Letters to the Editor

Heen association loses Andy my vote

I do not know much about Andy Anderson, but I do know I will not vote for him for governor now that he is being supported by Walter Heen, the former state Democratic Party chairman.

I still remember Heen's remarks during the 1998 governor's campaign when he called Linda Lingle "Wonder Woman — wonder why she came to Hawai'i, wonder why she stayed." This blatant use of race as a "wedge" issue I thought previously was the domain of the Republican Party — as a lifelong Democrat, I was appalled by his demagoguery.

Mr. Anderson, I am sorry, but if the likes of Heen are supporting you, then I cannot.

Lee Black

Phone solicitations farmed out to Idaho

I recently received a telephone call from someone claiming to represent the Radford High School girl's softball team. The caller was soliciting donations for the team schedule and calendar, which would provide advertising space to local businesses.

I was very impressed with the manner in which the caller represented herself and so decided to make a donation. I thought it impressive that a high school student had handled a sales call with such skill. She informed me that I would receive a fax requesting the billing information within the next hour.

Imagine my shock when I received a fax from a printing company in Idaho from the phone salesperson thanking me for my donation. Every day I read the headlines predicting more doom and gloom for our state, and yet a local high school, soliciting donations from local businesses, sends its business out of state.

Are there no printing companies in Honolulu?

Ken Gemelli

GOP seeks exclusion of military dependents

Throughout the nation, while American flags flutter and people are honoring the military, the firefighter, police and other emergency workers for their good deeds and personal sacrifices, in Hawai'i, the Republicans are pushing the reapportionment commission not to count the military dependents who are stationed here.

We have asked these young people to volunteer into the military, to put themselves in harm's way, to make untold sacrifices — sometimes the ultimate sacrifice — and yet we would not count their families?

We ask these young families to bear uncertainties and to live in a community that pretends they are not here by not counting them? They go to our schools, they drink our water, they drive on the streets and roads and they pay the 4 percent excise tax. When they are a part of the economy, they are a part of the infrastructure. How can you not count them?

Marsha Joyner
Don Hayman

Homosexuality is not a behavioral choice

In her Nov. 21 letter excoriating The Advertiser for publishing "pro-homosexual views" in a Nov. 18 story, Mary Papish claims "children of homosexual parents are more likely to experiment with homosexual behavior."

I am a 39-year-old heterosexual male raised by loving heterosexual parents. Yet I experimented with homosexuality, too, with other boys when we were all about 8 to 10 years old. So what? I also "played" with girls. This is normally how children first begin to understand their sexuality and discover their own biological orientation.

I did not "choose" my sexual orientation, nor does any person. The vast majority of doctors and scientists concur that homosexuality is not a behavioral choice; it is a biological function.

My parents were also Christians, and as much as they tried to indoctrinate me into their faith, I have remained as I was born — an atheist. Please don't misunderstand that statement — I explicitly "choose" to remain an atheist. Unlike my sexual orientation, which I did not and could not choose, I do have a choice when it comes to my religion (or lack there of).

Papish concludes that "the majority of Hawai'i's people do not favor homosexual parenting." I've got news for her: Homosexual parenting is a fact of life, whether any majority "favors" it or not.

Mitchell Kahle

Let's look on bright side of Hale'iwa economy

Hats off to Bob Leinau in his Nov. 22 letter for setting the Hale'iwa record straight.

The same morning that I woke up to the negative story Bob refers to, I also woke up to a near-record day, on "My Morning Report," for client Surf & Sea in Hale'iwa. Client Wyland Galleries is having a great month in Hale'iwa, as are others who are focused on positive action and doing what they can with the economic situation, rather than folding under the pressure.

Come on, media, tell us some of the good stuff as well. Your story sounded as if everyone in Hale'iwa were doomed. Not!

We've all heard enough doom and gloom.

Ron Martin

Housing development will worsen traffic

In response to a Nov. 21 article, Honolulu's commute-time status may be in jeopardy if Castle and Cooke Homes proceeds with its plans to add over 7,000 new homes on Koa Ridge near Waipio.

As eye-in-the-sky traffic reporter Tony Scott stated in Mike Leidemann's Nov. 20 article, "What's steadily getting worse is the trip from Central O'ahu ... yet we're still building homes out there faster than highways."

In fact, some Central O'ahu commuters spend over an hour per day driving to work downtown. That's nearly twice as long as the average commute in the city with the worst traffic in the country.

Yet Castle & Cooke insists on converting more prime agricultural lands to houses in Central O'ahu. It claims that if people didn't like the traffic situation, they wouldn't buy homes there. But what about people who have lived for years in Mililani and Wahiawa? Are they simply victims of Castle & Cooke's profiteering?

Some transportation experts estimate that continued growth in Central O'ahu will result in added travel time of five to eight minutes during peak commutes to downtown from Mililani. That means the Koa Ridge development is contributing to the loss of over an hour a week for those who live in Central O'ahu and work downtown. That's an hour that could be spent with their children and spouses, or contributing to Hawai'i's economy.

If O'ahu's decision-makers want to protect residents' quality of life from declining further, they need to embrace smart growth principles and stop the cancerous spread of housing development across Central O'ahu.

Randy Ching

Time out for food

Do smokers not have to eat?

Jeffrey Esmond

Jones Act stifles ability to grow and diversify

The Jones Act protects the cargo industry, and instead of being thankful to Matson and CSX, Hawai'i consumers should be outraged at our politicians for allowing such a monopoly where price gouging and price fixing appear obvious.

It costs $4,000 to ship a 40-foot reefer container from Los Angeles to Honolulu, while the cost is $1,650 to ship the same cargo from Singapore to Shanghai — nearly two-thirds less for about the same distance.

If other companies could obtain these margins, they too would not hesitate to service the Islands. It costs our company two-thirds more to ship goods from Hawai'i to Los Angeles on a U.S. carrier than it cost shipping the same goods from Hong Kong to Los Angeles on a foreign carrier. Does this give us an advantage to be more competitive and protect Hawai'i business?

If the Jones' Act were repealed, foreign carriers would stop in Hawai'i to pick up and drop off cargo on their way from the West Coast to Asia or vice versa, thus eliminating our No. 1 export — empty containers. Further, if the rates were reduced to a fair value, Hawai'i businesses would have a better chance to export their products to the Mainland to remain competitive and be successful, thus filling these empty containers. Outrageous freight charges are a monumental factor that prevent many Hawai'i businesses from exporting.

When free enterprise and competition are muscled by the government, such as by the outdated Jones Act, only three things are accomplished: Those who are protected are enriched, the consumers are overcharged and economic growth is prevented.

All one has to do is to look at Hawaiian Tel. When the market opened up for its competition, its rates dropped more than 50 percent in one week. Today, Verizon competes in an open market where the rates are dictated by supply, demand and the constant competitive pressure. It is still profitable, with a 50 percent drop in its rate, and the consumer has a choice.

The facts speak for themselves, and the consequences are real. Hawai'i's economy will never be diversified to its maximum potential and be successful until the monopolies stop. It would then allow "the lowest bidder" a chance to compete, as the price would be set by a free market.

Patrick Novak
1996 Small Business Exporter of the Year for Hawai'i

City should be neutral on private property

It was with great interest that I read Lee Cataluna's recent column entitled "Same story, different villains." I agree with many of the issues that Cataluna brought forth and felt compelled to provide additional insight to an issue that has only recently received coverage: conveying ownership interest from one private entity to another.

Since the issue was taken up by the City Council, I have been the lone voice opposing the taking of privately owned lands and conveying ownership to other private interests via the city's Lease to Fee Conversion Program. The intent of this program began as a somewhat noble attempt to provide an opportunity for people who could not otherwise purchase the leasehold property their homes sat on. Unfortunately, the implementation of the program has allowed even well-to-do individuals to capitalize on the opportunity to purchase private property in the name of "public purpose."

In the beginning, it was an effort to wrest lands away from Bishop Estate to provide ownership opportunities to lessees in the gated community of Kuapa Isle. Today, we find families that have invested their entire life savings into lands that are being taken from them in the name of "public purpose."

With Outrigger's request to have the city condemn privately owned parcels necessary for their revitalization project, we continue to test the limits of the city's right to transfer property between private entities as a "public purpose."

Prior to the Council's last Policy Committee meeting, I met with members of the Andrade family who have ownership interests in one of the parcels that Outrigger is asking the city to condemn. I explained that I have always supported the rights of property owners and suggested that they meet with my colleagues who have strongly supported the city's policy of lease-to-fee conversion and condemnation. At the Nov. 14 Policy Committee meeting, I was surprised that the majority of committee members had concerns regarding the proposed Waikiki condemnation, considering their voting record on other lease-to-fee conversion and condemnation matters. I believe that most people would agree that the project would be good for Waikiki, but not at the expense of private landowners.

I am hopeful that Outrigger will be able to come to an agreement with the parties that have ownership interests in the parcels targeted for revitalization. The city should not be involved with choosing one landowner's interest over another. That is a private matter. Government should work for all people.

I would like to thank Cataluna for bringing this issue forward and would like to invite her and her colleagues to come down and talk story about this and many other issues that concern our community. Maybe then she might think I'm a little better than a mere villain.

John F. DeSoto
City Council member