Saturday, May 30, 2009

Superferry Files for Bankruptcy

 
Hawaii Superferry Inc., which provided high-speed ferry service for cars
and passengers between Hawaii's Oahu and Maui islands, filed
 for bankruptcy protection today.

Hawaii Superferry and parent HSF Holding Inc. filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy
petitions in Wilmington, Delaware. They cited a Hawaii Supreme Court ruling
in March that struck down a state law permitting the company to operate
before completing an environmental impact statement.

The company, which reported more than $100 million in assets and debts
in its bankruptcy petition, said it will use the bankruptcy to shut down its business
and liquidate the company.

The case is: In re HSF Holding Inc., No. 09-11901, U.S. Bankruptcy Court,
District of Delaware (Wilmington).

HONOLULU  ADVERTISER
Updated at 2:46 p.m., Saturday, May 30, 2009

Hawaii Superferry files for bankruptcy

By Bob Van Voris     Bloomberg News Service

Hawaii Superferry Inc., which provided high-speed ferry service for cars
and passengers between
Oahu and Maui, filed for bankruptcy protection today.
 
Hawaii Superferry and parent HSF Holding Inc. filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions in
Wilmington, Del. They cited a Hawaii Supreme Court ruling in March that struck down
a state law permitting the company to operate before completing an environmental
impact statement.
 
Tom Fargo, Hawaii Superferry's president and chief executive officer, said
in a statement at the time that completing an environmental impact statement could
take a year. As a result of the decision, ferry service was immediately shut down
and the company's two high-speed ferries docked in Mobile, Alabama.
 
The company, which reported more than $100 million in assets and debts in its
bankruptcy petition, said it will use the bankruptcy to close its business completely
and liquidate the operation.  Hawaii Superferry was formed in 2002 to provide
high-speed ferry service among the four main Hawaiian islands of Oahu, Maui,
Hawaii and Kauai. The company began carrying passengers in August 2007 on
the Alakai, an aluminum-hulled catamaran that carried as many as 866 people and
282 cars, according to court papers in the bankruptcy case.
 
The law struck down by the Hawaii Supreme Court was enacted in November 2007
to permit the ferry to keep operating despite a series of successful state court legal
challenges, Hawaii Superferry said in a court filing. The high court ruled that the
law was intended specifically to benefit the company, in violation of the state constitution.
 
In addition to the court decision, Hawaii Superferry said its business was hurt by
a decline in tourism, a 2008 increase in fuel prices and a price war between airlines
that provided inter-island service in Hawaii.


--
John Tyler, owner.
www.happyswimmers.com for swim lessons an private lifeguard services for pool parties

Learn CPR fun and easy for your family: Click to watch our informative 3 min intro video: why is CPR so vitally important?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fban7dx-AUM

POSITIVE QUOTES OF THE DAY
In every person who comes near you look for what is good and strong; honor that; try to imitate it, and your faults will drop off like dead leaves when their time comes.
John Ruskin (1819-1900) English Art Critic
-----------------------------
Practice thinking about as many people as you can:  "I love you, and want the best for you." and watch tensions dissolve, and all relationships blossom new gifts.

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

SUPERFERRY CASE:: "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is DENIED"



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:10 PM
Subject: SUPERFERRY CASE:: "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is DENIED"
To: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>


The Supreme Court has denied the Department of Transportation's motion
and the request by the legislature to reconsider their earlier decision that
ACT 2 was unconstitutional.  The original decision stands.

 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 4:50 PM
Subject: "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is DENIED"

Wednesday, May 13, 2009

"IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion for reconsideration is DENIED"

Here is the Decision on the Motion for Reconsideration:
http://www.state.hi.us/jud/opinions/sct/2009/29035recond.pdf

Here is the Order of Amendment on the original Opinion of March 16, 2009: http://www.state.hi.us/jud/opinions/sct/2009/29035am.pdf

Here is the Amended Opinion of the Majority of the Court from March 16, 2009: http://www.state.hi.us/jud/opinions/sct/2009/29035opam.pdf

Here is the Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of the minority from March 16, 2009:
http://www.state.hi.us/jud/opinions/sct/2009/29035conam.pdf

You can read them all or just read the title here to get the point. This is done...for now.




--
John Tyler, owner.
www.happyswimmers.com for swim lessons an private lifeguard services for pool parties

Learn CPR fun and easy for your family: Click to watch our informative 3 min intro video: why is CPR so vitally important?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fban7dx-AUM

POSITIVE QUOTES OF THE DAY
In every person who comes near you look for what is good and strong; honor that; try to imitate it, and your faults will drop off like dead leaves when their time comes.
John Ruskin (1819-1900) English Art Critic
-----------------------------
Practice thinking about as many people as you can:  "I love you, and want the best for you." and watch tensions dissolve, and all relationships blossom new gifts.

Friday, March 20, 2009

EIS Study ordered as ferry ends

Study ordered as ferry ends

Under stricter law, state seeks environmental review for future use

The state Department of Transportation plans to complete an environmental impact statement for Hawaii Superferry, laying an important plank in the legal groundwork if Superferry chooses to resume operations in the Islands.

Advertisement

Thomas Fargo, Superferry's president and chief executive officer, said yesterday that Superferry is looking for commercial and military charter options for the Alakai and a second catamaran after a state Supreme Court ruling on Monday led the company to cease operations.

The Alakai made its last scheduled round trip between O'ahu and Maui yesterday, where passengers and employees, including many who will be laid off today, expressed sadness and anger about the shutdown.

Fargo said Superferry would retain its company name and a minimum staff to maintain operations in Hawai'i. He left open the possibility the Alakai could again run between the Islands, but said the company has no option but to look elsewhere.

"The problem before us today is there appears to be no short-term solution to this ruling," Fargo said at an early morning news conference at Honolulu Harbor's Pier 19. "To conduct another EIS (environmental impact statement), even with the work done to date, and move it through the legal review that it would have to go through, might take a year or so. And other options don't provide the certainty that's necessary to sustain a business.

"As a result, we're going to have to go out and find other employment for Alakai, for now. Obviously, this is not even close to our preferred and desired outcome. We have believed from the very start, and continue to believe, that there's a clear and unmet need for an interisland high-speed ferry system for this state.

"My hope, our hope, is that the conditions will eventually be such that we can realize that vision here in Hawai'i."

Brennon Morioka, the director of the state Department of Transportation, said state contractor Belt Collins has completed most of the work on the $1.5 million environmental review ordered by the law the court struck down.

The department will essentially start the process over under the procedural framework of state's more stringent environmental review law, known as Chapter 343, but hopes to transfer the bulk of the work already performed into the new document.

Morioka said a completed environmental review could be used by Superferry or any other ferry company interested in the Islands.

"All of the information and all of the studies we have done to this point are all still valid," he said.

Backlash feared

Robert Harris, director of the Sierra Club Hawai'i chapter, one of three environmental groups that brought the legal challenge against Superferry, said his group would likely not object to the state salvaging some of the environmental work on Superferry.

Harris said a bigger concern, however, was whether some of the anger over Superferry will lead some to want to dismantle the state's environmental review law. He said it was the decisions by the state and Superferry, and not the environmental review process, that was the problem.

"The DOT and Superferry were told to do an EIS, and if they had done that, we would not have had this situation," he said.

Fargo, in his first public comments since the court ruling, described it as "a terrible decision" but said the company accepts that it is the law.

Under questioning from reporters in Honolulu and Maui, Fargo would not address whether Superferry would repay the state for $40 million in harbor improvements other than to say that the payments were based on fees generated by ferry service. Superferry has paid the state about $2.5 million in fees and taxes since it has been in operation.

Fargo would also not discuss the extent of the company's financial losses or the possibility Superferry might file a lawsuit against the state. He said Superferry proved, after a year in service, that it took adequate steps to protect the environment. He said the ferry was popular with locals and small businesses and was beginning to tap into the tourist market.

Fargo said the company was expecting delivery of a second $95 million ferry soon from shipbuilder Austal USA of Mobile, Ala., and met Wednesday with officials from Virtru Ferries about leasing the second vessel. Virtu operates high-speed ferries between Malta and Sicily in the Mediterranean.

The second ferry was to have started service to Kawaihae early this year, but the company announced in September that it would delay the start of Big Island operations by a year in response to slower demand and the economic recession.

Fargo, after mentioning that the military might want to lease the Alakai, addressed speculation by some activists who have opposed the project that Superferry was designed from the start as a military operation.

"That's absolutely not true," said Fargo, a former Navy admiral. "We certainly wouldn't have gone to the trouble to paint Alakai in the manner that we did, to appoint her with 836 first-class seats, to spend the huge sums of money that we did to establish service here in Hawai'i if that was our goal.

"The goal that's unmistakable was to provide regular and reliable commercial ferry service in these Islands."

Early Superferry executives — and main investor John F. Lehman, a former Navy secretary — had praised the ferry's military utility in initial discussions with the state, including the possibility the ferry could be used to transport the Army's Stryker brigade between O'ahu and the Big Island. The second vessel was outfitted with a vehicle ramp that could make it more useful to the military.

REvisiting the ruling

Gov. Linda Lingle and state House and Senate leaders have said they would ask the state Supreme Court to reconsider aspects of its ruling. The court found that the Superferry was special legislation written for a single company. The governor and lawmakers are concerned, among other things, that the ruling will unduly restrict the Legislature's power.

Fargo spoke to reporters in Honolulu in the morning and then flew to Maui to join company vice chairman John Garibaldi and others for the final voyage.

With three blasts from its horn, the Alakai pulled away from Pier 2C at Kahului Harbor just after 11 a.m. for the return leg home.

As the 350-foot, high-speed vessel maneuvered toward the harbor entrance, passengers and employees crowded the outer decks and waved aloha while a tugboat sprayed water into the air in a traditional maritime tribute.

The Alakai sailed from Ho- nolulu to Maui with 290 passengers and 84 vehicles aboard, including many employees. The return trip carried 398 passengers and 126 vehicles. The vessel is capable of carrying 836 people and 230 autos.

Tracy Knight of Makiki and her family had to cut short a weeklong Maui vacation to catch the ferry back to Honolulu with their two cars. They had arrived Sunday on the Alakai.

"We loved it. We were really bummed. It's very sad. I hope they don't leave for good," said Knight, 34, who works for a liquor distributor. "They were very conscious of the whales on the way over, and everyone really enjoyed it."

Father-and-son classic car owners Butch Meyer, 65, of 'Ewa Beach, and Duane Meyer, 38, of Ha'iku, Maui, were taking their prized vehicles to Honolulu on the ferry. The elder Meyer's 1932 Ford sedan was refurbished on Maui, although the work was not quite finished before he had to catch the last ferry.

"I hate that it shut down. I love the ferry. It's one of the best things for us," he said, referring to car enthusiasts.

Duane Meyer, who owns a towing company, said he used the ferry on a regular basis to transport his souped-up 1965 Ford Mustang to car shows. He said he would have to ship the Mustang back to Maui on a Young Brothers barge at four times the cost of using Superferry.

"This is stupid. They should let the people decide and not some stupid judges," he said.

Holding tears back while directing cars into the vehicle check-in area at Kahului Harbor, port utility operator Corrine Dutro-Ponce planned to join co-workers on the Alakai for the final sailing. "It's like a death," she said.

Dutro-Ponce joined the Superferry in its early days in July 2007 and lived through the ups and downs of a legal battle that ended with Monday's ruling.

"It was hard, but we stuck it out and we always had hope we would survive, and we still have hope that it will start again," she said.

Dutro-Ponce was uncertain about her job prospects. "I'll have to fight for a job like everyone else," she said.

Reach Derrick DePledge at ddepledge@honoluluadvertiser.com and Christie Wilson at cwilson@honoluluadvertiser.com.

In your voice

Read reactions to this story
User Image
LeftMyHome wrote:
punatiki, get your facts straight. Matson barges are towed at about 8 knots and Alakai tops out at about 37. By my math, if Alakai went 10x faster they would go 80knots, which is about what a Nimitz class carrier and Navy subs can do. Not to mention that the hydroplane ferry service in 70's never had issues with whales and they traveled up to 40knots. Invasive species is a bogus argument, cars on barges and cruise ships pose the same risks from tire tread and ballast water but no one makes a stink about them.

since the ferry traveled at speeds up to 10 times faster than the Matson barges and offered a much easier vector for inter island invasive species.
03/20/2009 7:45:10 a.m.
User Image
punatiki wrote:
The court ruling just proves political muscle does not trump the Law. The SF may have had the permission of Lingle, but the ENTIRE government is comprised of 3 branches - each having checks and balances on EACH other. Anyone thinking the court should NOT rule on the Law needs a refresher course in civics.

Before the ship was even built the SF management was TOLD they would be sued if they proceeded without an environmental statement. A statement was required since the ferry traveled at speeds up to 10 times faster than the Matson barges and offered a much easier vector for inter island invasive species. They ignored it and hid inside Lingle's skirts. To me at least the management is to blame for the lost jobs.

I was bought up to obey the Law, and the Law has spoken. Act 2 was illegal.

The concept of the SF is a great grand idea, shoved down our throats by politics, which eventually blew up in their own faces.

Too bad, Hawaiian Power Politics rears its ugly head again.


03/20/2009 7:30:14 a.m.
User Image
HIBusinessBoy wrote:
The government made poor judgement. The worst of it is they let some small local non profit push them around. Instead of fighting back and keeping them at a distance this showed our state that our government and Lingle are week and don't know how to fight back.

This so called decision the supreme court made could affect old and new laws about doing business in hawaii is just a smoke screen. The bottome line is the enviornmentalist picked on a fresh entity in hawaii and won. If the super ferry was that important to the economy and the people of hawaii the government would have fought harder. They took for granted that Act 2 would do it but they kept picking away at it in court till they got what they wanted to hear and here we are.
03/20/2009 7:29:06 a.m.
User Image
LeftMyHome wrote:
This is truly sad for Hawaii but I would expect nothing less from a state that caters to a small, uneducated, vocal minority. I was born and raised in Honolulu but move to California a few years ago to get away from stuff like this. What most people don't realize is that Matson, NCL and the Navy cruise along at almost the same speed if not greater (Navy battle groups) than that of Alakai so speed is just a cover up. The real reason is that these groups are more interested in never having any progress or economic growth in the state because they are scared little cockroachs who never want change! Well it looks like they get it, not to mention sending the state even further into the financial toilet. I hate to say it but I don't think I will ever move back home, which I love and miss dearly. I hope for the future of the state, that the citizens can vote in some strong politicians. BTW the most vocal activist on Kauai is retired LAPD who was asked to retire early, sounds local to me.
03/20/2009 7:28:08 a.m.
User Image
haynboy wrote:
All this confirms to me is that JUDGES and our Judicial System is keeping an eye out for the INTEREST of the RICH and POWERFUL!

Easy to stop the FERRY just as it is setting a killer free!(giving killers weak sentences)
03/20/2009 7:27:57 a.m.
1 2 3 4 >> Last
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login | Register


Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Superferry To Announce Future Thursday morning 6:30am



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 6:45 PM
Subject: Superferry To Announce Future Thursday morning 6:30am
To: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>


Superferry To Announce Future
Thursday  (Live on TV - 6:30am)

Options Include Leaving, Waiting, Supreme Court Reconsideration

 
HONOLULU -- The Hawaii Superferry will hold a news conference on Thursday morning to announce it future plans.

Island Television News This Morning will carry that news conference live from Pier 19.

Possible options for the Superferry include packing up and getting out of Hawaii for good, wait the months it would take to complete a new environmental review in hopes of resuming service here, or seeking reconsideration by the state Supreme Court.
 
The governor said she hopes the Supreme Court will take another look at it's ruling that the law was unconstitutional to allowed the Superferry to operate while completing its environmental review.

"The Legislature is looking at perhaps requesting a reconsideration along with us. Ask the Supreme Court to take another look at this beyond the Superferry issue. There are larger implications from the decision," Lingle said.

The governor said the Supreme Court decision is too broad because it said the Legislature can never do anything to favor one group over another but that is what lawmakers do every day.

Superferry makes its last round trip for now to Maui to return stranded vehicles and customers to their homeports on Thursday.

Copyright 2009 by KITV.com All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.




--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For CPR training at your home:
www.alohacpr.com

Click to watch our informative 3 min intro video: why is CPR so vitally important?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fban7dx-AUM

For our swim school and private lifeguard services:
www.happyswimmers.com

Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded  in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTES OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

In every person who comes near you look for what is good and strong; honor that; try to imitate it, and your faults will drop off like dead leaves when their time comes.
John Ruskin (1819-1900) English Art Critic
-----------------------------

Practice thinking about as many people as you can:  "I love you, and want the best for you." and watch tensions dissolve, and all relationships blossom new gifts.

Thursday, January 8, 2009

BREAKING NEWS — Superferry Draft EIS finds significant impacts



BREAKING NEWS — Superferry Draft EIS finds significant impacts


*
By Coco Zickos
Published: Thursday, January 8, 2009 2:22 PM HST
After many months of waiting, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was made available to the public today, revealing many impacts the Superferry could have on the four main Hawaiian islands if operation were to continue.

The EIS assesses the direct impacts the ferry could have to the islands caused by new construction needed to support a large-capacity ferry vessel, and indirect impacts, such as affects on Hawaiian waters and cultural practices.

The report declares that the cumulative effects of the Superferry would significantly and adversely affect traffic within the vicinity of Nawiliwili, Kahului, Kawaihae and Honolulu Harbors. The large-vessel ferry could potentially impact the number of endangered humpback whales, the dispersal of inter-island invasive species and the traditional cultural practices conducted on the islands, the EIS said.

The comprehensive report declares that cultural activities within the vicinity of West Harbor in Kahului would significantly and adversely be impacted due to "new harbor improvements." New pier construction at Kawaihae Harbor would also result in significant and adverse impacts, including those to nearby Pu'ukohola Heiau National Historic Park, obstructing views and affecting not only the rock walls of the heiau, but ceremonial activities as well, due to noise and construction.


Indirect impacts noted in the report include activities such as fishing, surfing and diving, including the potential loss of natural resources as stated in the cultural impact analyses.

The only reportedly beneficial impact reviewed in the environmental draft is that the large-capacity ferry vessel would provide to all harbors a "superior" mode of transportation for disaster planning and emergency response. The statement concludes that the vessel would increase the capabilities and response times of first responders and relief efforts.

To view the EIS in its entirety and to leave comment, visit the Department of Transportation's Web site, hawaii.gov/dot/harbors

For full coverage of the Draft EIS, see Friday's edition of The Garden Island.

Tuesday, December 30, 2008

ABCNEWS.com: The Mission: Send 1,000 Love Letters to Complete Strangers

I found this special news story on ABC News.com and thought you'd enjoy reading about it and the intention behind it.  It's pay it forward in action, and is inspiring to me.

Aloha,
John


Subject: ABCNEWS.com: The Mission: Send 1,000 Love Letters to Complete Strangers


http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=6542201&page=1



--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For CPR training at your home:
www.jtacpr.com

For our swim school and private lifeguard services:
www.happyswimmers.com

Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded  in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------
Dwight L. Moody - "I have had more trouble with myself than with any other man I've met."

-----------------------------

Every man stamps his value on himself... man is made great or small
by his own will.

-- J.C.F. von Schiller

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

-- Chinese proverb

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Superferry's interisland service depends on court ruling



HONOLULU ADVERTISER     Tuesday, December 9, 2008


Hawaii Superferry's interisland
service depends on court ruling

Service may be halted if high court rules against law that let ship operate

By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Government Writer

The state Supreme Court, whose ruling last year led to a three-month shutdown of Hawaii Superferry, will decide whether the interisland service can continue in a new case to be heard next week.

The court will decide whether Gov. Linda Lingle and the Legislature violated the state Constitution last year with a new law that allowed Superferry to resume operation while an environmental review of the project is completed.

A ruling could have an immediate impact on whether Superferry can operate between O'ahu and Maui. It could also influence the separation of powers among the governor, the Legislature and the courts.

The Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow and the Kahului Harbor Coalition, the nonprofit groups that brought the legal challenge that temporarily stopped Superferry last year, have asked the court to declare the new law unconstitutional.

Arguments before the court are scheduled for Dec. 18.

The Supreme Court ruled in August 2007 that the state should not have exempted the Superferry project from an environmental assessment. A Maui court subsequently halted ferry service to Kahului Harbor, while public protests kept the ferry from returning to Kaua'i.

Lingle called a special session of the Legislature, where lawmakers passed a bill that allowed the ferry to resume operation under conditions designed to protect the environment while an environmental impact statement is prepared. Lingle signed the bill into law, and the Maui court allowed the ferry to return to Kahului Harbor.

Many political observers thought the legal challenges were largely over, but the court's willingness to hear the appeal so soon raises the possibility that Superferry may again be stopped.

"This case is now a case of even greater public importance," Isaac Hall, the Wailuku attorney representing the environmental groups, said in court filings.

violations alleged

Hall's main arguments are that the new law violates two parts of the Constitution: Article I, Section 21, which bars the state from making any irrevocable grants of special privileges; and Article XI, Section 5, which says the Legislature can only exercise power over state lands through general laws.

The constitutional restriction on special privileges, according to the Legislative Reference Bureau, is meant to ensure the state acts on behalf of all people and not for the sake of the elite. The provision limiting the Legislature's power to general laws over state lands is designed to prevent sweetheart land deals for private interests.

Lawmakers, mindful of the constitutional restrictions, were careful not to mention Superferry by name in the new law, and instead described a "large capacity ferry vessel."

But Hall argues that the new law was "conceived, cut and tailored" solely for Superferry, a special law that gave Superferry access through an operating agreement to state land at Kahului and other harbors.

Hall also argues that the new law deprives the environmental groups of a vested right, given by the Supreme Court's ruling last year, for an environmental assessment under the state's environmental review law. The new law removed the large-capacity ferry vessel from under the state's environmental review law and created a similar — although not identical — process to conduct an environmental impact statement by next summer.

Hall argues that the new law "amounts to a legislative and executive revision of judicial decisions."

Lawmakers were guided when drafting the new law by the 1992 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Robertson v. Seattle Audubon Society. The ruling found that it was not unconstitutional for Congress to change timber harvesting rules in federally managed forests in response to legal challenges by environmentalists, who had argued that the old rules threatened endangered northern spotted owls.

The ruling found that Congress did not direct results in the legal challenges under the old law, but instead replaced the legal standards with new provisions.

Lawmakers in Hawai'i essentially did the same thing with Superferry.

                      State lawyer counters

Dorothy Sellers, the state solicitor general, argues in the state's legal briefs that the governor and lawmakers acted within their authority to create new public policy.

Sellers said the new law is not an irrevocable grant of special privileges for a ferry company because it expires when the environmental impact statement is accepted by the state or, at the latest, by next summer.

The new law is not a special law involving legislative power over state lands, Sellers argues, because the operating agreement is between an executive-branch agency — the state Department of Transportation — and a ferry company. The ferry company also does not have an exclusive right under the agreement and must share state harbors with other users.

Sellers said Hawai'i courts have not addressed the meaning of general law as it applies to Article XI of the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has upheld a legislative act designed to respond to a singular circumstance. In Bulgo v. County of Maui in 1967, the court found that it was constitutional for the Legislature to pass a law tailored for Maui calling for a special election to replace the chairman of the board of supervisors, who had died shortly after re-election and had not begun his new term.

Sellers also argued that the environmental groups have no vested right to an environmental assessment for Superferry under the state's environmental review law because the August 2007 Supreme Court decision was not the final judgment in the case.

The appeal, Sellers said, is "an assault on the inherent, essential power of the Legislature to speak for the people and to revise the public policies of the state as the Legislature determines necessary."

Last year, lawmakers were not enthusiastic about returning in special session to help Superferry but agreed because of the potential benefits of interisland ferry service. Lawmakers found that the ferry was an alternative mode of transportation that could help move people and cargo between the islands and could be an asset in disaster relief.

State Senate President Colleen Hanabusa, D-21st (Nanakuli, Makaha), said she believes the Legislature acted properly. She wishes, however, that the state House, Lingle and Superferry had agreed with the Senate and supported an environmental review of the project before the court ruled that such a review was required.

Hanabusa predicted that justices would decide the appeal based on an Article XI test of whether the new law is general or special.

              'a major problem'

If the court were to issue a broad ruling limiting the Legislature's power, Hanabusa said, lawmakers may have to consider asking voters to amend the Constitution.

In 2006, for example, voters approved a constitutional amendment that allowed the Legislature to define what constitutes the continuous sexual abuse of a minor under 14. The court had ruled that a law defining continuous sexual abuse was a violation of the right to due process because jurors were not instructed that they had to be unanimous about which specific acts amounted to continuous abuse.

"If the Supreme Court comes back and says that we don't have the right to make exceptions to the law, for whatever reason, then we're going to have a major problem," Hanabusa said.

Irene Bowie, the executive director of Maui Tomorrow, said the environmental groups deserve a real environmental assessment of Superferry, not what their attorney has described as a "pseudo-process that falls far short" of the state's environmental law.

"I think that this has been an illegitimate process. I don't think there's any real results that we'll come away with on this," Bowie said of the new law. "We would absolutely like to see this done over again in the proper way."

Reach Derrick DePledge at ddepledge@honoluluadvertiser.com.




--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For CPR training at your home:
www.jtacpr.com

For our swim school and private lifeguard services:
www.happyswimmers.com

Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded  in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

-- Chinese proverb

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

The New Book, Fargo on the Big Island, and Confronting Act 2



The New Book, Fargo on the Big Island, and Confronting Act 2

There is a lot going on right now:

1.) The book on this is catching fire. There have been some interesting phone conversations and e-mail's exchanging hands between the islands about the book.

2.) Fargo went to speak to the Kawaihae community on Sunday. They were expecting him there for at least a couple of hours. He started getting peppered with difficult questions, like about DU, so he got short and left after only an hour before a number of people in the small audience could ask their questions. The flaming about this in e-mails from those in attendance is noteworthy. Why would a person take a time consuming round-trip to go over their from Oahu and then only stay for an hour? Here is the only article on the event: "Superferry Update; Questions remain unanswered at Kawaihae meeting."

3.) HSF announced yesterday they are offering 2 for 1 deals but only to military personnel. I wasn't even going to recognize this story, but others have, so I'll just say ridership must be low. Otherwise, the preference doesn't surprise me.

4.) Lastly Joan Conrow has a fairly decent blog entry today on word about the new book, Superferry Chronicles. I found the comments to her blog entry to be especially enlightening. One or two of the comments there clarify the size of the crowd at Nawiliwili Harbor in August 2007; it was somewhere between 1000 and 1500. Those comments also clarify the filled and overflowing auditorium at the beginning of the event when the Governor's Unified Command came to speak in Sept. 2007.

But what I found especially interesting was that one of the anonymous commentors asks if people have read what Ken Stokes has written on the issue? Surprisingly, I had not, so I looked it up. I was surprised with what I found. This is important because it relates to a similar type of evaluation that could be used by others with an influenced Act 2 EIS. Here are my responses to Ken's 2006 post on this subject:

"...Well, we'll take it in order:

1. Claim- "Ironically, concerns about the energy efficiency of inter-island transport have only recently entered the debate amid claims these boats would actually generate more emissions than inter-island jets, though the available data (see below) suggest the opposite is true."

Response- HSF burns 15 times more petroleum based fuel to cover the same route than an Hawaiian Air jet. Even if you brought the maximum number of people transported to the same for each, a jet airplane is at least twice as efficient as HSF using no more than 1/2 the fuel that HSF takes to transport the same number of people the same distance. This is mainly so because the boat has 4 diesel engines moving through more water resistance and these planes have 2 jet engines moving through less resistant air. One could question whether one pollutes the air more than the sea and vis-a-versa, but I would think the petroleum carbon is released into the environment nevertheless. From an economic standpoint, a jet plane is much more efficient than HSF, assuming there is not really the need to move cars quickly interisland.

2. Claim- About the traffic, and "300 vehicles" split evenly going north and south.

Response- A key point here is that they don't all come and go in one day. They accumulate over a number of days in the beginning, as people are here for a number of days, weeks; ie. visitors and construction workers. The accumulated daily average total, assuming uninterrupted service, would amount to more like 1000 to 2000 additional cars on the island. These roads, esp. between Wailua and Kealia, cannot handle that kind of influx.

3. Claim- As for "the added risk and impact" of invasive species "must be fairly small."

Response- Well, first of all, we don't know, and certainly an economist would not know. Maybe a biologist or a DOA or DLNR officier might have a better idea on that. What we do know is that Kauai does not have the size of invasives populations that Oahu and the Big Island, and that even Maui have. Those would include the mongoose, fire ants, varroa mites, and coqui frogs, among others. All of those have been spreading between the other islands, but not to Kauai, except for the coqui in small numbers.

Just one example I'll mention. The Nene geese are well established on Kauai, at least on the Northshore. I see and hear them on the land and at low altitude all the time. That is not the case on the other islands. THIS IS the beautiful state bird. If the mongoose gets established here, you can kiss the Nene and other egg-laying endangered native species goodbye.

4. Claim- "And, regarding threats to whales...the Superferry's "mitigation" responses to these challenges probably makes this boat less of a threat than the hundreds of "whale watch" tour boats...Again, there is some risk here, yet probably not large."

Response- "Less of a threat" how so? When whale watch boats have infrequently had accidental collisions with whales, they almost never result in the whale's death, as the whale watch boats are relatively small and moving slowly. Inertia, mass and velocity, are what determine the threat of fatal collisions between boats and whales as has been documented about every couple of months in places like the Canary Islands. So far, the ferry here has not operated consistently or at all in Jan., Feb., or Mar. last season. It remains to be seen what its track record will be operating daily during the height of the whales season here, assuming it can handle the Winter sea conditions and not run into other mechanical problems again as it did last Winter.

5. Claim- "Conceivably, the ferries could be a win-win…As in: keep the travel AND cut the [CO2] emissions."

Response- It's not a win for the company, because they have not and probably never will actually cover all of their costs, much less the significant costs they have been able to formally externalize to the State. As for less CO2 emissions, I am not convinced that burning 400 gallons of jet fuel releases more CO2 to the environment than burning 6000 gallons of diesel fuel to cover the same route.


Aloha, Brad



Stay up to date on your PC, the Web, and your mobile phone with Windows Live Click here



--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For CPR training at your home:
www.jtacpr.com

For our swim school and private lifeguard services:
www.happyswimmers.com

Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded  in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

-- Chinese proverb

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Superferry begins seasonal voyage into seasickness

Superferry begins seasonal voyage into seasickness


by Larry Geller

As we head into Winter, the seas around Hawaii will begin to get choppy. Bouncing in the middle of it all is the Hawaii Superferry, now with increased passenger load, headed for another barf-filled season. It's inevitable and predictable. Here's possibly the first report of the season, with thanks to Dick Mayer.

Blogs started as personal "journals," and many still are. So it's interesting to see this account of a Superferry voyage as part of a blog post on a Maui vacation:

So we just got back from our vacation on neighbor-island Maui (not neighboring and NOT outer island).  We took the Superferry (huge mistake) and stayed at the all-suites Fairmont Kea Lani in Wailea.  Hung out in Wailea the whole time and had a blast.  Since we already live on a tropical island, wasn't sure how "vacation-y" it would feel, but it was so much fun.  We can't wait to visit more islands.

First, the Hawaii Superferry.  We chose to take the Superferry because we thought it would be a fun experience and a convenient way to take our car.  Wrong.  I was so seasick, I made frantic calls on the Superferry to the reservations desk to cancel my return trip.  It was 3+ miserable hours.  Joe and kids did okay, but we (foolishly) sat in first class at the bow (front) of the ship which made it extra rocky!  Joe returned on the ferry with the car, and the kids and I flew back.  It was about the same price and only a 34 minute plane ride.

This is news that is not filtered through a newspaper that runs Superferry ads, it's real. The author talks about all the al fresco dining on Maui, and ABC stores, so I think we're looking at a genuine tourist experience.



Permalink posted by Larry @ 10/14/2008 11:11:00 AM


POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

The person who says it cannot be done should not interrupt the person doing it.

-- Chinese proverb

Tuesday, September 30, 2008

Second Superferry on budget and ahead of schedule for Hawaii Delivery

Well folks,
Now they're not even hiding the fact the new SF is to benefit the military.... see the inconspicuous last line of the news report...

Second Superferry on budget and ahead of schedule for Hawaii delivery

MOBILE, Ala. — Hawaii Superferry's second catamaran is nearing completion here.

The new vessel, destined to link Honolulu and the Big Island next year, left Austal USA's ship shed on the Mobile River into a floating dry dock Monday.

Advertisement

Austal President Joe Rella called the launch "ahead of schedule and on budget."

The vessel, which has not yet been named, will head back to Austal for final work before sea trials begin later this year.

Austal reports it is ahead of schedule on its contracted March delivery date, and on budget for "the largest aluminum catamaran vessel delivered in the U.S."

The vessel is about 20 feet longer than the 350-foot Alakai because of a stern ramp added for military use.



Saturday, September 20, 2008

Maui ocean resources finding way onto ferry



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 10:31 AM
Subject: Maui ocean resources finding way onto ferry
To: Dick Mayer <dickmayer@earthlink.net>


HONOLULU STAR-BULLETIN       Saturday, September 20, 2008

Maui ocean resources finding way onto ferry

By Gary T. Kubota    gkubota@starbulletin.com

WAILUKU » Maui Mayor Charmaine Tavares said she was "gravely" worried about attempts to take prohibited resources from waters around the Valley Isle and bring them aboard the Hawaii Superferry.

"I am appalled by the reported amount of marine resources that are leaving our island with Superferry passengers," she said.

During a state oversight task force meeting yesterday, enforcement officers reported that in the first half of August, they found passengers trying to take aboard 63 pounds of opihi, 60 pounds of fish and 43 pounds of limu.

Tavares said in a written statement that she wants state agricultural and conservation officials to continue inspections beyond December.

State conservation enforcement officers have been assigned to work with Superferry employees to inspect passenger belongings through the end of December and to assist the task force in preparing a report.

The task force report is expected to be presented to the Legislature by January.

Tavares said state enforcement officers are needed to conduct the inspections.

"The years of education and training they bring to the operation cannot be replaced by a handful of hours of training that Superferry employees receive," she said.

State conservation enforcement official Randy Awo said there has been a rise in the volume of ocean resources that passengers have tried to bring aboard the Superferry, including fish, limu and opihi.

In response to Maui residents' concerns, a state executive order banned using the Superferry to transport many ocean resources.

Superferry official Richard Houck said he felt his employees were capable of doing the inspections and the taking of ocean resources has been small.




--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For booking our private, at-home swim lessons see:
http://happyswimmers.com/enrollform.php

For Booking Private Lifeguards for Pool Parties see:
http://happyswimmers.com/lg.html

For CPR training at your home:
www.jtacpr.com

and for Lifeguard Training courses for your group:

http://www.happyswimmers.com/lifeguardflyerwebpage.htm


Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

No pleasure philosophy, no sensuality, no place nor power, no
material success can for a moment give such inner satisfaction as the
sense of living for good purposes, for maintenance of integrity, for
the preservation of self-approval.

-- Minot Simons

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Court appeal hangs over Superferry



Court appeal hangs over Superferry

Three groups are challenging a law that allowed the ship to begin interisland trips

Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Sunday, August 24, 2008
By Ken Kobayashi

One year after a Hawaii Supreme Court decision that led to a temporary halt of Superferry operations, the interisland service enjoys increased ridership and plans to expand to the Big Island next year.

The legislative power over the lands owned by or under the control of the State and its political subdivisions shall be exercised only by general laws, except in respect to transfers to or for the use of the State, or a political subdivision, or any department or agency thereof.

The Superferry survived thanks to the state Legislature, which passed a law that essentially negated the high court's ruling of Aug. 23, 2007. But the Superferry must still overcome a remaining legal hurdle to continue its twice-daily service between Honolulu and Kahului Harbor on Maui. Three environmental groups - the Sierra Club, Maui Tomorrow Inc. and the Kahului Harbor Coalition - have filed an appeal challenging the constitutionality of the law, called Act 2.

If the groups prevail, the Superferry would be not be able to use the Kahului Harbor improvements built for the ferry until a review is completed on the impacts of the Superferry on the environment, a process that could take months.

While state and Superferry lawyers defend the law, one environmental lawyer said the challenge has merit.

"Ultimately, I think the Supreme Court will take very seriously this type of appeal," said David Henkin, staff attorney for Earthjustice, an environmental group not involved in the case.

Tom Fargo, Superferry president and chief executive officer, declined to speculate on what might happen if the Maui groups prevail. "It's impossible for me to comment on a hypothetical situation like that," he told the Star-Bulletin. "Nobody's crystal ball is that clear."

A ruling on the appeal is not expected for weeks, perhaps months.

Environmental Impact

The heart of the legal dispute is whether the state should conduct an environmental review of the Superferry operations before its 350-foot Alakai can bring passengers and cars to Maui.
The high court ruled that the state erred in determining in February 2005 that the Superferry operations were exempt from the review, which must be done under state law prior to the start of the activity.

The high court's unanimous opinion came five days before the ferry's planned inaugural voyages to Maui and Kauai.

The Aug. 23 ruling by the five justices set off a tumultuous week that included Superferry officials moving the start date two days ahead of schedule at a reduced $5 fare; Kauai protesters preventing the Alakai from docking at Kauai's Nawiliwili Harbor; and Maui Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza issuing a court order on Aug. 27 halting Superferry operations to Maui.

Two months later on Oct. 31, state lawmakers convened in a special session to pass a law that said the "unique and critical importance" of the ferry service warranted a change in the environmental laws. The law required the state to conduct an environmental review of the operations by preparing an environmental impact statement, but also allowed the Superferry to resume operations.

Act 2 was signed two days later by Gov. Linda Lingle.

Cardoza lifted his order Nov. 14. The Superferry's Alakai later resumed sailings to Maui. Sailings to Kauai remained on hold after Coast Guard officials recommended suspending service because of security concerns.

Draft Being Prepared

The environmental impact statement is a keystone of the state's environmental protection laws. For the Superferry, it requires a study of the service's impact on "the economic welfare, social welfare and cultural practices of the community and state" as well as on marine animals and plants, traffic, public safety and control of invasive species.
It also allows the public to express concerns about the proposed projects, according to state law. And it must consider ways to minimize any "adverse effects" and alternatives to the proposed action.

The state is preparing that statement, not only for Superferry operations on Maui, the subject of the legal dispute, but also for Kauai and the Big Island.

State Transportation Director Brennon Morioka said 11 public hearings have been held around the state from March to May and hopes to complete the impact statement by June or July.

A draft statement is scheduled to be completed in October or November, at which time the public will have 45 days to comment on the draft. The state would then address those comments in preparing the final impact statement, he said.

Legislature's Role

The completion of the statement, however, will not resolve the legal dispute, according to Isaac Hall, the three Maui groups' lawyer, who calls the current effort to prepare an environmental statement "bogus."
Hall said that if Act 2 is declared unconstitutional, the state must redo the environmental impact statement because laws require that the state prepare the statement before the operation starts.

"If you prepare an EIS while the action is undertaken, it jeopardizes the validity of the statement," he said. "It's likely you'll tolerate more of the adverse impact of the project."

An environmental impact statement normally takes two or three years to prepare, Morioka said. But he also said the state might be able to rely on some data collected in the current process, which would shorten the time if the state had to redo an impact statement.

Whether the state has to start all over in preparing an impact statement, however, depends on the Maui groups' appeal of the law.

Some legal observers say they face an uphill fight. The rationale is that because the Legislature passed the state laws requiring an environmental review before a project gets under way, the lawmakers are free to change the law.

It's a point emphasized in the state's legal briefs.

"The judicial branch of government construes and interprets the laws that are relevant to disposition of a case, but does not itself legislate or make laws," Deputy Attorney General Dorothy Sellers said.

"The Legislature speaks for the people," she later added.

But the Maui groups cite two state constitutional provisions: Article 1, section 21 and Article 11, section 5. Hall argued that the provisions prohibit state lawmakers from passing a special law to benefit a single business enterprise, particularly when dealing with state lands, site of the Kahului Harbor improvements for the Superferry.

The reasoning is that the Legislature should be passing laws for the general welfare of the public and should not be cutting special deals on behalf of a single business, Hall told the Star-Bulletin.

Although the law refers to a "large capacity ferry vessel company," Hall argued that it's clear that Act 2 deals solely with Superferry.

Henkin said he believes the Maui groups have raised a "very serious claim, one that has a lot of appeal in terms of making sure our environmental laws can be effective in protecting us from unwise decisions ahead of time."

The State's Position

The state responded in its legal brief filed last week that Act 2 does not violate either constitutional provision. Superferry's legal brief incorporated the arguments by the state.

The law did not give anyone an "irrevocable grant" prohibited by Article 1, section 21 because Act 2 specifies it will be repealed on the 45th business day following the end of next year's legislative session or when the environmental impact statement is completed, whichever is earlier, the state argued.

The state also said Act 2 does not provide "special benefits and immunities" for the Superferry alone because the law applies to all large-capacity ferry vessels. The law also did not deal with exercising control over state lands, the state argued. Act 2 simply exempted large ferry vessels from the laws requiring an environmental review before a proposed activity, the state said.

The Maui groups failed to establish that it is "unconstitutional beyond a reasonable doubt (or by any standard)," the state said.

Rise in Ridership

While the appeal has been simmering, Superferry officials are touting an increase in ridership. They celebrated its 125,000th passenger last week and continued to plan for expanding to the Big Island and Kauai.
The Alakai carried 36,600 passengers between Honolulu and Maui in July, about a 40 percent increase from June, according to Superferry officials. The number of vehicles was 9,200, a 36 percent increase over June.

"Ridership is still very good," Fargo said. "I would say we're just about where we expected to be." He said they are targeting May to start service from Honolulu to Kawaihae Harbor on the Big Island using a second ferry, whose construction is about 80 percent complete.

For Kauai, he said, Superferry officials wanted to first establish a reliable track record of service to Maui, hear from Kauai residents and make sure they get reliable information about the interisland operation.

Fargo said they didn't have a firm date for the Kauai service, but said it would be after the state completes its impact statement.

During the now twice-daily trips to Maui, Fargo said, the Superferry has been "very diligent" about complying with environmental laws. No major issues involving violations of the law have surfaced, he said.

"Our goal is to meet and exceed the (environmental protection) standards because we believe them to be important also," he said.

Looking to High Court

But the final word on whether the state's current environmental review is adequate rests with the Hawaii Supreme Court, which a year ago yesterday shocked the state and Superferry officials.
With its ruling issued just days before the Superferry's inaugural voyages, the high court made clear that environmental laws must be followed, regardless of the potential harm to the business.

The appeal is with the Intermediate Court of Appeals, but Hall said he will ask that it be transferred to the high court because the appeal deals with matters of "great public importance" and whichever side loses in the Intermediate Court will likely ask the high court to review the ruling.

Hall said he has until early next month to respond to the arguments by the state and Superferry, the final legal briefs for the case.

He would not comment on whether he has a better chance with the five justices who would be considering the constitutionality of a law that shot down their decision.

Henkin doesn't think so. "I'm confident the justices are not going to be caught up in any kind of personal connection to round 1," he said. "I'm sure they will look at round 2 and give a neutrally fair and dispassionate decision."

WHAT'S THE LAW?

The two state Constitution provisions cited by the Maui groups challenging the state law that allows the Superferry to operate before an environmental impact statement is completed:
Article 1, section 21 - Limitations of Special Privileges

The power of the State to act in the general welfare shall never be impaired by the making of any irrevocable grant of special privileges or immunities.
Article 11, section 5 - General laws required; exceptions

Key dates in the superferry legal battle

» Aug. 23, 2007: After hearing arguments earlier in the day, the Hawaii Supreme Court unanimously rules that environmental laws require the state to review the impact of the Superferry operations on the environment. The ruling overturned a 2005 decision by Maui Circuit Judge Joseph Cardoza.
» Aug. 24, 2007: Superferry officials announce they are moving up the scheduled launch by two days, and one-way fares will be reduced to $5 a person and $5 a vehicle.

» Aug. 26, 2007: Superferry's Alakai departs Honolulu to Kahului Harbor and returns, but the afternoon cruise to Kauai is met by protesters in the waters of Nawiliwili Harbor. Alakai returns to Honolulu Harbor.

» Aug. 27, 2007: Cardoza issues an order banning Superferry operations to Maui until the state conducts an environmental review. (The Maui court case does not directly apply to Nawiliwili Harbor, but Superferry and state officials follow the Coast Guard's recommendation in suspending service to Kauai because of security issues raised by the protest.)

» Oct. 31, 2007: The state Legislature passes Act 2, allowing the Superferry to operate while the state prepares an environmental impact statement. Act 2 says, "It is clearly in the public interest that a large capacity ferry vessel service should commence as soon as possible."

» Nov. 14, 2007: Because of Act 2, Cardoza lifts his ban on Superferry operations to Maui.

» Dec. 13, 2007: Superferry resumes service between Honolulu and Maui, although it is later disrupted by high waves and repairs.

» Feb. 29: Sierra Club and two other groups file formal notice that they will appeal Cardoza's ruling. Like all appeals, the case goes to the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals, the state's second-highest court, but the three groups will ask that the appeal go directly to the Hawaii Supreme Court.

» Aug. 18: The state and Superferry file legal briefs defending Act 2.


Wednesday, July 30, 2008

Superferry Military Link

from reporter Joan Conrow's blog, Kauai Eclectic

Superferry Military Link

I just checked out Larry Geller's Disappeared News blog and he has a very interesting post that confirms something that many of us have believed all along: the Hawaii Superferry is indeed intended for military purposes.

Larry quotes a report in today's edition of BYM Marine and Maritime News that contains this nugget:

Austal was recently awarded a new contract to provide additional features and equipment on the second Hawaii Superferry to facilitate its use by the military. This follows on from the long term charter, since 2001, of the Austal built 101 metre vehicle-passenger catamaran "WestPac Express" by the III Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) based on Okinawa, Japan. As an adapted commercial vessel "WestPac Express" has demonstrated the enormous flexibility, cost savings and efficiencies achievable by commercial fast ferry technology over conventional air or sea transport.

As you may recall, the company had sought federal funding to equip the second ferry with ramps that would allow the military vehicles to easily access the ship. Other documents indicated that Austal also wanted to add desalination and sewage treatment plants and widen the hull to facilitate military uses. The total price tag was $5 million.

The article also states that Austal USA, which built the Alakai, continues to participate in the process to secure the lucrative Navy contract to build Joint High Speed Vessels for the military. It states:

The Austal JHSV Team's low risk, proven technology solution combines the expertise of Austal USA, Austal Ships (Australia) and General Dynamics Advanced Information Systems (GDAIS).

Austal USA's Mobile, Alabama shipyard is unique in having the proven infrastructure and trained workforce in place to design, construct, deliver and service 100 metre+ high speed ships in the US. Austal USA recently launched the 127 metre trimaran LCS-2 "Independence" combat ship for the US Navy and has under construction the second 107 metre Hawaii Superferry catamaran high speed vehicle-passenger ferry. In 2007 Austal USA delivered the first Hawaii Superferry "Alakai" for intra-island service in the Hawaiian islands.


Thanks, Larry, for picking up that bit of "news."


Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Fwd: [boycottsuperferry.org] Superferry legal update



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: John Tyler <mysticseaswimmer@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Subject: [boycottsuperferry.org] Superferry legal update
To: superferryimpact@yahoogroups.com


SUBJECT: SUPERFERRY APPEALS

SOURCE: RICHARD HOEPNER richoep@aloha.net

POSTED: 11 JULY 2008 - 7:00am EST

Superferry legal update

image above: poster of routes for Superferry posted on www.aloharents.com dated 6/12/08

by Richard Hoeppner on 9 July 2008

After the heart attack in May, along with the triple by-pass open heart surgery, the healing has been incredible, and I am just about back to a normal routine.

Legal developments are looking very positive. Dan Hempey has filed a brief that is brilliantly written to the Hawaii Supreme Court on Judge Valenciano's decision denying an injunction in our local court. Isaac Hall has filed his brief with the Hawaii Supreme Court on the Maui case that Judge Cardoza ruled superferry(sf) could not operate until an EIS was completed. That of course was overturned with Lingle's special session of the Legislature that resulted in Act II which exempted sf from Hawaii Environmental Protection Act(HEPA).

Hall's brief was spectacular in it's argument that Cardoza's decision could not be overturned by a legislative body, and that Act II itself violated both the Hawaii Constitution and the US Constitution.

Dan and Isaac have communicated and are working in concert on the two similar cases. Dan has filed an emergency appeal requesting the Supreme Court take the Kauai case directly, bypassing the appeal courts. Isaac has filed something similar requesting expedited service because Cardoza stated in his decision that there was a high probability that irreparable damage could result in sf operation without an EIS.

I have read both briefs and we are totally confident that the Hawaii Supreme Court will require sf to suspend operations until an independent EIS is completed. Our biggest problem on Kauai is budget. People for the Preservation of Kauai(PPK) has dissolved it's partnership with 1000 Friends of Kauai because it restricted PPK's ability to actively campaign against issues or persons going before the voters.
We therefore no longer have 501c3 status and donations are not tax deductible.

This primarily affected large contributions, but we are actively seeking smaller contributions to supplement our legal fund. We have won many battles but the war is not over. Please donate whatever you can without claiming the IRS exemption, to keep the legal battle afloat, to insure that sf will not be afloat to Kauai.

Checks can be made out to: People for the Preservation of Kauai, and mailed to PPK treasurer: Judie Lundborg, 4865G Nonou Rd., Kapaa, HI, 96746.

__._,_.___
John Tyler
Director
www.boycottsuperferry.org
Kaua'i, Hawai'i

Check us out on MySpace, and friend us:
http://www.myspace.com/boycottsuperferry 

"In our every deliberation we must consider the impact
of our decisions on the next seven generations."
~ From the Great Law of the Iroquois Confederacy

"The time is right to do what's right"--Martin Luther King
Yahoo! News

Fashion News

What's the word on

fashion and style?

Ads on Yahoo!

Learn more now.

Reach customers

searching for you.

Check out the

Y! Groups blog

Stay up to speed

on all things Groups!

.

__,_._,___



--
John Tyler, owner.
Toll free 866-530-4117

For booking our private, at-home swim lessons see:
http://happyswimmers.com/enrollform.html

For Booking Private Lifeguards for Pool Parties see:
http://happyswimmers.com/lg.html

For CPR training at your home:
www.jtacpr.com

and for Lifeguard Training courses for your group:

http://www.happyswimmers.com/lifeguardflyerwebpage.htm


Serving California, Arizona, and Hawai'i Founded in 1991

POSITIVE QUOTE OF THE DAY
-----------------------------

No pleasure philosophy, no sensuality, no place nor power, no
material success can for a moment give such inner satisfaction as the
sense of living for good purposes, for maintenance of integrity, for
the preservation of self-approval.

-- Minot Simons

Friday, July 11, 2008

Oahu men who allegedly took Maui rocks each fined $3,050

Oahu men who allegedly took Maui rocks each fined $3,050

Three Windward O'ahu men accused of illegally taking rocks from a Maui conservation district last year each will be fined $3,050, the state Board of Land and Natural Resources decided this morning.

Advertisement

Land board members, however, set in motion the possibility of a later presentation of the case before a hearings officer, which could reduce or increase the amount of fines.

On Aug. 28, Charlie K. Bright, Ralph Chun and Victor Fonoimoana allegedly took 934 river rocks from the Paukukalo Shoreline, placed them in three pick-up trucks, covered them with tarps and then drove to the Hawai'i Superferry's Kahului Terminal for a return trip to O'ahu.

The men were motivated to travel to Maui to replenish rocks for a church imu by the Superferry's offer of special $5 fares, Bright told the branch chief of the Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement.

"Our bishop told us to come to Maui to get imu rocks because ours is old already, about 10 to 12 years old," Bright was quoted as saying in a report to the land board. "When they had the $5 ferry fares, our bishop said this is one good time to go to Maui to get new rocks. So we came to Maui. We went to Paukukalo because our bishop knew about this place. We use the rocks to kalua pig for the Boy Scouts to support them through our fundraisers. We had good intentions. It was for a good cause. We didn't know it was illegal or that we needed a permit."

The trucks remain in state custody until the fines are paid. The rocks are still stored on Maui, Sam Lemmo, who is head of the office of conservation and coastal lands.

Attorney Thomas Otake, who represents Bright, told the board that the men had written permission to take rocks from land belonging to a private landowner.

But Otake acknowledged that about 200 of the 900 rocks did come from public conservation land.

"They didn't do it for any financial gain," Otake said.

He called the men "as good as they come."

Former city prosecutor Keith Kaneshiro, who represents Chun and Fonoimoana, told board members that he did not want to make a presentation today because of the possibility of criminal charges.

Board member Timothy Johns told Kaneshiro that attorney fees for his clients to go through a contested hearing could run well past the $2,000 fine imposed today, as well as the additional fines to cover administrative costs.

Reach Dan Nakaso at dnakaso@honoluluadvertiser.com.