|
|
Friday, July 18, 2025 |
|
Fraud and Misrepresentation: IDG Geothermal Schemers Get Cold Reception from Hawaii County Council
By Andrew Walden @ 5:58 PM :: 1187 Views :: Hawaii County , Energy, Ethics
|
|
Re: Comm. 354: Presentation by Mr. Zuri K. Aki, Waika Consulting and Innovations Development Group regarding Geothermal Energy Development
(LINK: VIDEO of Brendon Lee testifying July 7, 2025, for Waika/IDG before Hawaii County Council -- begins at 1:43:00. Several of the Councilmembers asked pointed questions based on the testimony below.)
July 7, 2025
Dear Chairs and Members of the Hawaii County Council,
It is critical that the Council verify the controversial claims of expertise and historical development successes in New Zealand made by the principals of Waika and Innovations Development Group (IDG) (they are the same group of actors acting in concert). It is recommended this be done prior to the Hawaii County Council offering any public guidance or support. The following suggest areas of inquiry:
-
Successful geothermal project leadership in New Zealand? There is a record of litigation surrounding those efforts which include claims of fraud and misrepresentation. This has been publicly reported as recently as March of 2025 including links to New Zealand court records.
-
Details of a failed attempt at geothermal development in Hawaii with the company associated with one of their current paid consultants, Gavin Murphy and Eastland.
-
Unsatisfactory research work performed for DHHL in 2023 using $500,000 appropriated from the State Legislature.
-
This work was assembled using primarily previous work performed by bonafide, Hawaii research entities. What new research there was provided no meaningful analysis beyond the need for more analysis (and more funding).
-
The work was considered sub-standard and has led to DHHL being unwilling to engage with Waika in subsequent resource assessments, choosing instead to work directly with the Hawaii Groundwater and Geothermal Resource Center from the University of Hawaii, Manoa.
Additional questions arise when considering “experts” using state taxpayer funding to promote a private commercial enterprise. Many of the answers these questions and more can be answered by submitting a UIPA request to the University of Hawaii regarding contracts and quarterly performance reporting for OVPRI subaward MA2123 to Waika Consulting, LLC.
Questions to be asked include:
-
The relationship between UH and Waika.
-
What was behind the process that resulted in a UH contract with Waika, a technically inexperienced, for-profit consulting company with no due diligence or competitive bidding.
-
Records show that UH has not exercised meaningful oversight regarding the use of $2,760,000 in state taxpayer funding which is being used to promote Waika/IDG as a private, geothermal development company in Hawaii.
-
Why are there no local, Hawaiian scientific participants working with either Waika or IDG vs. academics and commercial consultants from New Zealand and the Philippines?
-
Why has there been no direct collaboration between UH and Waika.
-
Is the Council aware of ethics complaints filed against Waika for illegal lobbying and Vassillis Syrmos at UH for the awarding and subsequent mismanagement of this funding?
-
Are there any participants within their ‘consortium’ who are not being paid with taxpayer funds for their testimony and support?
-
This includes Kumu Cy Bridges, a cultural practitioner, being paid $62,500 for his ‘blessing’ of Waika/IDG.
-
Why are there no representatives from the Maori Trust attesting to Waika/IDGs past contribution to New Zealand geothermal development or their current professional/cultural standing within the New Zealand Maori community?
-
Was Gavin Murphy still with Eastland when Waika/IDG was involved in New Zealand?
-
Public information suggests he was no longer with the company by that point.
-
How much is Murphy being paid for his supportive 'testimony' and illegal, unregistered legislative lobbying in Hawaii?
-
Was Murphy part of Eastland's previous failed Hawaii development effort with Waika/IDG?
-
Why, if Waika was successful in their work with DHHL, are they not working with DHHL now?
-
In fact, DHHL will not work with Wika, opting to work directly with the HGGRC @ University of Hawaii instead.
-
Why, if they were successful in their work with DHHL, are they publicly attempting to discredit DHHL's ongoing efforts during their outreach presentations? Is that how successful business colleagues speak about each other? Why are we seeing Hawaiians against Hawaiians? Money?
Waika’s presentations are, from the standpoint of local experts in geothermal technology and community sentiment, misrepresenting their abilities, exaggerating their bona fides for personal financial gain, all while using public tax dollars. Waika does not represent the indigenous community, at large. An example of this can be seen during their first outreach event held at Hawaii Community College on May 16th, 2025.
(https://www.facebook.com/100002069281169/videos/pcb.9803050533107159/39504624 88599313)
In fact, they have angered that community to the point they have organized rebuttal outreach meeting, the first of which will be held at UH Hilo UCB 100, 5:30 – 8:00, July 25, 2025. This is not what Native to Native is supposed to look like, pay to play for the benefit of a group that feels entitled to this source of power.
Please, don’t simply take their word for anything.
Respectfully,
A concerned citizen who feels at risk from Waika principal’s reprisal.
|
|
|
|
|
|