Traffic proves rail needed 20 years ago

So, one day the zipper-lane barrier is damaged at 8 o'clock in the morning. Motorists headed west on the H-1 Freeway are stuck in gridlock for the entire day and into the night. The very next morning, there's an accident headed east on the H-1. Again, traffic is a mess for the entire morning. And, accidents during morning rush hour are at least biweekly occurrences.

Still, there are those who oppose building a rail system. The only thing wrong with a rail system in Hawai'i is that it's 20 years too late. A rail system that ran from West and Central O'ahu through Pearl Harbor, the Honolulu business district and to the University of Hawai'i would have heavy ridership. Specifically, during those rush-hour periods.

And for those who oppose rail, their solutions are to bring the congestion and the mess that is Honolulu out to the 'Ewa Plains. Meanwhile, living units (not necessarily houses) are springing up on the 'Ewa Plains 10 times faster than the infrastructure to support them. The developments resemble CrackerJack Box-like units stuffed into a sardine can.

What happened to the moratorium on development of the 'Ewa Plains until the infrastructure shortcomings are resolved?

Government should say how it will work

It defies common sense: risking over a billion dollars plus unknown millions more annually to cover the operating losses and maintenance of a fixed-rail system to ease traffic conditions. It would be irresponsible government spending.

In all of the rail discussions, development has not been the focus, nor has it been incorporated into the planning. But common sense seems to dictate that development is the only possible justification for such an investment. Yet there has been no meaningful discussions about new industrial or employment centers. The new rail system, if successful, could double or triple the number of workers in downtown Honolulu, but not a single step has been taken to double or triple the office space in the downtown area in conjunction with fixed rail.

Just a few years ago, Hawai'i demonstrated the worst example of public capital investment in the construction of the Convention Center to support the growth of the visitor industry, but there was no private capital investment accompanying the government investment — not a single hotel, not a single hotel room.

Good public investment should be the catalyst for private investment. Government spending is not the economy. Government spending should cause private investments to grow the economy.

Before our state and city governments raise taxes, they should first clarify the purposes and justify the end result. Then detail how it will be achieved.

Republicans voted for the pay raises, too

According to House Minority Floor Leader Colleen Meyer ("Unions called the shots at the legislature," Island Voices, May 9), "Hawai'i's unions are the 1,000-pound gorilla at the Legislature, and the Democratic majority has proven itself to be a very willing dance partner."

Well, Rep. Meyer and her fellow House Republicans — who apparently specialize in calling the kettle black — must have liked the tune themselves. They all voted "aye" on each and every public employee collective bargaining agreement sent to the Legislature for final approval.

One shudders to think how Rep. Meyer might have felt if she didn't approve the raises.

Don't start bragging about the Legislature

Regarding Brickwood Galuteria's May 9 commentary, "Legislature accomplished much this year": What about the excise tax increase? Now the working people will have to pay the increased general excise tax on everything to pay for a rail system that they probably won't even use.

Then this Legislature also left intact a law instituting a gas cap, which will restrict wholesalers from selling petroleum products above a certain level. But it won't stop the retailers from buying expensive gasoline. What is the reason for a gas cap? The cars will need fuel, but if the consumers cannot afford to buy, maybe we can all just start walking and then the people of Hawai'i will be healthier.

Hemmings' district already has dog park

I respectfully disagree with both Sen. Fred Hemmings and Waimanalo Neighborhood Board member Andrew Jamila Jr., as quoted in the May 11 story "Waimanalo chews on off-leash dog park idea."

I have seen dogs of all sizes and shapes commingling, leashed and not, running along the finest sand in the world, playfully jumping in the water, among adults and children. I am surprised Sen. Hemmings does not know such a beautiful dog park already exists in his district.

The on/off-leash dog park extends from Castle Beach through Kailua Beach Park to Lanikai and is very popular with dog owners.

Tuition increase? Here's a little history

The May 8 commentary "UH tuition is rising; is it worth it?" by Linda K. Johnsrud couches the tuition cost argument in terms of outcome. Let's visit this issue over the past decades.

When the Democrats took over the Legislature in '54, one of their initial tasks was to lower UH tuition. During the next two decades, the Legislature held UH salaries down while students enjoyed the benefits of an affordable higher education. This effort was coupled with key placements in the UH personnel office whose mission was to hold costs down. In the early '70s, the faculty reacted, understandably, by establishing a union, which then made their wages negotiable.

Next, the great leap forward: Autonomy was approved for UH, and with it a "go finance yourself" shove from the Legislature — but also to remake the university from a land grant teaching school into a big science research institution and move those undergrads who are in the way at Manoa off to the remote campuses.

Consider the increase in CIP funding to UH-Hilo and UH-West O'ahu. As I gaze across the administration at UH, I see transients who are appropriating the university for their big science research interests. As I listen, I hear the administrators say, "We want to bring the tuition in line with other schools." To which I must ask, what do you mean "we"?

Important agricultural lands getting runaround?

After 27 years, are important agriculture lands finally protected?

Maybe, maybe not.

In 1978, Hawai'i voters ratified amendments proposed by the Constitutional Convention that forever altered Hawai'i. The amendments established the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, the agricultural self-sufficiency clause, the energy self-sufficiency clause and the Water Code, and strengthened the public trust doctrine.

All constitutional sections, however, were not created equal. Some clauses are self-enacting, while some require legislative action.

The Legislative Reference Bureau informed the 1979 Legislature that the agricultural self-sufficiency clause required enabling legislation, while the energy self-sufficiency clause did not.

In its 2001 Waiahole decision, the Hawai'i Supreme Court noted that the Water Code required enabling legislation, while the public trust doctrine did not.

After 27 years, the Legislature passed House Bill 1640, which appears to enable the agricultural clause. However, there are catches.

The legislation requires that landowner incentives encouraging agriculture are put in place prior to identification of important agricultural lands. This requirement may not pass constitutional muster. The Constitution clearly states that "the state shall conserve and protect agricultural lands, promote diversified agriculture, increase agricultural self-sufficiency and assure the availability of agriculturally suitable lands." However, HB1640 delegates this responsibility to landowners.

Furthermore, the legislation appears to violate the public trust doctrine regarding water allocation by determining it on a cost basis, regardless of public trust implications. The Hawai'i Supreme Court has stated: "The Legislature cannot order the courts to make the doctrine inapplicable."

Even if HB1640 is constitutional and is implemented, the state may refuse the constitutional mandate to increase agricultural self-sufficiency. After all, we are no more energy self-sufficient today than we were in 1978.

David Shapiro's criticism of Clayton Hee was unfair

Unlike commentator David Shapiro, I know Clayton Hee personally. I worked for him this year, taking leave from my position as a UH-Hilo professor.

I met Hee in 1973 as my student at UH-Manoa in Hawaiian language. In 1983, when Hee was a representative from Moloka'i in the House of Representatives, I contacted him. He helped abolish a law forbidding the Hawaiian language to be used in public schools.

While OHA chair, Hee urged the board to purchase the first K-12 Hawaiian Immersion School that today is the national model for indigenous languages. In 1995, the OHA attorney and I drafted the agreement between OHA and the UH regents to establish the masters of arts in Hawaiian language. No other state offers a graduate degree in any indigenous language.

In 1996, I was with Hee at the Capitol when he worked with then-Finance Chair Calvin Say and then-state Budget Director Earl Anzai to create the Hawaiian Language College at UH-Hilo.

Recently with Hee as chair of the Senate Higher Education Committee, I heard him speak with UH President David McClain on progress in establishing a Ph.D. for the Hawaiian language. I was also present in the Senate chamber when Democrat Suzanne Chun Oakland and Republican Gordon Trimble thanked Hee for conducting an unprecedented two public hearings on interim regent candidates Ramon de la Pena and John Kai and, most of all, for being fair to both.

I was in Hee's office when he advised the governor's chief of staff, Bob Awana, that the Kai nomination did not have the support of the Senate. The governor declined to withdraw the nomination.

This year, with Hee's assistance, the UH budget increased from $950 million to $1.3 billion — a growth of almost 40 percent. Included is financial help for the medical school, two new buildings for UH-Hilo, a new campus for Hawai'i Community College, and repair of damage caused by flooding at UH-Manoa.

Clayton Hee is the first one to say he is not perfect. But Shapiro's one-sided column of someone he does not personally know is inaccurate and hurtful. Since our first meeting 32 years ago, I have asked Clayton Hee to do many things for our university, our state language and the people of Hawai'i. He has never said no.