A DIVIDED COMMUNITY SEEKS LŌKAHI: AN EXPLORATION OF SOCIAL

CHANGE AND ‘SENSE OF PLACE’ IN KAILUA

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAI‘I AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF ARTS

IN

SOCIOLOGY

MAY 2014

By

Michelle B. Horton

Thesis Committee:

Patricia G. Steinhoff, Chairperson Susan J. Wurtzburg Krysia Mossakowski

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to the various individuals whose continued support and encouragement have assisted me in completing this thesis. First and foremost, I would like to thank the members of my committee who have spent countless hours on my behalf and have also remained committed to ensuring I succeed, both personally and academically. Dr. Patricia G. Steinhoff, I am very grateful to have had the opportunity to work with you. Although many of the tasks which you suggested were not easy at the time, I can look back and honestly acknowledge that it was for the best because you have pushed me to great lengths to ensure I produced a piece of work that is both rigorous and meaningful. I am not only proud of the work I have produced, but also a stronger person due to the obstacles you have helped me overcome. Dr. Susan J. Wurtzburg, I am humbled by the time and energy you have geared towards students like myself. Your passion for teaching is evident and you have always gone above and beyond to nurture and inspire those around you. Thank you for reigniting my flame in times of darkness and for constantly reminding me that my work is important. Dr. Krysia Mossakowski, thank you for always being open-minded and supportive of my academic interests and for encouraging me to seek new and innovative ways to improve my work. I would also like to thank my family, whose unconditional love and support I could not have done without. To my father, I am forever grateful for the strong work ethic you have instilled in me from a very young age. To my mother, thank you for always encouraging me to follow my dreams and for teaching me through example to live my life with compassion. Kristy and Aaron, this thesis would not have been possible without the time and energy you have devoted on my behalf. Thank you for opening your home to me from a young age, and for playing a tremendous role in my shaping my trajectory from a high school dropout to a college graduate. I would also not be here without my other siblings, who have supported me along the way. Thank you for comforting me in times of grief, laughing with me in times of joy, and for always reminding me of the great example I have been to your children. Lastly, I would also like to honor my grandfather, who was an exceptional writer and family historian. Although you are no longer with us, your genuine love and support for my writing has not only

ii provided me with a solid foundation to become a writer, but has also equipped me with the tools that have helped me navigate life in general. Thank you to my grandmother, who has remained committed to preserving his legacy and always reminded me of my strength. To John, I am forever grateful for the time and energy you have sacrificed so that I could pursue my career in academia. You were my backbone when I was weak and have taught me to persevere even when it seemed as though the odds were stacked against me. Thank you for helping me retain my spirit through your youthful ways, and for constantly reminding me that life is short and should never be taken to serious. I could not have done this without you, and for that, I owe my deepest gratitude and respect. To Andrew and Penn, thank you for always lending an open ear and for taking time out of your busy schedules to give me thoughtful feedback. There was a point in time when I did not think I would make it this far, so thank you for helping me keep things in perspective and for encouraging me to stick it through to the end. I would also like to acknowledge the various individuals who have contributed to this research. For those who participated in this study, thank you for your honesty and willingness to participate and also for the time and energy you have sacrificed on behalf of the Kailua community. Last but not least, I would like to thank the following individuals and groups that supplied photographs for this thesis: Peter Mouginis-Mark, Roy Wilkins, Michael Sproul, Oliver Koning, Mark A. Johnson, Craig Kojima, GEOATLAS, Look at Hawaiʻi, Hui o Koʻolaupoko, KITV News, Beach Environmental Awareness Campaign Hawaiʻi (B-E-A- C-H), KaʻOhana News, Kailua Vacation Rentals and Aikahi Elementary School.

iii ABSTRACT Using Kailua as a case study, this thesis examines social change by exploring how underlying place relations are impacted by community conflict stemming from a rapidly expanding tourism industry. Ten semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with residents who were recruited from Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings in order to illuminate perceptions regarding Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, issues facing the community, as well as how these issues have impacted Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. Interviews were supplemented with field notes taken from participant observation of monthly KNB meetings and were analyzed inductively using grounded theory methodology. Findings suggested that underlying place relations not only largely affect resident perceptions of tourism, but also undergo changes in the face of community conflict since meaningful places are socially constructed.

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………………….II ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………..…...IV TABLE OF CONTENTS…………………………………………………………….....V LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………………...VII LIST OF PLATES……………………………………………………………………VIII

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION, LITERATURE REVIEW, AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION………………….…………………1 Introduction……………………………………………………………………….1 The Social Construction of Meaningful Places…………………………………...2 Conceptual Overview……………………………………………………..3 ‘Sense of Place’ as a Conceptual Framework…………...... ……………...4 Tourism in Hawaiʻi……………………………………………………………….8 Background of Kailua……………………………………………………………10 Neighborhood Board System…………………………………………………….20

CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS……………………………………………...23 Research Design……………………………………………………………….…23 Participant Observation…………………………………………………………..23 Kailua Neighborhood Board Meetings.………………………………….24 Semi-structured Interviews………………………………………………………27 Sampling…………………………………………………………………28 Participants……………………………………………………………….29 Procedures………………………………………………………………..31 Data Analysis….………………………………………………………………....32 Coding and Memo-writing…………………………………………….…33

v CHAPTER 3: SOCIAL CHANGE, COMMUNITY CONFLICT, AND ‘SENSE OF PLACE’ IN KAILUA………………………………………….……….34 Part 1: Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’……………………………………………….34 Physical Characteristics………………………………………………….35 Sense of Community………………………………………………….....38 Residential Character…………………………………………………….43 Part 2: Community Conflict………………………………………………..….46 Finding a Balance………………………………………………………..46 Commercialization……………………………………………………….54 Visitor Accommodations………………………………………...54 Commercial Activity……………………………………………..61 Development……………………………………………………………..68 Physical Structures……………………………………………….68 Natural Environment……………………………………………..76 Part 3: ‘Sense of Place’ Revisited……………………………………………...80 Negative Implications…………………………………………………....80 Restoring and Preserving Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’…………………….82 Education……………………………………………………..….82 Participation…………………………………………………...…84 Leadership………………………………………………..…..…..87

CHAPTER 4: A DIVIDED COMMUNITY SEEKS LŌKAHI………………….…..89 REFLECTIVE STATEMENT………………………………………………………...93 REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………….....95 APPENDICES…………………………………………………………………………104 Appendix I: IRB Human Studies Approval ……………………………………104 Appendix II: Consent to Participate…………………………………………….105 Appendix III: Interview Guide…………………………………………….……106

vi LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Map of Hawaiʻi, Oʻahu, Kailua…………………………………………...…11 Figure 2 Map of Oʻahu’s Neighborhood Board System………………………….…..21

Figure 3 Map of Kailua Neighborhood Board No. 31 Boundaries…………………..25

Figure 4 Map of Education Levels on Oʻahu…………………………………………30 Figure 5 Map of Bike Paths in Kailua…………………………………………………38

Figure 6 Map of Kawainui-Hāmākua Marsh Boundaries…………………………...76

vii LIST OF PLATES

Plate I Battle of Nuʻuanu…………………………………………………………….…12

Plate II Early Days of Kaneohe Ranch……………………………………………..…13

Plate III Pali Road in 1920…………………………………………………………..…14 Plate IV Kailua in the 1950’s………………………………………………………..…15

Plate V Kawai Nui Marsh……………………………………………………...………16

Plate VI Windward Passage……………………………………………………………16 Plate VII Aerial Image of the Mokulua Islands………………………………………18

Plate VIII Kailua Beach………………………………………………………………..18 Plate IX Aerial Image of Kailua……………………………………………………….19

Plate X Members of the Kailua No. 31 Neighborhood Board………………………..25

Plate XI Kawai Nui Marsh……………………………………………………………..36 Plate XII Kaʻiwa Trail Ridge…………………………………………………….…….37

Plate XIII Paddlers on Kailua Bay….…………………………………………………37 Plate XIV Kailua Beach Environmental Awareness Campaign…………………….40

Plate XV Volunteers of Hui o Koʻolaupoko………………………………………..…41

Plate XVI Kōkua Foundation Tree Planting Ceremony……………………………..42 Plate XVII Aerial Image of Honolulu…………………………………………………44

Plate XVIII Waikiki Beach…………………………………………………………… 45

Plate XIX Kailua Beach Adventures Brochure………………………………………48 Plate XX Kailua Segway and Pedego Brochures……………………………………..49

Plate XXI Obama Visits Kailua………………………………………………………..51 Plate XXII Tour Buses in Kailua………………………………………………………52

Plate XXIII Map of Kailua and Windward Oʻahu Beaches……………………...….55

Plate XXIV Kayakers Headed to Kailua Beach….……………………………..…….62

viii Plate XXV Residents Showing Support for Bill 11……………….…………………..63

Plate XXVI Resident Posters Indicating Support for Bill 11…….….……………….64 Plate XXVII City Council Hearing of Bill 11…………………………………………64

Plate XXVIII Merchants and Residents Oppose Bill 11…………...…………..…….65 Plate XXIX Mitch D’Olier at Demolition Site…………………………………….…..69

Plate XXX Newly Developed Whole Foods Market Building…………………….….70

Plate XXXI Longs Drugs in 1976……………………………………………………...70 Plate XXXII Newly Developed Longs Drugs Building…………………………...…..70

Plate XXXIII Residents Protesting the Introduction of Target……………….……..72

Plate XXXIV Open House Hosted by Target…………………………………………73 Plate XXXV Star Advertiser Announces Sale of Kailua……………………………..75

Plate XXXVI Alexander & Baldwin’s Newly Acquired Real Estate Portfolio……..75 Plate XXXVII Envisioning Kawainui: Outdoor Learning Center……………….….77

Plate XXXVIII Envisioning Kawainui: Boardwalk and Observation Deck………..77

Plate XXXIX Envisioning Kawainui: Public Informational Meeting……………….78

ix

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION, LITERATURE REVIEW AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Introduction Concerns over the meanings and functions of places have gained magnitude in sociological inquiry, particularly in response to the accelerating pace of change in contemporary society. While many scholars have theorized that a wide array of global economic, social, and political processes have resulted in places losing their distinctiveness, there is a growing body of literature that suggests these processes have in many ways reinvigorated the importance of place because it is a constituent element of social life. The concept ‘sense of place’ has played a pivotal role in capturing the meanings and functions of places, particularly because it presumes places as constructed, negotiated, and politically contested (Gieryn 2000). Rather than assuming the meanings and functions of a place are inherent, scholars who explore ‘sense of place’ suggest that places are dynamic, with a past, a present, and a future (Williams and Stewart 1998). Conceptualizing places in this manner has become an important task for sociologists because although they are socially constructed, places have implications for everyday life since they are “interpreted, narrated, perceived, felt, understood, and imagined” (Gieryn 2000: 465). ‘Sense of place’ has often been studied in relation to tourism, particularly because it has become an important catalyst for change. As one of the fastest growing economic sectors worldwide, tourism is a global phenomenon that greatly impacts the social, economic, and political activities of places. In response to tourisms growing popularity people all over the world have been faced with the challenge of adapting to this phenomenon since it plays a pivotal role in shaping the dynamics of community life. Furthermore, because tourism-driven changes alter the landscapes of places, ideas about place become increasingly important because place meanings are also connected to ideas about what constitutes legitimate use of space (Yung & Freimund 2003). Hence, what were mostly taken-for-granted, subconscious meanings of place come to the surface in

1 response to tourism-driven changes mainly because they symbolize external threats to the local ‘sense of place’ (Williams & Stewart 1998). Communities within Hawaiʻi have without a doubt experienced the effects of tourism since they are situated in a state whose economy relies primarily on tourism. The Hawai’i Tourism Authority (HTA) has concluded the industry is the largest source of private capital, and also the biggest generator of jobs among the major economic sectors in the state. It is a multi-billion dollar industry, with over 7.2 million visitors coming to Hawai’i annually (www.hawaiitourismauthority.org). In addition to rippling through all sectors of the economy, the pervasive nature of tourism in Hawai`i impacts nearly all “private businesses, community organizations, government, unions, visitors, and residents” (HTA 2002: 8). While the HTA (2002) has remained committed to achieving a sustainable and responsible tourism industry for the State by 2015, it has not deterred those who view tourism as a viable method for economic growth and revitalization. Tourism thus poses a variety of challenges for communities since, in addition to being a rapidly expanding and extremely diverse industry, its financial advantages come with social, political, and economic repercussions. For these reasons, resident perceptions regarding tourism’s impact are more often than not of a highly contentious nature. This is especially true for communities in Hawai`i since as an island state, development and use of its resources are inevitably constrained (HTA 2002). Using Kailua as a case study, this research thus explores the politics of place by examining the relationship between social change, community conflict, and ‘sense of place’.

The Social Construction of Meaningful Places A growing body of literature suggests that a thorough understanding of people’s underlying attachments to place is key in illuminating the politics of place. Due to the variety of terms that have been used to describe human-place relationships, this section begins with an overview of theorists who have conceptualized the social construction of meaningful places. Next, empirical studies that have explored this phenomenon in relation to tourism will be reviewed in order to provide justification for ‘sense of place’ as a conceptual framework for the current study.

2 Conceptual Overview In response to criticisms that contexts are often treated as a setting or backdrop that exists in objective reality, many theorists have conceptualized the process of place- making in order to bring to light the human element that makes places meaningful (Agnew 1987; Jorgensen & Stedman 2001; Low & Altman 1992; Stedman 2003; Tuan 1977). In geography, Tuan distinguished ‘spaces’ from ‘places’, maintaining that the latter are socially constructed and thus, perceived and constituted by the meanings people attribute to them (1977). Stemming from here, Tuan and Steele developed the concept ‘sense of place’ in reference to the meanings, attachments, and satisfaction an individual or group associates with a particular place (Tuan 1980; Steele 1981). Since its original conception, the phenomenon of human-place bonding has been explored from a variety of disciplines. Although the terminology used to describe this relationship has varied from one theorist to the next, they are all essentially rooted in a symbolic interactionist framework (Kyle and Chick 2007). For instance, Low and Altman preferred the term ‘place attachment’ to refer to human-place relationships; however, they also indicated that it “subsumes or is subsumed by a variety of analogous ideas” (1992: 3). Similarly, Jorgensen and Stedman built on the notion of ‘place attachment’ suggesting that it is a single facet of a much broader concept, ‘sense of place’. Whereas ‘place attachment’ represents the affective relationship between people and places, equally important are the cognitive dimension, or ‘place identity’, and the conative dimension, or ‘place dependence’ (Jorgensen and Stedman 2001). Agnew also deconstructed meaningful places into a three-part model, suggesting that meaningful places emerge in a social context through social relations, they are geographically located and related to their surroundings, and they give individuals a subjective territorial identity, or ‘sense of place’ (1987). Although the notion of human-place bonding has been conceptualized in a variety of ways, theorists interested in this phenomenon share a common ground in that they are ultimately concerned with explicating “what a particular place means and how people evaluate it based on those meanings” (Amsden and Stedman 2011: 33). Exploring people’s underlying relations to place is an important task for sociologists for several

3 reasons. First and foremost, research that is sensitive to place meanings sheds light on “the multiple relationships people have with geographic locations, relationships that encompass livelihood and economics, and values, symbols, emotions, history, and identity” (Yung and Freimund 2003: 856). Second, because conceptualizing place meanings requires the researcher to consider the perspectives of a variety of stakeholders, it illuminates places as sites of common ground and political difference. More simply stated, place-sensitive research treats places as an arena of both shared and contested meanings. Finally, understanding the meanings of place is an important task because they “manifest themselves behaviorally in participation” (Manzo and Perkins 2006: 339). In other words, place meanings are “more than values, ideas, and images; people’s understandings of place are also transformed into action” (Yung and Freimund 2003: 855). This is essentially based on the notion that if people’s identity and values are informed by a particular place, then it follows that their relations with that place will also impact their engagement with it, whether it be to maintain or improve it or to respond to changes within it (Manzo and Perkins 2006). When combined, the previous factors suggest that place-sensitive research can provide insights into the making of places as well as the functions of places, which may in turn, illuminate how and why places matter for social, political and economic practices as well as historical change.

‘Sense of Place’ as a Conceptual Framework Due to the wide range of terms used to address the phenomenon of human-place bonding, ‘sense of place’ was deemed the most appropriate conceptual framework for this study. This is ultimately because ‘sense of place’ is an umbrella concept encompassing a wide range of place-related concepts (Klanika & Buchecker 2006) that have often been used throughout the literature on tourism. Although it has been criticized for being an elusive concept, ‘sense of place’ has nonetheless managed to gain momentum since it “reflects the complex web of lifestyles, meanings, and social relations endemic to place” (Williams & Stewart 1998: 18). In fact, in recent years a large number of empirical studies have utilized ‘sense of place’, or related-terminology, in order to address topics that include, but are not limited to: impact on host communities, land-use

4 conflicts, planning and development, ecosystems management, and natural resource depletion and preservation (Amsden et al. 2011; Harrill 2004; Klanika & Buchecker 2006; Manzo & Perkins 2006; Terkeneli 2001; Williams & Stewart 1998). Scholars who have studied the politics of place have often suggested that the underlying place-relations and meanings are key in bringing to light people’s rationale for blocking or facilitating tourism-driven changes (Schöllmann & Perkins 2001; Yung et al. 2003; Klanicka & Buchecker 2006;). For example, Schöllmann & Perkins (2001) explored conflict amongst community members regarding the function, use, and meaning of the city center in Christchurch, New Zealand. They found that due to a variety of place promotional tactics that promoted the same place in different ways, existing conflicts regarding Christchurch’s ‘sense of place’ and future developments escalated. Similarly, Yung et al. (2003) explored people’s viewpoints on natural resource use and conservation using the Rocky Mountain Front in Montana as a case study. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews conducted with 30 residents and nonresidents revealed that due to a diversity of place meanings, ideas about property, conservation, and governance were different and often conflicting. In yet another study, Klanicka & Buchecker (2006) compared locals’ and tourists’ support toward future landscape development using Alvaneu, a Swiss Alpine Village, as a case study. Interview responses revealed that because different meanings were attributed to the characteristics that defined Alvaneu’s ‘sense of place’, opinions regarding future land-use were incongruent. Taken together, the previous studies highlight some of the ways in which place-relations may influence people’s rationale for either embracing or resisting tourism and landscape development. While the previous studies serve a purpose, they have also been criticized because they disregard the interplay between place meanings and tourism. This is because they seldom explore how tourism-driven changes may alter ones ‘sense of place’ since places are dynamic, with a past, present, and future (Williams & Stewart 1998). A few scholars have attempted to fill this gap by acknowledging that place meanings and functions are shaped by larger social, economic, and political processes (Dredge 2010; Amsden, Stedman & Kruger 2011; Williams & Stewart 1998). Dredge for example, suggested that because tourism trades on the character of special places, “conflict can emerge where

5 local residents perceive that tourism development proposals challenges the special qualities of place, and where place meaning and attachment are compromised” (2010:104). Using a cruise ship terminal proposal in Australia as a case study, she looked at public interest and place change and found that because the prevailing neoliberal policies marginalized resident interests, their meanings and attachments were overridden as a result (Dredge 2010). Other studies have taken into consideration the notion that “places are continually produced and reproduced in interaction with their surroundings and thus may acquire new meanings over a period of time” (Gustafson 2001: 6). In Seward, Alaska Amsden et al. (2011) used resident-employed photographs that were supplemented with in-depth interviews to explore how a ‘sense of place’ was established in a tourism-dependent community. They found that the interplay between place attachment and community were vital to the creation and maintenance of Seward’s ‘sense of place’. Whereas place attachments, a subset of ‘sense of place’ consisted of “the social and individual interactions and meanings that inform how residents perceive their world” (Amsden et al. 2011: 33), the community was a social construction used to organize these interactions in a meaningful way (Amsden et al. 2011). This study thus concluded that in the face of larger social, economic, and political processes, individuals have the potential to alter their conceptions of ‘sense of place’ in a way they deem fit. While the previous studies are rigorous and have each made contributions to the ‘sense of place’ literature, there remains a demand for exploring the interplay of tourism and place with different methods. This is especially true because existing studies have relied predominantly on interviews and photo-elicitation techniques. While they serve a purpose, these methods have also constrained knowledge regarding the contentious nature of places because they seldom incorporate the wide array of individuals and groups that have a stake in a particular place. Although a few studies have included two types of stakeholders for the sake of comparison, future studies can contribute to a more holistic understanding of the politics of place by adopting methods that illuminate the wide array of stakeholders involved. Hence, this study intends to address this gap by using sampling and recruitment strategies for interviews that will incorporate a wider

6 range of stakeholders and perspectives. Furthermore, participant observation of neighborhood board meetings was also selected since it is a public sphere where a variety of stakeholders go to address community-related issues. These meetings, which will be discussed in detail in the pages to follow, will thus be useful in bringing to light factions within the community. In addition to the demand for future studies that utilize alternative methods, there is also a demand for exploring different contexts since the circumstances vary from one place to the next. Although they have provided many important insights, existing studies typically look at places that are newly introduced to tourism or already established as tourist destinations. Studies such as these have prevailed mainly because in places that are newly exposed to this phenomenon “residents are exposed to tourism for the first time, whereas established destinations may experience increasing volumes of tourists (Harrill 2004: 251). Because tourism is a process with different developmental stages, there is a demand for exploring places that are at different stages in the progression (Harrill 2004). Communities within Hawaiʻi may address this gap since they are situated in a state whose economy relies primarily on tourism. While there are many places that have been officially zoned and designated as resort areas, there are also a large number of communities that are neither newly introduced to tourism nor categorized as full-fledged tourist destinations. Kailua is one such place, and may therefore offer new insights since it is arguably in a transition stage. Kailua is also a place worth of exploration because despite a long history of competing interests, its history is also comprised of many successful events in which resisting tourism was paramount. In addition to the factors mentioned above, Kailua is also a place worthy of exploration because it is situated in Hawaiʻi, an island state whose resource base is inevitably constrained. Generally speaking, this factor heightens the contentious nature of tourism in island communities since their limited resources make them extremely fragile and vulnerable (Moyle et al. 2010). Furthermore, exploring the contentious nature of place in Kailua will offer unique insights since because of Hawaiʻi’s rich cultural heritage, it is a community that has faced challenges that are different from other places.

7 Although all host destinations face the challenge of adapting to a tourism industry that undergoes constant, rapid change, the ways in which Hawaiʻi’s communities respond is unique since their strategies are largely based on incorporating Native Hawaiian values. Finally, it must be mentioned that my decision to select Kailua as a case study was also influenced by familiarity with the community. In addition to being born and raised in Kailua, I had strong inclinations to retain jobs, extracurricular activities and volunteer opportunities within the community throughout adulthood. In other words, I was interested in studying Kailua because it has been a major component of my identity for over 26 years. Another thing worth noting is that while this research was largely influenced by my personal interest in Kailua, I also selected interviews and participant observation of KNB meetings since they were methods that would allow me to gain greater insights into how other individuals perceived Kailua’s ‘sense of place’ and issues facing the community. Hence, this research was designed in a way that would limit my background from influencing the results and instead, incorporate a variety of perspectives for the sake of gathering data that was open and balanced.

Tourism in Hawaiʻi While tourism has been the staple of Hawaiʻi’s economy since its statehood in 1959 (HTA 2002), several factors led to a halt in what was once a strong and sustained industry for over three decades. According to the HTA, some of these include “weaknesses in key Asian economies, increased global competition, the Persian Gulf War in 1991, and Hurricane Iniki in 1992” (2002:5). Although Hawaiʻi’s economy was severely impacted by these events, the tourism industry recovered and by 2000, would go on to experience record highs (www.hawaiitourismauthority.org). This economic resurgence however, was ultimately short-lived. Within a year, the industry as a whole (globally and locally) saw a major decline in response to the “terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, economic woes of countries like the U.S. and Japan, and increasing concerns about SARS and the War in Iraq” (HTA 2002: 6). In addition, the globalized environment in which the industry now operates has made it extremely competitive, diverse, and fluid. Host destinations are now faced with challenges in “changing

8 consumer preferences, technological advances, and emerging trends such as the growth of timeshares, vacation rentals, cruise ships, consolidation of travel distribution systems, consumers’ new lifestyles, greater number and variety of choices, and safety and security issues” (HTA 2002: 6). Like other places, Hawaiʻi has been forced to adapt to an industry that undergoes constant, rapid change. In addition to seeking new and innovative ways to remain competitive, host destinations are often tasked with developing plans that are sustainable, both economically and environmentally. This is especially true in island destinations like Hawaiʻi, whose limited resource base makes them ecologically fragile and vulnerable (Moyle et al. 2010). For these reasons, there has been a growing trend in which island destinations are implementing sustainable tourism strategies. Hawaiʻi has done so, with the HTA developing a comprehensive strategic plan which, when implemented, would make the State’s tourism industry sustainable by 2015 (HTA 2003). Although strategies such as these are not unique to Hawaiʻi, its location and rich cultural heritage have distinguished the HTA’s strategy from those of other places. This is because in addition to adopting a set of basic guiding principles, Hawaiʻi has also been tasked with incorporating Native Hawaiian values such as Lōkahi (balance or harmony), or a group working together toward a common goal that has a positive benefit for all; Malama `aina (nourishing the land), or the protection of the environment and resources similar to the way Hawaiians saw themselves as stewards of the land and ocean which sustained all life; Kuleana (responsibility), or the active participation and collaboration of key stakeholders in order to protect the future well-being of Hawai`i as a place to live and visit; Ho`okipa (hospitality), or the proper treatment of visitors just as Hawaiians of the past took great pride in hosting, welcoming, and entertaining visitors; and Aloha (welcome), or the intangible spirit of Hawaiʻi (HTA 2003). Taken together, the overall objective of the Hawaiʻi Tourism Strategic Plan is thus to reinvigorate visitor interest in Hawaiʻi in a way that is both sustainable and culturally relevant. Although the HTA’s strategy has been a major driving force behind Hawaiʻi’s tourism industry as a whole, it has also served as a framework for various communities throughout the state, who are now equipped with new ideas on how to utilize tourism as a

9 tool for economic growth and revitalization. This has definitely been the case on Oʻahu, whose communities have faced unique challenges in comparison to those of neighboring islands. For several decades, Oʻahu was the primary beneficiary of tourism due to the large influx of eastbound visitors; however, by the mid-1990’s these numbers declined significantly. According to the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT), the decline in eastbound visitors (visitors from Asia, the Pacific Islands, Australia, and New Zealand), was shortly followed by an increase in westbound visitors (visitors from Canada and the U.S. mainland). As a result of this shift, the visitor count on Oʻahu declined significantly while neighboring islands experienced increasing volumes of tourists (DBEDT 1999). In Hawaii’s Economy (1999), the DBEDT suggested that, “This trend has restored confidence in the tourism sectors of neighbor islands and provided a needed economic boost; however, the impact on Oʻahu, which accounts for more than three-quarters of the state’s economy, has been the opposite” (5). In response to these trends, individuals and communities throughout Oʻahu have sought out new and innovate ways to re-establish visitor interest as a mechanism for economic growth and revitalization. This has arguably been the case in Kailua. Despite being a place with a long history of events in which resisting tourism was paramount, recent years have indicated a resurgence of interest in tourism as a source of economic growth and revitalization, at both the individual and community level. The overarching reliance on tourism has ultimately created new ideas and exacerbated existing ones about the meanings and functions of Kailua as a place.

Background of Kailua

Kailua is a census-designated place in Honolulu County, Hawaiʻi, United States (see Figure 1). Situated on the windward coast on the island of Oʻahu, Kailua is approximately 12 miles northeast of Hawaiʻi’s state capitol, Honolulu, and 14 miles northeast of Waikiki, a world-renowned tourist destination. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, it has a total area of 10.6 square miles, with 7.8 square miles being land and 2.8 square miles being water (2012).

10 Figure 1 Map of Hawai`i, Oʻahu, Kailua

United States-Canada/Hawaiʻi. Physical Map. © GEOATLAS. (2014). www.GEOATLAS.com. Accessed on April 17, 2014.

In the Hawaiian language Kailua translates to “two waters”, a contraction of the words kai, or sea, and ʻelua, or two (Hall 1998) and is derived from the two lagoons that flow through Kailua. The water that flows from the Koʻolau mountain range through Kailua to the bay played an integral role for early Hawaiian settlers, who are estimated to date back 1,500 years (Mustapha 1985). Historically, Kailua was an important place since it was designated the original capitol of Oʻahu and home to the aliʻi, or the royal class of higher and lesser chiefs. One of the most notable events signifying its historical importance was the 1795 Battle of Nuʻuanu (see Plate I) when King Kamehameha the Great of the Big Island conquered Oʻahu’s army. Hundreds of soldiers fell to their death at the Pali cliffs above Kailua’s plains and this marked a major turning point in Kamehameha’s quest to unify the Hawaiian Islands (Mustapha 1985).

Following the Battle of Nuʻuanu, Oʻahu’s capitol was relocated from Kailua to

11 Honolulu, an event that was paramount in secluding Kailua from the economic activities of Honolulu (Hall 1998). In addition, this event largely shaped the trajectory of Hawaiʻi in general since under the Kamehameha dynasty the Great Mahele of 1848 took place, which permitted private ownership of land for the first time. Prior to this event, which was largely influenced by Western ideology, Hawaiian geography was “characterized by fluidities including geographic mobility (not being bound to the land); a fluidity of access to resources; a fluidity between humans, divine, and natural realms; and a fluidity of sound, mean-ing, and metaphor regarding place names” (Herman 1999: 81).

Plate I Battle of Nuʻuanu

Painting by Herb Kane depicting the Battle of Nuʻuanu. Photo by Michelle Horton May 7, 2014.

Land ownership would also shift dramatically following the 1893 overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy and the 1896 annexation of Hawaiʻi by the U.S. These events would contribute to the rise of The Big Five, a conglomeration of five agriculturally based companies (Alexander & Baldwin, Castle & Cooke, C. Brewer & Co., American Factors, and Theo H. Davis & Co.), whose founders would significantly alter the social, economic, and political fabric of Hawaiʻi. Kailua in particular underwent many changes as a result, as large tracts of land were now leased for agriculture and cattle raising. By the turn of the 20th century, Kailua’s agriculturally based economy led to the birth of

12 Kaneohe Ranch Co. (see Plate II), whose future success was largely dependent on investments from the Castle family (Hall 1998). The Castle family, who was now benefiting tremendously from the business ventures of Castle & Cook, purchased several thousand acres of land on the windward side of O`ahu (www.thecastlefoundation.org). According to Hall (1998), “the prized gem of the Castle estate was Title to Kailua, which would gradually shift from farms, marshland and beach cottages to one of the most desirable suburban towns in Hawaiʻi” (123). In time, the Castle family acquired Kaneohe Ranch Co., which eventually had little to do with Kaneohe or ranching. Instead, it went on to become the largest landlord of Kailua’s agricultural and commercial activities (Hall 1998). Plate II Early Days of Kaneohe Ranch

Paniolo (Hawaiian Cowboy) from Kaneohe Ranch in the 1930's, Mokapu peninsula in the background (www.mcbhawaii.marines.mil) Accessed on April 11, 2014.

Kailua’s trajectory was also largely influenced by the leasing of 33 one-acre beach lots in 1910 along with the paving of the Pali Road in 1920 (see Plate III), which made the windward side of Oʻahu more easily accessible (Mustapha 1985). In addition, the events of WWI led to the commission of a military base on Kailua’s Mokapu peninsula, which led to a large influx of residents to the area. Taken together, these events were major contributing factors that spawned future development and population growth in Kailua (Mustapha 1985). Another event that is paramount in outlining Kailua’s history took place in 1937 when the Royal Hawaiian Hotel purchased several acres of land on Kailua Beach with

13 hotel developments in mind. In fear that Kailua would become a resort town like Waikiki, the community group Hui O Kailua emerged and strongly opposed resort-like developments (Kailua Historical Society). In Kailua: A Community History, Mustapha maintains that, “Kailua’s history might have been dramatically different, one of resort development rather than suburban residential development, had it not been for this active community group. The zoning decision that resulted has been the Kailua community’s battle cry ever since” (1985).

Plate III Pali Road 1920

Baker, R. (1920). Hawaiʻi State Archives Collection. www.archives1.dags.hawaii.gov Accessed on April 14, 2014.

In the post-WWII era, several ranches and farms in Kailua were converted into a suburb of leasehold subdivisions and the town was newly introduced to a variety of commercial stores (see Plate IV). Rapid development and population growth led Kailua to become one of the fastest growing communities in the Territory of Hawaiʻi. Census figures estimated Kailua’s population was 7,740 in 1950, and tripled in size within the decade (Mustapha 1985).

14

Plate IV Kailua in the 1950's

Hawaiʻi State Archives. www.archives1.dags.hawaii.gov. Accessed on May 5, 2014.

By the time Hawaiʻi was granted statehood in 1959, Kailua became an official postal designation and shortly after, was classified as the State’s second largest community (Hall 1998). During this time, several development issues arose which would create lasting divides within the community. One concerned the Kawai Nui Marsh (see Plate V) about which opinions were split between those favored development and those who did not. The marsh ultimately remained intact and is currently the largest wetland in Hawaiʻi, in excess of 800 acres (www.ramsar.org). In addition to its historical importance, the Kawai Nui Marsh provides refuge to several endangered water birds and flood protection for the adjacent Kailua town. Despite being designated a Wetland of International Importance by the Ramsar Convention in 2005 (www.ramsar.org), diverging opinions regarding its purpose exist to this day. Equally important were community clashes that pertained to the built structure. While the vast majority of residents supported the development of homes, schools, churches, grocery stores, roads, and other features that would make Kailua a self- sustaining town, divisions arose regarding the erection of high-rise buildings. Although the Meridian East and Windward Passage housing units were both completed by 1980, from that point on, there was overwhelming support for laws that outlined height restrictions for future developments (Mustapha 1965). These laws not only passed, but

15 have dictated development in Kailua ever since.

Plate V Kawai Nui Marsh

Kawai Nui Marsh with Mount Olomana in the immediate background and the Koʻolau Range in the distant background. www.dlnr.hawaii.gov. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

Plate VI Windward Passage

Photo of Windward Passage demonstrating the lack of high-rise buildings in Kailua . © Wilkins, R. (2012). www.windwardpassagekailua.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

Another land-use dilemma that sparked community conflict pertained to visitor accommodations. After a series of public debates, the Honolulu City Council concluded

16 that visitor-lodging businesses were at odds with residentially zoned neighborhoods and subsequently passed the Land Use Ordinance 86-89 in 1986. This ordinance prohibited transient rentals, those less than 30 days, in residentially zoned neighborhoods. The contentious nature of this ordinance cannot be overstated, since vacation rentals were on the rise in the 1980’s. In response to community upheaval, the City Council also implemented Land Use Ordinance 89-154 in 1989. Like the previous ordinance, this ordinance also prohibited vacation rentals in residentially zoned neighborhoods; however, it permitted the continuation of vacation rentals that were in operation prior to 1989. Non-conforming Use Certificates were used to distinguish legitimate vacation rentals (65 total in Kailua), and those who were grandfathered in have remained legal since (www.keepitkailua.org). While these ordinances were paramount in retaining the residential character of Kailua, they did not eliminate the existence of vacation rentals that were owned and operated illegally. Hence, these ordinances have remained controversial for the community to this day, as demonstrated by diverging views regarding what constitutes legitimate use of property. During the post-Cold War era, Kailua received widespread attention when Cable News Network (CNN) released the 1996 annual survey of travel agencies and organizations across the U.S. (Hall 1998). This worldwide announcement pertained to the top-10 beaches in the U.S., with Lanikai and Kailua beach listed as the top two choices. Lanikai, an unincorporated community within Kailua, would soon become known for its picturesque white sand beaches and offshore Mokulua Islands (See Plate VII). In fact, in Trip Advisor’s 2014 Travelers Choice Beach Award, travelers ranked Lanikai as the top beach in the U.S. and the 8th top beach worldwide (www.tripadvisor.com). Kailua beach (See Plate VIII) is also known for its ambiance and the trade winds make Kailua bay a haven for wind and kite surfers. Both of these beaches also attract large volumes of visitors who are interested in kayaking to the Mokulua and Popoiʻa islands, which are officially designated as offshore bird sanctuaries. Due to the increasing popularity of these beaches, conflict has recently surfaced regarding their use. Generally speaking, this conflict concerns those who condone commercial activities at these locations, and those who do not.

17

Plate VII Aerial Image of the Mokulua Islands

Aerial image of the Mokulua Islands with Lanikai in the immediate background and Kailua in the distant background. © Young, P. (2013). www.hookuleana.com. Accessed on April 30, 2014.

Plate VIII Kailua Beach

Kailua Beach with the Mokulua Islands in the distance. Photo by Michelle Horton (2013)

18 As of 2010, Kailua’s population was estimated at 38,635 and it is currently classified as a predominantly residential community (see Plate IX) with a core business district (www.factfinder2.census.gov). In its current phase, the community has experienced a variety of changes, some which have accrued gradually over time and others that seem to have taken place over night. Regardless of these differences, it is safe to say that these changes revolve around the rapidly expanding tourism industry. For instance, Kailua has seen an exponential growth in individuals and businesses that strive to accommodate visitors, as demonstrated by the increasing number of vacation rentals, recreational drop-offs by large tour companies, kayak and bike rentals, Segway tours, and vendors. In addition, there has been a renewed interest in developing the town in a way that appeals to visitors. Consequentially, Kailua has become increasingly attractive to visitors as well as those who embrace a marketplace that thrives on tourism.

Plate IX Aerial Image of Kailua

Image demonstrating Kailua as a predominantly residential community with a core business district. Hamakua and Kawai Nui Marsh to the far left with Kailua’s business district to the immediate right and Mokapu Peninsula in the distant background. © Mouginis-Mark, P. (1996). http://satftp.soest.hawaii.edu. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

19 Due to the multitude of stakeholders within the community, changes associated with tourism have been experienced and perceived in a variety of ways. While there are those who are in favor of tourism continuing its current trajectory, there are also those who have scrutinized the continued expansion of the industry by pointing out some of the negative and often unintended ramifications. Regardless of where on the spectrum these individuals fall, one thing they all have in common is that they are struggling for a voice in the decision-making processes that will determine the future of Kailua. One arena where this struggle is evident is through the Neighborhood Board system.

Neighborhood Board System Formal, local governance structures date back to the 1960’s, when a number of programs were introduced at the federal level in order to increase citizen participation in political processes at the grassroots level (Yates 1973; Hallman 1977; Lococo 1998). One such program was the Model Cities Act, which was implemented in several cities throughout the U.S. in 1964 (Lococo 1998). The primary objective of this initiative was to establish community and neighborhood organizations that produced local solutions to local problems. Although Honolulu was not initially a city included in the Model Cities Act, it “was one of the municipalities that applied for, and was granted, Model City status” (Lococo 1998: 10). This event largely shaped political life in Hawaiʻi because it paved way for the introduction of formal political structures such as the Neighborhood Board System. In 1971, the City and County of Honolulu’s Mayor Frank F. Fasi appointed a nine-member committee, whose mission was to develop an amended city charter that would make the city and its officials and agencies more responsive to the citizens (Lococo 1998). After being introduced by the commission in 1972, the system of neighborhood boards was adopted by voters and officially implemented on the island of Oʻahu in 1973 (Lococo 1998). The primary function of this system was to involve communities in the decision-making processes that affected them by establishing lines of communication between government and the community members themselves. According to the City and County of Honolulu Neighborhood Commission Office (2011),

20 the Neighborhood Board system is, “Full citizen participation in government so that the powers of the City can properly serve and advance the aspirations of its citizens”. Since its initial introduction, a uniform system of neighborhood boards (see Plate X) was established and currently contains a total of 31neighborhood boards on the island, which operate under the concept of participatory democracy (www1.honolulu.gov). Constituents are granted the opportunity to attend monthly meetings or public forums sponsored by the board, voice concerns publicly to the board representatives, or to serve on the board itself. Thus, neighborhood board meetings serve as an official platform linking participants directly to government, political decision-making processes, and various members of the community.

Figure 2 Map of Oʻahu's Neighborhood Board System

Map depicting boundaries of Oʻahu's Neighborhood Board System. © Board of Water Supply, City & County of Honolulu. (2004). www.boardofwatersupply.com. Accessed on April 11, 2014.

To this day, the system operates in much of its original form and is recognized and accepted as an important component of the political fabric of communities (Lococo 1998). Lococo (1998) outlined several factors that have contributed to the system’s continued success stating that, “the strictly advisory role played by the boards has served

21 to alleviate any official unease about shared power; and the wide variety of backgrounds of board members, elected by their neighborhoods rather than by the city, has provided officials with valuable insights into neighborhood concerns”. In other words, the significance of neighborhood board meetings lies in their ability to provide constituents the opportunity to participate in processes that will largely determine the future of their community. For these reasons, data for this study were collected through my observations of Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings in particular. In addition to a description of KNB meetings, Chapter 2 outlines the research design as well as the methods of data collection and analysis. In Chapter 3, data collected from participant observation of KNB meetings and interview sessions are analyzed and presented in terms of salient themes. Finally, conclusions are discussed in Chapter 4.

22 CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODS

Research Design A qualitative research design was used for this study. Many sociologists have stressed the utility of qualitative designs in order to illuminate “the meanings that phenomena have for the people being studied” (Bradley 1993: 434). In addition, they are often preferred over their quantitative counterpart since research can be conceptualized in a continuous, iterative cycle (Carter and Little 2007: 1325). Whereas quantitative research is “partly dependent on sampling, data collection, analysis, and reporting being kept separate and progressing in a linear fashion” (Carter and Little 2007:), in qualitative designs these phases tend to be less linear. My decision to adopt a qualitative design was also supported on the grounds that due to the exploratory nature of this research, data would be analyzed inductively in accordance with grounded theory methodology. The structured, yet flexible nature of this approach affords the researcher the opportunity to adapt to unexpected insights revealed through analysis and early writing (Charmaz 2006). For this reason, sampling and data collection could be “modified to better support the integrity, focus, and explanatory power of continuing analysis, and thus, the final product” (Carter and Little 2007: 1325).

Participant Observation Field notes were taken from participant observation of Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings. Participant observation is not only a common method in exploratory studies, but also in situations where the “research problem is concerned with human meanings and interactions viewed from the insiders’ perspective, the researcher is able to gain access to an appropriate setting, and the research problem can be addressed by qualitative data gathered by direct observation” (Jorgensen 1989: 13). This method was therefore selected on the grounds that empirical investigation of these meetings would give greater insights into the phenomenon being studied because data would be collected on naturally occurring behaviors in their usual contexts (Mack and Woodsong 2005).

23 KNB meetings are held on the first Thursday of each month. My attendance at monthly KNB meetings began in November 2012 until November 2013. At each meeting, I collected handouts and recorded my observations in written form. After each meeting, I dedicated an hour to reflect on the meetings in terms of the issues that were discussed, levels of participation, as well as the types of interactions that took place. Initial field notes were revised and expanded so that a detailed account of each meeting would remain fresh in my memory.

Kailua Neighborhood Board Meetings My decision to observe KNB meetings in particular was primarily due to the wide array of individuals who attend these meetings. Participants include members of the board, representatives from public agencies, elected officials, and residents. In addition, meetings often included a variety of guest speakers depending on the agenda. For instance, representatives from the Department of Parks and Recreation attended when matters related to commercial activity at beach parks and from the Department of Transportation when matters related to tour bus activity within the community. KNB meetings were therefore considered a viable avenue linking me to multiple data sources, which would ultimately provide views from various perspectives (Bradley 1993). The KNB (seem Figure 3) system is ultimately an arena that would effectively illuminate community-related issues since each meeting addresses both new and existing topics. Although meetings typically follow a structured agenda that is distributed in advance, time is allotted throughout each meeting for participants to raise questions, request clarification, or further delve into topics that are urgent. Members of the board (see Plate X), who are elected by their neighborhoods, manage the meetings in order to ensure the agenda is covered in its entirety. While each member has a degree of authority in determining the progression of meetings, the Chair ultimately has the final say.

24 Figure 3 Map of Kailua Neighborhood Board No. 31 Boundaries

© City & County of Honolulu, Hawai`i. (2004). www1.honolulu.gov. Accessed on April 11, 2014.

Plate X Members of the Kailua Neighborhood Board No. 31

Members of the Kailua Neighborhood Board No. 31.Last updated 2011. © City & County of Honolulu, Hawai`i (2002). www.honolulu.gov. Accessed on April 12, 2014.

After they are called to order, meetings proceed with announcements, board vacancies if any, followed by short reports by representatives of public agencies such as

25 the Honolulu Fire and Police Departments, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Ocean Safety Division as well as representatives for the Mayor and Governor. Next, time is allotted for resident and community concerns, which are limited to 3 minutes per comment, and are followed by announcements from the following elected officials: council members, senators, and representatives. Following these announcements, the board reviews and discusses board motions, if any. The remainder of the meeting pertains to reports from the following committees: Public Health, Public Safety & Civil Defense, Government & Community Services, Planning, Zoning & Environment, Parks & Recreation, and Transportation & Public Works. Finally, the Chair delivers a report regarding important matters and the meeting is then adjourned. Meetings are recorded and broadcast on television via ʻŌlelo Community Media. According to its mission statement, one of the ‘Ōlelo Community Media’s primary goals is “to strengthen our island voices and advance community engagement through innovative media” (www.olelo.org). Schedules for the televised version of KNB meetings can be located on the official website for the City and County of Honolulu (www.honolulu.gov). In addition, minutes for each meeting are recorded, converted to web format, and posted on the City and County of Honolulu’s website by the Neighborhood Office. The Neighborhood Office ultimately serves as an administrative support for the Neighborhood Boards as well as the Neighborhood Commission, which consists of appointees selected by the mayor and city council in order to oversee the Neighborhood Board System as a whole (Lococo 1998). Through my observations of these meetings I learned that the atmosphere was largely dependent on the topic at hand. In times where the vast majority of participants seemed to share similar sentiments, the meeting room evoked a strong sense of community and commitment to matters that went beyond self. When controversial issues arose, tensions ran high and divisions amongst participants were near impossible to ignore. This also seemed to be the case with the members of the board themselves. While there were times that the board seemed to share a common ground, there were also times when one or more members seemed to be ostracized for standing in opposition to the majority. Although these board members were outnumbered, it did not deter them from

26 being vocal about their beliefs. Overall, these interactions were not only interesting, but also useful in bringing to light the utility of the neighborhood board system because it seemed to be well represented in terms of a voice for different perspectives within the community. Finally, through my observations I realized that many individuals within the community were eager to have their voices heard and often driven by personal agendas. This was especially true after my role as a researcher was made known at the March 2013 meeting. At this particular meeting, I made a public announcement of my research interests and objectives in order to begin the recruitment process for interview sessions, which are discussed in the pages to follow.

Semi-structured Interviews As one of the most widely used interview formats in qualitative research, semi- structured interviews are considered a useful method since they allow the interviewer to delve deeply into personal and social matters (Crabtree and DiCicco-Bloom 2006). This is because they are “organized around a set of predetermined open-ended questions, with other questions emerging from the dialogue between interviewer and interviewees” (Crabtree and DiCicco-Bloom 2006). Hence, because semi-structured interviews are not strictly limited to questions contained in the interview guide, the interviewee is considered “more a participant in meaning making than a conduit from which information is retrieved” (Crabtree and DiCicco-Bloom 2006: 314). For these reasons, the researcher has the potential to retrieve new and unforeseen information as well as the opportunity to further delve into topics via probing, when deemed necessary. Interview sessions began with questions relating to basic demographic information: age, sex, race/ethnicity, and highest level of education completed. Next, three questions pertained to background information such as place of birth, length of residency, and the ways in which participants identify with Kailua. Finally, nine questions were in relation to the following topics: characteristics that define Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, issues facing the community, as well as how these issues have affected Kailua’s ‘sense of place’.

27 Sampling Ten research participants were recruited from Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings. As previously mentioned, a public announcement was made at the March 7th 2013 meeting in order to inform attendees of this research project. This message was also broadcast on television by ‘Ōlelo Community Media. The main objective here was to extend the information to the Kailua community, particularly those who were not present at the March meeting. Hence, the number and variety of participants was expected to increase via the televised broadcast since the ‘Ōlelo Community Media links community- related issues to non-attendees. For this reason, some research participants were recruited directly from the KNB meetings, while others were given my contact information and thus, the opportunity to contact me at a later, more convenient date. This procedure was deemed necessary upon realization that many individuals who are actively involved in community-related issues may have either missed the initial announcement or may have been unaware of the research project due to their selective participation in KNB meetings. In other words, after learning that many individuals only participate on an issue-by-issue basis, I deemed it necessary to be more flexible in my recruitment strategies. Participants were selected based on the following criteria: 18 years of age or older, participation in at least some KNB meetings, and involvement and familiarity with the Kailua community in general. Snowball and purposive sampling techniques were used in this study; however, it must be mentioned that although snowball sampling was used in the initial stages of this study, several factors led me to believe that this was not the most beneficial sampling technique. Since this sampling technique relies on “participants or informants with whom contact has already been made to use their social networks to refer the researcher to other people who could potentially participate in or contribute to the study” (Mack & Woodsong 2005: 5-6), I realized that although it would have been useful in increasing the sample size, it would have also have detracted from the exploratory nature of this research. This is because it seemed as though it was tactfully employed by existing participants in order to increase the homogeneity of the sample. It was therefore my belief that this technique would be useful in executing the personal and

28 political agendas of existing participants, rather than capturing the many facets of the phenomenon under study. For these reasons, purposive sampling was deemed the most appropriate sampling technique and was used throughout the remainder of this study since it would broaden the scope of participants and thus, make data more balanced. This decision was supported on the grounds that because qualitative research is an iterative process, it is permissible to change the recruitment strategy in the event that the original recruitment strategy is not working as well as anticipated (Mack & Woodsong 2005). Purposive sampling was appropriate for this study since here “samples are selected to serve an investigative purpose rather than to be statistically representative of a population” (Carter & Little 2007: 1318) in addition to participants being “deliberately chosen based on criteria that have relevance to the research question rather than criteria of randomness of selection” (Bradley 1993: 440). In other words, participants were selected purposively in order to capture perspectives from different factions within the community. Factions were determined based on my familiarity with the Kailua community and supported by my observations of KNB meetings. Purposive sampling was thus a technique that would allow the sample to be “broad enough to capture the many facets of a phenomenon” (Kuper & Lindgard 2008: 687), rather than seeking to generalize findings to the entire Kailua community.

Participants A total of 10 research participants were recruited for this study. Each participant was given a pseudonym and interviews were identified using a unique number. The sample was equally composed of men and women and ages ranged from 40-79. Although participants who were younger in age would have been useful in providing insights for this study, it was expected that participants would be older in age due to the fact that they are typically the ones to frequent KNB meetings. With regard to race and ethnicity, three participants identified as mixed or hapa. In its most literal translation, hapa is a Hawaiian term meaning mixed or fragmented and is a socially constructed category used to identify people of mixed ancestry (Reed 2001). The remainder of the sample identified as Caucasian, European, or Haole, which is a

29 Hawaiian term that “refers to foreigners but is used in common parlance to designate Caucasians” (Reed 2001: 331). Like hapa, the term haole is a socially constructed category that is historically situated; however, it retains a great deal of ambiguity due to the fact that it is an imprecise, flexible and continuously contested terminology (Reed 2001). It was expected that the sample would be composed in this way since according to census figures, Kailua is a predominantly Caucasian community (Hall 1998). Length of residency ranged from one to 41 years. What was interesting about this category is that three participants did not provide this information. Because this factor was not recognized until after interview sessions were completed, it is uncertain whether these participants did so intentionally or not. With regards to those who did, it seemed to be the case that higher length of residency correlated with stronger opinions regarding issues facing the community. With regards to education, three participants listed high school, two listed a bachelor’s degree, and the remaining five listed master’s degree as the highest level of education completed. It was expected that education levels would range this way since Kailua is known to have a higher percentage of individuals with a college degree or greater in comparison with other communities on O`ahu (See Figure 4).

Figure 4. Map of Education Levels on O`ahu

Geographical distributions of percentages of college degree or greater on O`ahu. (Zhang et al. 2010)

30 Procedures Prior to the interview sessions, those who were interested in participating were given a copy of the consent form, which contained the following: a description of the research project, the benefits and risks for participation, and matters relating to confidentiality and privacy. This course of action ensured the research objectives were made clear in advance. After attending several KNB meetings, it dawned on me that many individuals within the community were eager to have their voices heard and often driven by personal and political agendas. Additionally, due to the small size and interconnectivity of the Kailua community, I wanted to confirm in advance that the protection of their identity was paramount and that participation was voluntary with the ability to opt out at any point, with no penalty for choosing to do so. A copy of the interview guide was also attached to the consent form and given to interested participants in advance. The purpose here was threefold. First, I wanted to ensure that individuals were comfortable with the information they were expected to provide. Next, I wanted to ensure that individuals had a degree of familiarity with the terminology that was used throughout the interview, such as ‘sense of place’. Finally, by giving a copy of the interview guide in advance, participants would have ample time to reflect the questions. A copy of the interview guide and consent form can be located in the appendix. Interview sessions were set up at a time and location that was convenient for research participants. Whereas some individuals felt comfortable meeting in public spaces such as the Kailua Public Library, others preferred the privacy of their own home. I found that being flexible with the location of interview sessions gave insight into things such whether or not individuals were comfortable being vocal about interview topics. Interviews were digitally recorded (audio only) using the Olympus Digital Voice Recorder and the iPhone Voice Memo application. The use of two recording devices was mainly to have a backup recording in the event that clarity became an issue since interview locations were not predetermined. Audio recordings and consent forms were stored in a secure location in my home office and will be destroyed upon completion of this thesis.

31 Data Analysis This study used grounded theory methodology to code and analyze data. Grounded theory dates back to 1967, when Glaser and Strauss demonstrated the growing importance for social science research designs that strove to generate new theory from data (Birks & Mills 2011). The emergence of theory thus diverged from traditional research designs, where existing theories were tested deductively. While it is true that the work of Glaser and Strauss marked a turning point in social science methodology, there were also areas in which their outlooks diverged. Glaser, for instance, defined grounded theory as “a method of discovery, treated categories as emergent from the data, relied on direct and often, narrow empiricism, and analyzed a basic social process” (Charmaz 2004: 8). Thus, the primary concern for Glaser was the generation of theory without “contaminating and constraining the analysis of data with extant codes and concepts” (Birks & Mills 2011: 22). Strauss on the other hand, suggested that although the goal of research is the emergence of theory from data, “both specific understandings from past experience and literature may be used to stimulate theoretical sensitivity and generate hypotheses” (Heath & Cowley 2004: 3). This discrepancy was most likely shaped through Strauss’s work with Corbin, both of whom shared the belief that “the researcher should describe and justify the position they have taken and its effect on theory generation” (Heath & Cowley 2004: 5-6). While it is true that Glaser, Strauss, and Corbin have made major contributions to the social sciences, equally important is the fact that grounded theory has evolved over time and thus, has been adopted in a variety of research designs. A modified version of grounded theory was deemed the most appropriate methodology for this study for several reasons. Unlike more traditional versions of grounded theory, a modified version does not aim to generate theory. Instead, the ultimate outcome is description and exploration of a phenomenon with findings presented as themes (Birks & Mills 2011). Furthermore, a modified approach was selected since it correlates with the constructivist version of grounded theory, which “places priority on the phenomena of study and sees both data and analysis as created from shared experiences and relationships with participants and other sources of data” (Charmaz

32 3006: 130). This marks a point of departure from a more traditional, objectivist approach, in which data are presumed as real in and of themselves, without attending to the processes of production (Charmaz 2006). This decision was supported on the grounds that due to my familiarity with the research setting, it was nearly impossible to enter the research with a blank slate.

Coding and Memo-Writing Data from interview transcriptions and field notes were analyzed using coding and memo-writing techniques. First and foremost, important words, or groups of words were identified using initial line-by-line coding, a strategy which prompts the researcher to study data closely in order to begin conceptualizing ideas (Birks and Mills 2011, Charmaz: 2006). In the second phase of coding, the initial codes were broken down into smaller units and then reassembled to call attention to patterns, themes, and concepts (Bradley 1993). This exercise is also known as focused coding since it permits the researcher “to separate, sort, and synthesize large amounts of data” (Charmaz 2006: 11). Due to the complexity of topics discussed at KNB meetings and throughout interview sessions, memo-writing techniques were used to help clarify patterns, themes, and concepts. The utility of memos cannot be overstated since they “provide ways to compare data, explore ideas about codes, and direct further data gathering (Charmaz 2006: 12). Hence, the rigor of this study was expected to increase since in addition to helping the researcher “articulate, explore, and question interpretations of the data”, memos illuminate “deficiencies or gaps in analytical thinking” (Birks & Mills 2011: 40). The combination of coding and memo-writing techniques was utilized until theoretical saturation, or the point when no new properties of categories emerge, was attained (Charmaz 2006). All in all, it was a “process to identify formal themes in order to construct hypotheses as they are suggested by the data” (Bradley 1993: 443)

33 CHAPTER 3: SOCIAL CHANGE, COMMUNITY CONFLICT AND ‘SENSE OF PLACE’ IN KAILUA

This chapter contains an analysis of interview sessions, which are supplemented with field notes taken from Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings. To ensure clarity and a logical flow of data, the chapter is organized into three parts. In Part 1, data are analyzed in terms of Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. After a brief introduction that outlines how interviewees conceptualized ‘sense of place’, this portion proceeds with thematic descriptions of the characteristics that define Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. Part 2 pertains to community conflict and is also organized thematically with findings presented in terms of salient issues facing the community. In Part 3, ‘sense of place’ is revisited in order to illuminate some of the ways in which the issues facing the community have impacted Kailua’s ‘sense of place’.

Part 1: Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’ First and foremost, it should be acknowledged that research participants were not provided with a definition of ‘sense of place’ prior to interview sessions. Although they were given a copy of the interview guide in advance, it was expected that they would either look into the term on their own or ask the researcher to provide an explanation if they deemed it necessary. With that said, one of the first things that sparked my attention was that out of ten interviewees, only one took the time to talk about the actual term ‘sense of place’. Interestingly enough, Steve completed the entire interview before mentioning that he was initially unaware of this term, The title of your research project made me think of ‘sense of place’ and to be honest, I didn’t know exactly what that meant. So I found a quote that described it. This was the best description I found: A sense of place results gradually and unconsciously from inhabiting a landscape over time. Becoming familiar with the physical properties accruing history within its confines.

After providing this information, Steve was asked if this definition had in any way shaped the way he thought about Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, to which he replied, That was really my challenge with this interview, was putting the characteristics to words because really, it’s more of something you feel. Just driving down the 34 streets it occurred to me! There used to be a preschool located there…my kids went to preschool there! I remember the exact location where my son crashed his bicycle and the spots where I coached little league. These are different places I identify with, and it has to do with my memory of place, and they’ve accrued over time having lived here and having become familiar with it.

Since not all participants took the time to reflect on the actual term in the way that Steve had, the ways in which other participants conceptualized ‘sense of place’ was less easily understood. Although this was a task worth exploring in greater detail, it was ultimately beyond the scope of this research; however, the inclusion of this anecdote nicely demonstrates the fact that ‘sense of place’ can and does mean different things to different people. It also underscores that people are able to ascribe meaning to various features of places, regardless of whether they are familiar with such terminology. This seemed to be the case with this research, as several areas of convergence did in fact surface regarding the characteristics that define Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. These themes are explained in greater detail in the pages to follow.

Physical Characteristics

Physical characteristics were paramount in defining Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. Whereas some participants emphasized the importance of the physical structure since it dictates various aspects of community life, others highlighted the significance of the natural environment by referencing the white sand beaches, the Popoiʻa and Mokulua off shore bird sanctuaries, the Koʻolau, Kaʻiwa and Olomana mountain ranges, or the Kawai Nui and Hāmākua marshes. Jolene, a lifelong resident of Kailua, proclaimed, We’ve [Kailua] got a spectacular environment that is so beautiful you can’t miss it! It’s something that embraces you and so you want to nurture and protect it in any way you can. You don’t want it harmed, because you feel that you are part of your natural surroundings, and that makes it all the more important.

Whereas Jolene’s source of attachment seemed to stem primarily from the aesthetic qualities of the natural environment, other participants clung to narratives that illuminated the importance of Kailua, both in historical and present times. As stated by John, From a prehistoric standpoint, before Western contact, it [Kailua] was probably one of the most important Native Hawaiian communities in the archipelago. Why

35 is because the Windward side has a lot of fresh water resources. The Kawai Nui Marsh is huge! It was probably one of the largest fishponds in ancient times, in excess of 500 acres and it continues to be an important resource and a very important focal point of what happens regarding the dynamics around Kawai Nui Marsh and how that sense of community has established itself over the decades and over the centuries. So the water that flows from the mountain to the seas through Kailua is very important and that has been very fundamental in establishing the continuing character and the values that are associated with Kailua. (See Plate XI).

Plate XI Kawai Nui Marsh

Image of the Kawai Nui Marsh (from the Koʻolau range) demonstrating its relation to the Kailua community and Kailua Bay. © Look at Hawaiʻi (2011). www.lookathawaii.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

In contrast to the statements made by Jolene and John, other participants suggested that it was not solely the aesthetic qualities or historical importance of Kailua’s natural environment that made it an important feature of Kailua. Equally important was the healthy lifestyle the landscape helped promote. According to Anne, “Kailua is a very active community. People here are very active, you know? They swim, they run, they paddle, they hike (See Plate XII), and they exercise.”

36 Plate XII Kaʻiwa Ridge Trail

Kailua's Kaʻiwa ridge trail, which leads to the remnants of WWII bunkers. © Look At Hawaiʻi. (2011). www.lookathawaii.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

William also indicated the importance of the physical characteristics when he listed some of the benefits of living in Kailua, “It is beautiful on the water, it’s accessible, and it’s wonderful for sporting (See Plate XIII). I learned how to paddle, I can ride my bike anywhere I want to go (See Figure 5) we play tennis, we surf, and we swim. It’s a place that evokes happiness, sunshine, and peace”. Plate XIII Paddlers on Kailua Bay

© Mark A. Johnson Photography (2014). www.markjohnson.photoshelter.com. Accessed on May 6, 2014.

37

Figure 5 Map of Bike Paths in Kailua

Map of bike paths depicting Kailua’s accessibility (yellow- intermediate level & green beginner-level bike paths). © State of Hawaiʻi (2014). www.hidot.hawaii.gov. Accessed on April 30, 2014.

Regardless of the different sources or levels of attachment, the physical characteristics without a doubt seemed to play a crucial role in shaping Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. This became evident, as it remained a point of interest throughout the course of interview sessions. In addition, my observations of KNB meetings supported these findings since matters relating to the development of physical structures and the preservation of the natural environment were always on the agenda.

Sense of Community Another characteristic of Kailua is the strong sense of community it entails. What was interesting about this characteristic in particular, is that most participants demonstrated familiarity with the notion ‘sense of community’, without necessarily having definitive guidelines that explained exactly what this term meant.

38 The frequency and repetition of this term throughout interview sessions led me to conclude that it was a definitely a key component outlining Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. In addition, when one participant made clear that a strong sense of community was, in her opinion, unique to Kailua, it seemed as though it was a theme worth exploring in greater detail. According to Jolene, It [Kailua] still has a sense of community, and people really nurture it and stand up to protect it. Although I don’t know other communities well, my perception is that there is no other community on this island that still has that sense of community…people who are actually getting together and speaking up for what they feel is important, for them, for their children, for the future, and to maintain a quality of life. And I think it’s a feeling that you don’t find easily in other communities, except Kailua.

Further analysis brought to light a few sub-themes that seemed to surface when participants spoke about sense of community in Kailua. Some of these include, but are not limited to: residents identifying with and striving to retain a degree of familiarity with their surroundings and residents playing an active role within the community in an effort to maintain the valued quality of life as they perceived it. Probing was a useful technique that facilitated more in-depth discussions of these topics. A few statements have been drawn from these discussions, in order to illustrate some of the ways in which these sub- themes seem to be connected to sense of community in a more general sense. In relation to how residents identify with and strive to retain some sort of connection with their surroundings, many responses suggested that it was by knowing their neighbors and through regular contact with members of the community. Teresa mentioned that, It is my hometown, the place my children grew up, and where most of my friends are located. A strong sense of community evolves as you know your neighbors and know your town. Kailua is small enough that you have the opportunity to interact with various people and groups over the years. And so, as you participate, you meet new people and you learn what they’re about.

Similarly, John mentioned that, “It is a small enough community that you can go to the store and see people you know. It’s a small enough community that everybody takes care of it to the most extent” (See Plate XIV).

39 Plate XIV Kailua Beach Environmental Awareness Campaign

Community volunteers picking up marine debris on Kailua beach. © B.E.A.C.H. (2006-2014). www.b-e-a-c-h.org. Accessed on May 5, 2014.

Not only did John admit that these connections and daily transactions greatly impact his overall identity, but they also largely determine how John sees his time and energy is best spent. This portion of the interview was interesting in that it provided a nice transition into the next sub-theme, namely, the means by which individuals attempt to preserve the valued quality of life in Kailua through their involvement in the community. This is because in addition to living and working in Kailua, John is also involved in various activities through his church and local schools, many of which strive to “educate, inspire, and motivate kids to learn in the context of place.” Although this particular example was strictly limited to John, it was not uncommon to learn that other participants found ways to make a contribution. Jolene, for example, helped design and implement a reading program at a local school because she wanted to get kids excited about reading; Teresa is involved in a number of community groups, including the Lani- Kailua Outdoor Circle, the Hawaiian Civic Club, and Hui o Koʻolaupoko, a nonprofit organization that protects ocean health by restoring the land from the mauka (mountains) to the makai (sea) (See Plate XV).

40 Plate XV Volunteers of Hui o Ko`olaupoko

Volunteers at the Popoiʻa Watershed Restoration Site in Kailua, which improves the quality of storm water runoff and reduces pollution into the Kaʻelepulu stream. © Hui o Ko`olaupoko (2013). www.huihawaii.org. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

There was also Anne who, in addition to volunteering at her children’s school, participates in a nonprofit organization that helps local victims of sex trafficking. In addition to being a member of the Hawaiian Civic Club, William’s interest in business led him to spend many years on the Kailua Chamber of Commerce; Ellen is a member of the ad hoc committee Keep it Kailua and has also played a key role in various types of grassroots activism; Rosa helped introduce a local school to Jack Johnson’s Kōkua Foundation ʻĀINA in Schools program, which teaches youth about things like gardening, nutrition, and recycling (See Plate XVI); George serves on the Kalaheo Hillside Resident Association, a smaller version of the Kailua Neighborhood Board; and Steve founded a local anti-graffiti initiative whose proceeds benefit local sports teams in need of fundraisers. Finally, there was Albert, who serves on a local disaster-preparedness initiative. Albert’s response nicely summarized some of the potential reasons these individuals viewed their efforts as worthwhile,

41 Kailua has been designated as a storm-ready, disaster-ready community. To me that is just a sign until people really are that way, and are really willing to help themselves and their neighbors out. We’ve seen what happens elsewhere, and here, we are also vulnerable. A community that practices helping each other, will be able to do so should something really happen. And something like this is informative and also fun along the way because you get to know people and their talents and concerns. By doing this, you’ve started community building.

Albert’s outlook seems to highlight the notion that through these activities, not only do people become involved and familiar with community, but in doing so, they seem to be driven by a degree of fulfillment that extends beyond themselves. Teresa makes these assertions all the more compelling when she stated that what she likes most about Kailua is, “the willingness of people to volunteer and to give back to their community.” She continues, “I think that is because we get back so much from the environment we live in and the relationships we establish. You receive and yet you see a lot of people giving, and it inspires you to do the same.”

Plate XIIII Kōkua Foundation Tree Planting Ceremony

Students, faculty, parents, and volunteers with Jack Johnson at the Kōkua Foundation Tree Planting ceremony at Aikahi Elementary School in Kailua. © Aikahi Elementary School (2014). www.aikahi.net. Accessed on April 16, 2014.

42 Regardless of the factors prompting these individuals to engage in these sorts of activities, one thing that seemed to be consistent across the board is that these individuals felt that their commitments are in some shape or form, contributing to the betterment of Kailua as a whole.

Residential Character of the Community The third and final theme that captures Kailua’s ‘sense of place’ is that it is valued for being primarily residential in nature. Unlike the physical characteristics and sense of community themes discussed above, the residential character theme became apparent even though not all participants phrased their ideas in this manner. Hence, although this tended to be a more difficult theme to pinpoint, there were a multitude of indicators that led me to believe it should be classified as such. Some of these include: a small-town feel, infrastructure for single-family homes, the ability to know your neighbors, the lack of high-rise buildings and billboards, infrastructure that makes most things accessible by foot and bike, a sufficient number of stores that are locally operated and equipped to provide for the needs of the community, numerous churches, a variety of public and private schools, and the existence of a local hospital. In order to capture why some of these features are important, a few examples will be explored in greater detail below. In regard to the small-town feel and the ability to know your neighbors, some participants suggested that it makes interactions amongst residents more likely and frequent. Consequentially, these interactions contribute to the overall safety of the community. Several participants even suggested that it had an impact on child-rearing practices. According to Teresa for example, “When I was raising my children, I knew people in the neighborhood, and so my kids could run around and play with their friends and go down to the park.” Anne also seemed to share similar sentiments when she stated the following, “My kids want to play with neighborhood kids that live here, and if the neighborhood is filled with vacation renters, that’s not an option. They are not going to get to know those kids.” Steve mentioned that his family went as far as returning from the mainland in order to experience that which Kailua has to offer, “We moved to the mainland to start a business, and prior, I coached little league here and we raised our kids

43 here. When we moved away, our kids were completely out of place because…uh…well, out here [in Kailua] the community kind of takes part in raising the kids.” Another area that illustrates why Kailua is valued as a residential community is because the infrastructure is intended to make it a self-sustaining town. According to Albert, “Kailua has a wonderful flow and infrastructure for a small town that integrates nature, and a sense of village.” Another participant who shared similar sentiments was Teresa. Although she mentioned that the infrastructure was undergoing a lot of major changes, her response was useful in bringing to light the significance of Kailua as “a rather self-contained community with grocery stores, a post office, and a general store concept.” She adds, “This concept worked very well. You knew who your business people were, you supported them, and cared about them, and they actually provided products you would buy.” In addition to being a self-contained community, it became evident that the previous examples were key in distinguishing Kailua from a major, industrialized city. According to Albert, “We’ve got a sense of closeness to the natural environment, community, and still within reach of a major city, Honolulu (See Plate XVII). It’s a different half of the island that we’re talking about here, and that makes it unique.” Similarly, George states, “You’ve still got a lot of stores, places you can eat, and things you can do, but it’s different from the usual hustle and bustle [of Honolulu].”

Plate XIVI Aerial Image of Honolulu

Image demonstrating Honolulu as a major, industrialized city. O’Rear, C. (1973). www.research.archives.gov. Accessed on May 30, 2014.

44 Ellen on the other hand, mentioned that what she liked about Kailua is that it is different from Waikiki (See Plate XVIII). She states, “It’s a safe place. When people come home, many from stressful jobs and quite a few from tourist industry, when they come home, there is a way to replenish their spirit. They can relax and get ready for the next day.” It was difficult to deny the importance of the residential character for Ellen since she also admitted to committing a significant portion of her life to preserving it. For instance, in addition to playing a significant role in helping pass legislation that protected residentially zoned neighborhoods in the 1980’s, Ellen is also actively involved in ‘Keep it Kailua’, an ad hoc committee that has the preservation of Kailua’s residential character at the forefront.

Plate XVI Waikiki Beach

Image highlighting the tourist-laden beaches and hotel-lined streets of Waikiki. © Sproul, M. (2014). www.thecarefreetraveler.com. Accessed on April 20, 2014.

All in all, the previous excerpts speak loudly to some of the qualities that are valued by members of the community. Since many of the commercial activities found in major cities tend to be at odds with those of a residential community, they seemed to be less than favorable for these individuals. It is also worth noting that although these participants did not suggest that the previous examples could not be found in other types

45 of communities, they remained committed to their beliefs that they are distinguishing features of Kailua. In congruence with interview sessions, KNB meetings also signaled the importance of the residential character of Kailua. In fact, there were frequently meetings in which board motions targeted the Hawaiʻi Tourism Authority by requesting they respect the zoning of residential neighborhoods in Kailua and stop promoting it as a visitor destination and alternative to Waikiki.

PART 2: COMMUNITY CONFLICT This section pertains to issues facing the Kailua community, which are organized thematically and presented in terms of the following themes: finding a balance, commercialization, and development. Although the issues are convoluted and often overlap, each issue is explored separately in order to demonstrate some of the ways in which they have caused conflict in the community.

Finding a Balance Both interview sessions and Kailua Neighborhood Board (KNB) meetings brought to light the rapidly expanding tourism industry as a major source of conflict for the community. Although Hawaii’s economy relies primarily on tourism, the pace and intensity in which it has seeped into every sector of Kailua has exacerbated diverging views on how tourism is best managed. These views are not only extremely fluid, but also highly convoluted; however, they seem to share a common thread in that they are ultimately concerned with explicating what Kailua is and should be. In other words, these debates ask whether Kailua should remain a residential community, become a tourist destination, or fall somewhere in between? John captured this dilemma when he stated the following in his interview, I’m part Hawaiian, and so the concept of aloha ʻaina, which is to love the land and to understand the responsibility that comes with running the place that you live in, from a cultural, social, political and economic standpoint…I think all of those factors are important. So while change is inevitable, there’s also a sense of continuity that, to me, is also inevitable, and you have to constantly balance both. It’s part of the mystery and struggle of life.

46 Needless to say, mending the gap between change and continuity has remained a difficult task for the community, most likely due to the variety of stakeholders involved. As Rosa points out, “It [tourism/development] has affected people differently, and so, the community has to figure out what they want Kailua to turn into…whether they want to control growth and tourism and all that.” So what exactly does the community want? In congruence with many of the testimonies given at KNB meetings, interview responses brought to light a major area of convergence. In fact, there seemed to be consensus that what is needed most in Kailua is some sort of balance. More specifically, the community should strive to preserve the residential character of Kailua while also taking into consideration that change has and will continue to happen. In George’s interview for instance, he points out that although change is not always welcomed with open arms, it is still a fact of life and thus should not be treated as if it were escapable, I’m sure that the generation before us wanted everything to stay exactly the same. When all of the houses were being built, I’m sure they felt the same thing. Everybody wants to freeze things, you know? “These are my memories and I want them to stay that way”. If it stayed the exact same for the rest of my life, that would be great! But that just ain’t gonna’ happen. At the same time, I don’t think it should become another Waikiki, so you have to find a balance.

Similarly, although Ellen would “prefer it [Kailua] not be a tourist destination at all”, she was quick to acknowledge that this was wishful thinking. She continues, “This is a beautiful place, and people will come since it is advertised worldwide.” For Ellen, finding a balance is the best case-scenario because, “That way, when visitors do come in, they will know that this is a residential community.” Although the previous excerpts have indicated the existence of similar visions for Kailua, the problem is that in actuality, Kailua is far from reaching a balance. As a political figure in Kailua pointed out, “Balance is the word many people use these days in response to the tourism and development boom as visitors and Oʻahu residents flock to Kailua, a once sleepy suburb by the sea. The problem is: Different people have different visions of balance” (Creamer 2012). For this reason, it is not difficult to understand why implementing and maintaining balance has remained an ongoing and extremely difficult

47 process. Regardless of these difficulties, finding a balance is a task that has remained paramount for the community, particularly because many individuals have reached a breaking point. For instance, many individuals stressed fears that if left unchallenged, the tourism industry will continue its course and result in Kailua becoming a full-fledged tourist destination. In her interview, Teresa captures why the lack of balance poses a serious threat to Kailua. She states, It’s not the community that hasn’t figured out how to deal with this, because we can compromise. It’s the industry’s [tourism industry] overwhelming demand for money, which generates more and more businesses that want to participate in it (See Plate XIX). So they’re looking into the future 50 years, but we’re looking down the road 100 years, and we still want a residential community! It really just stresses the locals to the point where it harms the island. You can’t have a successful population here if you don’t treat your residents fairly, and with some kind of compassion. They will give back to you in support of your industry and tourism, but they cannot be overridden and trampled on as they have been.

Plate XIX Kailua Beach Adventures Brochure

Brochure used to depict expanding tourism industry. Photo by Michelle Horton (2014).

There was also Steve, who argued that “Change is going to happen, and that’s okay, but I don’t think that change HAS happened within the context of what we consider

48 to be Kailua.” Similarly, Albert suggested that, “Many of the changes seem to be not very Kailua. Some of the things here now, could be almost anywhere. There’s a large influx of visitors and a lot of emphasis on tourism (See Plate XX), which changes the dynamic of the residential part of Kailua. We need to find balance because if we don’t, we will no longer be the friendly community that we are known for.”

Plate XX Kailua Segway and Pedego Brochures

Brochures depicting expanding tourism industry. Photos by Michelle Horton (2014).

Despite the fact that tourism has pushed many individuals to the edge, they also seem to be facing the fact that because change is inevitable, it is not something that should be taken lightly. Hence, rather than avoiding change, people are finding it in their best interest to become involved so that the tourism industry does not continue its course unchallenged. In addition to increased participation in KNB meetings, City Council hearings, and public forums that are organized on an issue-by-issue basis, Kailua has also

49 witnessed an emergence of grassroots activists, community groups, and campaigns.

In spite of these efforts, the problem lies in the existence of diverging opinions regarding the impact tourism is having on the community. At the other end of the spectrum are those who advocate tourism since it is a vital component of the economy. According to these individuals, tourism has produced a series of positive outcomes since it has increased jobs and allowed many small businesses to flourish. In addition, William pointed out some of the social benefits when he stated the following in his interview, It’s [Kailua] a wonderful turn of the century community that has great value as a recreation place and as a place of peace for people, people from all over the world, if residents will allow that to happen”. He adds “We must ask how we can build a peaceful community, not only to Kailuans, but to international travelers as well?” Similarly, John mentioned that while managing tourism is an important task, he also welcomes visitors and would “like them to have a much more quality experience compared to that of Waikiki.” Evidently, finding a balance has remained a difficult task due to diverging views on tourism in general. In support of this, interview responses and testimonies given at KNB meetings revealed a huge discrepancy regarding who or what was responsible for the changes taking place. This was not only interesting, but also important because it revealed a potential reason for why determining balance has remained an ongoing and extremely complicated task. Several examples are given below, in order to illustrate how greatly responses varied. When asked about why Kailua has changed significantly in recent years, Teresa had not a doubt in her mind that the Hawaiʻi Tourism Authority (HTA) was largely responsible for the transitions taking place. In her interview, she stated the following, The HTA is one of the primary generators because what they have done in terms of their Master Planning is to acknowledge that Waikiki is becoming increasingly unattractive to visitors, especially return visitors. As they overdevelop Waikiki to satisfy the needs of developers to build more and more buildings, Waikiki becomes less attractive, and so, they are now looking for an island-wide playground for tourists.

Although Teresa was one of many who targeted the HTA, it must be noted that public opinion was often divided regarding the HTA’s role in promoting Kailua as an alternative

50 visitor experience. For instance, after the KNB requested the HTA to stop promoting Kailua as a tourist destination and alternative to Waikiki at the September 2013 meeting, there was a backlash from individuals who felt this request was uncalled for since it sends the wrong message to tourists. While public opinion was often divided regarding HTA’s role in promoting Kailua as an alternative visitor experience, further analysis brought to light that they were not considered the sole generator. Much to the contrary, data revealed the changes taking place were attributable to a wide range of sources. In John’s interview for instance, he argued that the tourists themselves are seeking an alternative to the Waikiki experience, We’re in a transition period. We’ve gone through 50 years now of statehood and you know, tourism is still at its highest ever! But the tourists that are coming to the island are more discerning than they’ve ever been. So they’re seeking out other places other than the Waikiki experience, and I see that transition happening more and more every month…of them seeking Kailua out, big time!

George on the other hand, believed that President Obama and the media played a role (See Plate XXI). He states, “Once he started vacationing here, it put us [Kailua] in the spotlight. Before it used to be Waikiki, but now it’s Kailua. If the President vacations here, if he could go anywhere in the entire country, and he chooses Kailua, people start to wonder, why”? Similarly, Steve stated, “We [Kailua] definitely got more attention once Obama started vacationing here”; however, he also mentioned that “We also have very sharp business people operating in Kailua town who know how to stimulate a commerce area.” Plate XXI President Obama Visits Kailua

President Obama and daughters taking a stroll on Kailua Beach .Academic Fair Use. © AP (2014). www.nypost.com. April 17, 2014.

51 Other participants viewed the problem in a different light since they focused primarily on Kaneohe Ranch. At the time of their interviews, Kaneohe Ranch was the largest landowner in Kailua, and therefore, played a major role in shaping the dynamics of what happened in the community. Some of the reasons Anne cited Kaneohe Ranch as a major player is because “They encourage large tour buses to come in and have special parking lots for them (See Plate XXII), in addition to “overdeveloping downtown to try to attract nonresidents.” Ellen shared nearly the same views as Anne stating that, “Kailua is a one-company town, where we have one landowner that owns the whole, practically entire business center of Kailua”. This has become problematic for Ellen, particularly because, They [Kaneohe Ranch] are modeling that center according to their financial interests and not so much with respect for what a lot of people in Kailua would want. We do not want to become a resort, a visitor destination, and that is what is actively being promoted.

Plate XXII Tour Buses in Kailua

(Left) Tour buses at Kailua Beach Center. (Right) Designated parking lot for tour buses on Hekili St., Kailua. © Pereira, A. (2012). KITV News. www.kitv.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

While Kaneohe Ranch has arguably played a role in accommodating tourists, there were also those who like William, who felt that “Kaneohe Ranch, and the other people that are building the next generation of physical structures are doing a really good job of keeping that original sense of beach culture and value and blending it with Hawaiʻi.”

52 Other participants cited those who own or condone visitor accommodations, particularly those that are owned and operated illegally. According to these individuals, the explosion of visitor accommodations has made achieving balance an extremely difficult task. Ellen for example, stated the following in her interview, There has been an explosion of illegal, new bed and breakfasts and vacation rentals. What they are doing is selling out our neighborhoods and diminishing our housing supply by converting our residential homes into businesses. The big bogus story is that most of these businesses are conducted by people who need it to pay their mortgage. That is simply not true! I think you cannot have your cake and eat it too! They’re looking out for their financial interests, and so, maybe some of them don’t see the harm they are doing.

Similarly, Jolene maintained that this has increasingly become the case because “you can get a higher amount of money to rent out to tourists by the night.” Despite the vast majority of participants taking issue with conversion of homes into visitor accommodations, there were also many individuals who did not believe the discontinuation of these units would restore balance in Kailua. These arguments were supported by claims that high volumes of traffic into the community were attributable to residents from neighboring communities, rather than the visitors themselves. Due to the fact that many individuals were quick to attribute the changes in Kailua to a single entity, it is not difficult to understand why Albert suggested that; “There is definitely a growing divide in Kailua.” For Albert, this divide is “partially because of ignorance in the sense that not everyone knows enough about these issues to put the pieces of the mosaic together to really see it clear enough.” While Albert’s remark holds a degree of validity, it must be mentioned that I was not always given the impression that residents deemed one and only one source responsible. In fact, an in-depth analysis of data suggested that participants were highly aware of the complexity of the issues. Thus, although these individuals often pinpointed a single source, their familiarity with and involvement in the community made it difficult to deny the existence and interconnectivity of a multitude of sources. With that said, it seemed safe to conclude that their perceptions were most likely shaped by their position in the community as well as the ways in which they actually experienced the effects of tourism. Regardless of these differences, one thing that remained constant was that there is a wide-array of players

53 contributing to the lack of balance in Kailua. With so many factors on the table, it is not difficult to understand why reaching a balance has proven to be easier said than done.

Commercialization The issue of commercialization was a focal point of interest, particularly due to community clashes stemming from the conversion of homes into visitor accommodations and the growth of businesses that seek out tourists. While these issues have several areas of convergence, for clarity purposes they will be examined separately in the pages to follow.

Visitor Accommodations As mentioned in the introduction, the Honolulu City Council issued two Land Use Ordinances in 1986 and 1989, which prohibited transient rentals (rentals less than 30 days) from residentially zoned neighborhoods. Owners and operators of bed-and- breakfasts (B&B’s) and Transient Vacation Units (TVU’s) that could prove they were in operation prior to the enactment of the LUO’s were granted Non-conforming Use Certificates, which ultimately distinguished them as legitimate business operations. As a result, sixty-five B&B’s and TVU’s in Kailua were grandfathered in and have remained legal to this day. Although the LUO’s have remained intact, it has not deterred those who own and operate visitor accommodations illegally. Consequently, the community has been divided between those who either condone these businesses or would like to see them become legitimate business practices, and those who do not. While the actual number of visitor accommodations is uncertain, the Hawaiʻi Tourism Authority has estimated that there are over 500 units in Kailua (McAvoy 2013). Determining the actual number has remained a difficult task, most likely due to the fact that the vast majority of these accommodations do not have Non-conforming Use Certificates; however, a simple Internet search will retrieve a large number of websites containing visitor accommodation information. For instance, Kailua Vacation Rentals has a website containing an extensive list of rentals in Kailua and even provides a detailed map of Kailua and windward Oʻahu beaches, in both English and Japanese (See Plate

54 XXIII).

Plate XVI Map of Kailua & Windward Oʻahu Beaches

© Kailua Vacation Rentals. (2011). www.kailuavacationrentals.net. Accessed May 1, 2014.

The Kailua Vacation Rentals website is one of many; however, its website prizes itself for having one of the best lists of vacation rentals in Kailua. According to its website,

There are no Kailua hotels, no motels, no resorts or timeshares—but there are Kailua vacation rentals, and plenty of them. Local families have opened their homes, their cottages and spare rooms to visitors from all over the world. Here [on the website], you’ll find Kailua beach rentals, vacation home rentals, in-home rentals, B&B’s, cottages—you name it (www.kailuavacationrentals.net).

It must be noted that due to lack of clarification, it is uncertain whether or not the visitor accommodations listed on the website have Nonconforming Use Certificates. Regardless, the information provided on this site nicely captures the scope of rental units in Kailua, the large number of individuals who either condone or would like to see these unites become legitimate business practices, and also, the large demand for visitor accommodations in general. Despite the large number of individuals who view visitor accommodations as a

55 viable method for their economic endeavors, they have remained problematic for residents for a variety of reasons. First and foremost, many individuals feel that because the units are highly profitable, there seems to be an endless pursuit of conducting this type of business, regardless of the impact it has on the community. According to Anny, There is a lack of affordable rentals for local people, and part of that is because you [homeowners] can get a higher amount of money to rent out to tourists by the night, instead of a local person, a teacher, or really anybody…they’re really not going to get as much money, so that increases the rent for local people. It also increases the price of homes because you [realtors] can sell homes at a higher price, and you say ‘Oh, but you can rent this out to tourists and earn money on it, so you should pay more for this house’. So these things make it harder and harder for local people to live here and rent here.

Like Anne, Ellen also stated that vacation rentals have not only affected people like herself who have lived there for decades, but more importantly, younger generations who cannot even fathom living in Kailua due to the high cost of living, If you have an extra room or cottage, then you can help friends and relatives, or rent it out as people have done for generations, to local people or students or older people. Don’t diminish the housing supply by converting our residential homes into businesses! When you get this kind of sellout of residential homes, it has an effect on housing for our people, the rents, and the purchase price of homes. My concern is what it does to local residents as far as their ability to afford a home or a rental…they’re going to have to compete with the tourist dollar. That has an immediate and long-term effect because young people have to leave the island because they can’t afford to live here and raise a family. People look at the prices of homes and the diminishing of neighborhoods, and they say ‘well sorry, we cannot compete’.

Although Ellen’s statement seems to suggest that residents themselves are the owners and operators of illegal vacation rentals she also mentions that, “Many of the units, especially in Lanikai, are owned by offshore investors”. Jolene was another participant who has also resided in Kailua for a long enough period of time to experience these changes firsthand. It is thus her lifelong residency that makes Jolene a good candidate to capture some of the ways in which the housing situation in Kailua has changed over time. She states, It’s sad the changes I’ve seen since the seventies…the property values have skyrocketed! It breaks my heart that I was able to work hard and get a home, but now that seems less and less likely. I know people that work so hard, working two jobs and it’s rough! People can no longer afford to have their own place, and so groups of people end up living together. Now I feel like I work in Waikiki. I never 56 planned to live in another Waikiki blooming, and I didn’t work two jobs to live in another Waikiki, but I am! I’ve noticed many people build additional units on their homes and they rent them out without claiming their earnings, and some build without even having permits. It’s such big money that it never seems to end. It’s big money…but it comes at a cost!

Although Jolene and Ellen’s length of residency seems to give them a degree of credibility, it became apparent that one did not need to reside in Kailua long before witnessing these issues firsthand. In fact, there were several participants who elicited similar testimonies, despite their length of residency being significantly shorter. George, for example, had only lived in Kailua for two years before the housing crisis became evident, “It’s getting to the point where Kailua is not going to be a first-time homeowner purchase. The prices keep going up and up and up. As it gets higher and higher, there’s going to be a real dichotomy between the people who grew up here and the people that are moving in.” All in all, while these participants did not conclude that illegal visitor accommodations were the sole reason for the high cost of living, they were certain it was a major contributing factor. In addition to the financial ramifications, KNB meetings brought to light that the visitor accommodations have been associated with increased crime rate in Kailua. For instance, at the October 2013 meeting a spokesman for the Honolulu Police Department (HPD) announced statistical data regarding crime rates in Kailua. In comparison to previous months, this data indicated an increase in the number of assaults, auto/motorcycle theft, theft from an automobile, and burglaries in Kailua. Theft in general was the most alarming figure, with 59 cases being reported in a single month. Although the HPD agreed to look into the causes of these statistics and report findings at the following meeting, it did not deter all participants from coming to conclusions on their own. For example, there were often informal conversations from spectators who were deeply saddened by the statistics, and attributed it to the diminishing of the community in general. According to one of these individuals, “They [B&B’s] make it harder to have a close-knit community. It just doesn’t feel as safe when half of the people don’t live here and there are lots of strangers around.” Interview sessions revealed similar findings. Ellen for example, suggested that

57 safety has become a major area of concern because, You don’t know who is in your neighborhood. We have a Neighborhood Watch and we are supposed to let each other know when there is suspicious activity. Well, that doesn’t work as well anymore because there is a parade of people passing your house. So it really jeopardizes a preventative measure, a crime preventative measure in the community when you do not know who belongs in your neighborhood. You can have anybody!

In addition, she suggests that it is a violation of rights because, “It is really diminishing our sense of safety and the quality of life that should be part of a residential community to which you pay into.” Due to the number of ways in which the community has been affected by this issue, interviewees were asked how it might be mended. It did not come as a surprise that those who felt strongly about this issue would like to see more enforcement. As Jolene stated, “We need to stand up for things, and have our voices be heard. We also need to have stronger zoning laws and cite people when they do these incredibly illegal things.” Similarly, Teresa argued that, “We have legal B&B’s in our neighborhood, but there’s a certain carrying capacity for that. So the big solution to illegal visitor accommodations is to enforce it.” Enforcement was without a doubt a hot topic at KNB meetings as well. Many participants appeared eager to resolve the issue of illegal visitor accommodations, with some even providing concrete enforcement strategies. One participant suggested that the Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) devise sting operations in order to catch illegal B&B’s. A spokesperson for the DPP, which is the department tasked with overseeing regulations of B&B’s and TVU’s, gave the following statement, “Investigators cannot perform sting operations because legally, they are required to make site visits to gather information from renters or owners to determine whether a notice of violation is warranted to be issued.” It was also mentioned that on Oʻahu alone, there are only 13 DPP inspectors who receive anywhere from 20-40 complaints of illegal visitor accommodations each month. Upon learning these shortcomings, another participant suggested that more attention be paid to Internet advertisements of illegal TVU’s and B&B’s, to which the DPP pointed out that, “they are not sufficient to confirm that real

58 property is actually used as a B&B or TVU” mainly because “Internet advertisements do not establish the actual rental of property or exchange of compensation for a rental period of less than thirty days.” Much to the dismay of these participants, these propositions were ultimately short-lived due to funding, legal and operational constraints. After witnessing this exchange of information, one could not help but sense the frustration these attendees felt. In addition to being dissatisfied with the ineffectiveness of DPP enforcement, KNB meetings revealed that there were also grievances toward the Hawaiʻi Tourism Authority (HTA). These frustrations stem from marketing material on the HTA website, which promotes visitor accommodations in Kailua without deciphering whether or not they are legal. Hence, at the September 2013 meeting the board proposed a motion that requested the HTA to “Respect the zoning and quality of life of our [Kailua’s] residential neighborhoods and immediately stop promoting Kailua as a tourist destination and alternative to Waikiki.” Out of the entire 14-member board, two did not support the motion. One of these board members not only opposed the motion, but also asked that it be removed indefinitely stating that, “time is being wasted discussing the resolution because this is a free country and businesses should be promoted, not repressed.” With regard to those who supported the motion, a board member noted that the inability of the DPP to properly enforce illegal units, combined with the HTA’s promotion of rentals has become extremely problematic because it has created a governmental process that is at odds with itself. The combination of one government agency promoting visitor accommodations, while another struggles to enforce them has not only contributed to many residents becoming skeptical of the legal system, but also, burdened residents with being vigilantes in their own neighborhoods. For these reasons, there is a growing animosity towards the owners of visitor accommodations, most of whom are free to conduct business as usual. As Teresa pointed out, “We’re [residents] forced to become a police force to make sure that illegal vacation rentals aren’t moving next door.” She adds, It has put a tremendous burden on the community to be vigilante, to constantly monitor legislation, City Council, government agencies, the Department of Planning and Permitting, and to constantly be aware of what is coming down the

59 road because decisions are made quickly. My sister has a bed-and-breakfast in the mainland, but there, it’s seasonal. Here, it is 12-months a year and so there’s no relief!

Although Teresa appeared to be in strong opposition to visitor accommodations, she also mentions that part of the problem lies in unfair legal constrains imposed upon operators. She states, There are a lot of good families that operate illegal B&B’s. What happened is that many of them were operating, the laws were made, and any of them missed that gate and were not grandfathered in. So they’re not all bad operators, and we shouldn’t discriminate who’s good and who’s bad.

Although Teresa made a valid point, there remained a large number of individuals who remained committed to their beliefs that enforcement was paramount and also stressed the important role played by residents. For instance, Anne stressed the growing need for “residents to be vigilante, and make sure that the laws are being enforced, voting for officials who realize the value of having neighborhoods, having residential zones stay residential, and probably going to KNB meetings and speaking up.” Ellen also believed that resident involvement was necessary; however she mentions that current circumstances have made it near impossible for residents to stand a chance, They [residents] have to follow the events and what is happening at City Council because those who have business interests will try to get bills passed, and so, one has to marshal the forces again and again. It’s not easy for a lot of people because the housing is so expensive people often have to work two jobs. Husband and wife work in most cases, and so, how can they show up at the Neighborhood Board meetings or City Council when they are working full-time? There is just not the time and energy for people to really become involved and participate.

Similarly, Jolene suggested that because it is a “constant battle”, there are many who no longer see the point, There are some people still fighting for this, but others have given up. What’s worse is that sometimes people actually get involved in the greed, and so, there are those who are jumping on the greed wagon more and more, and others who think it’s just too big to handle and so they resign themselves. And for the youth, this is showing that at any cost, you can break the rules, and it’s okay. It just doesn’t make for a good society!

Evidently, a variety of problems have been associated with visitor

60 accommodations. Whether referring to the lack of affordable rental for locals, the skyrocketing value of homes, or matters of safety, one thing that is certain is that the community in general feels deeply impacted by this issue. Despite these claims, those who pursue these business ventures have not been swayed. Much to the contrary, many of these individuals have time and time again, stressed the utility of visitor accommodations by suggesting that in addition to helping locals afford high property taxes they also provide jobs and boost the economy. It has thus remained what Teresa has classified, “a vicious cycle with no end in sight.”

Commercial Activity While both interview sessions and KNB meetings revealed that a healthy economy was essential for Kailua, it was also made clear that commerce should be conducted in a way that doesn’t compromise the natural environment or override the residential character of the community. Issues pertaining to commercial activities have risen to the top, particularly because Kailua has seen an exponential growth in businesses that provide goods and services to visitors. These include, but are not limited to: kayak, stand-up paddleboard, and bike rentals, wind and kite surfing lessons, Segway tours, recreational drop-offs by large tour companies, and vendors. Although many of these activities are not new to Kailua, data suggested that they have become problematic because they have managed to seep into every sector of the community in recent years, at a considerably fast pace. Consequently, there is an adversarial relationship between residents and merchants, both of whom have reasons for what they want. Interview sessions suggested that the adversarial relationship between residents and merchants is primarily due to the business communities’ endless pursuit of financial gains. Several participants argued that while many of the businesses are highly profitable and thus, legitimate in the eyes of the business community, they are problematic because they compromise the residential character of Kailua. According to Albert, “There’s a lot of emphasis on tourism, which changes the dynamic of the residential part of Kailua. You know, commerce is good, but there are limits to that”. Teresa compared the past and present state of affairs using tour bus and kayak rental companies as an example,

61 There have been kayak rentals at Kailua Beach Park for years, and no one complained about them. That had always been fine. But then all of a sudden, we have kayak companies advertising worldwide and large tour buses coming in, and so people are lining up by the hundreds (See Plate XXIV). We’ve always had visitors, and we’ve always welcomed that, but it’s the number of them, and it’s the impact we’re dealing with…NOT opposition to visitors themselves. These businesses have not come together with any kind of management plan that they could present to the community as some sort of reasonable so-called compromise.

Plate XXIV Kayakers Head to Kailua Beach

Long line of kayakers headed to Kailua Beach, demonstrating the impact of commercial activities on Kailua. © Pereira, A. (2012). KITV News. www.kitv.com Accessed on April 15, 2014.

Interestingly enough, responses like these were not uncommon. For instance, when George was asked about the issues facing the community, he replied, “What I like least right now is the commercialization that we’re seeing. We’re seeing a trend in that direction. You never used to see, you know, 10 years ago you never used to see a tour bus dropping over 50 people off near the beach.” There was also Steve, who became so alarmed by the congestion in Kailua that he did some research of his own, I read a capacity study for Kailua Beach Park, and it said 753 people. If it goes over that, it has to be managed. I’ve got a strong feeling that we exceed that on a regular basis and so the question is how do we manage capacity? Certainly the answer is less, but as to the how, there is no answer that will be a grand winner. One possible solution is to refrain from bringing in large busloads of people.

As Steve has made clear, there is no overarching solution that will completely rid the community of issues stemming from commercialization. At the same time, he remained

62 adamant that if boundaries were not set things would only get worse, If we don’t draw a line somewhere, it will draw itself. It will happen organically. If you’re familiar with Yelp, many of the reviews of Kailua have become increasingly negative. People are complaining that the beaches are eroded, the bathrooms are dirty, the locals are irritable, etc. For a state that relies on tourism dollars the way we do, that seems to be an issue everyone wants to avoid.

Albert also emphasized how important it was to draw a line sooner rather than later. In his interview he stated the following, “There are capacity issues on an island, and there are natural resource issues and we have to manage those. If you don’t draw a line somewhere, then you can’t address the issues head on.” With the number of businesses that seek out tourists on the rise, resident complaints became near impossible to ignore. Consequently, two bills were introduced in the City Council in 2012 in order to address resident concerns that public beach parks were overrun with commercial activities. Bill 5 was the first to pass in March 2012, requiring permits for any and all commercial activities at city parks. Bill 11 on the other hand, was introduced shortly after in order to address commercial activities at Kailua and Kalama beach parks specifically. Although Bill 11 was initially intended to set a cap that would reduce the number of commercial activities at these beach parks, residents felt the bill was not sufficient and urged lawmakers to prohibit commercial activities altogether. It did not come as a surprise that residents showed strong support for the modified version of Bill 11 (See Plate XXV and Plate XXVI)

Plate XXV Residents Showing Support for Bill 11

© Pereira, A. (2012). KITV News. www.kitv.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

63 Plate XXVI Resident Posters Showing Support for Bill 11

© Rossen, J (2012). KaʻOhana. www.kaohana.windward.hawaii.edu. Accessed on May 1, 2014.

In fact, residents flocked into KNB meetings and City Council hearings by the dozens when Bill 11 was on the agenda. At one particular City Council hearing, the meeting room was nearly filled to capacity (See Plate XXVII). The vast majority of testimonies were in favor of Bill 11 with many individuals demanding the prohibition of commercial activities in order to preserve the tranquil nature of what was once a neighborhood park; however, they were not met without opposition.

Plate XXVII City Council Hearing of Bill 11

Image demonstrating resident support for Bill 11 at City Council hearing in 2012. © Pereira, A. (2012). KITV News. www.kitv.com. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

64 At the other end of spectrum were those who either conducted or supported the continuation of commercial activities at these locations. Merchants often represented the other end of the debate stressing that Bill 11 was not a viable solution to the issue of commercial activities. For example, several successful kayak rental owners testified that in addition to having a negative impact on their businesses it would also send the wrong message to visitors. In addition, many residents mentioned that because the bill prohibited all commercial activities it would impact residents as well, many of which use the beach parks for activities such as exercise classes, bouncy houses for parties, and food trucks, all of which fall under the commercial activity category (See Plate XXVIII). In support of why Bill 11 should be abolished, one merchant argued the following, “There are a lot of commercial activities that are appropriate for the park and don’t interfere with the use of the park by residents that live in the area.” Hence, although many of these critics appeared to be equally concerned with preserving the residential character of Kailua, they did not feel the continuation of commercial activities in certain public spheres would prevent them from doing so.

Plate XVIIVIII Merchants and Residents Oppose Bill 11

Bob Twogood of Twogood Kayaks, who is Stroller strides, an exercise class for women using one of many merchants in Kailua who stand strollers, was one of many activities banned from in opposition to Bill 11. © Koning, O. public beach parks in Kailua under Bill 11. © (2013). www.honolulumagazine.com. Koning, O. (2013). www.honolulumagazine.com. Accessed on May 1, 2014. Accessed on May 1, 2014.

65 Despite competing interests, Bill 11 passed in the City Council with a 7-2 vote (Grube 2012). Although many residents celebrated this event, it did not deter merchants from continuing their business practices in Kailua. While they were tasked with finding new and innovative ways to remain competitive, merchants ultimately managed to sustain themselves against the constraints imposed by Bill 11. The issue of commercial activity has therefore remained a focal point of interest for the community in general. With that said, it was no surprise that data from interview responses and KNB meetings not only confirmed the existence of an adversarial relationship between residents and merchants, but also indicated that it was growing as well. As Teresa pointed out, “There are fundamental and legitimate opposing sides, both of which have reasons for they want.” Furthermore, data also suggested that there is a growing animosity towards tourists as well. Several participants attributed these animosities to commercialization, suggesting that many residents have reached a boiling point because the business communities’ success seemed to require an endless pursuit of visitors. According to Teresa for example, There’s an animosity growing and the Aloha spirit is being challenged. People don’t like to be put in a position that’s like being a hostess and not liking the person who’s coming to our home. You want to be generous, you want to be friendly, and unfortunately, it’s very tiring for people who can’t get out of their driveways and they go to the beach and there’s no place for them to put down their towel.

Similarly, Rosa stated that “We’re sending the message to tourists that ‘we don’t want you’, and that’s not the message we want to send because it doesn’t help our businesses. Community is not just residents, it’s businesses as well.” There was also Ellen, who acknowledged that, “the resentment against tourists in Kailua is evident and growing.” She continues, “Our town is just changing. It has changed, and I think we will be far more welcoming if there were fewer. When you look around, all you see is tourists. They never look at you, they look at their maps, and it feels as if aliens are in our community.” Upon first glance it would seem as though Ellen does not want visitors at all; however, she concludes with the following statement, The relationship between residents and tourists is NOT what it should be! We should be able to be much friendlier. (Long pause) But we feel so impacted! Our

66 quality of life is so impacted! Our infrastructure was built for single-family homes and the city, the promoters…they are not facing the fact that we do not have the infrastructure to handle that kind of influx.

In congruence with interview sessions, KNB meetings also signaled the growing animosity towards visitors with one community member noting that, “Kailua is colloquially referred to as ‘No Aloha Kailua’ and is also gaining the reputation of being inhospitable.” In contrast to those who attributed blame to the business community, there were others who felt that the relationship between residents and tourists should never be compromised. For instance, William suggested that residents’ opinions regarding what constitutes legitimate business activity should not come at the expense of the relationship between locals and tourists. Coming from a different point of view, he seemed to believe that the hostilities towards tourists stemmed from residents who were driven by a sense of entitlement, Because they [residents] live here they seem to think they have a privileged position here. They seem to forget that the land was taken from the Hawaiians in the first place, one way or another. So it’s not a sense of stewardship, it’s a sense of possession and not wanting to share that possession with anyone else. I believe that we need a sense of stewardship, a sense that we all belong to this land and we have a responsibility with it. We have a responsibility to Aloha and to welcome the people that use it.

All in all, William’s statement nicely highlights the fact that not all individuals within the community feel that the business community should be held responsible for negative attitudes towards tourists. Evidently, there are major issues facing the community and they extend far beyond the commercial activities themselves. Although the existence of diverging standpoints has remained intact, there also seems to be an underlying shared commitment to reversing the animosities towards tourist. As Steve pointed out, people seem to be acknowledging the futility of releasing their angst on tourists and are increasingly becoming aware that, “These issues are important, and to Hawaiʻi in general, because tourism is our number one industry, and they sell Aloha from the people to the visitors.” At the same time, how these animosities will be mended in actuality has remained an

67 ongoing question with no simple answer in sight.

Development Another issue that has remained a focal point of interest was the development of the physical structures and the natural environment. For many participants, these issues have become a major area of concern because there seems to be a renewed interest in developing the town in a way that appeals to tourists. While the development of the physical structures and natural environment overlap in many ways, for clarity they will be addressed separately in the pages to follow.

Physical Structures The development of the physical structures has arguably created new and exacerbated existing conflict between residents and Kaneohe Ranch. As one of the primary landowners in Kailua, Kaneohe Ranch plays a major role in shaping the dynamics of community life. For many participants, the problem lies in Kaneohe Ranch’s overreliance on tourist dollars, which has created a renewed interest in developing the town in a way that appeals to tourists. Ellen captured why the activities of Kaneohe Ranch have been subject to scrutiny in recent years by comparing the past and present state of affairs, I think that Kaneohe Ranch, in the past, did a lot of good things. But now that the family [Castle] is not here, the heads are all investors. So the heads that felt some sort of responsibility to the community are either dead or so far removed now. The new heads are modeling the center [of Kailua] in accordance with their financial interests and treating it like it’s just another marketplace, and so, they’re bringing in large tour buses to shop at their businesses because they get a percentage of the sales.

Similarly, Teresa stated that what she least liked about Kailua is “its dependence on Kaneohe Ranch.” Like Ellen, she also took the time to acknowledge that Kaneohe Ranch had “contributed largely to the growth and development of Kailua in the beginning stages”; however, she adds that it has now “reached a point where it [Kaneohe Ranch] is making a lot of decisions in terms of their financial interests, and so, there is an animosity with Kaneohe Ranch that wasn’t always there.” In the following passage, Teresa

68 summarizes the nature of this shift in order to capture why public opinion has changed so dramatically, It is Kaneohe Ranch’s need to bring in shoppers for their new stores in order to support and pay for the development that’s required at this stage since many of their leases have expired. As they build, they have the costs of running them and paying for them, and so, they need more people to shop because they collect rent on a percentage-basis. So although we support the idea that it’s wonderful to have shoppers come in, and we want these businesses and the Ranch itself to succeed, there seems to be this endless promotion of Kailua to satisfy the economic needs of the business interests. They have to create a ‘Kailua that works for them’, and in doing so, they are creating a much larger town plan that is in conflict with many locals who have lived here for a long time, and do not want this kind of open door development and change of character (See Plate XXIX and Plate XXX).

There were also those like Anne would like the economy to be healthy and sustainable; however, she concurs that the addition of stores that are intended to support the financial needs of Kaneohe Ranch are ultimately changing the valued character of Kailua (See Plate XXXI and Plate XXXII). She states, “I don’t like that Kaneohe Ranch is bringing in large box stores like Whole Foods and Target. I’d rather have smaller, unique stores, instead of becoming like every other town in America.” Similarly, George states, “Kaneohe Ranch is a business, right? So their goal is to make money for their shareholders. These businesses are frequented and they’re busy, but at the same time, everything in Kailua is starting to look the same.” Plate XXIX Mitch D'Olier at Demolition Site

Mitch D'Olier (President and CEO of Kaneohe Ranch) standing in front of demolition site in Kailua (2007), which will be replaced with Whole Foods Market. © Kojima, C. (2007). www.archivesstarbulletin.com. Accessed on May 6, 2014.

69 Plate XXX Newly Developed Whole Foods Market Building

Image of newly developed Whole Foods Market building used to demonstrate changing character of physical structures in Kailua. See Plate XXIX for comparison. Photo by Michelle Horton (2014).

Plate XXXI Longs Drugs in 1976

Although this image is over three decades old, Longs Drugs stayed much in its original form until it was demolished in 2003. Academic Fair Use. © Wu, N. (2008). www.archives.starbulletin.com. Accessed on May 6, 2014.

Plate XXXII Newly Developed Longs Drugs Building

Longs Drugs building (2004) used to demonstrate changing character of physical structures in Kailua. See Plate XXXI for comparison. Photo by Michelle Horton (2014).

70 In addition to many individuals disagreeing with Kaneohe Ranch’s business tactics, they have also been criticized for not always having the heart of the community at the forefront. According to Teresa for example, There are documents and they say in the nicest way “As we expand the visitors experience into local communities, we can upgrade your parks and your resources, so that the residents will benefit as well”. They [Kaneohe Ranch] phrase it in a way as if they’re trying to benefit the community, but really, it’s about how do we maximize this neighborhood in terms of what we can get from the tourists.

In support of this, Ellen also believed that, “They [Kaneohe Ranch] hold meetings and they pretend to listen to what the community has to say. The community came out against this proliferation of resort activities and then they go and do the complete opposite.” What’s worse for Ellen is that, We are becoming a feudal society, or worse than a feudal society because in feudal times, landlords didn’t waste peoples time or give them the impression that they cared or were listening. But now, they pretend they are listening and they are wasting our time. In time, it fosters a sense of cynicism and anger because they are managing our lives and since we are not the property owners, we have little that we can use to defend ourselves. Because of their power, we cannot tell them “Don’t do this and don’t do that”. We can say, “Please don’t do this”, but if it’s not in their interests, it doesn’t matter. Right now, it’s all about profit, in spite of what they might say…and they have a way to do this, they donate here, they donate there. They have money! For me, these are bribes because once people have money they don’t speak up. So really, there is a lot you can do when you have money.

Similarly, Jolene concluded that, “With Mitch D’Olier [President and CEO of Kaneohe Ranch] the bottom line is money and you can’t believe what he says. He has a plan and we don’t know it, or I don’t anyway. It’s pretty frightening and sometimes it’s easy to feel outgunned.” Although there were numerous individuals who were dissatisfied with Kaneohe Ranch, there were also those who viewed the circumstances in a different light. For these individuals, not all of the changes taking place under Kaneohe Ranch were entirely negative. William for example, believed that “Kaneohe Ranch, and the people building the next generation of physical structures, are doing a really good job of keeping that original sense of beach culture and value and blending it with Hawaiʻi.” He adds, “I think

71 that it will be a remarkable community that way, and not just a hotchpotch.” Further analysis indicated that not all individuals within the community posited themselves against Kaneohe Ranch. For instance, although Rosa and George did not seem to defend Kaneohe Ranch in the way that William had, they did make an effort to point out that not all of the changes were entirely negative. As Rosa states, “A big issue has been the introduction of Target. Some people want it, and others don’t. I wouldn’t mind having it, but others are worried about the loss of mom-and-pop stores” (See Plate XXXIII).

Plate XXXIII Residents Protesting the Introduction of Target

Academic Fair Use. No Target Kailua. www.notargetkailua.blogspot.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014.

Despite community upheaval, Kaneohe Ranch continued to support the introduction of Target, basing their rationale on the outcome of a community survey conducted in 2004. According to an article published by Hawaii Business (2012), Kaneohe Ranch received approximately 3,000 mailed-in replies indicating that residents wanted a movie theater, to be able to shop in Kailua, pedestrian friendly roads, and for the developments to reflect the Hawaiian heritage, but didn’t want a Costco, Kmart or Wal-Mart. Mitch D’Olier President and CEO of Kaneohe Ranch, remarked, “We’re trying to create the coolest little place in Hawaiʻi. We’re trying to look for merchandise that would allow Kailua residents to never leave [Kailua]. There are judgment calls, and things we do not think are appropriate. No Wal-Mart, Kmart or Costco” (Creamer 2012). In other words, Kaneohe Ranch’s vision was to develop Kailua town in a way that not only generates revenue, but also in a way that the community would feel proud of. With the introduction of Target moving forward, residents complaints continued

72 to grow, prompting Target to hold an open house that would engage the community in informal conversations (See Plate XXXIV). The meeting took place in late 2010 and covered topics ranging from traffic impacts and improvements, building design and landscaping, economic impacts, and Target’s commitment to sustainability (Baehr 2010). In regards to this meeting, George stated the following in his interview, People were passionate about the Target issue, and so you had Kaneohe Ranch on the one side stating, “We’re going to do this”, and the community on the other side saying, “No you’re not!” It caused Kaneohe Ranch to re-think everything, and to make concessions. So although Target is still being implemented, they [the community] didn’t lose because the traffic flow got more attention and also how the street lights are implemented, the parking, what stores are surrounding it, the electrical grid, etc. So good things came about because people were passionate about it, whereas if Target had been built with no fight, I don’t think it would have been the best it could be.

Plate XXXIV Open House Hosted By Target

Dozens of residents eager to participate in Target’s open house in 2010. Academic Fair Use. No Target Kailua. www.notargetkailua.blogspot.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014.

Since the statements given by William, Rosa, and George were key in bringing to light the other end of the spectrum, they were asked why there has been such a strong backlash against Kaneohe Ranch in particular. According to William, Well, I think it [development] has torn Kailua apart. You’ve got environmental and social groups that don’t want any change at all. They posit themselves against 73 Kaneohe Ranch, and people that want to make money, doing business in Kailua. And they’re [Kaneohe Ranch], in my opinion, fairly benevolent developers. At least they make an effort to understand and promote the Hawaiian culture.

In addition to environmental and social groups positing themselves against Kaneohe Ranch, William also suggested that there is a divide between old time residents and newcomers, It is also the sons and daughters of second or third generations of the pioneers that came, settled, took, and also gave. The Castle family was certainly very giving, but it’s that next generation that says, you know, “I can rest on my parents laurels. I have a privileged position here and I don’t have to work for it. I just belong here, so you know, I don’t want anybody else to share any of it”.

William was adamant in these claims, maintaining that, “This has happened in many places. It’s a generational thing…of pioneers of settlers and the privileged generation that follows.” Although tension between advocates and opponents of Kaneohe Ranch has been a part of Kailua for many years, further complicating matters is that in the midst of this study there were speculations that Kaneohe Ranch was going to sell its commercial real estate portfolio in Kailua. At the September 2013 KNB meeting for example, a participant announced the possible sale and also recommended the board [KNB] put together a community-wide survey to get public opinion on the issues currently facing Kailua. A board member replied that the KNB Planning and Zoning committee had already taken action by examining the Oʻahu General Plan (Island-wide development plan) and the Koʻolau Sustainable Communities Plan (community-specific development plan), both of which significantly impact Kailua’s future. By the end of 2013, Kaneohe Ranch made a public announcement that its real estate was in fact sold, with the new owner being Alexander & Baldwin Inc. (See Plate XXXV). Alexander & Baldwin Inc., a 145-year old company and also one of the Big Five corporations that played a tremendous role in shaping Hawaiʻi’s social, economic, and political trajectory, is now the largest landowner in Kailua. According to Hernandez (2014), the newly acquired real estate portfolio in Kailua consisted of 70 percent of Kailua’s commercially zoned property and 90 percent of its retail property (See Plate

74 XXXVI).

Plate XXXV Star Advertiser Announces Sale of Kailua

Newspaper article announcing the sale of Kaneohe Ranch's real estate portfolio to Alexander & Baldwin in 2013 . Academic Fair Use. www.mykailua.net. Accessed on May 7, 2014.

Plate XXXVI Alexander & Baldwin's Newly Acquired Real Estate Portfolio

Photo illustration of Alexander & Baldwin's newly acquired (2013) real estate portfolio in Kailua. Academic Fair Use. © Hernandez, M. (2014). www.oahuinmotion.com . Accessed on May 7, 2014.

Shortly after the transaction was completed, Mitch D’Olier of Kaneohe Ranch retired and the CEO of Alexander & Baldwin Inc. released the following statement to the public, We [Alexander & Baldwin Inc.] take a long-term perspective on our community development efforts and strive to work closely with communities to meet their 75 changing needs. Kailua is a thriving and vibrant community, and we intend to partner with the community in maintaining the livability, desirability and beauty of Kailua town.

Although this event did not eliminate animosities toward Kaneohe Ranch, it without a doubt complicated matters because many individuals seemed to be uncertain as to how this change will affect the community in both the present and future.

Natural Environment Another development issue pertains to the Kawai Nui and Hāmākua marshes. While they have a long history of individuals and groups advocating for their preservation, conflict surrounding their future has become a focal point of interest for the community. This was especially true after the Kawainui-Hāmākua Marsh Complex Master Plan (KHMCMP) was introduced, which is a marsh project created by the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), the Department of Forestry and Wildlife (DFW), who were in partnership with the Division of State Parks (DSP) (See Figure 6). The project included but was not limited to: a 4,000 ft. boardwalk around the marsh, paved walkways, a bridge, up to a dozen parking lots, and several physical structures (See Plate XXXVII and Plate XXXVIII). The project has been supported by a wide-range of Hawaiian civic organizations, whose input has been paramount in emphasizing the protection and enhancement of the native culture and heritage of the marshes. Figure 6 Map of Kawainui-Hāmākua Marsh Boundaries

Academic Fair Use. © Helber, Hastert & Fee. (2012). www.hhf.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014. 76 Plate XXXVII Envisioning Kawainui: Outdoor Learning Center

Image demonstrating what some of the low-impact physical structures will look like when the KHMCMP is implemented. Academic Fair Use. © Helber, Hastert & Fee. (2012). www.hhf.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014.

Plate XXXVIII Envisioning Kawainui: Boardwalk and Observation Deck

Image depicting what the low-impact boardwalk and observation desks will look like when the KHMCMP is implemented. Academic Fair Use. © Helber, Hastert & Fee. (2012). www.hhf.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014. Since its introduction in 2004, the DLNR, DFW and DSP have hosted three public informational meetings and several meetings with community organizations in order to foster community-wide discussions and to receive input on the project (See Plate

77 XXXIX).

Plate XXXIX Envisioning Kawainui: Public Informational Meeting

Academic Fair Use. © Helber, Hastert & Fee. (2012). www.hhf.com. Accessed on May 7, 2014.

In time, the KHMCM became a hot topic at KNB meetings. At the September 2013 meeting for example, three planners of the KHMCM delivered a presentation that demonstrated what the completed project would look like and also emphasized that it would be used for educational and cultural activities. In addition, it was mentioned that of the 1,000 acres that would be developed, 810 would be designated for preservation, 130 for passive recreation, 34 for cultural practices, and 22 for management. Although the presentation was appealing, it was without a doubt received with skepticism. In fact, there seemed to be underlying concerns that the project was politically motivated and also, not reflective of community concerns. For instance, it was often suggested that there were ulterior motives behind the KHMCM, particularly because it would benefit special interest groups, the tourism and construction industry, Kaneohe Ranch, and those wishing to conduct commercial activities at the marsh. Whereas one participant suggested that the project would do little to benefit the community and instead, benefit visitors and tourists coming into the community, another suggested that regardless of its original intent, the cultural centers would eventually be used for tourist-related activity. In addition to concerns that the KHMCM would be used

78 for tourism-related purposes, several participants maintained that the project was problematic since it appeared to be about development, rather than preservation. For instance, a participant suggested that due to the large number of parking lots incorporated in the draft, the KHMCM would encourage large volumes of visitors and thus, compromise the fragile and unique marsh. In congruence with KNB meetings, several interviewees seemed to be equally concerned with the implementation of the KHMCM. Teresa for example, stated the following in her interview, The KHMCM has brought in a tremendous number of people and different opinions, including Kaneohe Ranch. They’re [Kaneohe Ranch] funding groups who want to develop a cultural center in the marsh. So they’re using their funding to promote the vision they have for tourism. So you’ll have a cultural center with a gift-shop that brings in tour buses. It’s just the plan. It’s a good business plan…but it’s not a good community plan.

Teresa was asked to elaborate on which groups she felt supported the development of the marsh, to which she replied, Well, the Hawaiian community would like to have a large cultural center with gift shops, restrooms, etc., and I’m not opposed to that because I think the Hawaiian community has a great need to have that, but at the same time, the marsh is a marsh and it’s a wetland and water bird sanctuary. You can’t put something like this there because the environment is so sensitive.

Like Teresa, William also mentioned that the Hawaiian community had done a great deal to influence the marsh’s trajectory. He states, “Kawai Nui marsh at one time was an overgrown swamp and there were plans to develop a mall and department store there. The Hawaiians really stood up and took a stand, and prevented that from happening.” Although both of these participants indicate some of positive influences the Hawaiian community has had, Teresa also pointed out that, There are many Hawaiian organizations who have done a great deal of work in terms of planting native species and getting rid of invasive ones, protecting bird life, and educating people on the history and culture of Hawaiians, which builds tolerance. But because they get funding from others in the tourism industry, they are compromised. That is the insidiousness of financial support that goes into these smaller groups, is that they are dependent on the larger groups to support them. So when you have a big issue they hesitate to stand up and so, it compromises the integrity of these small groups.

79 Coming from a completely different point of view, there were individuals like George, who felt that the community is divided between those who embrace change and those who do not, “Nobody wants change. I mean, some of the things that they’re [Kaneohe Ranch] doing are going to be for the better. But things like, how important is it really that the marsh or wetlands get preserved for flood relief and this kind of thing? How important is that really in the grand scheme of things?” Evidently, the future of the marsh has divided the community in a number of ways. To this day, the DLNR, DFW and DSP have continued to host workshops that update the community on the KHMCM revisions and also encourage the various stakeholders to participate in discussions about “one of the state’s most valued natural and cultural resources” (www.hhf.com). With the draft of the KHMCM undergoing constant revisions, the community as a whole has remained uncertain as to what will happen in actuality.

Part 3: Restoring and Preserving Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’ In this section, the concept ‘sense of place’ is revisited. The purpose here is to explore some of the ways in which the issues facing the community have affected Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. Although data indicated that issues have in many ways diminished Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, there also seems to be an overwhelming interest in restoring and preserving it. Thus, after briefly reviewing some of the negative implications, the body of this section discusses some of the positive implications, namely in terms of resolutions proposed by research participants.

Negative Implications

It did not take long to capture why the issues facing the community were in desperate need of attention. In addition to polarizing and paralyzing the community, there seemed to be underlying concerns that if the issues were not addressed, they would increase in complexity and scope. According to Albert, “If you keep referring to the

80 future and punting it away, then pretty soon your issues become the bigger issues of your children and future generations. They will inherit your irresponsibility and I think that’s just the worst thing we could be doing. It’s very selfish.” Similarly, Jolene claimed that it is essential for Kailua to “think about the larger picture and the overall impact the issues are having on the community.” She continues, “We have to think long-term because if not, it will become a huge drain on our society. It will take away the neighborliness, the warmth, and the sense of community.” Even more alarming were those who believed that if the issues continued their current trajectory, Kailua as they knew it would eventually cease to exist. In William’s interview for example, he took a long pause before regretfully acknowledging that, “The issues are important because if they’re not resolved…the town will die! If they’re not resolved, the town will die. People will continue to be unhappy and it will become an unwelcoming community.” Although William seemed to take it to the extreme, the vast majority of participants expressed similar fears, though they evoked it in a different light. Whereas some individuals stressed the depletion of community, others emphasized the deteriorating quality of life and the degradation of the natural environment. For instance, Teresa feels that the issues “attack your sense of community and undermine your residential neighborhoods,” Albert on the other hand warns that, The water quality and marine life is disappearing and there are erosion issues from the Pillbox hiking trails. Those are big concerns! They have to be used wisely because there are capacity issues on an island. Without these resources, we change the quality of life and the reason why we’re here in Hawaiʻi in the first place.

Other participants like Ellen, stressed that if left unresolved, the issues will “produce immediate and long-term effects and we will end up with more and more mediocrity.” She continues, “People are realizing that the features here are fragile and we could destroy them unless we nurture this feeling of community and make some sacrifices in the process of keeping it that way.” Finally, one of the most interesting responses came from Steve, who at the termination of his interview talked about the concept ‘sense of place’. In addition to describing his personal attachment with Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, he was quick to add, “We’re moving more towards a ‘sense of placeless-ness’. We’re

81 becoming more generic and the surroundings aren’t familiar. I don’t know whether that’s good or bad, but I know that it’s just not the way it used to be.” Evidently, the previous excerpts have indicated that the issues facing the community have taken a toll on Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, both in the present and the predicted future. While participants seemed to be deeply affected by the negative implications, they also appeared deeply committed to Kailua by offering insights as to how the valued characteristics can be restored and preserved. This not only signified the importance of the physical characteristics, the strong sense of community, and the residential character of Kailua, but also led me to conclude that these individuals do not perceive Kailua’s ‘sense of place’ is past the point of no return. Much to the contrary, the proposed resolutions led me to believe that participants are motivated to act since they are highly aware that it is a critical point in time.

Restoring and Preserving Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’

Education Interview sessions revealed that education is not only esteemed, but also key in addressing the current dilemmas facing the community. In addition to keeping members of the community up-to-date on current events so they can make informed choices, participants also highlighted the long-term implications by emphasizing the crucial role education plays for future generations. In her interview for example, Ellen stressed the importance of a local newspaper, or its absence, for a community. She mentions that the Sun Press (local newspaper) was useful for “keeping residents informed about what’s going on”; however, it merged with the Star Bulletin (island-wide newspaper). Shortly after, Ellen states that she contacted the Star Bulletin and was told that a section of this newspaper was dedicated to Kailua. The problem for Ellen is that “There is NOTHING of substance regarding the events or challenges facing the community. It’s just, you know, fluff! It’s nothing that compares to a local paper that reported on important things.”

82 Other participants like Anne suggested that due to time constraints, Internet blogs could be useful in keeping people informed, “Nowadays, with everyone using the Internet for everything, it seems like that would be the way to go. People could go there and see what’s going on, read about issues, and maybe post their comments and whatnot.” Like Anne, Steve mentioned that “regular emails from our local and state representatives help keep me informed.” Although using the Internet for information-exchange would seem to be a logical solution, there were others who begged to differ. For instance, John had his reservations regarding Internet blogs as a means of exchanging information, I think dialogue is good, and so, it could be a good thing, as a tool. But it could also be a negative thing because if you can’t exchange breath and you cannot see body language, how can you really discern if someone is being truthful about what the issues are? How can you know if they have the heart of the community at the forefront? So when it comes to ‘sense of place’, I really think the issues have to be resolved face-to-face.

Similarly, “While the Internet has its benefits”, Ellen concludes that “older generations may not frequent those sites and they are typically the ones with more time to participate and actually follow through.” In addition to benefiting the community, it was often suggested that education was important because the benefits would extend to visitors as well. John, for example, suggested that it will “increase the quality of experience for visitors” in addition to “helping people understand the importance of this place and what it means to us, so that we don’t dilute and take away the essence of what Kailua really is.” While information-exchange was without a doubt a hot topic, interview sessions also indicated the importance of the education system for community life in general. John for example, advocated for place-based education that is culturally relevant with a strong emphasis on natural resource management. He states, Motivating kids to learn in the context of place, to me, is absolutely critical! They live here, and so they have a connection to place. They don’t understand it, but they want to have a connection. The resources we have, the streams, the mountains, the taro patches, the fish ponds, and the wetlands…these are prime community classrooms because they’re so rich and you can learn science, mathematics, social studies, and language arts, all in the context of place. The younger we can provide opportunities for children to make connections to place, the better off we’re going to be in the next several generations. And so for me,

83 education is absolutely fundamental to the broader questions about how do we maintain our ‘sense of place’ for future generations.

Ellen seemed to share similar sentiments, though she focused on civic education in schools, I think far more civic education needs to be done in schools. Children have to be made aware of the world in which they live and the responsibility they have in preserving what is good and in standing up for what they believe in. There has to be a sense of stewardship and responsibility, and I think the schools are failing that horrendously! It’s not just our public schools; it’s our private schools as well. Look at how many people don’t vote! That alone is telling of the fact that we are failing our youth. It’s a failure. It is a failure of our education system.

Regardless of whether these individuals focused on the present moment or future generations and despite discrepancies between their proposals, interviewees remained deeply committed to their beliefs that education is not only valuable, but also paramount in keeping people informed and connected for the sake of Kailua’s ‘sense of place’.

Participation Participation was another theme that surfaced throughout the course of interview sessions. While there were many individuals who advocated KNB meetings as an avenue for public participation, there were also those who suggested new and innovative forums are needed in order to bring the ideas of the community together. The arguments of those who stressed the importance of participating in KNB meetings rested on the grounds that it is ultimately an avenue for keeping the community informed and connected. According to George for example, “Local problems need to be solved locally. The board lets people be heard, and all of our representatives are there.” Steve also stressed that, “It [KNB meetings] is an outlet. It is a place to get help. You realize that you’re not alone and the people care.” Interestingly enough, many interviewees admitted that their attendance was typically sporadic and depended on what issues were addressed as well as how pressing the issues were considered. John for example, participates on an issue-by-issue basis. He states, “I participate primarily for information exchange…to learn about or advocate certain things as they come up.” Similarly, Rosa attends on occasion and thinks, “They

84 are good forums for sharing information and learning about issues and whatnot.” There was also Teresa who stated that due to her involvement in a variety of community organizations, attending KNB meetings is not always necessary because “information flows are already in the pipeline.” In congruence with interview sessions, my participation at KNB revealed similar findings. In fact, it did not take long to realize that participation levels were largely influenced by what was on the agenda. For instance, there seemed to be a stark increase in participants when the agenda included matters related to visitor accommodations, issues relating to safety and traffic, as well as Bill 11, which addressed commercial activities at public beach parks. After learning that many of these individuals only attend KNB meetings on an issue-by-issue basis, I probed further in interview sessions. This revealed that KNB meetings were not always deemed the most effective avenue for addressing community- related issues. First and foremost, many interviewees suggested that regular attendance is difficult due to the time and energy it requires. For Anne, “The ideal thing is to go to all meetings, make contacts, and know what is going on...but you know, life is busy and it’s hard to do that.” Similarly, Ellen argues that, “There is just not the time and energy for people to really become involved and participate. How can they go when they are working full-time? It is really diminishing the ability of people to participate.” Next, many individuals concluded that low participation levels were due to the rigid nature of the neighborhood board system in general. According to William, the neighborhood board system is “procedural and structured so tightly that there’s only so much you can do to that structure”. He adds, “The other problem is that it does not promote a sense of open dialogue. Monologue? Yes! Dialogue? No! So while it provides a listening post and a place for retrieving information, it is ultimately not a means for exchanging thoughts and ideas.” What was interesting about William’s statement is that one could experience this shortcoming firsthand, simply by attending a KNB meeting. One particular meeting comes to mind, in which a member of the board requested more attention be given to the issue at hand. This particular board member was not only instructed to move forward, but also warned that if he did not, he would be removed from the meeting altogether. Hence, although time is allotted for attendees to make public

85 statements, they are seldom followed with in-depth discussions. Finally, there were those who criticized the neighborhood board system for not always being a place where people felt comfortable expressing their opinions. Whereas Anne believes that many people have resigned themselves due to the existence of “animosity and even threats”, Teresa suggested that others have refused to stand up due to the ramifications that will come from being vocal. Using community groups as an example, she states, “That is the insidiousness of certain kinds of financial support that goes to smaller community groups, who are dependent on the larger community groups to support them. When you have a big issue, they hesitate to stand up.” There were also individuals like Ellen and George, who argued that participation is affected by ethnic and cultural differences. According to Ellen, There are ethnic differences that determine how people will speak up. Kailua is sort of known as the “loud mouth Haoles” and I think in our culture we are more used to speaking up, whereas the local community be it Hawaiian, Japanese, Chinese or whatnot, that’s not the way they do things, they don’t want to stick out. I’m not trying to criticize them, but it’s just not in their culture to speak up in a loud manner.

George on the other hand mentioned that, “In Hawaiʻi it is often stressed not to be rude. For a long time I didn’t get involved [in KNB meetings], but then a friend encouraged me not to give up. And so, once I realized that participating was not necessarily rude, I began to get involved and I kept fighting.” Although it became evident that new and innovative forums are needed in order to facilitate community-wide discussions, participants also stressed the utility of the neighborhood board system. According to Teresa, the neighborhood board system is “important because there are people on the board with extremely different opinions, and it is therefore, very well represented in terms of a voice for different perspectives.” She also warns that without the neighborhood board system, the public will not have access to crucial information, “One way to thwart community, is to stop information flows. You cannot cut the public off from that public information, that information zone has to stay open.” All in all, the statements provided by Albert and John nicely capture why

86 participation is both necessary and important. According to Albert, “People should be a little braver in being more open with each other and having more open dialogue regardless of what information is brought to the table.” He adds “If we truly are a community that we feel blessed to be in, we should not be afraid of what people have to say, because there are diamonds in the rough, in people’s ideas and concerns.” Similarly, John believes that, “When it comes to ‘sense of place’, there’s room for everybody! But there’s also a large kuleana (responsibility) that comes with it. The foundation of that kuleana is in truthfulness and openness to different points of view.”

Leadership Due to the complexity of the issues facing the community, many participants suggested that more leadership is needed if there is any hope for Kailua’s ‘sense of place’ to survive. Albert acknowledged that alternative methods are needed in order to begin the process of community bridging, I think the issues can be resolved with greater community involvement. People have to speak up more and find out what it means to them, you know, like what ‘sense of place’ means to them. We need to network, so that businesses, residents, families, politicians, and all the different stakeholders can connect with people who have vision and memory, and work on real functional and sustainable designs that have a lasting effect.

Although he believes this greater community participation is a viable solution, he also mentioned that “community leaders really should be taking that leadership and making that happen; working with businesses and local politicians to really encourage turnout amongst residents.” John on the other hand suggested that, People are starting to realize the importance of place, and so, the issue of conflict management is very important. There are some very strong opinions from people in Kailua, which is great! I think that’s a reflection of passion. But what I think is often lacking is the leadership, or the ability of certain people who have a gift for conflict resolution, is to be able to provide a framework for people to have a more constructive dialogue. I believe in participatory democracy, but I also think we need the leaders to help guide us in that direction, towards a resolution that can hopefully address the majority of the needs of the community. We can never get to a place where it’ll be perfect, but I think the process is 90% of the solution.

In congruence with the statement above, William believes that “There’s ongoing conflict

87 because people won’t face and deal with issues. There’s no leadership in community conflict transformation for prosperity and benefit.” William was asked why leadership was desperately needed but lacking, to which he replied, “Everything seems to be a struggle with our confused political organization and leadership…the city, the county, the state, and the federal all have intertwining, overlapping and not very well separated relationships.” Hence, leadership at the community level is essential because “It puts some responsibility on the leadership in the community and forces them to reach out into their communities.”

88 CHAPTER 4: A DIVIDED COMMUNITY SEEKS LŌKAHI

In this study, I have explored tourism as global phenomenon that greatly impacts the social, political, and economic life of communities. Using Kailua as a case study, I have examined social change by looking at some of the ways in which underlying place relations are impacted by community conflict stemming from tourism. Ten semi- structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with residents who were recruited from KNB meetings in order to gather data relating to their perceptions of Kailua’s ‘sense of place’, issues facing the community, as well as how these issues affect Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. Interviews were supplemented with field notes taken from participant observation of monthly KNB meetings. Using grounded theory methodology, data were analyzed inductively and presented in terms of salient themes. In the first section of data analysis, I explored Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. This portion of the study was based on the notion that ordinary ‘spaces’ become ‘places’ when people endow them with meaning and value. Hence, this chapter analyzed resident perceptions of Kailua’s ‘sense of place’ using a symbolic interactionist framework which suggests that meaningful places are socially constructed. Data was analyzed and coded in terms of the following salient themes: physical characteristics, sense of community, and the residential character of the community. With regard to the physical characteristics, data highlighted the importance of the natural and built environment in terms of their aesthetic qualities, functions, and historical significance. The strong sense of community theme indicated the importance of residents being familiar with and connected to their surroundings, both of which are made possible through their activities and service to the community. Finally, the residential character of the community was an important feature of Kailua because in addition to residents being able to know their neighbors, its small- town feel, self-sustaining infrastructure, accessibility, and lack of high-rise buildings distinguished it from a major, industrialized city. In the second section of data analysis, I explored the issues facing the community. This portion of the research was based on the notion that the meanings and functions of place(s) are more often than not, highly contentious. Broadly speaking, data suggested

89 that the issues revolve around the rapidly expanding tourism industry and were thus categorized into the following themes: finding a balance, commercialization, and development. While these issues are convoluted and often overlap, they were addressed independently in order to capture why they have become problematic for the community. Data indicated that residents have struggled with finding a balance due to a wide array of sources that have been associated with the transformation of Kailua. In addition, the sources deemed responsible were largely influenced by the ways in which participants experienced and perceived the effects of tourism as well as their positions within the community. Although there seemed to be an underlying shared commitment to establishing some sort of balance, it is a task that has proven easier said than done due to the variety of stakeholders involved. The commercialization theme was divided into two parts: visitor accommodations and commercial activities. With regard to visitor accommodations, data suggested that due to controversial Land Use Ordinances that were passed in the 1980’s, the community has remained divided between those who own and operate illegal visitor accommodations or would like to see them become legitimate business practices, and those who do not. It seemed as though those who condone visitor accommodations are motivated primarily by financial gains, whereas their counterparts have advocated for stricter enforcement in order to reduce the negative impact visitor accommodations are having on the community. The constraints of the legal system combined with the community’s inability to compromise, have produced lasting divides that are centered around questions regarding what constitutes legitimate use of property. With regard to commercial activities, data suggested that the business community’s over-reliance on tourists has created clashes between merchants and residents, and also increased resident hostilities towards the tourists themselves. The problem seems to lie in differences in perspective, with merchants perceiving their practices as legitimate and having little or no impact on the community and residents feeling bombarded with commercial activities that are compromising the Aloha spirit and residential character of Kailua. In other words, the community seems to be divided between those who embrace a market place that thrives on tourism and those who are reluctant to let the market continue its current trajectory in

90 fear that Kailua will become a full-fledged tourist destination. When combined, the issues of visitor accommodations and commercial activity have created an adversarial relationship between residents and merchants, both of whom have reasons for what they want. The development theme was also separated into two parts, namely in terms of the development of the physical structures and the natural environment. The study found that the development of the physical structures, which is dictated primarily by Kailua’s largest landowner Kaneohe Ranch, have polarized the community. At one end of the spectrum are those who support Kaneohe Ranch, maintaining that their vision is reflective of the community’s wishes and for the betterment of Kailua as a whole. At the other end of the spectrum are those who feel that Kaneohe Ranch’s vision is not only incongruent with the wishes of residents but also problematic since their over-reliance on tourist dollars has led them to develop the physical structures in accordance with their quest for financial gains. Further complicating matters is that in the midst of this study, Kaneohe Ranch sold its Kailua real estate portfolio to Alexander & Baldwin Inc., an event which has left the entire community uncertain as to how this transaction will impact Kailua in the present and future. In regards to the natural environment, the community has remained conflicted regarding the future of the Kawai Nui and Hāmākua marshes. Whereas a variety of individuals and community groups are in favor of the development of the marshes for educational and cultural purposes, a large number of individuals have remained committed to its preservation. In addition to maintaining its historical, practical, and environmental significance, those who are in favor of preserving the marshes have maintained that development plans are incongruent with resident wishes and driven by ulterior motives since developments are intended to attract large volumes of tourists. All in all, the development of the physical structures and the natural environment are issues that have in many ways polarized the community. In the third and final part of analysis, I re-visited the concept ‘sense of place’. The primary objective of this section was to explore some of the ways in which the issues facing the community have impacted Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. This portion of the research is based on the idea that because meaningful places are socially constructed,

91 negotiated, and politically contested, they may undergo changes in response to larger economic, social, and political processes. In addition to polarizing and paralyzing the community, the issues have produced a series of negative implications for Kailua’s ‘sense of place’. In other words, the issues have in many ways taken a toll on the physical characteristics, challenged the sense of community, and nearly compromised the residential character of Kailua. At the same time, while these features are fragile, they are neither completely diminished, nor are they past a point of no return. Much to the contrary, due to the timing in which data were collected, participants appeared to be highly motivated to offer resolutions since the valued characteristics of Kailua are at stake. Hence, despite being plagued by issues that have created lasting divides within the community, there seems to be an underlying shared commitment to Lōkahi, which is the Hawaiian term denoting harmony and balance. Findings from Kailua have ultimately contributed to a more thorough understanding of the importance of place in contemporary society. Despite a world that is characterized by constant, rapid change, and despite the existence of large economic, social, and political processes that result in places losing their distinctiveness, findings from this study support the notion that the subjective interpretations of places are worthy of exploration because they have implications for everyday life. In other words, although the meanings and functions of place are socially constructed, they are nonetheless “interpreted, narrated, perceived, felt, understood, and imagined” (Gieryn 2000: 465). Places are thus worthy of our attention because their existence requires engagement, maintenance and care. Finally, findings have indicated the importance of understanding how ‘sense of place’ develops and changes over time because in addition to being a task that highlights places as sites of difference and common ground, it is also a task that helps us understand how we identify and interact with our environment.

92 Reflective Statement As previously mentioned, my research interests stem primarily from the fact that as a place, Kailua plays a major role in defining my identity. I was born in Castle Medical Center in 1988 and attended various schools throughout the community, including Trinity Christian Preschool, Aikahi Elementary, Kailua Intermediate and Kalaheo High School. Although I did not fully recognize it at the time, Kailua became a distinguishing feature of my life as I had strong inclinations to retain jobs, extracurricular activities, and volunteer opportunities that were within the community. After moving to Washington State for four years to attend college, I felt like a major part of myself was missing and was certain that moving back to Kailua would mend the hole in my heart that was not always there. Words cannot capture how complete I felt upon returning. I was within walking distance of my childhood friends and close-knit family, surrounded by a natural environment that was breathtaking, and proud to be back in a place that had a strong sense of community. As an avid runner, I was also astonished by how easy it was to feel the Aloha spirit flooding through the streets on my daily runs. It was a breath of fresh air. I was home. While the previous anecdote was given with the intent to capture why Kailua is a crucial component of my identity, equally important is the fact that while this place was special, it had also undergone major changes. The business district was being redeveloped in phases, and upon completion of each phase one could not help but notice how uniform everything began to look. Mom-and-pop shops that were unique and at one point in time frequented by locals were gradually replaced with boutiques, kayak and bike rental shops, large corporate stores, and restaurants that were now occupied by unfamiliar faces. Sidewalks that were once empty were now filled with pedestrians who appeared eager to experience that which Kailua had to offer. Additionally, neighborhoods that were once residential were also taking part in this transition, with many homes being converted into visitor accommodations. Although the previous examples represent only a fraction of the changes that have taken place in my lifetime, they are significant because taken together they symbolized the fact that Kailua was no longer the same. In addition to my own perceptions, I was also greatly impacted by the various

93 ways in which individuals throughout the community responded to the changes taking place. While some individuals welcomed these changes with open arms, there were also those whose concerns focused on the negative ways in which the community had been impacted. Regardless of these differences, the changes seemed to consume the lives of Kailuans. For instance, conversations pertaining to these matters could be located almost anywhere: at a public function, a youth soccer game, a crowded restaurant, the grocery store, the beach on a hot day, or get-togethers with family and friends. In other words, these matters were near impossible to ignore because the changes were visible in every direction. It was therefore something I often reflected, most likely because my entire life revolved around this community. While there were often times that I felt a strong sense of detachment from my childhood memories of this place, I was also frequently reminded of why this place is special and worth preserving. Hence, despite some of the difficulties I faced in adapting to the changes taking place, it was also humbling to witness large numbers of people who were captivated by this place I called home. It is also worth mentioning that although the valued characteristics seemed to be at stake in response to the changes taking place, there were many occasions that led me to conclude the opposite. By simply attending a community function such as the Lanikai Elementary School 50th Anniversary Fundraiser Luau, it became apparent that I was not alone in my quest to retain the valued characteristics of Kailua. At this particular event, various members of the community not only joined in celebration of something that went beyond self, but more importantly, their differences seemed to lose significance in response to a night that was filled with the joy of each others company, live music, and food. Surely new and innovative forums are needed to bring the ideas of the community together, but perhaps events such as these are viable solutions to begin the process of community building since they serve as a reminder of what is truly important. In other words, we become a community when we act like one.

94 REFERENCES

Allen, J. et al. (2009). Kailua. Kailua, HI: Kailua Historical Society.

Amsden, B., Stedman, R., & Kruger, L. (2011). The Creation and Maintenance of Sense

of place in a Tourist-Dependent Community. Leisure Sciences 33: 32-51.

Ap (2013). “Obama Visits Kailua”. www.nypost.com. Accessed on April 17, 2014.

Ap, J. (1992). Resident’s Perceptions on Tourism Impacts. Annals of Tourism Research

19(4) 665-690.

Baehr, B. “Kailua residents and merchants voice concerns over Target.” Hawaii News

Now. November 19, 2010. www.hawaiinewsnow.com. Accessed on April 3,

2014.

Baker, R. (1920). “Pali Road”. Hawai`i State Archives Collection.

www.archives1.dags.hawaii.gov. Accessed on April 14, 2014.

B-E-A-C-H. (2006). “Volunteers at Kailua Beach Environmental Awareness Campaign.”

www.b-e-a-c-h.org. Accessed on May 5, 2014.

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2011). Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Bradley, J. (1993). Methodological Issues and Practices in Qualitative Research. The

Library Quarterly 63(4): 431-449.

Carter, S., & Little, M. (2007). Justifying Knowledge, Justifying Method, Taking Action:

Epistemologies, Methodologies, and Methods in Qualitative Research. Qualitative

Health Research 17(10): 1316-1328.

95 Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical guide through

qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cohen, E. (1984). The Sociology of Tourism: Approaches, Issues, and Findings. Annual

Review of Sociology 10: 373-392.

Cowley, S. Heath, H. (2004). Developing a grounded theory approach: a comparison of

Glaser and Strauss. International Journal of Nursing Studies 41: 141-150.

Crabtree, B., & DiCicco-Bloom, B. (2006). Making Sense of Qualitative Research: The

qualitative research interview. Medical Education 40: 314-321.

Creamer, B. “Kailua Seeks Balance: Business and jobs vs. preserving a residential

community.” Hawaii Business. July 2012: 1-3.

Department of Business, Economic Development, & Tourism. (1999). “Tourism Looks to

the Future.” Hawaii’s Economy. www.files.hawaii.gov. Accessed March 24,

2014.

Dredge, D. (2010). Place Change and Tourism Development Conflict: Evaluating Public

Interests. Tourism Management 31: 104-112.

Echtner, C., Jamal, T. (1997). The Disciplinary Dilemma of Tourism Studies. Annals

of Tourism Research 24(4): 868-883.

Gieryn, T. (2000). A Space for Place in Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology 26: 463-

496.

Grube, N. “Beach Ban for Business Vetoed by Honolulu Mayor.” Honolulu Civil Beat.

www.civilbeat.com. Accessed on April 3. 2014.

Gustafson, P. (2001). Meanings of Place: Everyday Experience and Theoretical

96 Conceptualizations. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21: 5-16.

Hall, C. (1994). Tourism and Politics: Policy, Power and Place. Chichester, London:

Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Hall, Thomas W. (1998). The History of Kailua, Hawaii. Kailua, HI: Dolphin Printing &

Publishing.

Hallman, H. (1977). The Organization and Operation of Neighborhood Councils: A

Practical Guide. Park Avenua, NY: Praeger Publishers.

Harrill, R. (2004). Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development: a Literature

Review with Implications for Tourism Planning. Journal of Planning Literature

18: 251-266.

Hawai`i State Archives. “Kailua in the 1950’s”. www.archives1.dags.hawaii.gov.

Accessed on April 16, 2014.

Hawai`i Tourism Authority. (2002). “Hawai`i Tourism Strategic Plan 2002-2015.”

Hawai`i Tourism Authority. www.hawaiitourismauthority.org. Accessed on

March 8, 2014.

Hawai`i Tourism Authority (2003). www.hawaiitourismauthority.org. Accessed on

March 8, 2014.

Helber, Hastert, & Fee. (2014). Kawainui-Hāmākua Marsh Complex Master Plan.

www.hhf.com. Accessed on April 12, 2014.

Helber, Hastert, & Fee. “Kawainui-Hāmākua Marsh Boundaries”. Map. www.hhf.com.

Accessed on April 14, 2014.

Herman, RDK. (1999). The Aloha State: Place Names & the Anti-Conquest of Hawai`i.

97 Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89: 76-102.

Hernandez, M. (2014). “Photo Illustration of Land Acquired by Alexander &

Baldwin”. www.oahuinmotion.com. Accessed on April 12, 2014.

Hetter, K. “22 Can’t-miss U.S. Beaches” Cable News Network. www.cnn.com. Accessed

on April 16, 2014.

Hill, T. (2013). “Merchants Oppose Bill 11”. www.honolulumagazine.com. Accessed on

April 15, 2014.

Howarth, C. (2001). Towards a Social Psychology of Community: a social

representations perspective. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 31(2): 223

-238.

Johnson, Mark A. (2014). “Paddlers on Kailua Bay”.

www.markjohnson.photoshelter.com. Accessed on May 6, 2014.

Jorgensen, D. (1989). Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies.

Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications.

Jorgensen, D. & Stedman, R. (2001). Sense of Place as an Attitude: Lakeshore Owners

Attitudes Toward Their Property. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21: 233-

248.

Kailua Vacation Rentals. (2011). “Map of Kailua and Windward Oahu Beaches”.

www.kailuavacationrentals.net. Accessed on May 1, 2014.

“Ka`iwa Ridge Trail”. (2011). Look At Hawaii. www.lookathawaii.com. Accessed on

April 15, 2014.

Department of Land & Natural Resources (2012). “Kawai Nui Marsh.”

98 www.dlnrhawaii.gov. Accessed on April 15, 2014.

Klanicka, S., Buchecker, M., Hunziker, M., & Muller-Boker, U. (2013). Locals’ and

Tourists’ Sense of Place: A Case Study of a Swiss Alpine Village. Mountain

Research and Development 26: 55-63.

Kojima, C. (2007). “Mitch D’Olier at Demolition Site”. www.archives.starbulletin.com.

Accessed on May 6, 2014.

Koning, O. (2013). “Merchants Oppose Bill 11.” Honolulu Magazine.

www.honolulumagazine.com. Accessed on May 1, 2014.

Kuper, A., Lindgard, L. (2008). Qualitative Research: Critically Appraising Qualitative

Research. British Medical Journal 337: 687-689.

Kuvan, Y., Akan, P. (2012). Conflict and Agreement in Stakeholder Attitudes: residents’

and hotel managers’ views of tourism impacts and forest-related development.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism 20(4): 571-584.

Kyle, G., Chick, G. (2007). The Social Construction of a Sense of Place. Leisure

Sciences 29: 209-225.

Lococo, P. “Participatory Democracy at the Grassroots: The Honolulu Neighborhood

Boards.” Diss. University of Hawaii, 1998.

Lofland, J., Snow, D. Anderson, L. (2006). Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to

Qualitative Observation and Analysis. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.

Look at Hawai`i. (2011). “Kawai Nui Marsh.” www.lookathawaii.com. Accessed on

April 15, 2014.

Look at Hawai`i. (2011). “Ka`iwa Trail Ridge.” www.lookathawaii.com. Accessed on

99 April 15, 2014.

Low, S.M., Altman, I. (1992). Place Attachment: A conceptual inquiry. Human Behavior

and Environment 12: 1-12.

Mack, N., Woodsong, C., (2005). Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s

Field Guide. Research Triangle Park, NC: Family Health International.

Manzo, L., Perkins, D. (2006). Finding Common Ground: The Importance of Place

Attachment to Community Participation and Planning. Journal of Planning

Literature 20(4): 335-348.

Matarrita-Cascante, D. (2010). Changing Communities, Community Satisfaction, and

Quality of Life: A View of Multiple Perceived Indicators. Social Indicators

Research 98(1): 105-127.

Meethan, K. (2001). Tourism in Global Society: Place, Culture, Consumption. New

York, NY: Palgrave.

Merrifield, A. (1993). The Struggle Over Place: Redeveloping American Can in

Southeast Baltimore. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 18(1):

102-121.

Marine Corp Base Hawaii. “Mokapu Peninsula”. www.mcbhawaii.marines.mil. Accessed

on April 11, 2014.

McAvoy, A. “Kailua to Hawai`i: Stop Sending Tourists Here”. November 14, 2013.

www.huffingtonpost.com. Accessed April 24, 2014.

Mouginis-Mark, P. (1996), “Aerial Image of Kailua”. www.satftp.soest.hawaii.edu.

Accessed on April 15, 2014.

100 Moyle, B., et al. (2010). Community Perceptions of Tourism: Bruny and

Magnetic Islands, Australia. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research 15(1):

353-366.

Mustapha, G. (1985). Kailua, O`ahu: A Community History. United States: Gael

Mustapha.

'Ōlelo Community Media. (2012). www.olelo.org. Accessed on March 24, 2014.

Page, W. “Kailua depends on Tourism, not the Neighborhood Board.” Hawaii Reporter.

September 16, 2013. www.hawaiireporter.com. Accessed on April 2, 2014.

Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. (2005). “USA Designates Site on Hawaiian Islands.”

www.ramsar.org. Accessed on April 12, 2014.

Reed, G. (2001). Fastening and Unfastening Identity: Negotiating Identity in Hawai`i.

Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 22(3): 327-339.

Rossen, J. (2012). “Resident Posters Showing Support for Bill 11.” Ka`Ohana.

www.kaohana.windward.hawaii.edu. Accessed on May 1, 2014.

Schöllmann, A., et al. (2001). Rhetoric, Claims-making and Conflict

in Touristic Place Promotion: the case of central Christchurch New Zealand.

Tourism Geographies 3(3): 300-325.

Singh, S., et al. (2003). Tourism in Destination Communities. London, UK: CABI

Publishing.

Sproul, M. “Waikiki Beach”. www.thecarefreetraveler.com. Accessed on April 20, 2014.

Stedman, R. (2003). Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of the

physical environment to sense of place. Society and Natural Resources 16(8):

101 671-685.

Steele, F. (1981). Sense of Place. Boston, MA: CBI Publishing, Inc.

Strauss, A. Corbin, S. (1998) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures

for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Terkenli, T. (2001). Local Perceptions of Tourism Impacts on Place Identity: The Case of

Northern Crete. Tourism 49(3): 229-240.

TripAdvisor. (2014). “Travelers’ Choice Top 25 Beaches.” www.tripadvisor.com.

Accessed on April 2, 2014.

Tuan, Y.F. (1977). Space and Place: The Perspectives of Experience. St. Paul, MN:

University of Minnesota Press.

Tuan, Y.F. (1980). Rootedness versus sense of place. Landscape 24: 3-8.

United States-Canada/Hawaii. Physical Map. www.GEOATLAS.com. Accessed on April

20, 2014.

United States Census Bureau (2014). Kailua CDP (Honolulu), Hawai`i.

www.quickfacts.census.gov. Accessed on April 3, 2014.

Wilkins, Roy. (2012 “Windward Passage.” www.windwardpassagekailua.com.

Accessed on April 15, 2014.

Williams, D., Stewart, S. (1998). Sense of Place: An Elusive Concept that is Finding a

Home in Ecosystem Management. Journal of Forestry 96(5): 18-23.

Williams, P., Hunter, G. (2002). Assessing Stakeholder Perspectives on Heli-Skiing’s

Socio-economic Impacts in British Columbia’s Rocky Mountains: Applying a

Tourism Impact Scale. Tourism Recreation Research 27(3): 67-82.

102 Wu, N. (2008). “Longs Drugs 1976”. www.archives.starbulletin.com. Accessed on May

6, 2014.

Yates, D. (1973). Neighborhood Democracy. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath and Company.

Young, P. (2013). “Aerial Image of the Mokulua Islands.” www.hookuleans.com.

Accessed on April 30, 2014.

Yung, L., Freimund, W., & Belsky, J. (2003). The Politics of Place: Understanding

Meaning, Common Ground, and Political Difference on the Rocky Mountain

Front. Forest Science 49(6): 855-866.

Zhang, W. et al. (2010). Education and self-rated health: An individual and

neighborhood level analysis of Asian Americans, Hawaiians, and Caucasians in

Hawaii. Social Sciences and Medicine 70: 561-569.

103 APPENDICES

Appendix I: IRB Human Studies Approval

104 Appendix II: Consent Form

Consent to Participate in Research Project My name is Michelle Horton. I am a graduate student at the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, Department of Sociology. I am conducting a research project in order to fulfill the requirements of my Master’s program. The purpose of my research is to explore Kailua’s sense of place, by looking at the perspectives of community activists in Kailua. I am asking you to participate in this research project because you are a member of the community and are actively involved in community-related issues.

Project Description- Activities and Time Commitment: This research project will include participation in an interview. If you are 18 years or older, and, chose to participate, I will schedule the interview at a time and location that is convenient for you. The interview will consist of 10-15 open-ended questions, and will last approximately 20-40 minutes. I will be digitally recording (voice only) the interviews. Interview questions will pertain to community-related issues, community activism, and perspectives on Kailua’s sense of place.

Benefits and Risks: There will be no direct benefit to you for participating in this survey. The results of this research project are intended to contribute to a better understanding of activists’ perceptions of community activism and sense of place in Kailua. There is little risk to you by participating in this interview.

Confidentiality and Privacy: You will not be asked to provide any personal information that could be used to identify you. Please do not include any personal information in interview responses. All personal information will be kept confidential to the extent allowed by law. Several public agencies with responsibility for research oversight, including the UH Human Studies Program, have authority to review research records. Research records will be kept in a locked file in the investigator’s office for the duration of the study. All personal information will be destroyed upon completion of the research project.

Voluntary Participation: Participation in this interview is voluntary. Participation in this research is voluntary. You are free to choose to participate or opt out, with no penalty or loss of benefits for either decision. If you agree to participate, you are free to withdrawal at any time without any penalty of loss of benefits for choosing to do so. Questions: If you have any questions about this study, you can contact me at (808) 388- 2595 or [email protected]. You can also contact my faculty advisor, Dr. Susan Wurtzburg, at (808) 956-7950 or [email protected] . In addition, questions regarding your rights as a research participant may be answered by contacting the University of Hawaii Committee on Human Subjects at (808) 956-5007.

105

Appendix III: Interview Guide

Basic Demographic Information Age Male/Female Race/ethnicity Highest level of education completed

Background Information 1. How long have you lived in Kailua? 2. In what ways do you identify with Kailua? 3. Of the ways in which you identify with Kailua, which are most important to you?

Kailua’s ‘Sense of Place’ 4. What are some of the characteristics that define Kailua? 5. What are some of the characteristics that make Kailua unique? 6. What do you like most about Kailua? 7. What do you like least about Kailua?

Issues Facing the Kailua Community 8. What are some of the issues facing Kailua in general? 9. How have these issues affected the Kailua community? 10. Of the issues facing Kailua, which are most important? 11. Why are these issues important?

Kailua Neighborhood Board Meetings 12. How often do you attend Kailua Neighborhood Meetings? 13. Why do you attend Kailua Neighborhood Meetings? 14. Are there other ways in which you are actively involved in the community? 15. In your opinion, how are community-related issues best addressed?

106