Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 17, Number 9, 1 September 2000 — TRUSTEE MESSAGES External and internal enemies [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

TRUSTEE MESSAGES External and internal enemies

ĪHE RICE decision has resulted in a deluge of attacks on Hawaiian rights and entitlements by another group hellbent on dismanthng OHA. Espousing "equal treatment for all," H. Wilham Burgess filed a lawsuit anempting to ehminate the Hawauans-only restriction for OHA candidates. It is part and parcel of the recent assaults on our community, whieh began with Freddy Rice's chahenge. Riding the Rice coat taUs, Burgess and 12 others have joined with the Campaign for a Colorbhnd America that assisted Rice with his case and wrote briefs that helped overtum at least 10 minority or Native American-related Supreme Court cases. Burgess' group has retained a Texas-based law fīrm that has also worked closely with the Campaign for a Colorbhnd America. One of the plaintiffs in the new case, Kenneth Conklin, attempted to puU nominahon papers for

OHA, but was denied because he was non-Hawaiian. This self-pro-fessed "expert," who has hved in our islands for only eight years, is clearly ignorant on issues pertaining to ceded lands revenues. If Conklin and his group were truly interested in justice for aU, they would be suing the State of Hawai'i for mismanagement of the 80 percent of revenues that it manages for the general public, 20 percent of whieh is used specificaUy for public education. Thurston Twigg-Smith has also joined the Conkhn lawsuit and has offered to hnanee it. In my view, Twigg-Smith is attempting to keep everything in Hawai'i stams quo. He has eonsistently expressed anh-Hawaiian senhments and continues to insist the overthrow never took plaee, even though his relatives (the source of his iU-gotten wealth) were directly involved. It is no secret that Twigg-Smith is anti-Hawahan, as evidenced by his book.

While it is understandable that Conklin, Burgess and Rice would attack the OHA trust because of their ehtism, it is unfathomable that we also have Hawaiians within our ranks of whom we must be wary. Earher this year, Frenchy DeSoto filed a lawsuit against OHA

claiming that in order to for her to serve her beneficiaries, OHA must provide her with a special care assistant who would, for example, drive her between her home and the office every day, and be avaUable, on request, for other personal tasks. This assistant would be in addition to DeSoto's regular staff. Why would an elected ofiBcial, swom to serve a pubhc trust for Hawaiians, try to extract money from it for personal reasons? There is no precedent regarding special treatment of this kind for elected officials. To my knowledge, there has been no such special treatment for state House members or City Council members, nor am I aware of any special accommodations like these in the U.S. Congress. Why should OHA use beneficiary money on special treatment for one tmstee who has taken an oath to protect these tmst assets? Simply because we are in control of the tmst? The most egregious

part of this suit is DeSoto's elaim for $150,000 in trust funds in general damages for alleged emotional distress. In addition to DeSoto's pending suit, in 1999 one of her daughters also filed suit against OHA whieh was also evenmally thrown out, but not before costing the beneficiaries more than $18,000. This is an attempt to extract money from the Hawaiian beneficiary trust. At a time when trastees should be united against outsiders, who would like to see the tmst depleted, it is inconceivable that one of us would be trying to do the very thing most of us want to prevent. Strange as it may seem, 106 years after the overthrow, history repeats itself, and we find ourselves in the throws of adversity facing enemies both extemally and internally. ■

[?]

wmm I