OHA PR campaign a momentous decision

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs is poised to take a giant leap from which there may be no turning back. It’s a decision that must be made only after the most careful soulösearching.

As reported yesterday by Advertiser staff writer Yasmin Anwar, OHA’s trustees propose a multimillion-dollar nationwide public relations campaign to combat what it correctly perceives as a dire threat to Hawaiian entitlements — not to mention OHA’s own existence.

"It’s not about advancing OHA," said Haunani Apoliona, the agency’s chairwoman. "It’s about advancing the interests of all Hawaiians."

Well, yes. OHA certainly has the duty to protect the interests of Hawaiians in the face of mounting legal challenges, and Hawaiians certainly need all the friends they can get. But there’s bound to be confusion.

OHA carries an unfortunate amount of baggage from the past that clouds its motives in the eyes of many observers, Hawaiian or not. Beyond its history of unproductive squabbling, it now awaits a scathing state audit that will accuse the trustees of failing to provide leadership needed to improve the lives of Hawaiians.

More to the point, the audit is also expected to accuse OHA of being less than careful in hiring — and slow to fire — investment managers for the $350 million portfolio it holds in trust. True, that was a largely different board with a different chairman. Still, many will feel uncomfortable as the present trustees undertake to parcel out similarly lucrative PR contracts.

Indeed, it seems likely that a significant portion of OHA’s PR work may be needed just to justify the Mainland PR campaign to Hawai‘i residents.

Beyond these immediate concerns, however, we wonder how deeply the trustees have pondered the implications of what may be a profound change of direction.

In the past, the aspects of Hawaiian business under federal purview have been handled relatively quietly, in lesser-known subcommittees where the Hawai‘i congressional delegation, led by Sen. Dan Inouye, could imbed needed legislation deeply within other bills. Thus Hawaiian entitlements have been generous without ever becoming the subject of coastöto-coast breakfast table conversation. This is how the delegation last year sought to handle the Native Hawaiian Recognition bill, which was seen as the answer to challenges to OHA and Hawaiian entitlements.

Even if OHA’s intention is to advance its cause more through discreet lobbying than through a broad public campaign, it will be all the more likely to become the subject of Mainland media comment and criticism. A danger might be that some would compare OHA’s effort to the old Bishop Estate trustees, who sometimes blurred the line between lobbying and something less wholesome.

And finally one must wonder what could make the cause of Hawaiian self-determination truly become a cause celebre on the Mainland. Would it result from a slogan like "Live Aloha," "Thumbs Up Hawai‘i" or even "Eddie Would Go"? OHA’s trustees must be careful not to get swept off their feet.

[back to top]