Since writing about the illegality of the “green fee” that then-Governor candidate Josh Green was promoting, the idea of it has been kept alive in various ways, but never really got anywhere post-election.
PC: “File:SIUC Student Green Fee.png” by Gisclubsiuc is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.
With the idea so out of the realm of possibility as initially presented, it was no wonder that the Hawai‘i State Legislature has been spending three years trying to re-engineer it into something that would pass Constitutional muster. Everything from imposing a per-person fee at a hotel to creating a licensing scheme for tourists to enter state parks has been floated, with no real action by the time Sine Die came at the end of each session.
And that was one reason this blogger took his eye off the issue, seeing that perhaps it could be slept on until something came along that had legs. Meanwhile, in interactions with other political pols in town, the attitude started shifting from “it will never happen” to “Green should just make the fee happen and then go to court to defend it when it’s challenged”.
That action would be the entry into a years-long, millions-of-dollar legal battle that could eventually make its way to the United States Supreme Court. And to this blogger, that would be a grand waste of time and Hawai‘i taxpayer money.
However, as with many ways to get a green fee passed, this blogger noted a new angle to it that was put out by the August 29th Honolulu Star-Advertiser, with the article entitled “Green blasts State Farm for refusing to settle Maui claims”. In the article, Green proposes that the fee be revamped so that the income generated from a potential visitor impact fee be used to assist the state in offering insurance to individuals affected by future disasters, like Lahaina last year.
Considering that Hawai‘i right now is facing an insurance coverage crisis for all kinds of things, from condominiums and homes to automobiles and perhaps other types, getting the state to step in and fund an in-state insurance program, to this blogger, adds new merit to the fee idea.
Here is the reason why, and why an idea like this could be worthy of fighting by the state should it be challenged in court.
PC: “Insurance Company Calendar” by C. K. Hartman is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
The initial idea that the Green Fee could be used to address sea level rise and climate change could face real issues of whether it was worth challenging the Constitution of the United States to help fund programs that, in some ways, are hard to wrap one’s head around. Yes, this blogger understands that the science behind climate change and sea level rises are numerous. However, as with many things in this country, the issue is still up for debate. Something which different leaning courts may see and dismiss as “things ain’t settled” on those issues, from their standpoint.
However, if the focus of the fee is not on an evolving definition of a potential threat, but on something that is targeted and real, then perhaps there may be more of an opening to successfully defend the green fee, should it be challenged in court.
Why is that? Simply because there is a linear line between the increase in insurance rates and increasing challenges in fiscal health for the entire nation. In this case, residents whose maintenance fees have increased exponentially in their condo, or whose car insurance rate skyrocketed, have less money in the pockets of residents and drivers, and less money all around for the economy. If those rates stay up, or even go higher, more people will feel the financial pinch drifting to overall unaffordability.
In Hawai‘i, a financial pinch is more akin to a hard punch in the shoulder, and unaffordability forces residents to leave the state and go to other places.
If the green fee is passed, it will fund a captive insurance program to mitigate rate increases due to natural disasters, providing better economic security for the people of Hawai‘i. The state could argue that the fee is necessary to preserve and protect its residents amidst a brain drain driven by cost of living increases.
While the challenge may arise, possibly from the tourist industry as it has in the past, it will undoubtedly involve a very different exchange of ideas that would make a fee like this acceptable to more people, including tourists. Changing the discussion from a vague talk of climate change and rising sea levels to a more understandable conversation about the financial quality of life for residents in Hawai’i would be much more challenging to oppose, especially given the current situation with Hawai’i’s insurance industry.
Politics Hawaii With Stan Fichtman is a 2023 Society of Professional Journalists, Hawaii Chapter, first-place award winner in the category of 1-person online/1 person blog. Read what the judges said about it!
