Federal prohibition on parking unacceptable

What if you couldn't park in your own garage? The gardener could, the handyman could, so could the baby sitter. In fact, all the people who worked for you could park there, but you couldn't. Who would create or permit such an unbelievably stupid system? We have!

The people who built and continue to pay for the upkeep and operation of our federal buildings where they must go to conduct federal business are prohibited from using the parking facilities; even handicapped persons are barred. Parking is reserved solely for our "civil servants."

The rationale for this insanity is today's catch-all excuse — "terrorism." In the name of this bogeyman, everything is justified — from confiscation of nail clippers, to arrest without charges, to denial of trial by jury and freedom of speech.

Congressman Neil Abercrombie's office meekly claimed that there was no law permitting this removal of public parking, and indeed his office had received many complaints, but it was a dictate of the General Services Administration, our employees who manage the building and thus beyond his power to correct. Really? This is representing the people?

I call it the arrogance of power! These federal bureaucrats would become our masters if we allow it. And now our state minions are entertaining the same delusions of grandeur and enhancement of their power over us by eliminating public parking at the state building.

Two great leaders in our history had this to say:

"I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations." — James Madison

"The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." — Frederick Douglass

Rezoning of Kamilonui won't be supported

I would like to respond to Bob Hampton's Aug. 11 letter requesting information about my position on the future of Kamilonui Valley.

I completely oppose rezoning Kamilonui Valley and allowing further residential or commercial development in that part of Hawai'i Kai at this time. I am dedicated to preserving as much farmland as possible on O'ahu and have urged the City Council to adopt Resolution 04-198 in support of the East Honolulu Sustainable Plan. I fully support continued agriculture uses in the valley.

Kamilonui Valley is a much-needed green belt in a sea of homes. In addition, the people who live in these neighborhoods already spend too much time in traffic, and there are other concerns as well.

I recognize what most residents of Hawai'i Kai already know — that the infrastructure that supports their community has reached capacity. I strongly believe it would be irresponsible of the city to allow additional growth in this area, which is already at or beyond its ability to support the numbers of homes, people, vehicles and level of urbanization that already exist.

While I am fully aware of the desperate need for additional housing in Honolulu, this is not the proper time or place for addressing those needs.

As mayor, I will not support the effort to rezone Kamilonui Valley.

Winchell's advice: stop blaming the other guy

Ever since that guy wrote "If you don't like tailgating, get out of my way" a couple months ago, the Letters and Commentary section has been filled with "traffic," "left lane," "speeding," "tailgating," etc., almost daily.

But I have yet to read what the older-days newscaster Walter Winchell, who usually ended up his radiocast with "Watch out for the guy in front of the guy behind you," would say. Stop blaming the other guy!

Alas, it must be because I'm still back in Winchell's era.

We have a right to question war record

The Aug. 10 editorial "Attacks on Kerry's war record are unfair" is hypocritical. The Advertiser has continually attacked President Bush's record of military service in the Air National Guard during Vietnam, but now The Advertiser says it's unfair to question John Kerry's seemingly unbelievable earning of three Purple Hearts and a Silver Star in just four months of Vietnam service.

The fact is, John Kerry used his short Vietnam experience as an opportunity to build himself a 30-year career in politics and now hopes the mystique of his service will propel him into the White House.

Since Kerry is using his war record to campaign for president, it is only fair for others to question the validity of his self-aggrandized heroic record. Let's hear all sides of this story before we declare it is "unfair."

Experience mandate wouldn't be workable

Regarding the bill requiring three years experience in private and public sectors for candidates: This would be quite desirable but hardly pragmatic. We have enough trouble finding qualified candidates willing to run as it is. If memory serves, many races here have been uncontested, either at the primary or main election level.

On a more mundane level, I like your waterfront line drawing, but remember it was part of your masthead, not your mast-tail. Put it up at the top of your editorial column.

Regents should have to raise money for UH

In the fight between the UH Board of Regents and ex-UH President Evan Dobelle, we see that one time the board can't hire the right guy and the next time it can't fire the wrong guy.

The solution to the problem is to give the regents one assigned duty so that their range of ineptitude works the least damage. I strongly recommend that there be a job description for each regent, set by statute, that would stipulate that in order for a regent to continue serving a term, he or she must bring into the unencumbered general endowment of UH $1 million each calendar year.

Since some regents, including a few good ones, have not been rich, the 12 regents as a group must bring in $12 million a year to the general endowment. They will get on-the-job training in teamwork. The money must not be earmarked for pet projects, but must be left for the rest of UH to allocate in direct support of teaching, research and public service given by professors.

This would put an end to the lobster salad sort of fund-raising that is so tempting to some regents and presidents. The long-range aim would be an unencumbered endowment of $1 billion for UH.

Billion-dollar endowments for state universities are not unheard of. UH is already about 15 percent of the way there. We could make it in about 10 years if our publicly guided regents, supposedly with plenty of contacts among the rich and famous, could work earnestly at their jobs. It would be institution-building rather than personality-fumbling.

Public is still being denied access to Poamoho Trail

The Poamoho Trail was built in 1935 by the Civilian Conservation Corps using public monies and establishing a public right of way. It winds its way through forest land populated by a diversity of flora and fauna.

Interested parties may observe native birds such as 'apapane and 'amakihi. Botanists will find a variety of native plants such as na'ena'e, manono, pu'ahanui, and loulu palm. The trail features spectacular views as it winds its way above the Poamoho Stream.

Further along there are views of the Wai'anae Mountains after the trail crosses from one side of the ridge to the other. The trail eventually reaches the summit of the Ko'olaus overlooking Punalu'u and Kahana.

Looking back, there is a spectacular view of the Wai'anae Mountains. The trail remains on the Na Ala Hele State Trail and Access System roster and appears to receive occasional maintenance by the Forestry and Wildlife Division.

It is nothing short of amazing to me that access to this excellent and popular trail has been denied to the people who own it, the people of Hawai'i, since January 2002, by a private corporation — Dole Foods.

It has been 2 1/2 years since the closure of this trail to the public. The Sierra Club has gotten permission to use the trail once this year. As far as I know, only 14 people have been on this beautiful trail in the past seven months. Previously the trail was well used by scouts, bird watchers and various hiking groups. In a state that promotes healthy exercise and outdoor activity, this is gross underutilization of assets.

State law prohibits blocking access to beaches, so why not forest land? For 2› years, we have been getting lip service from the Department of Land and Natural Resources regarding this situation. However well intentioned, its record for results is dismal in this particular case. It has been successful in its opening of previously closed trails on other parts of the island, so why not this one? It should have less problem with Poamoho than some others due to its longtime use and the fact that it was built and maintained with public funds.

We need tools to fight ice

An Aug. 4 editorial called "counterproductive" U.S. Rep. Mark Souder's comments at a recent Big Island congressional hearing.

According to The Advertiser, Souder stated that Hawai'i would not lose federal dollars because of Hawai'i's weak enforcement laws, noting that officials will examine if money is being properly spent assisting our state law enforcement. The Advertiser concluded that a re-examination of Hawai'i's wiretap and "walk and talk" laws was "counterproductive."

What is "counterproductive" in dealing with our ice problem is to shovel money into treatment without strengthening law enforcement. No one, Republican or Democrat, argues that treatment is unimportant; however, neglecting the law-enforcement aspect only undermines our efforts against drugs. It is common sense to take dealers off the streets and put them behind bars. Stemming the flow of ice into our state via the airport is good for Hawai'i.

It does not make sense to keep Hawai'i laws weak. Our wiretap laws are feeble compared to the federal government's. To get a wiretap, police need to first win a contested hearing before a judge. The information required at that hearing often means identifying an informant or undercover police officer. Rather than endanger lives, prosecutors avoid wiretaps.

In the past, the "walk and talk" and "knock and talk" programs have enabled officers to question suspicious characters at the airport and check up on reported drug houses in the neighborhood. Most people in Hawai'i have heard of or live near such houses. What is less known is that our laws prohibit our cops from knocking on the door of that house to follow up on a lead. Also, consider that 90 percent of Hawai'i's ice comes from out of state through the airport. Restricting these programs has allowed ice to flow into our state and neighborhoods. Why not change the law to protect Hawai'i?

The axiom that "it's hard to diet if you live in a bakery" applies to Hawai'i's drug situation. It is impossible to adequately treat people with ice addiction by preserving an environment in which ice is readily available. By getting tough on dangerous drug dealers, we actually help those who want to be free from addiction. We have to stiffen our wiretap and drug search laws for the sake of Hawai'i's people.

In Hawai'i, drug dealers have it made easy for them. Our people live in fear of criminals, and the police fight crime with one hand tied. Should Hawai'i's constitution be wrongly construed to protect only criminals' rights? What about our rights as law-abiding citizens? Who will defend those? I will stand on the side of the law-abiding community every time.

People in Hawai'i would like to live in safer neighborhoods. We want dangerous thugs and drug pushers off the streets and a safe place to work and raise a family. To do this, we need a comprehensive strategy that includes sensible measures such as "walk and talk" and improved wiretapping capabilities. This is the most productive approach to fight drugs in our community.