Two Kaua‘i public officials, Mayor Bryan Baptiste and County Council Chairman Bill “Kaipo” Asing, Monday decided to ban The Garden Island newspaper from a meeting held in a public building to discuss public safety when a privately owned business next
Two Kaua‘i public officials, Mayor Bryan Baptiste and County Council Chairman Bill “Kaipo” Asing, Monday decided to ban The Garden Island newspaper from a meeting held in a public building to discuss public safety when a privately owned business next returns to the publicly owned waterway known as Nawiliwili Harbor.
The mayor said publicly the reason for barring the newspaper was to ensure the people attending the meeting had a level of comfort.
The meeting was reportedly for those involved in the Superferry “actions” on Aug. 26 and Aug. 27.
We’re sure the people feel better knowing an independent voice in the community was censored and what occurred in that meeting could only be learned by the newspaper from secondhand accounts.
We at The Garden Island were naive enough to believe it might be in the entire community’s interest to learn about temporary restrictions to ensure public safety if the Hawaii Superferry returns to Kaua‘i.
What is the mayor and the council chair trying to hide? What is the big secret? Is public safety to be handled with such ill regard?
One of the only things we were able to learn about the meeting secondhand was the fact that when the Hawaii Superferry is in the harbor, all activity must stop.
Comforting?
Ask the paddlers and surfers and boaters and fishermen and kayakers and swimmers who weren’t allowed at the meeting. We did … they don’t seem comforted. Why is the county placating the protesters by protecting their comfort? The actions of the protesters are affecting the access for the rest of the island; shouldn’t the rest of the island be let in on the comfort? Or at least the information that will affect them?
We’ll never know how the mayor or council chair were questioned when they told the public allowed at the meeting about the harbor dead zone when the ferry is at dock. We weren’t allowed to be there to hear or ask questions of our own. We do know people stormed out of the meeting.
Were they comforted?
We don’t know, as we were on the sidewalk, a danger to the comfort of those attending.
The mayor told the reporter who was attempting to cover the meeting that it was a “debriefing” and therefore he could bar the newspaper’s presence there. The only problem with that misinformation is the fact that the debriefings occurred last week when the local, state and federal authorities met behind closed doors to devise the security plan that was revealed to the public Monday at the meeting the mayor closed.
When the security plan was revealed to the public at the Monday meeting, the mayor and the council chair must have felt the people who were allowed to attend would be more adept at disseminating the information themselves.
One would think a savvy county government would recruit the help of the local newspaper to disseminate that information, especially in the interest of public safety; and furthermore, with the possibility of the immediate return of the ferry to the harbor.
Will the comfort of the people be assured the next time the ferry enters the harbor, knowing the county halted the free flow of information that may stop someone from being injured or killed? Or taking their boat out? Or trying to bring their boat in?
Since the council chair and mayor did so much to protect the people from the newspaper, where do their true interests lie? What was its backup plan for getting the information out?
The reporter had gone through the proper channels starting Sunday morning to inform the county we would like to be there. The county spokesperson could not confirm the paper’s attendance at the meeting after several phone calls over two days. When the reporter and the photographer showed up at the door of the meeting, a county official said the newspaper had not been invited by the mayor, the protesters had invited us. Huh? That simply is not true. Who invited the protesters? We think it was the mayor and the council.
Since we weren’t invited, we couldn’t attend, was the county person’s reason.
Why would only the protesters be invited to a meeting to discuss temporary restrictions on an area used by a massive portion of the island population, as well as visitors. Why would the county want to make those at the meeting comfortable, to the exclusion of the information to the rest of the island?
Seems a high price to pay for the comfort of those at the meeting. Let’s see how that comfort translates on the streets and water if the “Alakai” comes back to Kaua‘i.
