Use eminent domain
very sparinglyThe issue: Waikiki property owners may
be forced to sell if the city exercises its power.That sprucing up Waikiki is a worthwhile endeavor and would benefit Honolulu and the entire state seems beyond dispute since it is the most prominent symbol of Hawaii's vital tourist industry. The ambitious plan of Outrigger Enterprises to construct a $300-million resort called Waikiki Beach Walk surely fits into that scheme of things.
How some of the land for the project is to be acquired, however, is open to question. Mayor Harris has proposed to the City Council a resolution under which the city would exercise the right of eminent domain to force five owners of parcels of land to sell to the city at market value. The city would then sell the parcels to Outrigger Enterprises for the same amount. The proposal has been met, rightly, with skepticism.
The taking of private property by eminent domain is a powerful government tool to be used judiciously and in circumstances where the public benefits are clear and direct. The law should be used fairly so that it does not provide an advantage to one property owner over another. Moreover, that power should not be wielded as a threat to force one land owner to yield to another. The mayor's resolution may be intended to intimidate the land owners into selling to the hotel chain, which is a debatable use of eminent domain.
The resolution proposed by the mayor asserts that "acquisition and redevelopment of the parcels are necessary to advance public purposes." Presumably the public benefit would come through construction and jobs, and tax revenue derived from increased tourism. Outrigger would also make a profit from this private enterprise, a result usually beyond the realm of eminent domain.
In this age of litigation, it would not be surprising if this course of action led to lawsuits that could delay Outrigger's project beyond the limits of a new 10 percent state tax credit for hotel construction. Moreover, aligning itself with one company could leave the city in an assailable position should another ask for the same consideration.
The city should certainly do what it can to encourage the refurbishing of Waikiki but this proposal seems tainted with favoritism. A less contentious approach would be for the city to help Outrigger and the other land owners reach a fair settlement rather than create the potential for further conflict.
Don’t let Microsoft
maintain monopolyThe issue: States have been asked to agree
to an antitrust settlement accepted by
Microsoft and the Justice Department.MICROSOFT Corp. would escape nearly unscathed from a court ruling that it monopolized the personal computer market under a proposed settlement accepted by the Justice Department. States that joined in the lawsuit against the huge computer software manufacturer have balked at the settlement and should apply more pressure to bring competition to the marketplace.
U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, newly assigned to the case, had called for a settlement, citing "the recent tragic events affecting our nation." Attorney General John Ashcroft says the settlement "will bring relief to the market." But the economic damage caused by the Sept. 11 attack does not justify abandoning antitrust enforcement, ultimately at the expense of consumers.
The proposed settlement does little to force Microsoft to change its strategy of tightly integrating software applications such as instant messaging, Internet browsing and digital video and audio into the Windows system, the latest version of which was released last month. Microsoft would be required to provide software developers with codes to make their products work in Windows, but Microsoft's past behavior casts doubt whether it would abide by such an arrangement.
Microsoft would be forbidden from entering into exclusivity agreements with computer manufacturers and from retaliating against companies that don't back its products. However, computer makers that have no choice but to include Windows in their products would be responsible for policing Microsoft's behavior. Ken Wasch, president of the Software and Information Industry Association, likens that to asking a child to police his parents' conduct.
Courts have established a precedent in antitrust cases that monopolistic practices should be eliminated and that ill-gotten gains from illegal acts should be denied. Apple Computer Inc., Sun Microsystems Inc. and Netscape, now owned by AOL Time Warner Inc., all were found by the courts to have been damaged by Microsoft's monopolistic activities, but the proposed settlement allows Microsoft to retain the fruits of those violations.
Judge Kollar-Kotelly has ordered Microsoft, the Justice Department and a group of attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia to decide by tomorrow whether to accept the settlement or prepare for a series of hearings aimed at achieving remedies by the spring. The attorneys general should press for those hearings.
Published by Oahu Publications Inc., a subsidiary of Black Press.Don Kendall, Publisher
Frank Bridgewater, managing editor 529-4791; fbridgewater@starbulletin.com
Michael Rovner, assistant managing editor 529-4768; mrovner@starbulletin.com
Lucy Young-Oda, assistant managing editor 529-4762; lyoungoda@starbulletin.comRichard Halloran, editorial page director, 529-4790; rhalloran@starbulletin.com
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin (USPS 249460) is published daily by
John Flanagan, contributing editor 294-3533; jflanagan@starbulletin.com
Oahu Publications at 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
Periodicals postage paid at Honolulu, Hawaii. Postmaster: Send address changes to
Star-Bulletin, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802.
