TMT: Up in the air

Astronomers, especially those at the University of Hawaii, dream of the clear view they hope to get through the long-planned and long-embattled Thirty Meter Telescope atop Mauna Kea. That can only happen if a persistent and increasingly murky cloud hovering over the Earth-bound enterprise can be dispelled.

Last week, the fog grew even thicker, obscuring a path forward for a compromise position on the controversial project. Part of the divide opened up between the chambers of the state Capitol: The Senate has passed bills related to the project, but they appear to be doomed in the House.

Two pending court decisions comprised the main reason why leaders such as House Speaker Scott Saiki last week told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser that Sen. Kaiali‘i Kahele’s bills would be “dead on arrival.” Of course, nothing is ever certain until the end of session, but the next week or so, when conference committees are convened to iron out differences, will be telling.

Also still obscured: whether or not the TMT International Observatory board would extend its well-publicized April 2018 deadline for getting the green light on construction for the $1.4 billion project. At issue is whether TMT officials are willing to wait until November before pulling the plug on the Hawaii location and shifting plans to an alternate site in the Canary Islands.

On Friday TMT’s board decided to delay its decision “as further progress is made in the legal and regulatory processes at both proposed sites,” according to a statement.

But even if extra time is allowed, as helpful as that would seem to TMT supporters, it would lapse soon enough, and there is much to clear up.

First and foremost are the anticipated Hawaii Supreme Court rulings on two challenges from opponents. One concerns the conservation district use permit issued on the project; the other was lodged by a plaintiff arguing that the state failed to conduct a contested case hearing about the University of Hawaii sublease on the property.

Regardless of whether the telescope gets its permit upheld, though, many believe the TMT consortium will face a tough slog getting the shovels in the ground.

One of them is Kahele, who has spent the last several weeks making a statewide tour to explain the issues to the community, and to work on building consensus around a solution. The feedback he’s hearing is that the telescope opponents are every bit as motivated to block construction as they ever were.

“You cannot get state construction access to the summit, then you have no astronomy,” he said. “Until we address that issue, which is trying to address balance, we’re not going to move forward with TMT, no matter what the state Supreme Court says.”

Kahele has represented Hawaii island since his February 2016 appointment to fill the seat of his late father, Gil Kahele, and was elected to his first full term that November.

He has been pushing legislation this session, he said, to achieve that kind of balance, but so far the bills have encountered significant pushback, from telescope supporters and opponents alike.

They take issue on different fronts, but ironically both sides believe the right time to legislate on the issue is not when the court has yet to show its reading of the law in the TMT case.

One of the two principal bills aims to create a new authority for governance of the observatories, one that is not under the control of the UH and its Institute for Astronomy (see sidebar, at right). The other is a measure that calls for a forensic audit on the handling of observatory revenues, and that a moratorium on further action be in place until all the tasks are completed.

UH spokesman Dan Meisenzahl, who has been tracking these developments closely, said there is no real objection to an audit, as the astronomy operations have undergone multiple audits over the decades. It’s the moratorium that proponents fear would kill the TMT project, given all the extensions on permitting and construction deadlines that already have passed.

What’s most puzzling about Kahele’s “The Future of Maunakea” tour (the final stop is scheduled for 6 p.m. April 24 at Lincoln Elementary School) is that it’s done little to forge a consensus.

On Wednesday he met with a gathering hosted by Ka Waiwai Collective on University Avenue. Kahele gave what almost has become a trademarked presentation, reeling off dates and bullet points about the history of the astronomy reserve, posing questions about heady subjects such as the fair-market rent to be assessed and generally how Native Hawaiian interests have been given short shrift.

He talked about the scattered assortment of agencies and individuals who have a hand in the governance of the place, including, he said, “legislators who keep introducing gut-and-replace bills.” It was meant as a joke and got some laughter.

But in fact, the so-called “gut and replace” lawmaking process has not won many friends in this case. Its name describes how the contents of existing bills are torn out and replaced with proposals that would not otherwise move forward.

Supporters of the TMT have called out Kahele for introducing a last-minute amendment on the Senate floor that never got a hearing: the proposed moratorium.

And TMT opponents such as Kealoha Pisciotta are unhappy with the timing. One of the outspoken leaders of Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, a party embroiled in the current legal battle, Pisciotta would not discuss strategy details in the group’s legal case, but worried that elements of the proposed bills could undermine some of its arguments.

The group had met privately with Kahele as part of a traditional Hawaiian consensus-building process called ‘aelike. In it, Pisciotta said, the group believed they had agreement on specific issues but not enough to warrant going out to legislate.

“We couldn’t get consensus in time for the Legislature on the management authority,” she said — and that’s why Pisciotta and other Hawaii island residents had wanted a delay in most legislative efforts until after the court had ruled.

According to a prepared statement issued by her group and the Mauna Kea Hui, telescope opponents did favor a forensic audit “for the purpose of establishing fair market lease rents for the observatories to pay as a way to offset the costs to state taxpayers.”

One other point of agreement: Kahele and Pisciotta both dismissed the findings of a recent Hawaii Poll conducted for the Star-Advertiser, what Pisciotta called a “bogus poll.” Their critique was that the way the question was asked could have skewed the answer and, Kahele said, not enough Native Hawaiians or Hawaii islanders had been surveyed. They disputed what Kahele described as a “kumbaya” accord over the telescope.

There’s little agreement over why Kahele has pursued this particular legislation that seems to have the odds stacked against it. Opponents in their statement called it an effort “to create the illusion of protection” for the mountain. Miesenzahl mused that Kahele may be trying to raise his political profile among constituents.

Kahele, not surprisingly, disputes that wholeheartedly.

“The Senate has taken a proactive role in Mauna Kea,” he said. “It has recognized the untenable pressure on the mountain.. It has recognized that there are no proposed major fixture to fix the core issues on Mauna Kea.

“The Senate has taken a leadership role in it,” Kahele added. “Whether the House chooses to or not, we can’t dictate what they do, we can only do what we do in the Senate. But the Senate has spoken: We are going to try to find a solution for Mauna Kea … if the House doesn’t want to be a part of it, nobody can say the state Senate didn’t try.”