratorium falls short of the demands of some
taro farmers who believe genetic modification is
unnecessary to prevent disease. They had sought a
10-year ban on alteration of the crop used to
make the Hawaii staple poi.

They also worry that Chinese varieties of taro
are not covered by the moratorium, meaning
altered varieties could cross-pollinate with pure
Hawaiian taro.

Scientists praised the Legislature's compromise
because it protects cultural rights while
allowing research to continue in case deadly crop
diseases reach Hawaii.

The measure was passed 9-3 by the House
Agriculture Committee. It now advances to the
full House.

The new draft of the bill has a defective date of July 1, 2020 for implementation (as opposed to 1/1/10). The bill will next be referred to a Joint Committee.

Click here to read amendments

Support the moratorium!