Connect with us

Hawaii

Communications breakdown left authorities in the dark and residents without alerts amid Maui fire

Published

on

Communications breakdown left authorities in the dark and residents without alerts amid Maui fire


HONOLULU (AP) — As unpredictable wildfires roared across Maui last August, the head of the emergency management agency dragged his heels about returning to the island amid the unfolding crisis, while a broad communications breakdown left authorities in the dark and residents without emergency alerts, according to a report released Wednesday.

Communications problems were also encountered with the Hawaiian Electric Company, with power and emergency workers unable to confirm that power lines were de-energized until well after flames had caused widespread damage, the report from the Hawaii Attorney General’s office said.

It was the second of two major assessments out this week about the deadliest U.S. wildfire in a century. A report released Tuesday by the Western Fire Chiefs Association detailed the challenges facing the Maui Fire Department during the unprecedented series of blazes, including one that killed 101 people in the historic town of Lahaina.

Attorney General Anne Lopez presented the latest report along with Steve Kerber, vice president of the Fire Safety Research Institute.

Advertisement

“When Attorney General Lopez contacted us, clearly we were paying a lot of attention to what was going on in Lahaina and really had the same question that she had. How is it possible that something like this could happen?” Kerber said.

Officials did not answer questions about cause or liability, saying it is only an initial reckoning and two more reports will follow. Investigators are still trying to get some documents from Maui County, officials said.

“We’re going to continue this investigation, and we will follow it wherever it leads,” Lopez said.

The federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is also investigating, and its report, expected to pinpoint cause, will come out before the one-year anniversary.

The report released Wednesday says that five days before the flames broke out, meteorologists warned that strengthening winds resulting from a hurricane south of Hawaii could lead to extreme wildfire risk Aug. 8. “Confidence in the development of critical fire weather conditions this many days away is quite rare, and we believe that this warrants a heads up to you,” a National Weather Service forecaster said in an email to fire contacts Aug. 3.

Advertisement

Kerber described complex and “incredibly fast” fires with flames traveling at a rate of about a mile in 90 minutes.

The Maui Emergency Management Agency had posted to Facebook on Aug. 6 about a “serious fire and damaging wind threat” due to dry conditions as Hurricane Dora passed.

The agency’s administrator, Herman Andaya, was off island at a conference on Oahu on Aug. 8 as the fires intensified. His call and text records show that he was getting updates from Gaye Gabuat, an administrative assistant. After a series of evacuations in Lahaina, Gabuat told Andaya that “multiple people look overwhelmed,” according to the report. Andaya asked if he should come home, to which Gabuat responded, “it may look okay.”

After the fire had been burning for more than five hours, Gabuat told Andaya that flames had reached Front Street, Lahaina’s commercial heart. Only then did Andaya respond that he had “better come home tomorrow.”

By that time multiple areas had been evacuated, according to a situation report by Andaya’s agency. Front Street had been closed along with the Lahaina bypass road, another key thoroughfare. In Lahaina alone, 29 utility poles were reported downed.

Advertisement

There was no immediate response to attempts Wednesday to reach Andaya, who resigned Aug. 18, via phone, email and social media.

Investigators said they requested incident activity logs and other records from the agency’s emergency operations center, or EOC, on multiple occasions. Derek Alkonis, a manager with the fire research institute, said they had received some information but not everything they had requested. “You’ll find in the report that there is a difficulty with gaining information from the EOC,” Alkonis said. “In terms of the reason for that challenge, it’s going to be analyzed in subsequent reports.”

The report also describes a breakdown in communication between police, firefighters and emergency officials after cell networks went down. Police and firefighters had to communicate using their handheld or car radios on closed channels that public officials and others could not listen to.

Meanwhile a stretched and limited dispatch center had single operators monitoring five or six channels at a time to keep up.

“With no cellular communication, residents and tourists were not able to receive emergency alerts, communicate with loved ones and/or to receive incoming or outgoing calls/texts,” the report’s authors wrote.

Advertisement

They detailed how one police officer told other responders his daughter had been babysitting in a neighborhood that was hit by the fire. Without cell communications he had no way to check if she escaped, and it took two days before he confirmed she was OK.

Fire crews also became trapped, according to staffing logs included in the report. Around 4:30 p.m., one engine was destroyed and another broke down. A firefighter from one of the engines rescued the crews using a police department SUV, according to the logs.

Hawaiian Electric has acknowledged that a downed power line sparked a fire in Lahaina early on the morning of Aug. 8. Firefighters were still mopping up that fire at noon and waiting for a utility worker to arrive and confirm that the power lines had been de-energized. But when the worker got there, he was unable to confirm the power had been cut off — information that would likely have helped fire crews assess the risk of re-ignition as well as the risk posed by other downed lines.

Still, the fire crew determined that the blaze was extinguished and headed back to the station at 2:17 p.m. By 2:55 p.m., several calls came about another fire in the same area. Firefighters were finally advised that power to the area had been shut off at 4:11 p.m., according to the report.

In the months since, Hawaiian Electric has said the lines were shut off for more than six hours before the afternoon fire was reported.

Advertisement

The attorney general’s report is the first phase of a comprehensive assessment that includes a timeline of the Lahaina fire using social media posts, metadata from citizen photos and videos, dispatch records, emergency communications and other sources. It describes the 72 hours before, during and after the blaze, and says investigators relied on “all known available facts” related to the fire and to preparations by local, state and federal agencies.

Because power was out to much of the area, security camera video generally wasn’t available, so investigators had to rely on interviews with residents and first responders to piece together the events.

“What this report doesn’t capture is the loss, the people, the challenges that they’ve gone through, the pain, the sorrow. And some of those things will be analyzed later. But you need the facts first,” Alkonis said.

Phase 2 of the report will focus on how Maui’s fire protection system functioned, specifically what conditions fed the inferno, attempts to stop its spread, and evacuations. The third phase will try to answer the critical question, “How do we prevent this from happening again?”

“The tragedy serves as a sobering reminder that the threat of grassland fires, wildfires, and wildfire-initiated urban conflagrations, fueled by climate change and urban encroachment into wildland areas, is a reality that must be addressed with the utmost urgency and diligence — not just in Hawaii, but around the globe,” the authors wrote.

Advertisement

The fire destroyed roughly 3,000 properties in Lahaina and caused more than $5.5 billion in estimated damage, according to state officials.



Source link

Hawaii

No. 3 Rainbow Warriors continue winning ways against No. 6 BYU | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Published

on

No. 3 Rainbow Warriors continue winning ways against No. 6 BYU | Honolulu Star-Advertiser


The third-ranked Hawaii men’s volleyball team had no problem recording its 11th sweep of the season, handling No. 6 BYU 25-18, 25-21, 25-16 tonight at Bankoh Arena at Stan Sheriff Center.

A crowd of 6,493 watched the Rainbow Warriors (14-1) roll right through the Cougars (13-4) for their 11th straight win.

Louis Sakanoko put down a match-high 15 kills and Adrien Roure added 11 kills in 18 attempts. Roure has hit .500 or better in three of his past four matches.

Junior Tread Rosenthal had a match-high 32 assists and guided Hawaii to a .446 hitting percentage.

Advertisement

UH hit .500 in the first set, marking the third time in two matches against BYU it hit .500 or better in a set.

Hawaii has won seven of the past eight meetings against the Cougars (13-4), whose only two losses prior to playing UH were in five sets.

Advertisement

Hawaii has lost six sets all season, with five of those sets going to deuce.

UH returns to the home court next week for matches Wednesday and Friday against No. 7 Pepperdine.




Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Hawaii

Travelers Sue: Promises Were Broken. They Want Hawaiian Airlines Back.

Published

on

Travelers Sue: Promises Were Broken. They Want Hawaiian Airlines Back.


Hawaiian Airlines’ passengers are back in federal court trying to stop something most people assumed was already finished. They are no longer arguing about whether they are allowed to sue. They are now asking a judge to intervene and preserve Hawaiian as a standalone airline before integration advances to a point this spring where it cannot realistically be reversed.

That approach is far more aggressive than what we covered in Can Travelers Really Undo Alaska’s Hawaiian Airlines Takeover?. The earlier round focused on whether passengers had standing and could amend their complaint. This court round focuses on whether harm is already occurring and whether the court should act immediately rather than later. The shift is moving from procedural survival to emergency relief, which makes this filing different for Hawaii travelers.

The post-merger record is now the focus.

When the $1.9 billion acquisition closed in September 2024, the narrative was straightforward. Hawaiian would gain financial stability. Alaska would impose what it described early as “discipline” across routes and costs. Travelers were told they would benefit from broader connectivity, stronger loyalty alignment, and long-term fleet investments that Hawaiian could no longer fund independently.

Eighteen months later, the plaintiffs argue that the outcome has not matched the pitch. They cite reduced nonstop options on some Hawaii mainland routes, redeye-heavy return schedules that many readers openly dislike, and loyalty program changes that longtime Hawaiian flyers say diminished redemption value. They frame these not as routine airline integration but as signs that competitive pressure has weakened in our island state, where airlift determines price and critical access for both visitors and residents.

Advertisement

What is different about this filing compared with earlier debates is that it relies on developments that have already occurred rather than on predictions about what might happen later.

The HA call sign has already been retired. Boston to Honolulu was cut before competitors signaled renewed service. Austin’s nonstop service ended. Multiple mainland departures shifted into overnight red-eyes. And next, the single reservation system transition is targeted for April 2026, a process already well underway.

Atmos replaced both Hawaiian Miles and Alaska’s legacy loyalty programs, and readers immediately reported higher award pricing, fewer cheap seats, no mileage upgrades, and confusion around status alignment and family accounts. Each of those events can be described as aspects of integration mechanics, but together they form the factual record that the plaintiffs are now asking a judge to examine in Yoshimoto v. Alaska Airlines.

The 40% capacity argument.

One of the more interesting claims tied to the court filing is that Alaska now controls more than 40% of Hawaii mainland U.S. capacity. That figure strikes at the core of the entire issue. That percentage does not automatically mean monopoly under antitrust law, but it does raise questions about concentration in a state that depends exclusively on air access for its only industry and its residents.

Hawaii is not a region where travelers have options. Every visitor, every neighbor island resident, and every business traveler depends on our limited air transportation. The plaintiffs contend that consolidation at that scale reduces competitive pressure and gives the dominant carrier far more leverage over pricing and scheduling decisions. Alaska says that competition remains robust from Delta, United, Southwest, and others, and that share shifts seasonally and by route.

Competitors reacted quickly.

While Alaska integrated Hawaiian’s network under its publicly stated discipline strategy, Delta announced its largest Hawaii winter schedule ever, beginning in December 2026. Delta’s Boston to Honolulu is slated to return, Minneapolis to Maui launches, and Detroit and JFK to Honolulu move to daily service. Atlanta also gains additional frequency. Widebodies are appearing where narrowbodies once operated, signaling Delta’s push into higher capacity and premium cabin layouts.

Advertisement

Those moves complicate the monopoly narrative. If Delta is expanding aggressively, one argument is that competition remains active and responsive. At the same time, Delta filling routes Alaska trimmed may reinforce the idea that structural changes created openings competitors believe are profitable, and that markets respond when gaps appear.

What changed since October.

In October, we examined whether the case would survive dismissal and whether passengers could refile. That moment felt more procedural than what’s afoot now. It did not alter flights, fares, or loyalty programs.

This filing is different because it is tied to post-merger developments and seeks emergency relief. The plaintiffs are asking the court to prevent further integration while the merits are evaluated, arguing that each added step toward full consolidation this spring makes reversal less feasible as systems merge, crew scheduling aligns, fleet plans shift, and branding converges.

Airline mergers are designed to become embedded quickly, and once those pieces are fully intertwined, unwinding them becomes exponentially more difficult, which is why the plaintiffs are pressing forward now rather than waiting any longer.

The DOT conditions and the defense.

When the purchase of Hawaiian closed, the Department of Transportation imposed conditions that run for six years. Those conditions addressed maintaining capacity on overlapping routes, preserving certain interline agreements, protecting aspects of loyalty commitments, and safeguarding interisland service levels.

Advertisement

Alaska will point to those commitments as evidence that consumer protections were built into the core approval. The plaintiffs, however, are essentially claiming that those conditions are either insufficient or that subsequent real-world changes undermine the spirit of what travelers were told would remain. That tension between formal commitments and actual experience is at the core of this dispute.

Hawaiian had not produced consistent profits for years.

That is the actual financial situation, without sentiment. Alaska did not spend $1.9 billion to preserve Hawaii nostalgia. It purchased aircraft, an international and trans-Pacific network reach, and a platform it thinks can return to profitability under tighter cost control.

What this means for travelers today.

Nothing about your Hawaiian Airlines ticket changes because of this filing. Flights remain scheduled. Atmos remains the reward program. Integration continues unless a judge intervenes.

However, Alaska now faces a renewed court challenge that points to concrete post-merger developments rather than speculative harm. That scrutiny alone can bring things to light and influence how aggressively future route decisions and loyalty adjustments occur.

Hawaiian Airlines’ travelers have been vocal since the start about pricing, redeyes, lost nonstops, and loyalty devaluation. Others have said very clearly that without Alaska, Hawaiian might not exist in any form at all. Both perspectives exist as background while a federal judge evaluates whether the integration should be impacted.

Advertisement

You tell us: Eighteen months after Alaska took over Hawaiian, are your Hawaii flights better or worse than before, and what changed first for you: price, schedule, routes, interisland flights, or loyalty programs?

Lead Photo Credit: © Beat of Hawaii at SALT At Our Kaka’ako in Honolulu.

Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Hawaii

Lawsuit claims Hawaiian-Alaska Airlines merger creates monopoly on Hawaii flights

Published

on

Lawsuit claims Hawaiian-Alaska Airlines merger creates monopoly on Hawaii flights


HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) – An effort to break up the Hawaiian and Alaska Airlines merger is heading back to court.

Passengers have filed an appeal seeking a restraining order that would preserve Hawaiian as a standalone airline.

The federal government approved the deal in 2024 as long as Alaska maintained certain routes and improved customer service.

However, plaintiffs say the merger is monopolizing the market, and cite a drop in flight options and a rise in prices.

Advertisement

According to court documents filed this week, Alaska now operates more than 40% of Hawaii’s continental U.S. routes.

Hawaii News Now has reached out to Alaska Airlines and is awaiting a response.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending