There's a lot more to the sale of Verizon

The Advertiser's editorial board does a disservice to its readers by focusing on only one aspect of a very detailed analysis provided by my office on the proposed sale of Verizon Hawaii to the Carlyle Group ("$20 credit shouldn't ensure Verizon deal," Jan. 7) .

While the "customer appreciation credit" would give Hawai'i's consumers a tangible benefit, the other conditions that the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs has proposed do far more to protect the interests of Hawai'i's consumers than the editorial leads people to believe. The purpose of these conditions is to insulate customers from much of the risk associated with the proposed transaction, particularly in the early years when debt service obligations and transition burdens are most severe.

First, requests for general rate increases would be precluded until 2009 unless the Public Utilities Commission finds a compelling financial reason to consider one. If that should happen, Carlyle would be required to first invest additional equity in the new telephone company equal to the amount it seeks from its customers. As further protection to consumers under this scenario, over two-thirds of yellow page advertising revenue would be counted against the company's revenue requirement for the purpose of calculating any such rate increase.

The goal here is to allow time for equity to build to an acceptable level and lessen the risk of the transaction to consumers. Since it is impossible to entirely negate Carlyle's opportunity to seek rate relief, the equity infusion and directory revenue imputation serves two purposes: first, to strongly discourage a request to increase rates during the moratorium; and second, to ease the effect on ratepayers should an increase prove necessary.

Additionally, the conditions would ensure that the transaction and transition costs would not be borne by consumers through a rate increase.

While $20 in the pockets of customers is nice, it was certainly not the motivating factor in the consumer advocate's agreeing to conditions that should be required if the sale is approved.

It's a shame that it's come to this

The Kaimana Beach Coalition has performed such an excellent job of misinforming the public about the restoration of the Natatorium that our new mayor has decided to stop the project.

Five years from now, the Natatorium will be in the same limbo. There is no way that approval will be given to tear down parts of a building that is on the National Historic Register. Even if demolition were possible, the costs would be more than the restoration budget, and the potential loss of the existing beach would be great.

It is a shame that a small special-interest group could stop a project that went through an appropriate public review and approval process. The delays are what have added cost to the project — not the project itself. It is sad to think about the enjoyment the public would have gotten out of the use of this facility if the work were allowed to be completed several years ago.

While other cities like Long Beach and Indianapolis have pulled off amazing international swimming events in temporary pools, ours is allowed to continue the slow deterioration process. These pools were then dismantled and sold to other communities at half price for permanent use. These same pools could be erected as permanent pools in the shell of the Natatorium — at less cost then tearing it down.

Biases got in the way of education column

Cliff Slater makes a couple of thoughtful points in his Jan. 3 column "Education: tough love and no excuses"; unfortunately, his personal biases send the message way off track.

Perhaps Slater should ride the bus to UH, befriend some sociology professors and watch a non-mainstream movie.

While Slater quotes reliable data about science and math achievement, and correctly asserts these subjects need much more focus in our schools, his value statement on what is "essential" in order to "cut it" or "get ahead" in society misses a crucial point — that there are many positive ways young people in our state can succeed in life and contribute to society.

Regarding our public educators, perhaps we should start by compensating principals and teachers according to the true value they have in the development of our children and society. And while we're at it, forget about finger-pointing.

DOE's concepts on math don't add up

I was shocked when Greg Knudsen said Hawai'i doesn't want its children to learn the basics before immersing them into math concepts, including algebra ("State math standards ranked last nationally," Jan. 5).

I and many others always thought you should learn to walk before trying to run. I think that analogy is more than appropriate in this case. I came from a generation wherein rote training was used for math skills. I think that system has served me far better than what is presently being given to Hawai'i's students.

I wonder if there's any connection between Hawai'i's continuing low test scores and this newly disclosed belief the DOE has.

Hawai'i's bottle law is doomed to failure

O'ahu has 800 million beverage containers sold annually and has only 20 redemption centers that will be open more than one day a week. Estimating that 80 percent of the statewide beverages are consumed on O'ahu, each redemption center on O'ahu, on the average, would have to redeem 319 containers per minute. Since someone has to look at and count every single container to ensure that it has the "HI 5¢" mark ...

It is doomed to fail.

Is it not clear that rail's time is here?

Despite almost a full page devoted to the Advertiser editorial on the need to "tackle issues head-on (Jan. 2)," no mention was made of the issue of fixed rail for O'ahu. This, after a year in which more than 100 columns, letters to the editor (70 percent-plus favorable), articles and editorials covered rail, is a glaring omission.

With Advertiser editorials favoring mass rail transit and polls indicating a majority of residents willing to pay for a fixed-rail system; with Gov. Linda Lingle, state Transportation Director Rod Haraga, Mayor Mufi Hannemann and Transportation Services Director Edward Hirata advocating rail; and with resolutions supporting rail passed by both the state Legislature and City Council — why is transportation not even listed as a major issue for 2005? The Advertiser said it best in its Jan. 10 editorial: "All great cities provide sophisticated transit for their citizens ... "

Another year has passed and we are no closer to a transportation alternative. O'ahu now has more than 900,000 residents and more than 600,000 registered vehicles; is it not clear that rail's time has arrived?