Judiciary site is not in public’s best interest ADVERTISING Judiciary site is not in public’s best interest In the Oct. 26 and Nov. 20 West Hawaii Today, it was announced that the privately owned Makalapua land next to a shopping
Judiciary site is not in public’s best interest
In the Oct. 26 and Nov. 20 West Hawaii Today, it was announced that the privately owned Makalapua land next to a shopping center was being substituted for the state-owned land across the street from the West Hawaii Civil Center as the site of the Kona Judiciary Complex. This is a triumph of private interests over public good and good government.
A very long, and comprehensive, expensive site selection process with a lot of public input was involved in the Kona Judiciary site selection process, conducted by an expensive private consultant hired by the state. The leading sites overwhelmingly favored by the public and public interest groups were several sites on free state-owned land near the West Hawaii Civic Center. Certainly Kona deserved courts and state departments and offices at the same convenient and traffic accessible location as the county (civic) facilities, just like Hilo, Honolulu and elsewhere in Hawaii, using one of the free state-owned sites near the civic center. The best and most popular state land site was chosen, across the street from the civic center. Other nearby state land at Kealakehe appeared to be the second choice.
The state’s private consultant had put the privately owned Makalapua site on the list, too. After all, their clients included the private landowner and the developer of Makalapua lands and it would certainly be a valuable enhancement and service for their client to have the Kona Judiciary Complex on the client’s land. But that site was rejected because of accessibility and traffic problems, it was privately owned (not free); appearances of impropriety or conflicts of interests were present; it was too far away from the civic center; and was not accepting of a criminal holding/correctional facility that would go with the courts. It was way down the list.
Then, with no public input, without even notice or invitation for public input, with an argument that a single uhiuhi tree was growing on only one of the many state land sites near the Civic center, the disfavored private Makalapua land was pushed up to replace the several better located State lands. Why?
Certainly the private landowner will offer a cheap lease — so all its nearby lands will become more valuable and more quickly usable as commercial property surrounding the Judiciary Complex.
Who is the state serving with this private decision: The public, private interests, or both?
Mark Van Pernis
Kailua-Kona
