Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 15, Number 3, 1 March 1998 — Lost opportunities [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Lost opportunities

N l Hh tive months since the turnover, OHA has lost its opportunity in our negotiations with the govemor and the State of Hawai'i. The window of opportunity to receive upwards of $500 million based on the Heely decision is lost. What was needed was a strategy whieh represented OHA smartly and boldly at the negotiating table. The "new" leadership was handed the beginnings of this strategy when they took charge of OHA, but nixed the strategy in favor of their own, more subtle, approach. The laek of experience on the part of the new leadership all but stopped negotiations the "old" leadership had begun and dashed all hope of hiring a private negotiating team, such as the Wall Street group, to negotiate with the state. Because the situation was not pursued by the new leadership, there has been little discussion with the governor or the state regarding the situation. Without a prospective deal, there was no hope for negotiation. Our "window of opportunity" closed

when the 1 998 legislative session opened without an agreement on the table because any negotiated settlement has to be ratified by the legislature. Since the legislative session ends on May 5, OHA's new leadership has less than two months to negotiate a settlement, have it heard before the proper committee(s), then ratified by the legislature, a grim prospect indeed. In reality, the earliest we ean hope for a ratified settlement would be dur-

ing the 1999 legislative session. In my view, this is a serious breach of fiduciary responsibility. We're in limbo another year before any settlement ean be made. As we linger in anticipation, we remain vulnerable to other influences whieh affect negotiations. Thecurrent political climate behooves OHA to try to negotiate a settlement

quickly. In this eleehon year, will the govemor be re-elected? If not, will we be better or worse with Linda Lingle or Jeremy Harris than we were with Ben Cayetano? And what about the legislature? Are we allowing it time to amend Act 304 to prevent any opportunity for settlement? The laek of progress from the "new" leadership leaves the entitlement for future generations hanging in mid air with no safety net.

In this year's legislative session, there were many bills whieh, if passed into law, would have affected our Hawaiian entitlements. The most notorious bill was Rep. Ed Case's Hawaiian Autonomy bill (HB 2340) whieh mandated anything but autonomy for Hawaiians. It legislated the demise of OHA and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and created a trust

corporation to replace them. There are other examples: • A whole slew of bills like SB 2010, SB 2645/HB 3475, SB 2897/HB 2880, HB 2374 and HCR 21/SCR 23 would privatize small boat harbors and tum management of harbors over to private eompanies. These bills would increase costs and impact ceded land revenues. • Several bills would either abolishe or erode the responsibilities of the Land Use Commission. Bills like SB 2063, SB 2147 and SB 2264/HB 2558 would abolish the commission or turn most of its powers over to the county. The Land Use Commission offers us a contested case hearing process whieh would disappear if the eommission were dismantled. • SB 2 1 34/HB 2604 would require eaeh Native Hawaiian 65 or older to be paid $10,000. If passed, this would deplete the corpus for future entitlements to Hawaiians. In summation, the new leadership, with its indecision and inexperience, has made OHA vulnerable and subject to takeover by the state. ■

TRUSTEE M E S S A G E S

I 1 ' B