Negotiations between the state of Hawaii and the U.S. Army regarding the lease of military land at Pohakuloa have raised significant legal and environmental concerns. Governor Josh Green and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll have emphasized their commitment to protecting the environment and adhering to legal protocols. However, critics argue that these negotiations may be circumventing established laws designed to protect public lands.
The Hawaii Board of Land and Natural Resources has recently rejected the Army’s environmental impact statement (EIS), citing numerous deficiencies. According to state regulations, the transfer of public lands cannot proceed without an approved EIS, which is crucial for assessing potential environmental impacts. This legal requirement is reinforced by the Hawaii Constitution, which mandates that the state conserve and protect its natural resources for the benefit of present and future generations.
In a letter to the editor in the Star-Advertiser, local resident Gary Hooser expressed concern over the state’s approach. He urged Governor Green to reconsider the pace of negotiations with the Army, emphasizing the importance of public trust responsibilities towards the people and the land of Hawaii. Hooser’s statement reflects a broader sentiment among residents who believe that environmental safeguards should take precedence over military interests.
The ongoing discussions surrounding the Pohakuloa land lease highlight the tension between military needs and environmental protections. As the state navigates these negotiations, the implications for Hawaii’s natural landscape and the legal framework governing land use remain critical points of contention.
The situation calls for heightened scrutiny and public engagement to ensure that the rights of the people and the environment are adequately protected. As negotiations continue, residents and stakeholders across Hawaii are encouraged to voice their opinions and advocate for responsible stewardship of the islands’ natural resources.