Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 27, Number 9, 1 September 2010 — Like cockroaches - all are running for cover [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Like cockroaches - all are running for cover

'Ano'ai kākou . . . A blind man ean see that there is a conspiracy by OHA's leadership to silence dissenting voices. Here are examples

taken fromlast month's issue: OHA CE0 CLYDE NAMUO: • Namuo writes that "Under the current policy approved by the Board, eaeh Trustee is limited to 600 words for their monthly eolumn. We plan to enforce this policy infiiture issues as well as carefully review submissions. . . " Trustees have always been allowed to borrow eolumn space from eaeh other. This move by

the administration amounts to the suppression of the Trustees' rights to free speech. And who does he mean by, "w e?" And who is going to review Trustees' eolumns in a way that will not be considered a violation of Freedom of Speech? Just like all of our e-mails are monitored by the legal department and everyone is fingerprinted so the administration ean tell what employees and Trustees are going to what floor. • He also writes that, "This change is also necessary because of the change in printing press used by our vendor and its switch to a smaller tabloid size newspaper, whieh subsequently reduced the amount of space available for columns." This is ridiculous! The space available remains the same regardless of borrowing! • Namuo writes that, "/ will also be recommending the suspension of Trustee columns while he or she runs for re-election." This rule is clearly meant to silence me during the election while Trustees who are not running for office this year, like Haunani Apoliona and Colette Machado, are free to criticize me without my rebuttal. Why didn't CEO Namuo suggest this when Apoliona was running for office two years ago? • Namuo concludes by stating that, "The changes l'm proposing will clearly define what is expectedfrom Trustee columns in the future. . ." Clyde Namuo needs to be reminded that he is not a Trustee and, therefore, cannot set OHA policy. Also, he should have discussed his plans with the Trustees prior to printing his proposals. Isn't it curious that when a Trustee writes something that the administrative officer does not agree with - an article from the administrative office will appear in the next issue defending their position? Why are there no rules governing the administration regarding article contents and number of words used in their response

article? Isn't this an abuse of power? TRUSTEE HAUNANI APOLIONA

• Apoliona complains about my 1,800word July article, but she doesn't talk about her own word count in the August issue. In addition to her allotted eolumn space of 600 words, Apoliona somehow received pennission from the CEO to use an additional 1,996 words to smear me with misleading statements and untruth in another article. I guess this means that selected Trustees don't have to follow the rules. Add to that the 654 words from Trustee Stender and 431 words from CEO Namuo's message and you have a whopping 3,681 words directed against me - Now

who's out of line! • Apoliona mentions that OHA provided funds for a post-Lei Draping reception in Washington, D.C., but glosses over the fact that it wasn't just a simple potluck gathering but a very fonnal, first-class affair. What she also doesn't mention is that this is the rule and not the exception. I still have not received an answer on how mueh it cost OHA. Nor, after two months of requests, have I received infonnation on the travel expenditures for Trustees and the administration. • She mentions that "OHA 's CEOandkeyadministrators attended scheduled meetings withfederal agencies in D. C. Ai operational meetings, they are intendedfior the administration only, not the Board." Who decided that these meetings are "operational" and should not involve the Trustees? We should be attending these meetings to help us form OH A policies. What could possibly be discussed that Trustees should have nothing to do with? How ean this administration and the Chair discuss issues effecting OHA without the authority and knowledge of the Board? • Apoliona tries to justify her denial of my request to attend the Governors' Interstate Indian Couneil annual meeting, but she failed to mention that OH A and the GIIC have worked closely for many years in support of the Akaka Bill and that OHA even sponsored the GIIC's 2006 Annual Meeting, whieh was a huge success. I also requested a letter of appointment from Apoliona so I could continue to serve as a voting delegate. However, she completely ignored my request. While I am still a board member, I cannot vote without a letter. A blind man ean see through deception. • Trustees were basically "hoodwinked" into not attending the Goldman Sachs Due Diligence Meeting. We were told that the meeting in New York would be televised via live-video conferencing with our office in Honolulu, but at the last minute - the plans were canceled. As of this SEE AKANA "IIPAOE 29

LEO 'ELELE ^ TRUSTEE MESSSAGES /

www.oha.org/kwo | kwo@OHA.org NATiVE HAWAiiAN » NEWS | FEATURES | EVENTS

Rūwena Akana TrustEE, At-largE

AKANA

Continued from page 28 date, Trustees have not been informed about the Goldman Sachs meeting. • Apoliona tries to justify reducing the amount of board conunittees from five to two by stating: "Think of the inefficiency, costs and laek of timeliness that woukl result." "Think ofthe expense to neighbor islanders of travel costs and work loss." "The current two-committee system is efficient, effective and accessible for beneficiaries." Apoliona needs to remember that we live in a DEMOCRACY, whieh ean be inefficient, time-consuming and expensive. However, beneficiary involvement and input is essential in order for us to properly serve their needs. Ask the Trustees who are NOT coimnitted to Apoliona if her connnents are true. • Apoliona sunnnarizes her smear article by stating, "All Trustees are expected to support the action ofthe majority." I take great offence to this statement. I believe that if a

Trustee sees or hears something that is being done by the majority to hurt the interests of our beneficiaries THEY MUST SPEAK OUT. No Trustee should ever be afraid to challenge injustice. In fact, it is required by law: HRS §554A-6(a) states that "a dissenting trustee is not liablefor the consequences of an act in whieh the trustee joins at the direction of the majority of the trustees, if the trustee expressed a dissent in writing to any ofthe co-trustees at or before the time ofthe joinderT TRUSTEE 0SWALD STENDER • Stender wrote that I am trying "to discredit the good work her fellow Trustees do while dragging ourhard-working staffinto thefray." I say, the only ones dragging our hard-working staff into the fray are Stender and Apoliona by forcing them to constantly cover their tracks. Besides, OHA staff members are discouraged from speaking to Trustees by CEO Namuo. Stender states that, "the Asset and Resource Management (ARM) Committee schedules meetings twice a month." He also adds that, "Sofar in 2010, we have had 10 ARM Com-

mittee meetings and one budget workshop." But if you add up the meetings we were supposed to have this year, there should have been 16 meetings (8 months x 2 meetings a month = 16 meetings). What happened to the other 6 meetings? Nurturing the Native Hawaiian Trust Fund is our most important responsibility. Shouldn't we be meeting more in these troubled eeonomie times? By not meeting, he continues to keep Trustees in the dark and keeps us from asking questions that he cannot answer. Stender also writes that, "While most boards and organizations handle their dijferences within the confines oftheir ojfices by finding solutions and a means of mutual cooperation..." I would like to remind Trustee Stender that we are a public agency that is required to do everything out in the open. Further, from personal experience, I know that his suggestion doesn't work because he only says things that people want to hear, but he does NOT practice what he preaches. In suimnary, Stender wrote that, "In my opinion, the most efficient way to present OHA 's budget and gather input is tofile an agenda to

inform the public ofourARM Committee meetings and workshops that everyone is invited to attend." It may be more efficient to force our beneficiaries to eome to us in Honolulu, but I believe they would be better served if we go out to them in their own communities, as OHA always did before Stender became Chair of that committee. The OHA Board of Trustees Operations Manual states, "The Board, pursuant to Chapter 10, Hawaii Revised Statutes, as amended, will provide opportunity for the puhlie to comment on the Biennium Budget through a number ofmeans to include, but not limited to: puhlie meetings, publications and announcements in loeal media, and through the use of the Internet." Stender has yet to follow this rule. In my opinion, what Stender says is not what Stender does! What do you think? Let me know by eontacting my office rowenaa@oha.org. Aloha pumehana. ■ Are you interested in Hawaiian issues and OHA ? Please visit my new and updated web site at www.rowenaakana.org for issues and links to other information sites.

m Follow us: twitter.com/oha_hawaii | E Fan us: "Office of Hawaiian Affairs" j LEO 'ELELE > TRUSTEE MESSSAGES