Readers weigh in on
Bishop Estate and its future

Greed is the motivator
behind Bishop trustees

The word "greed" is missing from the many words now being written about the Bishop Estate trustees. If the trustees were not making close to $1 million apiece, the politically powerful would not be making deals and compromising the integrity of Hawaii's entire political structure.

What a beautiful morality play. Look what greed can do! Not only has it made the Bishop Estate trustees untouchable until now, it has kept them above the law.

Let us now hope that those in responsible positions -- such as newspaper editors, leaders in the Hawaiian community, legislators, the attorney general, the trustees themselves and, yes, the Supreme Court justices -- all finally act to change this appalling situation. The community must hold them accountable.

The five courageous people who finally said "no more" (Star-Bulletin, Aug. 9) made five recommendations to ensure accountability from the Bishop Estate trustees. Implementing those recommendations should be the starting point.

Joan King

Editor's note: The letter writer is not related to Judge Sam King, one of the co-authors of Saturday's article.

Conflicts of interest
can no longer be ignored

For years we have seen public and private willingness to overlook the appearance of conflicting interests among the trustees and those who appoint them.

It is impossible to overlook such serious failures of public and private trust. The time has come to sweep the stable clean and to demand accountability.

Phil Olsen
(Via the Internet)

State should divorce itself
from Bishop Estate

The affair between government and Bishop Estate is adulterous -- the lovers should part. The state of Hawaii has its own family to look after; we are wedded to the public school system which needs our attention. Bishop Estate is betrothed to Kamehameha Schools, and they are old enough to take care of themselves.

Our judicial system, no model of chaste efficiency, could show some spirit by discontinuing its assent to this behavior.

Michael Colgan

Lindsey is simply trying
to improve Kamehameha

Congratulations on your excellent coverage of the Bishop Estate trustee situation. However, it appears that one trustee, Lokelani Lindsey, may be getting the short end of the stick.

It seems as though Lindsey is being condemned because she has the audacity to wonder why Kamehameha students don't perform at higher levels. For example, how many Kamehameha students have won Sterling Scholar awards? As one who served as a judge at three state debate tournaments this past year, I observed that Kamehameha was conspicuous by its lack of presence.

As a high school teacher, several students have asked me to complete recommendations for their admission to Kamehameha. It is clear that the schools get a lot of great students. It is also clear that Kamehameha has wonderful facilities and exceptional resources.

Why then doesn't Kamehameha dominate in academic areas? I suspect this is the question that nags at Lokelani Lindsey.

Joe Gardewin
(Via the Internet)

Trustees answer to
no one but themselves

The Star-Bulletin's coverage of the Bishop Estate saga is well written and reveals the truth to the Hawaiians. They fail to answer to the people whom they work for. Instead of answering to us Hawaiians, they answer to themselves. It is about time their selfish actions are revealed.

Thank you for a job well done. Imua Kamehameha.

Iana Robbins
Tulsa, Okla.
(Via the Internet)

Greed motivates trustees,
not children's education

I am appalled by the amount of money the Bishop Estate trustees earn. Yes, managing and investing money is a big responsibility, but the big picture here is the education of native Hawaiian children.

Good education should be made available for all Hawaiian children. It is obvious that the trustees are motivated by greed, and could care less about educating the children.

Could it be that the trustees would rather continue to see the oppressed conditions of the native Hawaiians, than to see them educated?

Nano Takuma Chavez
Albuquerque, N.M.
(Via the Internet)

---

Read the original articles:
[Betrayal of Trust] or [Betrayal of Trust] - No Frames

---

Small businesses weren't
listened to back in 1995

I'd like to correct David Ramsour's statement about small business in your Aug. 5 story. In 1995, Gov. Ben Cayetano called together small businesses in the state for ideas on turning around the business climate. It was called the Hawaii Congress on Small Business. After months, and hundreds of man hours, delegates from each island were sent to Oahu to hammer out 20 ideas.

We limited our suggestions to 20 and gave them to Senate President Norman Mizuguchi and Rep. Gene Ward. It's been two years and only one suggestion has been passed and signed by the governor.

If this is a true economic task force, where are Bette Tatum of NFIB and George Mason of PBN, to name only two?

In reality, this is a top-level re-election task force.

Chuck Eakes
Director, Kaneohe Business Group

Those in power neglect
small-business owners

Thank you, thank you, for your Aug. 6 editorial, "Small-business sense is needed on task force." Before reading your editorial, my husband and I had a conversation while washing the dinner dishes that echoed your words. It is very discouraging to watch the powers-that-be carry on as though we are oblivious to what they're orchestrating.

Too many times we have seen them create the problems, then come riding in on the proverbial white horse with banners flying to offer the solution! (We are hoping that, in this dire economic crisis, legalized gambling will not be accepted by the public as the solution!)

Give small business the freedom to grow and prosper in order to create more employment opportunities and continue contributing to the community. This would have a profound impact on the economy and enhance the general health and well-being of the place we live.

Sharon Reynolds
(Via the Internet)

New law takes away guns
from all domestic abusers

The Star-Bulletin missed the mark in its July 8 editorial and July 5 news article that suggested there are ways in which a domestic abuser may still be able to own a firearm, irrespective of Congress' new gun law prohibiting convicted domestic abusers from owning a firearm.

In fact, it is virtually a legal impossibility in Hawaii for a convicted domestic abuser (whether a law enforcement officer or otherwise) to own a firearm. The governor recently signed into law Act 321, which eliminates any possibility of an expungement for a person convicted of abusing a family or household member.

This new law closes a major loophole through which a domestic abuser could slip. Last year, in 1996, the governor signed into law Act 201, which stopped domestic abusers from being entitled to a deferred acceptance of guilty or no contest plea.

However, the law still allowed domestic abusers the right to have their convictions expunged after five years. Domestic abusers were the only convicted persons who had such a right. That is why we introduced Act 321.

Eliminating the possibility of an expungement by Act 321, coupled with Act 201, precludes circumvention of the federal gun law. The Legislature took an important step in assuring that domestic abusers could not carry guns. Its members should be thanked for improving our laws in our fight against domestic violence.

Margery S. Bronster
Attorney General
State of Hawaii
(Via the Internet)

---

Same-sex archive

---

Want to write a letter to the editor? Let all Star-Bulletin readers know what you think. Please keep your letter to about 200 words. You can send it by e-mail to letters@starbulletin.com or you can fill in the online form for a faster response. Or print it and mail it to: Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802. Or fax it to: 523-8509. Always be sure to include your daytime phone number.