Letters to the Editor
Punahou band also did itself proud at festival
Congratulations to the Hawai'i All Star Band, which performed in the Pasadena Rose Parade and at Disneyland. A big round of applause to the Hawai'i band directors and organizers of the special event for all the work that went into planning and preparation.
Farther south, in San Diego, the Punahou Marching Band showed its stuff in the annual Holiday Bowl Parade and participated in the Holiday Bowl at Quaalcom Stadium during the pregame show and in a massed band (including Arizona State and Kansas State universities) during the half-time festivities.
Two hundred twenty-one Punahou students accompanied by 25 chaperones and band directors (John Bridges, Gary Graser and Dave Gonzalez) also performed in a band festival that included a marching competition and adjudicated concert performances by the Jazz Band, Wind Ensemble and Symphonic Band. The Punahou students walked away with 19 festival first-place awards.
All Hawai'i band students and their band directors have much to be proud of for their hard work and great musical presentations.
Lindbergh Marzo
Punahou Band booster parent
State marching band did the Islands proud
I am writing regarding the Hawai'i All-State Marching Band. Last April, you wrote a story about the band performing at the Rose Parade. I had the wonderful opportunity to see these incredibly gifted young people at Band Fest, a preview of bands that were to perform at the parade. They were absolutely fantabulous! What music! What energy! What coordination! They were hair-raising and goose-bump-generating!
The people in the stands gave them a standing ovation, with me being one of the first to nearly jump out of my shoes. How very impressive they all were. The state of Hawai'i should be extremely proud, as I'm sure the parents already are.
Unfortunately, I was unable to attend the parade in person, but I was so taken by this band that I watched the televised parade seven times, just to see and hear them. As far as I'm concerned, they were the best out of all the other bands that played.
The people of Hawai'i need to know that these young people represented the state with an incredible, unpretentious pride. I am so very impressed with the outcome and the coordination that had to take place. Obviously, their leaders are just as blessed with talent.
Roberto Camacho Jr.
Los Angeles
U.S. military prevents invasion of Islands
Regarding Kyle Kajihiro's Dec. 30 letter, "Caring for the land": The commentary regarding the military presence and the subsequent return of military-controlled land here provided fodder for thought but is terribly misguided.
Does Kajihiro have any concept of what would happen to these Islands without a U.S. military presence? Has he considered the fact that these Islands are the premier outpost for any military operations in the pacific region? Has he considered that countries such as China and North Korea salivate to have control of the Hawaiian Islands? Has he contemplated that if the U.S. forces were to leave — which, if one reads between the lines, his letter intimates — what the consequences would be?
Surely the kanaka maoli, at least those who advocate a sovereign nation or a kingdom of Hawai'i, could not ward off the inevitable hostile invasion after our troops packed up and left.
I will grant that there has been damage done to the 'aina we all hold so precious, but the powers that be in the U.S. military here are doing what they can to work with the local government to rectify their unwitting damage.
The fact remains: The U.S. military presence here is essential to the protection of our shores from far more sinister invaders whose governments do not care about individual rights or the environment.
Imagine trying to negotiate a halt to the use of Kaho'olawe as a bombing range with your new government of Kim Jong Il. It would scoff at you and then hang you. Count your blessings, Mr. Kajihiro.
M. Gilleland
Punalu'u
Legislative honeymoon no longer is in order
I disagree with Robert Chanin (Letters, Jan. 1) that Richard Port should give Linda Lingle "at least one legislative session" before criticizing her for an emerging pattern of disingenousness.
If Lingle wanted such a honeymoon, she should not have made the rash and deceptive promises to potential voters such as vowing during her first month in office to give millions of dollars to Hawaiians for ceded lands.
She need not have rushed to side with landowners of leased properties while avoiding any intervention in the disastrous nurses strike. A one year's legislative honeymoon makes no sense when real people and real families are already suffering the painful consequences of her actions.
Moreover, it's certainly not too soon, in my opinion, to criticize her slew of appointments to her closest political cronies, friends and party insiders like Micah Kane, Randy Roth, Mark Bennett and Lenny Klompus to the highest levels of her administration. While some would call this loyalty, she's always brayed against "rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies." Why the double standard?
Patrick J. Daly
City should enforce air-quality standards
It truly is a poor species that fouls its own nest. I drove home from work at 11 p.m. on New Year's Eve, and all along that six-mile drive there was a heavy cloud of smoke. The smell was strong, and my 3-year-old daughter with asthma was coughing that night.
I wonder how many people will file lawsuits against the city for personal injury for allowing this to happen within the city limits (other cities do not).
Truth is, there are air-quality and fire-safety standards in effect in most metropolitan areas for some very simple and common-sense reasons: public health and safety.
David Studstrup
'Aiea
45 layoffs spark round of questions
I read the sad news concerning the termination of 45 staff positions from the Queen Lili'uokalani Trust because of financial losses in assets. But I have a few questions that need to be resolved.
- How come the trustees recently voted themselves a substantial pay raise?
- How come the trustees recently gave the director a substantial pay raise?
- How come the trustees are building themselves a multimillion-dollar corporate office?
- Why did the head trustee fail to diversify the portfolio and decide to put all of the investments into high-risk technology stocks, when the signs in the market for the last five years indicated major problems in the high-technology field, led by the failure of all those start-up dot.coms and the excess capacity in fiber optics? It was all there, if they took the time to read Morningstar and other financial news. Good returns on investments are not driven by wishful thinking.
- Finally, when did the maka'ainana ever chant an ali'i genealogy — in public?
George Thomas
Shapiro column wrong on Bush's Iraq policy
I'm puzzled that there has been no reader response to the David Shapiro column that posted a very negative view of the Bush policy on Iraq.
In my view, Shapiro first misses the mark by not addressing the fundamental issue facing us: Iraq is absolutely determined to possess nuclear weapons.
The possession of nuclear weapons by an Iraq, led by a homicidal sociopath, would drastically alter the balance of power in a region upon which the industrial world depends for oil production (and fundamental economic well-being). That very oil wealth coupled with nuclear weapons would amplify the leverage Saddam would have over neighboring countries.
If this comes to pass, we will look with nostalgia on the days when we only had Osama bin Laden and the Palestinian problem to worry about.
Yes, war is awful. But if we don't act before it is too late, we will face a far more difficult problem in the future.
So, to answer Shapiro's main points:
Is the danger from Iraq "clear and present" enough? Our 10-year policy of containment is failing and, unless we act while we have the will and political momentum, the chance will be lost and Iraq will certainly possess nuclear weapons.
Is the U.S. policy sanctimonious (hypocritical)? Contrary to what the "liberal-multilateralists, hate-America" left would have us believe, we're still the good guys and our leadership regarding Iraq is in the best interest of the Middle East, the rest of the world, and, oh yes, the U.S.
Jeff Pace
There's a better way to fight war on drugs
Barry Markowitz's assertion in his Dec. 27 letter that convicted drug dealers should get the death penalty demands a response.
First, there is no evidence that increased penalties deter people from using or selling drugs — the high is too appealing and the money is too good.
Generally, with intoxicating substances, the best means of control is regulation — not prohibition. For such a nasty drug as "ice," however, regulation is not viable.
Another approach would be to allow the use of other currently illicit drugs, such as marijuana. In fact, a link has been shown between Hawai'i's perennial marijuana eradication efforts and the rise of "ice" use.
Second, despite continued cries for more treatment space, most addicts can't get help until they are arrested. Drug courts are great, but they often leach treatment space from other sectors of the population.
One way to dramatically increase funding for treatment would be to divert seized assets from drug arrests away from law enforcement to treatment.
Most people don't realize that if you get arrested for a drug crime, the courts may seize your car, home or money, and it all goes to the police. By using that money for treatment programs, we might actually be able to help Hawai'i's drug abusers.
Spike Bradford
Commentary was wrong on leasehold conversion
Jerry Burris' column in the Dec. 9 Focus section indicates he is woefully misinformed on the leasehold conversion issue.
The column states that in the case of leasehold condemnation, there is good reason to defer and delay. No, there is not. The leasehold conversion ordinance was passed in 1991, after many, many years, giving the same rights to multi-family lessees that single-family lessees have enjoyed for years. Eleven years is more than enough time to explore all the ramifications of this issue, and they have certainly been explored.
There is no reason whatsoever, at this point in time, to "reinvent the wheel." The leasehold conversion ordinance is the law of the land. It has been upheld by the state Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court.
The statement that "decisions about whether to petition to buy in fee are made on a group basis; in some cases by a minority of apartment owners making the decision for the group" reveals ignorance of the issue. This is not the case. Each qualified lessee applies as an individual. No one can outvote or coerce any other lessee into doing anything with respect to leasehold conversion.
The statement about ending up with a hodgepodge of fee-simple and leasehold apartments in the same building is similarly revealing of lack of knowledge of the issue. Since landowners, notably Bishop Estate, have conducted voluntary programs to sell the leased fee interests under many condominiums, and since their prices have been far above the means of many lessees, there are many condominiums in Honolulu that are part lease and part fee. This is not an unfortunate result of leasehold conversion, as the column indicated.
The column states that "An apartment with its lease about to expire is virtually worthless." That is precisely the point. When the lease expires, it is worthless. The lessee is required to turn the property over to the lessor with no reimbursement whatsoever, and abandon his home, after paying for the development and infrastructure of the land, and paying the maintenance and property taxes, as well as the lease rent, throughout all the years of the lease.
Issues such as "shared appreciation," alluded to in the column, were considered when the ordinance was written. Resurrecting them now again indicates ignorance of the issue.
Mary H. Shelton
