I'm pretty sure the transferability clauses also specified change of shareholders in a corporation voiding the permit. At least one of the drafts I read did.
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
OK, a real answer; the resort operators can still lead night dives off the resort beaches. Hopefully there will eventually be a Wailea Westin so Ulua night dives can return.
A few comments:
Why does the list of "holidays" include Christmas Day, but none of the Jewish Holidays or those of any other religion?
As far as the definition of "business," it means: "any commercial enterprise or establishments." The "including but not limited to" clause does not change the definition. The clause only eliminates the opportunity to call a commercial enterprise a "club" to circumvent the ordinance. If it is not commercial, it is not covered.
The insurance requirement demonstrates that the drafters of the ordinance do not understand insurance policy drafting. The ordinance says nothing about deductibles or exclusions. While it is clear the County wants to protect itself, it is like requiring automobile insurance and then allowing the driver to get insurance with a void-on-impact clause.
After reviewing the whole ordinance, my guess is that the County is trying to keep parks and beaches from being overrun with CORAs at the expense of others who wish to use them and to ensure that any CORAs meet certain minimum standards. While the scuba industry has certification requirements, there is really nothing to prohibit me from calling myself a dive instructor and giving dive lessons. My guess is that something happened to cause the County to consider there to be some problem that it had to control.
Some of you may recall an incident, I believe in the Maldives, where guests on a live aboard got bad air fills ... Everyone yelled that the government had to regulate dive operators to ensure safe air ... What happened in Maui that triggered this?
It's common for property owners to require users to have liability insurance if they're accessing their facilities. Up here, it's $2m to use the City facilities. I don't see that as a problem -- especially for scuba instructors that, for the most part, all are required to have $1m in order to be in teaching status.Also, since you are not doing business with, nor are you being paid by the county, I don't think that it is legal for them to impose insurance mandates on the beach operators with defined limits of coverage.
This is good for those of us that are single divers and need to find a buddy to beach dive, but it's still bad for the CORA dive ops. I was wonder if the resort operator at my wifes favorite hotel was going to get axed by this new law as well. Seems like a singling out of the local beach operators to me.
OH, did I just say "discriminatory" out loud?
You are somewhat correct.The dive operator at the Grand Wailea will not be affected by this because the hotel maintains the walkway that goes through the hotel property....I think.
Since I'm single this leaves me out in the cold...anyone out there who's really into SCUBA want to marry me and have a kid?? Looks like I'm gonna need a little Shaka Doug JR if I plan on having a future here on Maui!!