Letters to the Editor

More bureaucracy will only hurt classrooms

Gov. Lingle's proposal to create seven school districts (and accompanying staffs and programs) will only take away funding from the classrooms. Millions of dollars will be needed to put in place the new school districts, its staff, and the professional curriculum and program specialists to support the new districts.

The problem with the current public school system is the lack of proper funding to fix the existing facilities; the construction of more classrooms, cafeterias, laboratories, sports facilities; the need for more books and school supplies; the improvement of the teachers' pay; the hiring of more security staff to protect the children from bullies and outside elements; etc.

Politicians (governor and Legislature) can help the current system work by supporting the Board of Education and the Department of Education, by providing adequate dedicated funding and by not obstructing the educational system through micromanagement.

Let's make a surefire move: lower class size

The latest argument used in support of local school boards is that we might as well try something new.

Because it appears that our leaders don't agree on this issue, and we want to try something different, maybe what we should do instead is lower class size.

Every single expert agrees that small class size, especially in the early grades, makes a positive difference in school success for our children. Our teachers, parents and principals are always pushing for it. In fact, it seems to be one area that the legislators, the governor and Superintendent Pat Hamamoto feel the same about.

Heads should roll for homeless solution

I am writing to publicly ask that Gov. Lingle act immediately to remove the person or persons whose decision it was to spend nearly a quarter of a million dollars of our tax dollars on razor barbed wire and whatever other disgustingly inhumane measures were applied to prevent homeless people from occupying certain areas under the Nimitz Highway.

I was absolutely appalled at seeing and listening to a state Department of Highways spokesman proudly telling the media of his department's efforts to rid the state of this "problem." This "problem" involved real human beings engaged in an unfortunate mode of survival.

And for many who enter this underworld, either voluntarily or involuntarily, there is seemingly no perceivable alternative. Many ostensibly suffer from mental illnesses and are bound to seek shelter in unusual places. They are salvaging their lives, and irrespective of what others consider to be "life," living on the ground under a freeway is all they have for the moment. For the most part, these people are completely harmless to other people whom they happen to encounter when wandering from their "hiding places."

Kingdom knew how to take care of roads

Driving while trying to avoid potholes, I cannot help but think how road and highway improvements were handled here in Hawai'i well over 100 years ago. It was quite efficient and very community-based. Shouldn't policies and societies improve with time?

Over 100 years ago, the minister of the interior would appoint a road supervisor in each district of the Hawaiian Kingdom. There were 25 districts: eight on Hawai'i; six on Maui, which included Moloka'i and Lana'i; five on O'ahu and six on Kaua'i, including Ni'ihau. In each district, the road supervisor directed "the public labor on roads, bridges and all public highways ... "

If it was believed that the district road supervisor was in breach of his duties as defined by law, a written complaint signed by a minimum of 12 district residents could be presented to the minister of the interior for a hearing. Road supervisors proven to be in breach of the law would be dismissed.

Kingdom law provided, upon request of at least 50 district taxpayers, "that a new road, highway or street be opened," or old ones be "shut, widened or altered." The minister of the interior would have a judge select 24 names among the district's legal voters. Of this group, a jury of six people would be chosen "to decide on the propriety of the measure proposed." A majority decision would be certified immediately and acted upon by the minister of the interior.

Surely, more than a century later, we should be able to repair roads more efficiently and effectively, build new access roads in needed areas such as Wai'anae, and hold someone or some governmental department accountable for the inability to serve the public good.

'Kahuna' protesters not consistent in objections

I recently saw a story on one of the television news stations that aired complaints from some Hawaiian organizations that were outraged at Dodge naming its concept vehicle "Kahuna." They said naming a vehicle Kahuna is an insult to the Hawaiian ways or to the "spiritual" meaning of the word. Dodge scrapped the idea.

So I decided to thumb through the phone book to see if any Hawaiian companies were using the Kahuna name in the commercial arena. I found Big Kahuna Aviation, Big Kahuna Fabrics, Big Kahuna Pizza and finally Kahuna Distributors.

So to keep things in "spiritual" perspective, am I to surmise that our traditional kahuna of old were pilots who wore garments ordered by Kahuna Fabrics, they were pizza lovers and they spread their teachings through a distribution company?

I'm not making fun of Hawaiian history or tradition, but if anyone is going to scream because Dodge wanted to use "Kahuna" for marketing purposes, why haven't our Hawaiian organizations been consistent in their conviction?

Lay-net fishing ban would infringe on rights

On Jan. 30, I attended a public meeting at Benjamin Parker Elementary School to discuss the proposed ban on lay-net fishing. I am kanaka maoli, with rights as a Native Hawaiian protected in the state Constitution. This was very important to a majority of the people I listened to.

Across the state, we have seen a decline in fish stocks along the reef ecosystem. This is not due to Native Hawaiians. The practice of malama ke kai has been passed down through the generations. We are taught you take only what you need and no more.

The depletion of fish stocks is directly due to the overfishing by commercial and foreign fishermen who do not understand or practice Native Hawaiian gathering customs.

The only way to solve this situation is to implement a limited permit process for commercial fishermen; all Native Hawaiian commercial fishermen would be exempt. We need to be able to teach what it means to malama ke kai; commercial fishermen who do not practice this custom take all they can in order to make the almighty dollar.

I am against a ban on my rights to lay a net where I want to, when I want to; I am in favor of limiting commercial lay net fishing and a total ban on all foreign fishermen who do not understand or practice the custom of Native Hawaiian gathering techniques.

State has misled public on public worker talks

Gov. Linda Lingle and state chief negotiator Ted Hong have misled the public on Hawaii Government Employees Association's negotiation and arbitration. To correct their misinformation, the Bargaining Unit 13 Negotiating Committee presents the facts regarding our 2003-2005 contract negotiations:

HGEA initiated talks in September 2001 with the Cayetano administration, but it refused to discuss cost issues and at one point refused to meet, citing the upcoming change in administration.

When the Lingle administration took over, talks did not immediately resume, which was understandable because they needed some time to organize. However, the employers continued to drag their feet in the months leading up to February 2003 when impasse was declared by law. Yet, even after that date, we made every effort to settle the contract at the table. We repeatedly asked to meet with them, we continued to offer reasonable proposals and we remained patient. The employers responded by refusing to negotiate any cost proposals.

We finally got a wage offer when they submitted to arbitration their final offer of zero percent for the first year and 1 percent for the second year. It is clear from evidence presented at the arbitration hearing that the employers can afford a more reasonable increase.

The governor and her chief negotiator say that arbitration doesn't work. And the governor says she wants to blunt the "unfair advantage" the union has in binding arbitration. In reality, the arbitration panel determines any award based on evidence presented by both sides. This is a very fair process. The employers fail if they cannot provide evidence that there is no money for a reasonable wage increase. Perhaps this is what the governor is referring to as our "unfair" advantage.

The chief negotiator suggests that the HGEA "stay at the table with us, negotiate with us." Yet when we did that, the chief negotiator did not offer anything at the table and said "no" to any cost proposals. And the arbitrator even mediated during arbitration, but the employers were not serious in trying to resolve the dispute. That isn't the way to negotiate. If the chief negotiator wants us to continue to stay at the bargaining table, he has to do better than that. He left the HGEA bargaining units with no other option than arbitration.

Anti-gay rhetoric will spew again

The religious leaders of Massachusetts, during the course of the next couple of years, will tell the people of that state many things, most of which is in the best interest of the people everywhere and will enrich their lives. However, some of what they are about to hear from them this year and the next is a laundry list of lies. I know this because I have experienced it firsthand in my state.

Back in 1998, the issue of the vote to ban same-sex marriage faced this Hawaiian who lived in Hawai'i at the time. There were two years' worth of hateful anti-gay rhetoric about this issue on the news, on TV, in radio ads and with sign-wielding protesters.

There was a huge call to arms by the Catholic Diocese of Hawai'i and other religions to "defend traditional marriage," which resulted in a huge amount of animosity toward the gay community in my state. They made everyone believe that the moral fabric of the state was going to literally fall apart if gays were allowed to marry. For the first time in my life, I was no longer proud of the state I was born and raised in or its religious and political leaders.

As was expected, the end result was the state overwhelmingly voted to ban same-sex marriage and amend the state Constitution. But the issue tore Hawai'i apart, drove a wedge between the gay community and the state's churches and ultimately put everyone through a couple of years of hateful name-calling and fear.

After the issue had faded, I began to question the whole ordeal. Would the churches in Hawai'i have fallen apart if gays were allowed to marry? My answer would be no. How could they have? Many of the leaders who were spouting anti-gay marriage rhetoric were the same leaders who told us from the pulpit of Catholic churches that if our faith were strong enough, nothing could destroy us. Their actions spoke against their words. The same leaders who told me I could be strong told me that if I married my partner, I would ruin my church.

The state that allows gays to marry could never force any church to marry two people of the same sex. That would be against the right of freedom of religion and cross the lines of separation of church and state. As we have already seen in Canada, where gays are allowed to marry, and in Vermont, where civil unions are performed, these two places have not fallen into the sea nor have the moral convictions of their religious institutions deteriorated.

In the end, as painful as it was, I believe the whole incident made the Hawai'i gay community and myself stronger. Wonderful things grow in the shadow of adversity.