Letters to the Editor

Show up to protest plans for beach park

There are four "options" to the proposed new Kailua Beach Park master plan "improvements," each including more concrete, paving and structures than the previous. Why must a new master plan always include major new construction and less open space?

I suspect because "open space" doesn't move money the way construction does. Let's put some support behind "open space" by attending the public information meeting April 15 at 7 p.m. in the Kailua District Park rec center conference room, 21 S. Kainalu Drive (behind the fire station).

More concrete, more steel, more structures, more paving and less open space. The city cannot adequately maintain the rusty, poorly designed structures they already have. The 12-year-old Kailua Beach Park comfort station/concession is rusting badly because of inappropriate materials. Why build more in one of the most beautiful open parks on O'ahu?

If you love this park, show up.

Larry Bartley
Kailua

Medical premium increases daunting

It is difficult to digest the 11.5 percent increase in medical premiums. Since I started using their plans five years ago, I have succumbed to a 41 percent increase. Have any of you gotten that increase in your salary? Are we becoming a sick nation that desperately needs perpetual care?

Perhaps we should all be mindful the next time we take a trip to the doctor. Do we need the evaluation from our primary-care physician that we have a cold or flu to take a day off and ride it out?

What we need is a better place for small businesses to pool their resources to get a better grip on these spiraling costs associated with healthcare premiums. How can any employer consider to pay the $880 for a family plan for any of their employees? This needs to be addressed ASAP with the help of our political representatives, considering the ratio of small businesses in the state, if they want small businesses to survive and prosper.

Keith Cronin

Governor's forum isn't policy-making

I agree that the public should be involved in policy-making decisions, as expressed in your April 9 editorial pertaining to the governor's tourism forum ("Too much state policy is being made in secret"). I do not believe, however, that it is the intention of the governor or the visitor industry to exclude the public from that process.

This forum was introduced as an opportunity for the industry to express honest and unmitigated opinions regarding the governor's agenda for tourism, not as a policy-making meeting.

As a member of the industry, I am particularly interested in the role of the Hawaii Tourism Authority and how it fits within her agenda, as I have grave concerns regarding its change in direction from being results-oriented to process-driven. This is due, I believe, to the number of members on the board with experience in process-oriented fields such as government and law rather than tourism, and I am anxious to have an opportunity to share these views.

Other forums, including HTA meetings, allow media and public access, which makes it particularly difficult to express opinions that may be viewed as controversial. There has never been a forum for healthy, unbridled discussion, and I believe this is a necessary starting point that cannot be achieved in an open forum.

It is my understanding that this is the first in a series of meetings. It is a starting point from which the governor can garner honest feedback from the industry. The industry needs this opportunity to debate the issues and share honest opinions with the governor, and the governor needs to understand the opinions and viewpoints of the industry. Subsequent meetings should include the public, and policy formulation should require public involvement.

Keith Vieira
Senior vice president, operations, Starwood Hotels & Resorts

Adult education classes aren't an entitlement

In her April 7 letter, Laraine Yasui goes around the tree to call Gov. Lingle irresponsible for cutting funds to adult education. She says that "the real cuts will be felt in the areas of greatest need: English as a second language, the high school diploma program, and citizenship/naturalization courses offered to residents applying for U.S. citizenship."

With all due respect, when did America go from being the land of opportunity to being the land of entitlement? Isn't it presumptuous to think you can move to America and have the taxpayers subsidize your English language and citizenship classes? And if you drop out of the free public education system provided by the taxpayers, why should you expect the taxpayers to subsidize your classes for a GED?

Gov. Lingle didn't say these classes have to be dropped, but the cuts may mean that they have to be self-sustaining. Funds are being cut everywhere because the money just isn't there.

Instead of complaining, I think the taxpayers should be thanked for their generosity in supporting these classes when the economy allows it.

Barbara Nakamura
Kane'ohe

Unfairness continues on Hawaiian benefits

Nearly 200 Hawaiians came to the State Capitol and pleaded, in oral and written testimony, late into the evening last week on behalf of legislation that originally sought no more than clarification of OHA's funding formula.

Year-to-year funding uncertainty has not only shortchanged OHA beneficiaries but has made it difficult to plan and implement programs. Many testifiers, including elders and youth, were upset when an unexpected amendment proposed to reduce OHA's revenues to a fraction by basing it on raw, unimproved land.

Although the bill states, "The Legislature accepts the responsibility and is committed to enact legislation that most effectively and responsibly meets the state's constitutional obligation to give the Hawaiian people the right to benefit from the ceded lands trust," House Finance Chairman Dwight Takamine killed it.

Senate Bill 1151 had survived two Senate and two House committee hearings, representing countless hours of effort by OHA and members of the Hawaiian community. Moreover, Rep. Takamine's decision was made over the objections of many of his Finance Committee members. The Democratic House leadership's unfairness to Hawaiians continues.

Mahealani Kamauu
Executive director, Native Hawaiian Legal Corp.

Aggressive driving doesn't belong here

About Women columnist Keiko Ohnuma said a mouthful in a nutshell when she admitted to having "no patience" for Hawai'i's drivers ("Road map to self-realization unfolds when foot hits gas pedal," April 8). The curious thing is that she seems to particularly value that lack in herself and to even deride that most basic of local driving traditions — politeness.

Apparently, growing up on the Mainland, where "escape" is a basic instinct and "the only way out is in a car" driven "like a maniac," she seems to have concluded that driving without concern for others on the road is at the very core of basic American values.

I beg to differ.

Something about aggressive, inconsiderate, horn-honking Mainland drivers bringing their hotrod road skills and general attitude to Hawai'i disturbs me. Maybe they ought to be quarantined for a few months upon arrival until they settle down.

Maybe Ms. Ohnuma should realize that we in Hawai'i have learned to live together by appreciating those very values — humility, politeness, consideration, caring for strangers and one other — that she seems to find so offensive on the road. It may be faded and tarnished, but the thing called aloha spirit is, after all, what makes living here a joy.

Maybe Ms. Ohnuma ought to consider the possibility that imported values such as aggression, ingratitude, rudeness and arrogance are in fact polluting these shores as surely as any toxin. She might even want to consider trying a bit of politeness on the road now and then; nothing drastic, maybe waving someone in or thanking someone for the same courtesy.

She might even find that common courtesy does wonders for someone with nowhere to go, fast.

Mike Weidenbach

Women's commission editorial was flawed

In the April 3 editorial "Commission funding cuts dramatize choice," erroneous claims were made regarding the Hawai'i State Commission on the Status of Women.

First, you stated that because "the commission is part of a larger network of agencies and organizations interested in working on such issues as gender equality" that we could offer our support and somehow continue the work. Unfortunately, the majority of these agencies are social service agencies and nonprofit organizations that are already strapped for cash, time and resources. As a member of one such organization, I hardly see how we can make up for Linda Lingle's negligence by giving more of our time, money and heart to see that equality is achieved.

In addition, you claimed that Lingle appreciates the valuable work of the commission but has other obligations to the taxpayers. Of course she has obligations. One such obligation is to see that all people are treated fairly, given equal access to resources, information and education. On such a limited and tight budget, the commission works to achieve all of these things. But it absolutely cannot rely on the mercy of others in order to achieve these goals.

Equality should be important to our new governor. If it's not, then perhaps she should look back and see how many other women fought for equality in order for her to achieve such a powerful position in the first place.

Gender equality is vital for both men and women to be free. Anyone who deems equality as solely a "women's issue" is sadly misled.

Catherine Betts
Kahala

A right to have nukes?

While it is regrettable that North Korea has nuclear weapons, doesn't it have as much right to possess them as France does?

Ted La Fore

Vision teams need restraining

At a time when the city's operating budget is short $76 million and the mayor is proposing an increase in property taxes, one can't help but notice two monuments to government waste where Hawai'i Kai Drive meets Kalaniana'ole Highway.

On the mauka side is an elaborate Hawai'i Kai sign with an embedded time capsule; on the makai side is a lava rock structure for storing canoes that belong to private organizations. Both are vision team projects.

If the city administration won't do it, the City Council must set forth ground rules on how vision teams are run:

• No funds should be allocated to vision teams because it creates the illusion that the city has a lot of money to spend on vision team projects and also because vision teams will spend every dollar allocated to them. (Neighborhood signs with time capsules for one of O'ahu's richest enclaves?)

• Only registered voters or property owners should be allowed to vote on vision team projects. On at least one vision team, children were allowed to vote.

• Each vision team should be required to make its recommendations to the neighborhood board and fully justify why the project is needed, what alternatives were considered and what would happen if the project is not funded. The neighborhood board must then forward projects that it approves to the cognizant city agency for inclusion in its budget if the agency deems it a high-priority item. This would help to provide perspective as to how the vision team project ranks with other city needs.

• Each vision team must show that other means of financing are not available and why city funds must be used. Why must vision team projects be funded solely by the city? Why couldn't the Hawai'i Kai sign be paid for by the developers, merchants and community associations in Hawai'i Kai? Why couldn't the canoe shed be paid for by OHA, the Kamehameha Schools (a major landowner in Hawai'i Kai) and other Hawaiian groups? It is incumbent on vision teams to ascertain whether federal, state or private funds are available to fund all or a part of the project.

• Vision teams should be required to comply with the Sunshine Law, since public business is being conducted.

• The City Council should make it known that it will consider only those projects that are essential to protecting or enhancing public health and safety. To those of us living in East O'ahu, it makes no sense to give a high priority to neighborhood signs and canoe sheds when a police substation is sorely needed to combat the many property crimes that occur in this area.

Let us hope that the newly elected City Council has the courage to rein in the excesses of the vision teams. Of course, the best course of action would be to abolish the vision teams when the times call for fiscal restraint.

H. Lau