'GREEN HARVEST' DEBATE RAGES; COUNTY FIRST EVER TO RETURN GRANT

It could be said that no issue stirs up emotion at County Council meetings
more than "Green Harvest," the Big Island's marijuana eradication program.

At the July 26 meeting, public testimony and discussion lasted more than
six hours. Of the 42 Big Island residents who testified, 18 supported it
and 24 were in opposition.

Marijuana advocates contend the program is ineffective and creates
additional problems, such as increased hard drug use and helicopter noise
that disturbs the peace. One advocate has even brought an impeachment
petition against the mayor and council members because he believes a County
Charter-required review of the program hasn't been done.

Big Island police staunchly defend the program as an effective way of
reducing the amount of marijuana in the community, pointing to statistics
such as Hawaii leading the nation in the number of plants eradicated.

More than 200,000 cultivated marijuana plants were seized last year on the
Big Island, according to police statistics. In the other three counties,
nearly 170,000 plants were destroyed.

Even the nine-member council is divided on the issue.

The council approved a $265,000 grant from the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration in July but conditioned it on getting a public officials
liability insurance policy. The policy would pay the legal costs of the
council members if an impeachment petition is brought against them for
accepting the funds.

When Big Island police returned the grant Thursday, a new chapter was added
to the "Green Harvest" saga. The money was returned after the county could
not obtain an insurance policy to cover the council.

"This is the first time anywhere in the nation that the money has been
returned," said Lt. Henry Tavares, head of the Police Department's vice
section.

And to no one's surprise, those who support the eradication and those
against it have different predictions on what could happen as a result of
returning the funds.

"I think we're going have to wait and see what the impact is," said Kona
Councilwoman Nancy Pisicchio. " That's all we can do at this point."

Police are concerned rejecting the money sends a message that the Big
Island is a safe place to grow marijuana. "High Times," a worldwide
pro-marijuana magazine has covered the council's handling of the issue. It
reported information from other state law enforcement agencies indicating
growers from other islands already are considering moving their operations
to the Big Island.

"They want to find a place where they can grow marijuana with the least
amount of chances of it getting eradicated," Tavares said.

Returning the money also could have future negative impact on the county.
The DEA may be reluctant to give funding to the Big Island, knowing it has
returned the funds once before.

Thomas Kelly, the DEA agent in charge of the Honolulu district, said if the
same problems surface the next time the county applies for an eradication
grant, it could be difficult to obtain.

"If that's the case, why even entertain it?" Kelly said.

He said the DEA will attempt to spend the returned money in Hawaii, but
that will be challenging with the federal fiscal year scheduled to end
Sept. 30. The money may end up being returned to the general fund.

However, others say it is a chance to look at the benefits and downfalls of
the eradication program.

The four council members who voted against accepting the money, Pisicchio
and Curtis Tyler of Kona, Julie Jacobson of Ka'u and Vice Chairman Al Smith
of Puna, said it is a chance to examine the effectiveness of the program.
They said it's also a chance for police to focus on fighting "hard drugs,"
such as heroin, crack cocaine and crystal methamphetamine, also known as "ice."

"What I've heard is that the public is very concerned about the
proliferation of hard drugs," Tyler said. "I want to do all I can to
encourage (police) to go after the drugs with the greatest impact on public
health and safety."

Eradication Crippled, But Will Continue

Tavares said eradication missions will continue, though not as frequent and
will use older, more time-consuming techniques. He said he is concerned
fewer missions and more growers will lead to a lucrative marijuana trade,
similar to the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Police also lamented the loss of the funds, because a portion paid for new
safety equipment and training officers, as well as for drug prevention
education in schools and community groups.

He said police had used two helicopters, one as a spotter and one to drop
officers into a patch. The DEA grant mainly was used to rent the
helicopters to drop officers into growing areas.

Police still will have access to one helicopter, which will be used as a
spotter, but teams now will have to walk into the patch, a technique used
in the '70s and '80s.

"Taking away our helicopters is almost like taking away our patrol
officer's cars and expecting them to enforce laws," Tavares said.

However, a frequent complaint from those who oppose the programs is that
these helicopters fly too low, disturbing their tranquility.

Smith, who previously has voted both for and against the program, has said
the increasing number of noise complaints was one of the reasons he voted
against the money this year.

Jacobson also said she's concerned about the growing number of complaints
about the helicopters from residents in her district.

Tavares said helicopters used in the eradication are marked with the
letters "HPD" on the bottom and are required to be visible from 500 feet away.

Crime Increase Feared

Other concerns include the possible increase in marijuana-related crime and
the possibility that more of it will make it onto the streets.

One marijuana plant can bring in as much as $1,000. So if a grower
successfully cultivates 50 plants a season, it could reap as much as
$50,000. And since plants can be raised within 90 days, growers could net
as much as $200,000 a year.

The cash potential will motivate others to steal plants, which in turn may
force growers to use booby traps and armed guards to protect their crops.

"That's where the violence comes in," Tavares said. "Because a lot of guys
just go out and rip the guys off."

However, Jacobson said she believes armed confrontations are isolated and a
"rare phenomenon."

"I'm not saying it doesn't exist at all but (police) portray it as a
widespread problem," she said. "The increase of violence due to hard drugs
is way greater than a once in a blue moon booby trap."

However, Tavares said marijuana-related complaints already are starting to
rise. The federal grant was supposed to help pay for eradication mission
starting Jan. 1. Without the money, police haven't been able to do
eradication missions this year.

Tavares said Thursday, the Vice Section received four calls - three were
for marijuana being cultivating on other people's property, while the
fourth was for distribution.

"We may not see results next week, but throughout the coming months, I'm
certain we will see an increase in the amount of marijuana out there," he
said. "The eradication program pretty much takes it from the source. It's
far more difficult to catch it on the street."

Roger Christie, the Pahoa marijuana advocate who is attempting to impeach
the mayor and council members, said he believes decriminalization will do
away with marijuana-relate crimes.

He compares the current situation to the alcohol prohibition days of the
1930's.

"There's a relationship here to prohibition, we should have learned it,"
Christie said. "Nobody gets shot over beer profits anymore."

Council members and others also speculate the increase in hard drug use
could be attributed to less marijuana being available. Jacobson, Tyler and
Pisicchio have encouraged the police to be more aggressive in fighting
those hard drugs.

However, Tavares said the "ice" problem in Guam contradicts that theory.

He said Guam's major drug problem is "ice," and there is no formal
eradication program there. Big Island police last month assisted in a
special eradication operation in Guam.

"That's disparaging the fact that the unavailability of marijuana leads to
harder drugs," Tavares said. "Most alcoholics start off with beer. Some
stay with beer, some go to harder liquor."

Council Still May Face Impeachment

The council still faces an impeachment petition, despite not accepting the
funds. Christie said he plans to file it in Circuit Court later this year.

Last October, Christie attempted to impeach Mayor Stephen Yamashiro and six
council members - Smith, Chairman James Arakaki, Aaron Chung, Bobby-Jean
Leithead-Todd, Leningrad Elarionoff and Dominic Yagong -for not conducting
a review of the eradication program.

The petition was dismissed, but Arakaki said he could have spent tens of
thousands of dollars to defend himself if it went to trial.

Arakaki, who asked for the insurance provision, has said council members
shouldn't be impeached for accepting money. He also has been unsuccessful
in getting federal and state officials to indemnify the council members.

Elected officials cannot be represented by county attorneys in they face
impeachment. Smith said he simply can't afford the legal costs of a lengthy
impeachment trial.

"That's my concern. I just don't have the money to fight an impeachment
case," Smith said.

While the end result of returning the funds remains unclear, police
officials say they will continue to apply for eradication grants.

Assistant Police Chief Wendell Paiva said he viewed it as a "temporary
setback."

"We're not going to give up applying for grants," Paiva said.