Kahala Resort’s permit request prompts backlash

Opponents of The Kahala Hotel &Resort’s use of the beach for commercial purposes are ramping up efforts to protect the public shoreline.

The Sierra Club, Hawaii’s 1000 Friends, Livable Hawaii Kai Hui, The Surf­rider Foundation and the Hawaii Kai Neighborhood Board have joined a grass-roots group of Oahu residents seeking to stop the state from reissuing a permit to the hotel’s owner, Resorttrust Hawaii LLC.

The Kahala pays $1,281.60 per month for the revocable permit that allows it to use portions of the public beach for recreation and maintenance. That long-held permit came under scrutiny last year when Resorttrust sought to obtain an easement from the state that would have allowed it to use about an acre of public shoreline for commercial enterprise. The resort wanted to use the easement to expand its outdoor wedding ceremonies to three state parcels from two as well as carve out enough space to offer torch-lighting ceremonies and rides in traditional sailing outrigger canoes.

The resort withdrew its application for a nonexclusive easement after community protests were mounted from those who feared that the easement would set a precedent that eroded Hawaii’s hard-won public beach rights.

Kahala General Manager Gerald Glennon said, “It wasn’t something that the community wanted. I don’t think we’ll ever go to the nonexclusive easement again.”

But Resorttrust has petitioned the state to amend its revocable permit to allow the property to keep 40 items in the public area, including cabanas, showers, trash cans, canoes, beach chairs and storage. Resorttrust also is seeking permits to use a grassy strip for group events.

Resorttrust’s latest request, which Glennon described as an attempt to clarify permit language, is slated to go before the state Board of Land and Natural Resources on Sept. 14. Like the easement, it has also generated opposition from several community groups, including the Sierra Club, which said BLNR should “investigate and take action into violations of the current revocable permit.”

The Sierra Club said the Kahala’s current permit only gives it the right to occupy and use state-ceded land for recreation and maintenance, but that the hotel uses it for a restaurant and bar, weddings, surf lessons, canoeing, alcohol sales and consumption, and beach chair and cabana rentals.

If another revocable permit is issued to the Kahala, hui members say that they want the state to raise the fees and commit to better enforcement.

Diamond Head resident Linda Wong, who opposed the nonexclusive easement request, said she also opposes modifying the terms of the Kahala’s revocable permit, which “is essentially granting an after-the-fact permit allowing all the present activities and structures at Kahala Resort to be permissible.”

Wong said restaurant dining should not be defined as “recreation,” and market price penalties should be assessed for past placement of structures on state land.

“Public lands are for public use. The beachfront land in front of the Kahala Hotel should not be used for any commercial purpose; it should be free of all structures and storage; and should be freely available for use by the general public,” she said.

Glennon said Resorttrust is aware that there is a “small opposition group that would like to see everything that’s been there for decades gone.”

Glennon said Resorttrust wants the state to clarify the definitions of recreation and maintenance in its revocable permit so that “we can formalize the practices that have been going on for years.”

The owners want the state to be specific “so that everyone understands what is allowed and what is not allowed,” Glennon said.

“We also want to pay a fair price. In the past it was minimal,” he said. “Our ownership group wants the reputation of the hotel and its relationship with the community to be solid.”