A recent survey of Island residents on their attitudes toward tourism in Hawai'i has been treated as a valuable, and cautionary, message for the Hawai'i visitor industry.

That's true enough. But the survey also offers an important warning to local political and policy leaders. It suggests a growing resentment among local residents about the effectiveness of government and its ability to truly respond to the needs of the people.

Results of this survey, and potential reactions to it, should become an important part of the upcoming election season, from council and legislative races to the contest for governor.

The survey was designed and analyzed by John M. Knox and Associates Inc. for the Hawai'i Tourism Authority.

It was the latest in an ongoing series of public opinion surveys designed to gauge public sentiment about the state's No. 1 industry.

Overall, folks like tourism and acknowledge its worth to the state by substantial margins. This has been consistent through the years.

But the undercurrent this year was that folks think government has become a little too concerned about tourism and a little less concerned about their own needs and values. This cannot be good news for anyone in office.

Knox interprets this as a generalized worry over growth rather than as a specific antipathy toward tourism:

"For the first time, in 2005 a definite majority agreed with (the statement) 'This island is being run for tourists at the expense of local people,'" Knox wrote. "We interpret this less as an 'anti-tourist' feeling than as latent resentment toward political and economic decision makers for not better managing the impacts of growth."

Not surprising, really. Whenever Hawai'i experiences a boom period, the counter-reaction is always about the dangers of growth, overdevelopment and sustainability.

We went through this in the 1970s, before the oil crisis, when the economy was booming and both state and counties considered a variety of growth-control ideas.

If this survey is any guide, government leaders will have to begin talking that talk again.

For instance, Knox reports that while local governments got good marks in the survey for marketing and supporting tourism, they received relatively more "poor" marks for building new infrastructure to keep up with growth, and for balancing tourism's benefits with problems it might create.

In other words, folks feel that government is more interested in keeping the tourism engine running smoothly than in caring for the needs of local residents.

There is little in this survey to suggest a politician would do well to go forth on a direct anti-tourism platform. That would be a non-starter. But it does suggest that political leaders and candidates would be wise to pay more attention to the real and perceived needs of Island residents.

And in the end, what is good for the people of Hawai'i also is good for tourism.

Jerry Burris is The Advertiser's editorial page editor.

Reach Jerry Burris at jburris@honoluluadvertiser.com.