Disappeared News

Sent this to Joan this morning after watching Maui Planning Commission hearing on Akaku.

Joan, You are in a long term rental cottage on ag land? If you were here on Maui and you had a vacation rental in that cottage you'd be out of business. I'm not in the rental business, but Ag lots are going through a big crackdown all of a sudden. No B&B's no TRV and Min. income from farming are some. It's interesting to see all this ag lot law making in conjunction with HSF. If local farmers are officially denied vacation rental income and must make a certain amount a year to farm, how many will survive? If Maui Land and Pine is planning to ship Maui gold pineapple and other "products" by HSF might they be going into the veggie business in a big way? Are we cleaning out small farmers in the interest of corporate agra business? Have not seen anything written about this coincidental crackdown and HSF...have you? Is this why the farmers were saying HSF too expensive at the hearing yesterday? ML&P has already invested 1mil in HSF and done their own deal with HSF. OK, maybe I'm paranoid but can you blame me after watching the House hearing on my PC yesterday. I wish I could box it up and make it a required part of school civics curriculum. Heck, make it part of a requirement to vote in this state.
And finally, did I hear lots of hints from A.G. Bennett about "fixing 343? Would this be like the current admin and congress "fixed" our federal agencies? Scary!!!
 

In all fairness these are committee hearings, and a no vote in committee means you can't sit on the conference. ENE's Menor and Ihara both have good heads on their shoulders. As for Trimble, well he has good ideas sometimes too. Point is Yes WR is a valid tactic for remaining part of the discussion rather than being chalked up as part of the "no" opposition even in a situation such as this. In fact since this debacle involves shoving hastily written legislation through the presence of WR votes becomes much more important to determine how the final floor vote might fall. I guess I disagree with the assertion that a WR deserves to be viewed in the same light as a yes vote.
 

I do know about the WR being needed to serve on a conference committee. Maybe I shouldn't lump them together.

It's a problem. Normally, bills go forward because legislators keep voting for them. They go from committee to committee, each hoping, perhaps, that the final committee will deal with it.

I'll make a note in the original post to your comment.