Letters to the Editor
Special-needs costs due to state neglect
State Auditor Marion Higa's spin on the Felix Consent Decree spending issue provides an appalling disservice to taxpayers.
The state must look to the private sector to deliver such specialized expertise, and it is absolutely absurd as well as offensive to suggest that such compensation is lucrative. The current Felix climate creates doubt that mental health professionals can even afford to make a living in Hawai'i.
As a parent of a Felix child who has autism, I am amazed and extremely grateful that anyone would consider working as a mental health professional in Hawai'i. A dedicated and knowledgeable psychologist who has helped us literally survive for a year and half now is leaving Hawai'i because of the continuing uncertainty to the state's commitment to comply with the court-ordered decree (i.e., provide needed services). His suggested replacement is also leaving for the same reason.
The Legislature should stop whining about the cost of a federal court order, realize that this is the price of past neglect and do what is morally right. The angst, Ms. Higa, surfaces when special-needs families search for competent mental health professionals in the state of Hawai'i.
Mary Taylor
Women's facilities are a nationwide problem
In answer to Ty Whorton of Dallas regarding the need for more women's facilities at Hanauma Bay (Letters, July 24): The problem we have runs throughout this country, not only at Hanauma Bay. The problem is that women's restrooms are designed by men, not women.
We need more female architects and engineers to better design these facilities. Everybody knows that it take women longer to undress than men; therefore, more stalls should be installed in women's restrooms.
Bob Akamine
Hilo
Headline was biased against police officers
I didn't read the article with the headline "No charges against officers in Ala Moana shootout" (posted on The Advertiser Web site at 11:52 a.m., July 19), but it is biased.
"No charges filed ... " leads one to suspect, surmise or conclude that charges should have been considered. In my opinion, they should not have been.
The police are paid too little and are not appreciated for what they do, and that is to keep us safe from the ever-increasing number of unruly, violent people in our society. They are also currently trying to restore some sanity to driving on our public roads and highways and much more.
But I am expressing my opinion as the paper did. The difference is that I am sending this to Letters to the Editor as an opinion. The paper, on the other hand, put its opinion, in the form of a prejudicial headline, on the front page. That is not honest journalism.
Joseph M. Gardewin
Kapolei
Nonprofit privatization should be considered
Jerry Burris' July 22 column assured us that more privatizing of public services is coming, provided by profit-making firms. He raises a number of issues, but does not ask what services are appropriate to be privatized.
The public library system? The state Department of Human Services? The state Department of Health? The State Hospital? Is profit-making a proper motive for providing these services?
Consider the disarray in some of the Mainland for-profit prisons. Surely we can do better than that.
There are plenty of effective, efficient nonprofit organizations. Before the provision of any essential human services is proposed, I suggest a consultation with leaders of the nonprofit sector in Hawai'i. Much could be learned before we jump to relying on the profit motive.
Thomas A. Huff
Red-light-running madness must stop
In the wake of the fatal car accident on Fort Weaver Road recently, to my utter surprise and disgust, the car next to me continued on the Punahou Street off-ramp and turned left through the red light.
During the two or so minutes waiting for the light to turn green, I began to reflect on the reasons that motivate people to drive so recklessly. Is it just a blatant disregard for the laws, which are designed to ensure safety on the roads? Or is it because reckless drivers know they can get away with it?
The victims in the recent accident weren't so lucky. When is the madness going to end?
Jo Ann Kadooka
Cats in Kaka'ako Park should not be fed
On a beautiful Hawai'i day, what is better than a fishing trip to Kaka'ako Park? I have enjoyed the surfing grounds there for the past 30 some years. I reminisce how it used to be, but I enjoy what has become of this area — especially since there are so many families doing what quality time demands.
But I have a question for the so-called animal-rights activists or the just plain naive people who feel they are doing good by feeding all the stray cats living on the shoreline. Who takes on the responsibility of minimizing this population?
This beautiful area has become a flea-ridden animal wasteland that has no future for these homeless animals. Again, if you want to really help this increasing population of cats, please feel empowered to give them a nice warm home at your residence and at your expense.
B. Kawashima
Crime pays if you're on government payroll
Tell me that crime does not pay. It does if you are a convicted criminal who worked for some government agencies. For instance:
• Former FBI agent Robert Hanssen, a traitor and a spy, will receive his retirement pay from the federal government.
• Former city housing official Michael Kahapea stole millions of dollars and was sentenced to 50 years in prison, and he will receive his retirement pay from the City and County.
• Councilman Andy Mirikitani is a convicted criminal who not only is still drawing his pay from the city, but will also receive his retirement pay after he is finally sentenced.
Civilian government agencies are spending our tax dollars to pay convicted criminals. If those three criminals had been in any branch of the military, their convictions would have prevented them from receiving any pay, allowances or retirement compensation.
We need to change our laws to prevent this outrageous misuse of our tax dollars in the future and reinforce the fact that crime does not pay.
G.E. Jody Strickland
California provides examples of child law
California makes provisions for moral offenses against 14-year-olds, Penal Code 288 (c) (1):
"Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a) with the intent described in that subdivision, and the victim is a child of 14 or 15 years, and that person is at least 10 years older than the child, is guilty of a public offense and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for one, two or three years, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year. In determining whether the person is at least 10 years older than the child, the difference in age shall be measured from the birth date of the person to the birth date of the child."
California Penal Code 288a (c) (1) makes provisions for moral offenses against children under 14:
"Any person who participates in an act of oral copulation with another person who is under 14 years of age and more than 10 years younger than he or she, or when the act is accomplished against the victim's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person or where the act is accomplished against the victim's will by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim or any other person, and there is a reasonable possibility that the perpetrator will execute the threat shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for three, six or eight years."
Passage of the law raising the age of consent in a special session over the governor's veto in Hawai'i makes it worthwhile to look at the California example.
Richard Thompson
Kamehameha Schools must embrace everyone
At least in rhetoric or written policy, if not in action, Kamehameha Schools has shifted its prior rigid and exclusive Hawaiian-only policy to a preference for Hawaiians. However, discrimination based on ancestry continues to be illegal in Hawai'i.
Furthermore, if you read the will of Mrs. Bishop, her preference for Hawaiians is limited to that subgroup of boys and girls in Hawai'i who are either orphans or of indigent families. For this subgroup of children, the will provides both education and support. For the general class of beneficiaries, which clearly includes all boys and girls in Hawai'i, her will goes on to state her primary intent that her trust will first and chiefly provide a basic English education and that all other education is secondary to this primary trust responsibility. The primary goal expressed in the will is based on the Protestant ethic of producing good and industrious men and women.
The state in its legal and criminal battles with Bishop Estate has deliberately and consciously been derelict in not seeking to correct or require compliance with this basic and primary trust responsibility.
Ethically and legally, Kamehameha Schools must perform its primary trust responsibilities for the entire class of beneficiaries, the boys and girls in Hawai'i, prior to providing any secondary trust responsibility for any other child. Certainly, the primary trust responsibility must be met for each beneficiary before engaging in any other activities not part of the will of Mrs. Bishop.
The shame of it is that Kamehameha Schools, with billions of dollars, isn't even meeting its trust responsibilities for the children of Hawaiian ancestry.
State must keep pay commitment
After nearly a year of negotiations, after a three-week strike that caused many emotional, financial and academic hardships, and after the jubilation of supposedly reaching a contract settlement, the 13,000 public school teachers of our state are no better off now than they were a year ago.
Our teachers still have no contract because the state has continually backpedaled from its pledge — in writing — that the 3 percent pay differential for teachers with professional diplomas or approved master's degrees will be fully funded for two years.
This has paralyzed the entire settlement contract and all our hard-won guarantees. For example, teachers who are entitled to advance in the salary structure due to the settlement cannot. Teachers who would have retired earlier this year based on figures in the settlement cannot. The retention bonus that was to be distributed on July 5 was not.
Broader matters are also stalled. Accountability and education-quality issues such as the Peer Advisory Review cannot advance.
DOE incompetence and the state negotiator's inattention are at the root of this intolerable paralysis. The state agreed to the terms of the bonus back in 1995, pending funding. Yet the department failed to count and cost the number of teachers who would qualify for the 3 percent differential, and it had six years to do so.
The DOE, not the teachers, maintains the state's personnel records and payroll. Additionally, the state negotiator has publicly admitted he failed to read the settlement closely enough. The state made a mistake, and rather than take responsibility for it, it wants the teachers to pay for it.
The state has lately shown an alarming tendency to renege on good-faith agreements. It did so with the Hawai'i Government Employees Association and now it is doing the same to us. This is about fairness, trust and integrity. A deal is a deal.
The whole point of the 3 percent differential for teachers with professional and master's degrees is to keep Hawai'i competitive in attracting and retaining qualified teachers. Many Mainland school districts offer similar measures. Hawai'i must follow suit to keep pace.
Without a pay differential, a demoralizing message is sent to anyone teaching or thinking about teaching in Hawai'i: You are not valued. Who wants to work for a boss like that?
On Aug. 23, classes will reopen for all schools. We wish the state would honor its word and fully fund both years of the pay differential, just as the settlement contract states in plain language, so we can all get on with the real job at hand: teaching our students.
Karen Ginoza
President, Hawai'i State Teachers Association
