Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 15, Number 10, 1 October 1998 — OHA testifies before Water Resource Commission [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

OHA testifies before Water Resource Commission

ON THE morning of Aug. 26, as the trustee representing Moloka'i, I testified before the Commission on Water Resource Management in support of OHA's motion for reconsideration to be

admitted as a party in the Kukui (Moloka'i), ine. contested case hearing. My testimony highlighted the critical and compelling issues presented in OHA's motion for reconsideration filed July 22. I also urged the commission to continue precedent set, in admitting OHA as a party to a contested case hearing, by respecting the unique and special status of Native Hawaiians as they are represented by their elected body, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.

In previous COWRM contested cases such as the Waiahole Ditch and the Waiola O Moloka'i matters, OHA was directly involved as a party in eaeh proceeding. Indeed, OHA played an intricate and critical role in both cases and clearly represented issues on behalf of our Native Hawaiian people that went weU beyond the scope and

interests of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund and the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation. As the duly elected representatives of the Hawaiian people we are fiduciarily responsible to manage the ceded lands trust and are mandated by law to advocate for the rights of Native Hawaiians. OHA's present decision to intervene in the Kukui (Moloka'i), ine. contested case is evidence of that eommitment and duty that

: we, as trustees, pledge to uphold. Our unique role as a quasi-sovereign entity provides us with the latitude and independence to successfully advocate for the rights of the i Native Hawaiian people. This independence provides Native Hawaiians with the proper representation in matters that directly affect their interests. In this p£uticular case, OHA's representation is absolutely necessary in

addressing the fundamental rights of Native Hawaiians through the Winters doctrine. The scope of OHAs' representation is beyond that of the other parties representing specific native Hawaiian interests, such as DHHL and NHLC. OHA's independence affords us the ability to secure expert legal counsel independent of the attorney general and the indi-

vidual representation of the NHLC. By denying OHA's participation as a party to this contested case, the commission is essentially silencing a very critical and independent voice of the Native Hawaiian ; people. The commission was urged not to allow 100 years of history to repeat itself in this forum. In closing, I testified of my eoneem that the decision to deny OHA as a party would cripple the interests and needs of Moloka'i Hawaiians. Moloka'i is my home and I have worked with our eommunity to maintain its beauty, ruggedness i and fragile resources. I have always held i a special plaee in my heart for the people and the island of Moloka'i. As a tmstee, i I am in a unique position to educate the public and specifically this commission i of the importance of the unique Moloka'i | lifestyle. More importantly, my position affords me the opportunity to advocate for an island whose voice is often ignored in the state and county political maehinery. I have been involved in and understand the struggles this community has gone through just to be in control of its own destiny. I also understand that Moloka'i is representative of our greater Hawaiian community whose people straggle daily to live as a 21st century Native Hawaiian. "Mōhala I Ka Wai Ka Maka O Ka Pua." | Subsequently, on Aug. 26, the COWRM issued a decision admitting OHA as a party in the Kukui (Moloka'i), ine. contested case hearing. ■ I

[?]