Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 4, Number 6, 1 Iune 1987 — from the Chairman's Desk [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

from the Chairman's Desk

By Moses K. Keale Sr., OHA Chairman Trustee, Ni'ihau and Kaua'i OHA and H-3

Federal Judge Samuel King's recent ruling to lift the injunction against the H-3 project holds a special meaning to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and our beneficiaries. Like the rest of the community, Hawaiians are divided in their support or oppositions to the proposed trans-Ko'olau highway. This controversy over whether or not the H-3 should be built led to a general misunderstanding about the role OHA played. Too many people believed OHA's part in the suit was anti-H-3. That confusion needs to be cleared up. Our sole purpose in going to court was to force state and federal highway officials to obey federal law and to recognize the mandates of the National Historic Preservation Act. We succeeded. But only by suing. Since we filed last year, all known areas within the "Luluku discontiguous archaeological district" have been declared eligible for the National Register of Historic Sites. The most important and best known of these sites is the wetland agricultural terraces of Luluku — believed to be the largest surviving lo'i on the island of O'ahu. Prior to OH A filing suit, government officials attempted to deny the existence of Luluku. Then, when it beeame known that the Bishop Museum had prepared a report verifying the existence and importance of the Luluku sites, the report was declared "classified" and unavailable to the public. After direct intervention by U.S. Senator Daniel K. lnouye, the report was released. Project officials, however, stiil refused to activate what is known as the "Section 106 Process" of the National Historic Preservation Act. That's when OHA went to court. And that's why Judge King included our complaint in the injunction against H-3. It was not because OHA was opposed to the construction of the highway but because we rightly demanded that the state and federal governments comply with the law regarding historic Hawaiian sites. Onee that injunction was granted, transportation officials began to act responsibly. In the last four months, OHA has met with representatives from the National

Historic Preservation Oouneil, the State Historic Preservation Office and state and federal highway officers. As a result, they have now: 1. Formally acknowledged that Luluku is subject to the National Historic Places Preservation Act and held the public hearings required by law. 2. Actively included OHA in this process with the recognition that the Hawaiian people have a unique interest in the Luluku sites and we anticipate that we will be a signatory to the final "Memorandum of Agreement" outlining plans for the future of this area. 3. Agreed in principle to change the design of the Kane'ohe interchange to avoid destroying Luluku, and to consult with OFĪA whenever burial areas are in volved. Judge King's dismissal specifically noted that these things happened only after OHA sued. The dismissal, then, is a victory for the Office of Hawaiian Affairs because the law is finally being obeyed. Under that law, there is provision for. an award of court costs if citizens are forced to sue for proper application of historic preservation laws. We will be pursuing this reimbursement as fair and just. Additionally, Judge King's ruling explicitly provided that if the state or federal government again ignores historic preservation laws, we are free to return to court. We hope that won't be necessary.