TURTLE BAY

GOVERNMENT WRONG TO MEDDLE IN MARKETPLACE

Government intrusion into the real estate business has become the feel-good policy of choice for Hawai'i state government. The proposed Turtle Bay acquisition is but one example of government meddling in the marketplace. Despite support by policymakers, such use of taxpayer dollars is unwarranted and wasteful.

There are a number of reasons why going on a land-buying spree won't "keep the country country." First, the state government can't efficiently manage the 36 percent of Hawai'i it already owns, illustrated by the poor condition of Hawai'i's boat harbors and road infrastructure.

Like other state agencies, too many public resources are spent on project regulation and too little spent on effective planning. Most resources set aside by the state are held as neglected assets rather than well-managed public resources.

Secondly, state-owned property means taxing all of Hawai'i's people to maintain land only some will use. User fees are a more fair method of bringing in revenue.

Finally, the right of individuals to own and use private property is one of America's highest values and the foundation for economic growth. That's why the Constitution guarantees it.

Sadly, the state Legislature fails to see the waste and problems that years of intrusive land practice have caused. Not only is such action ill-conceived, but it fails to recognize prior failures and will not lead to the preservation of the "real Hawai'i."

SANDY BEACH

DANGERS ARE THERE ON 'SMALL' DAYS, AS WELL

The former Honolulu Fire Department's deputy chief's comments (Advertiser, Aug. 15) regarding Barack Obama's visit to Sandy Beach with regards to the surf at one of our state's most dangerous beaches were grossly uneducated and an absolute example of what not to tell friends, visitors and tourists who visit our island: "On small days, it's like every other surf spot. When the conditions are good, pretty much anyone who can swim can ride waves there."

That statement has city and county lifeguards cringing at the very sentiment that there is any less danger when the waves are small.

Any knowledgeable waterman or lifeguard will tell you that it is actually the smaller days that we find our biggest headaches when dealing with the "anyones" of the world.

Large days are self-announcing to the danger; and while lifeguards there still have to maintain vigilant warnings to beachgoers, it is a near guarantee that the smaller days will keep lifeguards busier because the ocean will appear more inviting but pack just as powerful a punch to the uneducated tourists who will find themselves getting slammed in the shoreline when turning their backs to the waves.

Some of the most serious injuries at the nation's No. 1 beach for neck and back injuries will occur on these so-called "small days," and it should be a reminder to all visitors to check with the lifeguards first and heed their informed suggestions before relying on an author whose career was spent fighting fires and not rescuing tourists on small days at Sandy Beach.

RAIL TRANSIT

TRANSIT SYSTEM WOULD CUT POLLUTION, STRESS

Working for Macy's required a move to the Bay Area in 2001 and I've been riding the BART rail system since. It's a 45-minute commute to downtown San Francisco. If I had to drive, my commute would be like going from the North Shore to Downtown Honolulu, resulting in a bridge toll, expensive parking, frayed nerves and wear-and-tear on my car.

O'ahu needs a system like this or another reliable transit option. Opponents say a rail system would ruin Hawai'i. Are traffic congestion and road rage a part of the Hawai'i we want? Traffic will only continue to get worse (accidents and road construction adding to the problem).

For those who say, "I'm not going to use it, I shouldn't have to pay," think about your children or your grandchildren. Will you pay now to ease their troubles in the future? It's likely they will live in the outer perimeter of Honolulu or further.

A rail system or something similar will keep a lot of cars off the road, reduce pollution, cut costly gas consumption, and offer a great way to get to work or school with a less stressful commute.

CITY'S TRANSIT PLAN TOO COSTLY FOR TAXPAYERS

I am not against rail per se. My main concern is that a rail system for Honolulu is too expensive, the people cannot afford it and the system will not achieve the ridership numbers necessary to justify its enormous cost. So said Charles Djou (Focus, Aug. 17), and I wholeheartedly agree.

If there ever was truth in all this rail controversy Djou's position is unequivocally meritorious. These are tough living and financial times for all the people of this town and to be force-fed a multi-billion dollar boondoggle project such as rail by the city administration is a sad commentary on leadership.

This same leadership intends to run for re-election and probably serve for two years only while eyeing higher office in 2010. The irony here is that the vote of the people is essential for higher office while the vote of the people for rail is viewed as a nonessential action by this city administration. The hue and cry from the beginning has always been, "It's my way or the highway."

NATIVE HAWAIIANS

NEW STUDY SKEWS FACTS, IGNORES CENSUS STUDY

After conducting skewed polls, the Grassroot Institute of Hawai'i has taken a new tack in its effort to tear down Native Hawaiians.

It has conducted a study claiming that Native Hawaiians are "as prosperous as everyone else." This group says the study proves that programs established to assist Hawaiians are "not warranted" and that "Native Hawaiians do just as well as everybody else, there's nothing to worry about."

The institute attempts to rewrite the 2006 U.S. Census Bureau study that finds Native Hawaiian poverty rates are nearly double those of the overall population. The institute's spin is Hawaiians can help their situation through more education, and having fewer children.

So how does that square with the Grassroot Institute's goal of killing off education programs for Hawaiians? Laws setting up these programs funnel tens of millions in federal dollars to Hawai'i, and their loss will impact all of Hawai'i.

This flawed study goes with the pattern established when the Grassroot Institute orchestrated push polls to try and convince Congress and the courts that the public supports its agenda to strike down Hawaiian programs.

No surprise, as this group is also home to attorneys who make a fine living suing Hawaiian programs and trusts. In its zeal to kill any program that helps Hawaiians, this outfit will continue using flawed research and greedy lawyers to achieve its goals. The Institute will deny it, but consider the source.