Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 35, Number 12, 1 December 2018 — THE MAUNA'S FUTURE [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

THE MAUNA'S FUTURE

[?]

TMT's approval highlights need for better Mauna Kea management BY OFFICE 0F HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS STAFF

Plans to build a Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) on Mauna Kea cleared another hurdle when the Hawai'i State Supreme Court upheld a permit necessary for construction of the $1.4 hillion observatory, but petitioners in the case are not giving up the fight. The conservation district use permit had been invalidated in 2015 due to lawsuits, but the court's 4-1 decision on Oct. 30 affirmed the permit issued by the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR). The ruling disap- pointed Native Hawaiian groups and environmentalists opposed to further development on Mauna Kea. Pua Case, a plaintiff in the case, took to Facebook

after the decision to post, "Mauna Kea is still sacred! The

TMT will not be built on our sacred mauna." On Nov. 19, Case and the other Mauna Kea petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration with the Supreme Court, urging it to adopt the findings of dissenting Justice Miehael Wilson, whose opinion was filed 10 days after the eon■H ferrine decision. Wilson's ouinion noted BLNR

"The opinion wrongly relies on representations that there is 'no evidence' of Hawaiian cultural practices on the specific acreage proposed for the TMT. Thousands

of Hawaiian cultural practitioners have affirmed the sacredness of the entirety of Mauna Kea. Thousands more have supported the protection of Mauna Kea from the TMT project. The Court's opinion has done nothing to ehanee this," read the

opinion erodes Chief Justice William S. Richardson's legacy with respect to Native Hawaiian traditional and customary rights and public trust doctrine. The opinion H diminishes basic principles and settled precedent under Jfl| these constitutional mandates and threatens to curtail the legal exercise of Hawai'i's native culture and practices." The amicus does not ask the court to reconsider its decision to affirm the BLNR's authorization. Rather it advocates for the court amend its analysis, whieh may undermine or minimally confuse critical legal protections of Native Hawaiian rights the court has previously established, and invite agencies to diminish

their constitutional affirmative obligations to protect Native Hawaiian traditional and customary rights. After the Supreme Court decision, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs announced it is moving forward with a lawsuit filed last year against Efl UH and the state over mismanagement of Mauna Kea, where 13 observatories have mN|

ln June 2009, a group of Thirty Meter Telescope supporters lined Kame- S hameha Avenue in Hilo. Supporters included members of the university eom- I munity, the business community, the construction industry and students. - [ Photo: ī llihia Gionson

īhe opinion wrongly relies on representations that there is 'no evideoce' of Hawaiian nnltiira ira ir

Ilp had concluded that addition of the TMT would have no significant impact because the eumulative effects from prior astronomical development have been so substantially adverse. "This does not mean that astronomy facility development is allowed to cause substantial, significant and adverse impacts to the conservation district area and that development is allowed to continue even after reaching such a level," the appellants wrote in their motion. Richard Ha, a member of a Native Hawaiian group that testified in support of the telescope - PUEO - is satisfied with the Court's ruling and believes that part of the fight is over. While the f Hawai'i Island businessman has been in favor of the TMT and the jobs it will bring to his island, he also believes that better management of Mauna Kea is required - including a plan that places Hawaiian culture over astronomy. "There's nothing up there that shows any respect for the culture. The telescopes are like little temples, but Hawaiian temples? No more," he said. "Frankly it's upsetting to me. I don't think there's respect there. I like pound the nw table." Ha sees room for Hawaiian culture and astronomy to co-exist on Mauna Kea - "Why can't we have both?" he asks - and proposes a cultural center above the clouds, and charging for access to limit traffic up the mountain. While some, like Ha, see potential for eompromise, that won't satisfy many Hawaiian groups and environmentalists who oppose construction on Mauna Kea's sacred summit. High profile demonstrations disrupted the TMT groundbreaking in 2014, and led to 31 arrests in 2015 when protestors blocked construction vehicles from traveling up the mountain. Those pursuing legal channels point to the toll existing telescopes have already taken on the 'āina, and warn new construction will further impinge on Native Hawaiian rights to traditional and cus-

tomary practices on the sacred mountain. Controversy and delays in construction led TMT officials to identify the Canary Islands as an alternative site for the telescope. In a statement expressing their disappointment in the Supreme Court's decision, KAHEA, a Hawaiian-environmental allianee and a plaintiff in the case, urged the University of Hawai'i, the state and TMT to choose the Canary Islands, already home to the world's largest telescope:

Oct. 30 statement. Kua'āina Ulu 'Auamo, Colette Machado and Dan Ahuna - collectively the Native Hawaiian Amiei - filed a memorandum in support of the Nov. 19 motion to reconsider the Supreme Court's decision. Machado and Ahuna both stepped forward in their personal capacities, not as OHA tmstees, because the timetable didn't give OHA's board time to take official action at a formal meeting. Their memorandum states: "...The Court's majority

already been built on the summit: "Despite four state BH audits and generations of Native Hawaiians expressing eoneem about the threats to Mauna Kea, the state and the University of Hawai'i have continuously neglected their legal duties to adequately manage the mountain. Instead, they have consistently prioritized astronomieal development at the expense of properly caring for Mauna Kea's natural and cultural resources. "The Supreme Court's ruling demonstrates an urgent need for the state to create mechanisms to m ensure that constitutionally protected traditional and cus- HE tomary practices and cultural resources are not sacrificed or abridged. "In November 2017, OHA sued to hold the state and UH accountable for its longstanding and well-doc-umented mismanagement of Mauna Kea. For years, OHA held good faith discussions with the state to stop the state's failed stewardship. We started discussions with all of the state parties and the University of Hawai'i in 2015, well before we filed the lawsuit, and have since then attempted to resolve the management issues in

the best interests of our beneficiaries and the state in general. Neither mediation, negotiation, nor discussions have proven fruitful. "After 50 years of empty promises to the mauna and our community, the state needs to be held accountable. Mauna Kea deserves better." The Office of Hawaiian Affairs will provide updates on the lawsuit and related Mauna Kea issues at www. oha.org/maunakea. ■

ln 2015, the group Kū Kia'i Mauna gathered in the OHA Board of Trustees reception area to deliver their request urging the board to reconvene on Mauna Kea and the Thirty Meter Telescope. ■ Photo: Francine Murray

I Ul I UUIIUI Ul |JI uuuuuu on the specific acreage proposedfor the TMT. Thūusands of Hawaiian cultural practitioners have affirmed the sacredness of the entirety of Mauna Kea." - KAHEA

In 201 4, Mauna Kea protectors disrupted a groundbreaking ceremony for the Thirty Meter Telescope wilh a peaeeful demonstration. ■ Photo: Courtesy of Occupy Hilo

[?]