[ OUR OPINION ]

---

Beverage sellers should
consider the empties, too

THE ISSUE Merchants say the state's container recycling law will be too much trouble.

Retail merchants who seek to dismantle a law to recycle beverage containers should instead get with the program that is designed to lessen the need to use more land to hide our refuse and reduce the blight of litter that mars the state. Continued resistance to the market-based policy will only increase the problem of finding places to bury the 800 million plastic, glass and aluminum bottles that retailers themselves put in consumers' hands every year.

Retailers last week complained that they will bear the costs for recycling when the program has been designed to pay for itself through a 1-cent fee on each container -- which will be paid by the consumer since retailers, as they generally do with taxes and tariffs, presumably will pass the costs on to them.

Consumers also will pay a 5-cent deposit on beverage containers, which they get back when they return the bottle. Placing a value on the container, although small, provides an incentive to collect the bottles instead of tossing them along Hawaii's roadsides.

Retailers say recycling unduly saddles them with handling the bottles and dealing with redemptions. No doubt it will take more effort than the present practice of just abandoning wastes as someone else's problem.

However, stores and markets will have several options. One of them requires nothing more than setting up a recycling appliance that works like a reverse vending machine. It takes in containers and returns deposits automatically; recycling businesses empty the machines. In addition, the program will reimburse businesses to cover the cost of collecting and transporting containers.

Carol Pregill, president of the Retail Merchants of Hawaii, said the group would prefer curbside recycling like the project the city is testing in Mililani. That program, in its fourth week, appears to be a success, but curbside collections ignore the fact that most beverages are consumed away the home.

The container recycling law was 10 years in the making. In the meantime, tons of bottles and cans have littered Hawaii's landscape. Tourism officials say that visitors often comment about our litter problem, an issue retailers, who depend heavily on tourists for revenue, should note.

The law, which was passed in 2002 and will go into effect in 2005, received the support of citizens, recycling businesses, environmental advocates, the state Health Department and the public works agencies in every county. Recycling is the responsibility of everyone, including retailers and the beverage industry. It behooves all to make this program work.

---

BACK TO TOP
|

Public ought to know
how Dobelle is faring

THE ISSUE The University of Hawaii president has said he won't reveal the results of his job performance evaluation.

A JOB performance evaluation is undeniably a personnel matter, but when the person is the chief executive of the state's system of higher education, public interest trumps privacy.

University of Hawaii President Evan Dobelle's refusal to allow taxpayers to see the evaluation conducted by the Board of Regents is disturbing and his threat of legal action should the board put the evaluation in writing suggests a degree of antagonism that could impede progress at the institution.

That the announcement of the evaluation was stuck in the last paragraph of a news release on procurement procedures is also indicative of disharmony. The terse description quoted Board Chairwoman Patricia Lee as saying that regents are "confident that we are going to move forward successfully for the benefit of the university," and that the board and Dobelle engaged in "extremely constructive conversation."

It is rare for colleges and university to unveil fully such evaluations because candid discussion would suffer if public scrutiny were the norm. Dobelle is entitled to a level of privacy. However, since the evaluation also charts a course regents want the president and the university to take, the public should be apprised of their directions.

Regents could provide a summary of the evaluation, listing accomplishments and goals, without revealing more personal observations. This would appropriately balance the public's interest and afford the president a good measure of confidentiality.