The planned eviction of six families from Ahupua'a 'O Kahana State Park seems harsh, especially in such a difficult economic climate. Why can't the state just allow them the leases they need to stay?

Unfortunately, it's not that simple. According to the state attorney general, by law the Department of Land and Natural Resources can't issue new leases, even if, as is the case, three leases defaulted and were presumably available.

But while the DLNR's obligations are clear — it cannot allow any of the families who applied for the three leases to live in the park — it's also clear the law banning new leases is overly restrictive and needs to be fixed.

The evictions also highlight the need for a comprehensive review of the law and the vision that created the "living park," which has traveled a rocky road since the plan was created through Act 5 in 1987.

The concept evolved out of the state's decision to buy the valley in 1970 to protect it from private development, while allowing those living there at the time to remain.

What eventually emerged was a unique "living park" — the perpetuating of Hawaiian culture in the ahupua'a through those who have lived there for years, sometimes generations. Thirty-one long-term leases were offered to the residents in exchange for 25 hours a month to teach and maintain traditional Hawaiian practices for the public visiting the park.

In some respects, the plan succeeded. Large-scale development was kept out of this beautiful, historically significant 'ahupua'a, which has become a treasured resource.

DLNR believes, correctly, that because Kahana Valley is a public park with a public purpose, the number of available leases should be restricted to prevent the valley from turning into a subdivision.

Fair enough. But a limit set 15 years ago may not apply today. After all, the people who live and work in the valley are integral to the park's mission.

The Legislature needs to consider relaxing the restrictions next session, at least for the three defaulted leases, as part of a broader effort to update the goals and future of the "living park."

The lack of a current master plan to manage the park has kept contentious issues festering ever since the original leases were signed in 1993: What kind of cultural programs qualify? Are residents being properly credited for their work? Is the state doing enough to empower residents to meet their cultural obligations? The state needs to work with the valley's residents to reassess and clarify their respective responsibilities — in short, to develop a new master plan to guide the park's future development.

It's unlikely all the families who want to live in Kahana Valley will be able to. But as part of a clear plan for the ahupua'a's future, perhaps a few more families could be allowed to return to help the valley thrive.

In the meantime, DLNR should not evict the six families until they have found proper accommodations elsewhere. With O'ahu's shortage of affordable housing, it may take awhile. The families should be allowed the time they need to move on.