Ferry ruling issues call for clearer policies
The protracted legal battle over the Hawaii Superferry service has ended with a painful verdict for the business, operating under a legal exception from environmental requirements that yesterday the state Supreme Court overturned as unconstitutional. The result: Superferry has decided to cease operations, at least for the present.
If there was ever a case in which the opportunity for a do-over would be appreciated by all parties, this would be the one. Nobody benefits from the disruption caused by the ruling, and by the closure of yet another business for an indefinite period, if not for good.
And clearly, nobody wants to wear the enforcer's hat during such a severe economic downturn, when Hawai'i can least afford another group of people laid off from their jobs. That's evident from the chorus singing their regrets that the state didn't push Superferry to do its EIS first, that the Legislature passed a bill allowing the ferry to sail while a smaller-scale environmental study is done.
What's more important than assigning the blame now is to explore possibilities, if any, of preserving the longterm survival of the business while seeing that the environmental and community concerns are met. Lawmakers also have raised valid worries about the state's further exposure to lawsuits in this matter.
The plaintiffs rightly believe that environmental law should be consistently upheld and that leaving gaping loopholes in the law sets a bad precedent. And the company has its own bottom line to consider before deciding its next step.
So finding a way forward now is a tall order, but it's worth some discussion among the parties to the lawsuit.
While the dust settles, state leaders can take away some key lessons. Primary among them should be the importance of getting environmental proceedings done right from the start.
In addition, government should minimize extraneous permitting delays so that the important exercises such as EIS preparation won't seem as onerous.
And nobody should cite this case as reason for dismissing the crucial role of environmental assessment and disclosure laws. When performed in the context of orderly planning, an EIS can help identify problems and ways to improve projects.
There's no reason why environmental protections, clearly defined in law, shouldn't coexist with a healthy climate for a business that adds fuel to the state's economic engine, as the Superferry does.