Hawaii Lacking Interisland Transport

Despite years of planning and hundreds of millions of dollars invested, the privately owned Hawaii Superferry and go! airlines, part of Phoenix-based Mesa Air Group, Inc., are threatened by court rulings against them in a state where the only option for getting to another island and back was costing close to $200.

With increased competition and more in the wings, typical roundtrip fares now are less than half that. And, for the first time, residents have the prospect of taking along cars and trucks.

The court cases against both new interisland transport operations are based on entirely different legal arguments, but they've each run into opposition from residents concerned that ease of access won't necessarily improve their quality of life.

Opponents fear swarms of tourists could lead to unwanted development in an economy that depends largely on preserving nature's beauty. Some fear that foreign plant and animal life could hitch a ride to other islands, disrupting delicate ecosystems. Otyers fear any change in a place they consider to be paradise already.

Proponents say the benefits of economic growth, more commerce and more jobs with new interisland travel options outweigh the downsides.

When go! started service, it offered promotional fares as low as $1, with regular round-trip fares around $80 that were quickly matched by the dominant island carriers, Hawaiian and Aloha airlines.

Voyages on Hawaii Superferry, a $300 million project of investors led by former Hawaiian Airlines official John Garibaldi, will cost a bit more but add the option of vehicle transportation, which previously was only available on slow-moving barges. Sports teams would be able to carry equipment for interisland play, and small businesses could afford to ship produce and products.

"There are many people who feel there's already been too much development in Hawaii that doesn't benefit the local population," said Mike Fitzgerald, president of Enterprise Honolulu, which advocates for economic diversification. "I find it perplexing because the Superferry is so beneficial."

Opponents of the Superferry have been the most vocal, including protesters who jumped into the water off Kauai in a successful effort to keep the 350-foot catarmaran from docking on the last of only two voyages to the island in August.

Another group of Aloha, Hawaiian and Island Air employees banned together to form a group against go! because they believe it is trying to drive local carriers out of business before jacking prices up to previous levels.

"Transportation is the lifeblood in a lot of ways to the economy," said Jeff Mikulina, director of the Hawaii chapter of the Sierra Club, one of three groups that filed suit over the Superferry. "But who's to say that we can't get the best benefits from something that's half the size? ... We need something that's a little less super."

The Superferry was held up by court rulings from the Hawaii Supreme Court and a Maui judge whose decisions said the state needed to complete an environmental review before the giant ferries could enter service -- a process that could take years.

Lawmakers are hurriedly crafting a bill in a special session this week to get around the courts and let the Superferry sail.

In the go! case, the upstart airline is being sued by Hawaiian Airlines for $173 million for allegedly violating a confidentiality agreement by using proprietary information it gathered as a potential investor during Hawaiian's bankruptcy.

"In general, people here appreciate having options ... because we have counties surrounded by miles of water," said Hawaiian spokesman Keoni Wagner.

But the go!'s pricing scheme will hurt consumers in the long run, he said.

"Things that seem too good to be true usually are," he said.

Superferry supporters are quick to point out that the company received government clearances to do business in Hawaii before the courts stepped in, but go!'s litigation pertains more directly to accusations of wrongdoing by the airline.

In Superferry's case, most of the blame has been focused on state officials, from Gov.Linda Lingle to the Democrat-controlled Legislature, who enthusiastically endorsed it without the environmental review.

Hawaii courts have previously stepped in to stop other large projects, such as the Hokulia luxury development on the Big Island, which a judge ruled in 2003 was an illegal use of agricultural land after residents voiced concerns about traffic, Hawaiian burial sites and runoff. A settlement in 2006 allowed the project to move forward with conditions.

"The signal this is sending is that there's a very high level of community awareness relative to the introduction of new business and environmental protection," said Hokulia CEO John De Fries. "It's a real difficult balancing act."

For the last few hundred years of Hawaii's history, the economy has usually come first, but the environment is now becoming more important as people come to understand that the islands depend on its preservation to promote tourism, Fitzgerald said.

"People seem to know that Hawaii is the kind of market where things can get jammed up," said Paul Brewbaker, chief economist at Bank of Hawaii. "There's this reputation for things being a little bit more difficult on average than would be the case in other places."