������Ƶ

In a Hawaii Legislature dominated by Democrats, a Democratic governor can typically expect a supportive reception for nominees to key administrative posts. Not only is that considered courteous from an intra-party perspective, lawmakers typically hew to the idea that they ought to be deferential to the governor’s wishes to choose appointees for his/her administration.

That this standard approach to gubernatorial business is running off the rails for Gov. David Ige is notable not only for the speed with which it has taken place — only two months into his tenure, when the word “honeymoon” is still commonly heard — but for the particular nominee whose selection has created a rift among legislators, environmentalists and the governor: Carleton Ching, Ige’s pick to serve as chairperson of the Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Vice president of community and government relations and lobbyist for leading developer/landowner Castle & Cooke, Ching has been assailed for weeks as a controversial choice to lead a department charged with protecting the state’s natural resources.  Twenty leading environmental groups, including the influential Outdoor Circle and the Sierra Club (which endorsed Ige’s gubernatorial bid), have come out in public opposition to Ching’s nomination. A MoveOn.org petition against Ching’s nomination started by a Maui environmental activist has generated nearly 7,500 signatures — and counting.

Critics point not only to Ching’s work for a major developer, but his leadership on the lobbying group in weakening environmental protections. Ching served as president and vice president of the organization from 2008 to 2010 and was active in efforts to diminish both regulatory burdens for developers and environmental safeguards.  Still, Ige until now has batted away concerns and continues to support his nominee.

But late Friday, the strongest rebuke yet surfaced of Ching’s selection, and from a source Ige should not ignore: Sen. Josh Green, floor leader for the Senate’s Democratic majority caucus. Green recently met with Ching, and while Green called the nominee “personally likeable,” his other characterizations were withering: “does not have the experience, background or expertise to lead this department” and “simply is not qualified for the job.”

“We need a [leader] of DLNR who has a proven record of fighting to protect and preserve our natural and cultural resources, not a career lobbyist for the development industry who has a record of calling for the elimination of cultural and environmental protections,” Green said in a statement that may reflect the attitudes of others in the Senate and that may embolden more opponents to go public.

“This nomination is the wrong choice for Hawaii, and we should not move forward with it.”

It’s unclear yet just how much new damage this does to Ching’s nomination, including whether it derails it entirely. That it comes from within Ige’s own party and from a former Senate leadership colleague is notable. Ching’s confirmation hearing is still more than two weeks away, meaning there will be an abundance of time for opposition to continue to build and for plenty of collateral damage to spread for Ige.

That damage is already significant. Not only has Ige’s judgment been called into question for a nomination that is unavoidably divisive and a distraction to other top gubernatorial concerns, but his values as a pro-environmental governor are being scrutinized. This has considerable implications for his leadership of a state where regard for the environment has major cultural and economic impact in addition to its environmental importance.

It does not help that this is playing out against the backdrop of a seemingly failed proposal by Senate President Donna Mercado Kim to abolish the Land Use Commission, which has state-level authority for land use districting and classification. Though the proposal was deemed dead last week due to its failure to earn a committee hearing in time for a Senate deadline, its existence had amplified concerns regarding Ching and whether a DLNR under his leadership would be too development friendly. With the Land Use Commission issue off the table, environmentalists’ heightened concerns may now be refocused exclusively on Ching.

Ige’s background as an engineer has given him an appreciation for the pragmatic and practical that ought to prevail here. If he sticks with Ching, he faces a difficult and uncertain confirmation process that stands a chance of ending in rather embarrassing defeat. At best, he stands to spend a significant amount of political capital to reach confirmation and wind up with a permanent group of critics who would be likely to make it difficult for Ching to be effective as director.

If there is a reason to maintain his resolve in this matter — say a fundamental issue that Ching is particularly well suited to address or a major administration initiative it feels only he can lead — Ige hasn’t articulated it.

In light of that, it would be better to admit defeat now and use the opportunity to build back trust with environmentalists and progressives with a new nominee more likely to earn the support that has so clearly eluded Ching.