I started writing this response as a comment on my last post, but, it ended up turning into its own blog post.
AnonymousSeptember 3, 2014 at 8:31 PM
So what Luke? Luke the pacifist would let this happen without a fight, resigning himself to saying "that's the way it is"? Or next time, Luke the activist would say "hell no the trees won't go" and rally the community to do what is right, stop the construction perhaps use public money to purchase and preserve, and then be blamed for stopping progress, killing jobs and dividing the community. Sorry but just could not resist. :-)
Anonymous commentator, you’re right: there is some contradiction in my words. How can I advocate structural change, yet do absolutely nothing in the face of this type of development? Am I being a hypocrite? Maybe.
Despite driving by it almost every day for my entire life, I barely even realized that the coconut grove existed until they began discussions on cutting it down. So, I can’t claim to have any deep connection or childhood memories of the two acre lot. The history of the land, as it transitioned from Hawaiian hands to Niu Pia Farms (run by the Luna of Grove Farm) to Niu Pia Land Company, to CVS Longs Drugs is representative of the sad ongoing story of Hawai’i nei. As a haole who was born on Kaua’i, I feel guilt, grief, hopelessness, and silent complicity with every new development.
I wrote the post merely as a way to express those feelings. So, anonymous commentator, you ask why I didn’t do anything to stop the development? I spoke against the project at the Open Space Commission, but was told by the deputy county attorney that, as an advisory body, the commission has no authority to voice an opinion on the subject. So, I went to the Planning Commission hearing (which does have authority) and saw a room overflowing with Longs Employees fighting for their jobs. On the way in, I happened to get into a conversation with the current land owner.
His family has owned the land since the turn of the century. The original family patriarch planted the trees as a coconut and cassava farm (hence the name Niu Pia). Forty-one years ago their tax designation changed to resort, and since then they have been paying the highest possible tax rate on the land. Farming it could never be profitable and the “best use” tax rate made development inevitable. Could the land-owners sit on it, paying the same property tax as the behemoth hotel next door? Could they sell it to some benevolent rich person who was willing to keep it undeveloped? Would the county want to spend the entirety of the Open Space Fund to acquire it? No. They needed to sell it, and the only willing buyer was inevitably going to be someone who could profit off of it through development.
After talking to the land owner and listening to the emotional appeals of the Longs Employees, I decided not to testify against the project. The death warrant of the trees was a web of factors and I was forty-one years too late to testify.
As much as I appreciate community activism and engagement, protesting the development or demonizing the land owners isn’t a solution. This is a systemic issue with capitalism, planning ordinances, and tax policies at the heart. If we fight the symptoms without addressing the root, then we accomplish nothing except divisiveness.
So, my solution? On a personal level, to limit my contribution to the endless growth paradigm of capitalism which necessitates development and, more specifically, to understand the system well enough to support political candidates who are dedicated to systemic change.
Thank you, Luke, for expressing your concern to be wary about "the endless growth paradigm of capitalism", and yet, at the same time, denote how important it is "to understand the system well enough to support political candidates who are dedicated to systemic change. There needs to be a "balance" in mapping out that which we value with respect to environmental concerns coupled with how it may be possible to consider those proposals for "change" and/or "improvement" determined by those in positions of authority who handle such determinations!
ReplyDeleteYes and if we think long and hard about it, and are wary enough about it, and respect the landowners rights and the people seeking the jobs rights, and honor the system while we seek balance - if we do this very thoughtfully and thoroughly enough and take the time to do it right and bring all the stakeholders to the table, then it will all be gone and we will not be able to do anything about it and thus are resolved of our responsibility. Hooray! A solution that absolves us of all responsibility and we can tell our children we thought about it and were wary about it when they ask us where all the trees have gone.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 7:47,
DeleteI am sorry if you think that that was the "take-away" message of the last two posts. I have no intention of saying that we should "give-up" on creating systemic change. And, I'm not trying to "absolve us of all responsibility;" in fact, I consistently reiterate that we are all responsible for acts like this. When I shop at Longs, I am cutting down the coconut trees. When I eat processed foods, I am spraying atrazine in our west-side soil. When I turn on my car, I am creating dictatorships in the middle east and creating a climate inhospitable to life as we know it. That concept, more than any other, is my motivation to write. We are all responsible. And, because of our silent complicity, there is no easy solution.
Because I don't see revolution on the horizon, we need to do what we can with the system that we have: support local, learn to understand the system, and vote for politicians committed to systemic change. The fate of the grove was sealed 41 years ago. We couldn't save it, but we can save and replant the groves of the next generation.
Luke, the goodness of your soul prevents you from understanding the depth of your naivety. Grove Farm could have down zoned this land to open or some other zoning a long time ago and gotten rid of the so-called tax burden of highest and best use. They could have donated the land and gotten a tax deduction and or done any number of things to reduce their tax obligation. The land is taxed at its value and if they were willing to give up that value then the tax would have been reduced accordingly. Grove Farm is one of the wealthiest land owners in the County and the heirs and present owners seek to maximize value so they ensure their regular monthly incomes. They live off of selling and developing their land and this is not a "woe is me I am stuck paying property taxes and have no choice but to pave paradise and put up a parking lot". They have lots of choices. Down zoning, land swapping with the county, donating and/or selling to a more thoughtful developer are just a few of the options. They were not forced because of economic hardship to sell to this drug store chain so they would build this monstrosity that we will all have to live with for eternity. You are young Luke and still believe the majority of things that people with money and power tell you. There are many of us who are all hopeful that you will grow through this time of your life with eyes wide open and become the leader we need. We love you Luke!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 8:20,
DeleteThank you for engaging in the dialogue. You're right: I am naive and I do have a habit of sincerely believing what people tell me. You're also right that the land owners could've rectified the situation. But, it still wouldn't solve the problem. If they took every beautiful lot they owned and downzoned it or donated it, it would be a quick path to insolvency and it would've saved a few hundred acres on Kaua'i. And since it's not something that we could expect every land-owner to do, then land will eventually be developed according to its zoning. It's inevitable. And, as I wrote about here: Bridging the Gap, as long as we support the endless growth paradigm of capitalism then development is not only inevitable, it's integral to a functioning economy.
The issue is complex, there is no single culprit, and there is no easy answer. Which is why this was my conclusion: "So, my solution? On a personal level, to limit my contribution to the endless growth paradigm of capitalism which necessitates development and, on a broader level, to understand the system well enough to support political candidates who are dedicated to systemic change."
I also want to be clear that I am not condemning community activism. The most successful social movements of the last 100 years arose from community activists such as Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. We need well informed activists as much as we need wonky policy makers who are working for a long range vision.
Just realized the owner may not be Grove Farm but an entity with similar/same historical owners that were also involved in Grove Farm, a kamaaina family with plantation roots. Nonetheless they have made millions off of land development over the years.
ReplyDeleteAmen to a fundamental structural critique of our present destructive economic ideology, and amen to efforts to begin the long overdue fundamental re-structuring of this inherited social value system.
ReplyDeleteI am pretty sure this makes you a 'radical' (working at the root of the issue vs. at the periphery), Luke. I am happy to hear this, and proud to know you. :)
Ha. While I really appreciate the sentiment, unfortunately I think I am the opposite of a radical. Calling out capitalism and believing that systemic change is necessary just makes me a pragmatic realist :)
DeleteYou have a cool head, Mr Luke.
ReplyDeleteAs Yogi Berra said "If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else."
This also seems to be the current motto of our council.