Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 9, Number 6, 1 June 1992 — "What's good for the goose is..." [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

"What's good for the goose is..."

by Louis Hao Trustce, Moloka'i & Lana'i

Aloha mai, I recently read a University of Hawai'iManoa student's term paper about OHA. According to the report, an appropriate picture of this agency is "a nine member volunteer crew embarking on a journey with a destination only partly determined and

no one having steered the eanoe before." Does this imply that thus far some of its members are not in cadence with the one who is directing its journey? As most of you know, my views as a trustee are usually based on substance, have positive value, and are of general interest to our Hawaiian community. Lately, OHA is again having its share of negative publicity concerning the chairperson and the vice-chairperson of OHA. Many are questioning what's wrong with OHA. Personally, I am not at all happy with the present situation. At the last board of trustees meeting, I called for a fuil investigation of the allegations made

that day by the Hawaiian community. Fact-find-ing has been referred to the OHA administration. This is a deviation from my proposal and from general practice. For example, in the past year, Trustee Moses Keale was alleged to have illegally signed a contract with a developer known as "Uhaele." An investigative committee was headed by the current chairperson, Clayton Hee. The investigative committee recommended that Keale step down until a full report was provided to OHA by the Attorney General's Office. It has been more than a year since Keale stepped down. and the AG's office has yet to present a preliminary report to OHA. Why so long? The AG's Office knows full well that this matter is of major importance. lt concerns all Hawaiians. There is some talk that the AG's office may not report back to OHA until after the general eleehon of 1992, about five months from now. The point is that it was an investigation of Keale by Hee whieh led Keale to step down from the chairmanship of OHA. The current situation warrants similar due process. Referring this matter to the administration seems inappropriate. How ean the administrator point to deficiencies of tfre chairperson or any other trustee since he is hired and fired by

them? This is definitely not a position for an administrator to be in. Because the administrator receives directions from the chairperson and from all nine trustees, this is a strong reason why, I believe, the administrator of OHA should be elected by the Hawaiian people. He should serve and answer to the Hawaiian people, not to the board of trustees. The administrator should represent the executive branch. We need a balance of power. OHA should have a legislative, executive, and judicial branch. We definitely need to revise our laws (the Hawai'i Revised Statutes) to this end. OHA has grave problems today after 12 years of existence. Some trustees now feel its effectiveness and reputation are at its lowest point in the history of this organization, in spite of receiving $5 million as first payment in the ceded lands past-due settlement from the state of Hawai'i. How ean we utilize $5 million effectively without first cleaning up this present mess? Our situation seems to be getting worse. I believe there must be an investigation by an independent agency (not a state agency) to provide OHA with structural and interpersonal organizational alternatives. We must work toward making OHA an agency we Hawaiians ean be proud of.