Advertisement - Click to support our sponsors.
Changing Hawaii
AS a non-Hawaiian resident, I've been hesitant to devote this space to the goings-on at the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. My philosophy about minorities -- whether gender or race or even sexual preference -- is that you can't fully comprehend their concerns unless you're a member yourself. Apoliona’s view
on OHA issueTherefore, last week, when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the Hawaiians-only voting practice for OHA trustees because it was unconstitutional, I watched the ensuing furor with quiet interest.
And when Governor Cayetano announced his intent to immediately appoint new trustees because the sitting board had been "illegally" elected, I could only laugh at the knee-jerk, in-your-face style of the Kalihi Kid.
Then I thought of Haunani Apoliona. I first met the OHA trustee a few years ago when she served on the Star-Bulletin's Diversity Advisory Board.
Every quarter, she and other representatives of true ethnic minorities in Hawaii met in the newsroom to critique how the Star-Bulletin was covering stories, or conversely how it wasn't adequately covering our multi-ethnic community.
Since then, I've been a fan of her level-headed demeanor and sincerity about Hawaiian issues. Obviously, OHA voters agree, as the accomplished musician is a perennial top vote-getter.
In light of the current controversy, I asked Haunani to share her thoughts on this historic legal decision, Cayetano's game plan and why non-Hawaiians like me should give a rip about the impact on OHA.
Haunani says that while the trustees aren't pleased with the high court ruling, that's not to say they don't respect the justices nor are they mad at them. However, they are angered and appalled by Cayetano's premature attempt to remove them from office.
The trustees see it as an arbitrary decision that is masking an act of aggression. They believe Cayetano is trying to disrupt the democratic process by booting out the current trustees, then hand-picking those who might be more cooperative with the administration, especially about negotiating money owed to OHA.
Haunani says it is more reasonable to wait for the Supreme Court ruling to officially come down to the federal district court in Hawaii, so that all concerned can review the subtle nuances of the findings.
This is especially important given the split nature of the ruling, which saw five justices signing onto the majority opinion, two agreeing but declining to sign on, and two dissenting.
HAUNANI says 1) the majority justices said nothing about the current trustees stepping down and 2) there's no reason they can't serve until the next OHA election, which -- in light of the Supreme Court decision -- could then be opened to all voters.
She urges the governor to review the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which say OHA trustee vacancies occur only in cases of death or resignation. Furthermore, the law mandates that two-thirds of the remaining trustees have 60 days to appoint vacancy replacements; only after 60 days does it become the governor's prerogative.
Because Donald Cataluna, the only appointed trustee, would constitute this "remaining two-thirds," he should be the one making any OHA appointments, if indeed legally required, not Cayetano. Take that, Benjamin Jerome!
Ultimately, says Haunani, all voters -- whether Hawaiian or not -- should be incensed at the governor's plan to thwart democracy, and should not be shy about telling him so.
U.S. Public Law 103-150
Office of Hawaiian Affairs
Diane Yukihiro Chang's column runs Monday and Friday.
She can be reached by phone at 525-8607, via e-mail at
dchang@starbulletin.com, or by fax at 523-7863.
