Posted on: Friday, February 20, 2004

Letters to the Editor

Fundraisers are needed to help out our schools

As a parent, I find it hard to understand how a supposed organized group of educators who control the futures of many young people can't even find ways to supply and educate, instead of frustrate, our children. Same old song, just different lyrics.

May I suggest that they do what the coaches do: hold fundraisers. Yes, that's right, if education is a priority, then we must treat it as a national title or goal to reach. Politics do not belong in school. It should not matter if your child goes to private or public school. Two-minute warning.

Most parents would welcome local boards

Who said there is a lack of parental involvement in the public schools? How do we define involvement?

I am saddened and disappointed with the principals interviewed for the Feb. 12 article who felt there are deeper issues than the need for education reform. The issues addressed were lack of parental involvement and a shortage of up-to-date textbooks and qualified teachers.

There are many ways to be involved in our children's education, such as volunteering, working with teachers to support our children's education plan, assisting with fundraisers, attending PTSO and SCBM meetings, music and sports programs, and other tasks. The majority of families in Hawai'i have two full-time working parents, and some parents have multiple jobs.

I believe that most parents would welcome having local school boards to create greater accessibility, to give them a voice, form parent collaboratives to address their district's specific needs, and provide opportunities for local business involvement.

There is no doubt that our educators need our support as we know many of them work long hours and contribute personal funds to meet the needs of their students.

Having local school boards as a new beginning to education reform in Hawai'i speaks to the need for grass-roots involvement. I encourage fellow parents to support education reform and be involved in school activities. I encourage educators and politicians to look at several successful public-school systems, be open to change and make informed decisions.

In the end, caring for our children's quality of education today will ultimately impact future generations to come.

Let the public decide on local school boards

As a proud parent of an honor-roll senior at Kalaheo High School, and a public-school teacher who is about to move into educational leadership, I'd like to express my views on the current controversy over local school boards.

First, many would have the public believe that all teachers and administrators are opposed to allowing the voters to decide whether or not we should have local school boards. I can't speak for others, but I can speak for myself.

Having seen a draft of a proposal for such a move, this teacher is fully in support of giving it a try. It offers a way to use the current structure in place at the district level to move toward serving the needs of those people within those districts, while leaving a lean state commission responsible for overall equity consistency (academic standards, reporting standards) and compliance with federal and state law. Schools would get 90 percent of the operating budget based on a weighted student formula, to spend as they see fit, to meet the needs of their particular students.

We are no longer a plantation economy with a significant segment of the population that is not literate enough to make decisions about how money is spent to educate our children. We no longer need the "parental" legislator to make those decisions for us, while sending his or her own children to private schools.

Let all of us who pay taxes to support public education, including those of us who send our children to public schools, decide the matter.

Don't dwell on the past; embrace our military

I have been an avid reader of the Letters and Commentary section of your paper for many years now and have heard from people crying foul about the way the Hawaiians have lost their land.

In many ways it is a shame how we came to be Americans. My family lost the lands that we farmed for over a hundred years. But the fact remains we are now, and have been for quite some time, Americans, and most of us are proud to be so.

Few oppose the new unit coming to the Islands, the Stryker brigade, but the soldiers will bring their families, which means money for our economy. No matter how you look at it, that is always a good thing. The military is a foundation of our economy; additional units will only improve our chances to provide raises for our police officers, renovations in our schools and possibly, dare I say, improvements to our roads.

Military personnel are willing to give their lives for us; the least we could do is be thankful.

Happy to be Hawaiian, but proud to be an American.

Hawaiians are lacking legal representation

Interest in some form of Hawaiian sovereignty continues to grow.

Movement is afoot for Hawaiians to organize themselves. Regardless of what form Hawaiian sovereignty takes, no contracts, leases, treaties or any other legally binding documents can be signed with the state of Hawai'i, the United States of America or anybody else until there is a legal entity that represents all Hawaiians.

Where is this organization that speaks for all Hawaiians, that is recognized by all Hawaiians, that is legally entitled to negotiate and sign documents on behalf of all Hawaiians? Who are its officers?

According to such an organization, what is the legal definition of who is a Hawaiian and therefore is represented by this organization and entitled to a share of its benefits and obligations?

Until such an organization exists, there is no one for the state of Hawai'i, the United States of America or anyone else to work with. It seems rather premature to debate what form Hawaiian sovereignty should take until a legal organization representing all Hawaiians is created.

Opening lanes a better cure than rail transit

I am amazed to see our great leaders now seriously thinking about mass transit as a solution to our traffic-congestion problems. Don't they realize that the people who will ride the train are primarily people moving from other methods of public transportation, primarily the bus? Don't they realize that for people to use mass transit, it has to be convenient and timesaving?

In our last plan for mass transit, the location of the system required the majority of the proposed riders to also transfer to some other means of transportation to get to their final destination. Also, parking was not adequately addressed as to where people who had to drive to the station would park their cars, not a big problem since not many automobile users would be using the train anyway.

Has anyone considered what would happen to our traffic congestion during the building of this mass-transit system? Remember the time it took to build the airport viaduct? We would have more traffic problems, not less, in the 10-plus years of construction.

A far better solution for the traffic problems is better use of the existing roadways, including the zipper and contra-flow lanes. Nothing is more aggravating when you are stuck in traffic gridlock than to see a contra-flow or zipper lane with minimal usage. These lanes should be opened to all drivers.

One of the biggest traffic problems on the city streets is buses blocking lanes of traffic as they stop to load and unload passengers. We need more turnouts for the buses to pull off the road for loading and unloading. If you noticed during the bus strike, traffic was actually better.

Given history, U.S. must defend freedom

What a sobfest! The spate of letters on Feb. 18 whining about Iraq, President Bush, Gov. Lingle and the Republicans are a tonic for an optimist like me. The message they convey? America is strong enough to carry on her broad shoulders a massive tonnage of aging infants, gutless ingrates and pusillanimous gasbags of the crybaby boom persuasion who never even acknowledge, let alone appreciate, the freedom America provides them 24/7.

Much as they contort themselves to avoid seeing it, the truth is quite simple: Freedom is not free. Nor is it the natural order of things. The history of man depicts the brutal order of things: The strong prevail over the weak. If we are to continue this two-and-a-quarter-century experiment in the consent of the governed, freedom must be defended.

There is an alternative, however. Elect the turncoat, "Hanoi John" Kerry, as our 44th president so he can turn our national security interests over to the United Nations for safekeeping.

If that happens, folks had better stay out of tall buildings and such other high-visibility terrorist targets as shopping malls, theaters and big-box retailers.

Driving with attitude

The reason we see more and more traffic fatalities is not due to stricter laws not being in place. Isn't the posted speed limit "the law"? We should not have to raise fees or take more money from taxpayers just to enforce stricter laws for drivers that won't work. The problem lies with the person's attitude toward driving.

Use contra-flow lane on Wai'alae Avenue

In view of the ongoing development and many new residents in Hawai'i Kai, may I suggest that during weekday mornings Wai'alae Avenue be contra-flowed town-bound from the freeway exit down to the Kapi'olani Boulevard/Old Wai'alae Road intersection?

This would alleviate some of the town-bound freeway traffic, especially when there may be accidents that back up this traffic all the way to Lunalilo Home Road.

I am one of those who leave home later to avoid the school traffic but feel the effects of these new homes, as it now takes 10 to 15 minutes longer to get to downtown Honolulu. In search of the most efficient means to get to my destination, I have tried the Diamond Head route, the freeway or via Wai'alae Avenue, and from these routes, also tried Ala Moana Boulevard, Kapi'olani Boulevard and King Street.

Consideration of this suggestion would be appreciated. Thank-yous are extended to Messrs. Haraga and Ishikawa and all who are part of the transportation team for their efforts in trying to lessen our frustrations with islandwide traffic and for keeping us informed as to the progress of their work.

Reckless drivers are playing with danger

I grieve for all the accident victims and their families. The recent rash of vehicle and motorcycle accidents is alarming.

We drove over glass on the Kahekili, not knowing a cyclist died that morning in a crash there. The next day, while returning to Kane'ohe on the H-3, two young men on motorcycles whizzed by us, snaking their way through traffic. Suddenly one cyclist did a "wheelie" and stood up on his bike for quite a distance. His friend also followed suit, doing the "wheelie" and standing as he sped to catch up with the first motorcycle. I was shocked! They were long gone, direction unknown, by the time we reached the merge to the Likelike/Kahekili.

These imbeciles were reckless and jeopardized their own lives and others on the highway. Unfortunately, police officers were not in the vicinity to witness or stop them. These were not servicemen, but locals showing off.

If they continue riding their motorcycles in this manner, they may end up with more than "road rash." Hurting themselves is one thing; hurting other motorists on the highways is another. May their engines freeze and tires flatten.

Column was Democrat bashing in disguise

Jerry Burris' column in the Feb. 8 Focus section about the Hawai'i Institute for Public Affairs was just an attempt at Democrat bashing. You didn't fool anybody with the comment about "this is where the Democratic Party should be today," attributed to some unnamed longtime Democrat. It was a sneaky attempt to say that the Democrats aren't business friendly enough or are out of touch with what Hawai'i needs. That's debatable, but clearly your column had an agenda, and I don't consider it fair at all.

The same goes for the comment you reported, anonymously attributed to a "political veteran," that "this is where all the people are who ran away from the Democratic Party." What's the matter? Didn't the person who made the comment have enough guts or integrity to give his or her name?

Makes me wonder if the person is real or a prop for your commentary, which is what I consider your piece to be. Although there were some labor-friendly people there at the dinner, the preponderance of those attending seemed to be more business friendly than labor friendly.

Why didn't you just end the piece by urging readers to join the GOP and give an address and phone number of the local Republican Party headquarters?

You came close to that anyway.

Questions remain in Bishop Museum firing

I read with interest the story about Bishop Museum President Bill Brown firing Dr. Guy Kaulukukui last month. I have known Dr. Kaulukukui for nearly 40 years, and although I respect him greatly, I am prepared to consider the issues critically. A number of questions come to mind:

• What was it about the content of the letters that Dr. Kaulukukui, the museum's vice president of cultural affairs, could not bring himself to sign?

• If Dr. Kaulukukui was responsible for the museum's handling of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) issues, presumably someone less fully immersed in the issues and with other responsibilities felt moved to draft an unacceptable letter and attempt to force Dr. Kaulukukui to sign it. Who was that person and why would he or she attempt to pre-empt the museum's established processes?

• Why was it so critical that Kaulukukui's signature be affixed to the letter? Was the effect of the letter likely to upset Hawaiian groups intimately involved in repatriation and reinterment of Hawaiian remains? Was it necessary that a noted Hawaiian family name be on the letter as opposed to that of others less known to care for the Hawaiian culture and the sensitivities of the host culture?

• If the museum already assured the Moloka'i group that its claim had been recognized and the U.S. Parks Service directed that the remains should be returned, then why on Earth would someone thwart the intent of NAGPRA?

• Does the institution bearing the name of the last Kamehameha, Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, truly want to be seen as seeming to interfere with the return of Hawaiian remains to the earth from which they were taken?

• Who at the museum actually thinks that Princess Pauahi or her husband, Charles Reed Bishop, would have allowed the Hawaiian remains to become part of the museum's collection in the first place or otherwise slow the reburial of Hawaiian remains?

This episode rings of a misunderstanding of Hawai'i, its culture and the respect that all of its people, Hawaiian and non-Hawaiians alike, share for the treatment of the remains of beloved ancestors.

If the Bishop Museum wishes to continue to be considered an honest broker and a respected institution in Hawaiian circles, it must not force its employees to choose between principle and obedience to the interference in an established process by one or more executives.