Source: http://www.rowenaakana.org/tag/akaka-bill/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 01:21:16+00:00

Document:
`Ano`ai kakou… Let me begin by expressing my warmest Mahalo to all those who supported me in the General Election. Your kokua has allowed me to return to OHA to serve you for another four-year term. A very special Mahalo nui to Ke Akua for his divine guidance and love that he has bestowed upon me and my family.
Now that the election is over, the time has come for all us to come together in spirit and give the Akaka bill the final push it needs to become law. The bill will provide powerful protection from the constant threat of lawsuits to all of our Hawaiian trust assets. This is the reason why I have always supported the bill. What we face today as Hawaiians is no different than what occurred over the past 100 years. We are still fighting off assaults on our culture, the deterioration of our rights to our lands, and attacks from racist organizations.
Let us begin to work together for the cause of recognition. Let us begin to agree on the things that we can agree to and set aside the things we differ on and move forward together for the future generations of Hawaiians yet to come.
This was an unusually difficult race with so many people running for the three at-large seats. As I traveled around the state, I listened to many questions that people had about Nationhood that I could only conclude that OHA was not doing enough to educate the people in our home state about sovereignty. What would sovereignty mean to Hawaiians and, just as importantly, how or will it affect the non-Hawaiians. This situation has got to change. Trustees are going to have to speak up and make this happen.
What is also needed is your participation. You must challenge EACH TRUSTEE to be accountable to you. It is unfortunate that you cannot assume that trustees will do this on their own. Like any governing entity, from time to time, especially when one faction has been in power for too long like it has been at OHA, “the people” need to become actively involved. Otherwise, complacency occurs and the abuse of power is inevitable.
As we close out the year of 2010, I would like to wish each of you a very safe and happy holiday season, and may the Lord in his grace bless each of you and your families and take you safely into 2011. Have a Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year. Aloha Ke Akua.
On July 15, 2009, OHA, three individual Native Hawaiian Plaintiffs, and the State jointly filed a motion to dismiss the 14-year-old OHA v. HHFDC case, which involves a tract of former crown (ceded) land on Maui, now known as the “Leiali’i parcel.” OHA sued the state to stop the state from selling the ceded land. Fellow plaintiff Professor Jonathan Kamakawiwo’ole Osorio was the only plaintiff who did not join the motion to dismiss the case.
OHA only agreed to dismiss the 14-year-old case after Act 176 (2009) became law after this past legislative session. The new law will make it extremely difficult for the state to sell ceded lands. While Act 176 is not as all inclusive as a full moratorium, it nonetheless provides a high bar for the sale of any ceded lands.
There is now a process for the state to follow to get permission to sell ceded lands. Act 176 assures that Native Hawaiians will have many opportunities to participate in that process, including community meetings. There is also a higher standard of 2/3 legislative vote (of each house) for any ceded lands to be sold.
While OHA simply asked that the case be dismissed without prejudice, the State, represented by Attorney General (AG) Mark Bennett, filed a Motion to Dismiss that went much further.
AG Bennett argued that Professor Osorio does not have standing because he is not a Native Hawaiian as defined by the term is used in § 5(f) of the Admission Act and Art. XII, § 4 of the Hawaii Constitution. OHA does not agree with this and explained to the AG that this type of argument should not be made. However, the AG did not change his position. The danger with making this argument in this case is that even if the Hawaii Supreme Court does not dismiss Professor Osorio’s claim on standing grounds, other people may use these statements against OHA and the State in other cases.
That during the many years of litigation, there has never been a distinction between Native Hawaiians and that is and should be the law of this case.
My hope is that the above information will help to clarify all of the different positions regarding the OHA v. HHFDC case. The State and Osorio have made very negative statements against each other in the media. OHA has not been involved in the “name-calling” other than refuting Osorio’s accusation that OHA breached its fiduciary duty. OHA’s continuing position is to dismiss the case without prejudice.
The danger in Professor Osorio continuing this case is the possibility that the Hawaii Supreme Court might rule that he has no standing to pursue this case because he does not have a 50% native Hawaiian blood quantum. This would seriously damage all of the progress that has been made to establish that there is no difference in a 50% blood quantum Hawaiian and those of us with less that 50%. Until the next time. Aloha pumehana.
Congratulations to all of the public servants elected in 2008. Campaigning can be a grueling process. I look forward to working with all of you in what is certain to be a historic year for Native Hawaiians. During this holiday season we can finally look forward to the passage of the Akaka Bill in 2009.
The time has come for all of us to come together in spirit and give the Akaka Bill the final push it needs to become law. The bill will provide powerful protection from the constant threat of lawsuits to all of our Hawaiian trust assets. This is the reason why I have always supported the bill.
The Akaka Bill has never been in a better position for passage, although it must be reintroduced in the 2009 Congress. The nation has elected Senator Barack Obama to be our next president and he is on record as supporting the Akaka Bill. The Democrats have also increased their majorities in both the U.S. House and Senate. We nearly got the Akaka Bill passed in the Senate just a few years ago with significantly less Democrats in office.
This time around it should be relatively easier – so much so that we could probably do without the “help” from our high-paid lobbyists. I believe we can get the bill passed on our own. Given the current state of the economy, we should seriously consider saving our beneficiary dollars wherever we can. Our congressional delegation certainly doesn’t need our current lobbyists just to count votes.
What we face today as Hawaiians is no different than what occurred over the past 100 years. We are still fighting off assaults on our culture, the deterioration of our rights to our lands, and attacks from racist organizations.
As many of you already know, the U.S. Supreme Court recently decided to consider the State of Hawai‘i’s appeal of a lower-court injunction against the sale or transfer of ceded lands until our claims have been settled. This inexplicable action by the Lingle administration highlights the fact that the future of OHA, the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and all of the Hawaiian Trusts continue to be perilously at risk.
The state’s appeal can be traced all the way back to 1994, when OHA and four Native Hawaiians sued the state to prevent it from selling or transferring any portions of ceded lands. We argued that the state must first settle Native Hawaiian claims to the ceded lands.
In 2002, a circuit judge ruled in favor of the state, but a 2008 ruling by the Hawai‘i Supreme Court, which cited the 1993 Apology Bill, ruled in our favor. Now, with the latest appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, the state is once again trying to sell ceded lands without resolving Native Hawaiian ceded land claims. A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of the state could lead to the transfer or sale of ceded lands without any oversight by Native Hawaiians.
Therefore, we must work together and combine our influence so that we can do what is necessary to finally pass the Akaka Bill. The fate of 1.2 million acres of ceded lands, the legacy of our once great kingdom, hangs in the balance.
May I wish each and every one of you a very blessed Christmas and a sincere wish of good health and best wishes for a wonderful New Year. Aloha Ke Akua.
Governor Lingle’s assertion over the weekend that Hawaiians only have a “moral” claim to the ceded lands, and not a legal one, is preposterous.
The governor knows that the state has been financed on the backs of Hawaiians since its inception. To take a position now that we do not have a legal claim to ceded lands is a slap in the face for all of us who have supported her for the past six years.
OHA has done nothing but open our hearts, and wallets, to her administration. We’ve guaranteed loans for her Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to the tune of $33 million dollars which should have been part of her budget and spent countless millions subsidizing her Department of Education, which has done so poorly educating our children. Where would her administration be without OHA money and Hawaiian land subsidies?
You would think that after six years of lobbying Congress to get the Akaka bill passed she would know better, or were her actions and words just a political ploy? Can Hawaiians, or anyone, trust what she says in the future.
On January 17, 2008, the BOT approved a realignment of the OHA budget appropriating $4,567,511 from OHA’s Fiscal Reserve Fund to be distributed over 3-years to the Hi’ilei Aloha LLC for the operation of its subsidiaries Hi’ipaka LLC and Hi’ipoi LLC. The operating budget for all three businesses for the July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008 fiscal year was $2,276,882, of which we have already spent $614,809.70 as of March 31, 2008.
The OHA budget was realigned again at our board meeting on June 5th to accommodate the huge Board Initiative grants which were also approved at the same meeting. The grants include: (1) $1,000,000 to Kanu o Ka Aina Learning ‘Ohana; (2) $750,000 to the Lana’i Cultural Center; (3) $500,000 to Kaumakapili Church; (4) $500,000 to the Malama Learning Center; (5) $150,000 to Hawaii Maoli; (6) $300,000 to Na Maka Walu; (7) $300,000 to Papahana Kuaola; and (8) $150,000 to La’i’opua 2020. The grand total for all of these grants is $3,650,000!
Hawaii Maoli is a permanent fixture in our budget as they are contracted by OHA to collect Kau Inoa registrations. However, there is no accounting for all of the funds that are being spent through this organization, especially monies given to grantees that do not have a 501(c)(3) nonprofit tax status. How much more money is Hawaii Maoli getting through fees or charge-backs from these organizations? The trustees have no idea.
On June 5th, the board authorized the Administrator to enter into an agreement with the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to cover their debt service on a loan of $35 to $41 million for a period of 30 years starting on July 1, 2008 with an amount not to exceed $3 million annually.
DHHL is a government agency under the Governor’s budget. The state has long neglected its obligations to house Hawaiians and it should, therefore, be the state’s responsibility to guarantee the DHHL loans – not OHA. It is the only fair thing to do since the state receives 80% of ceded land revenues while OHA has to survive on only 20% of those revenues. As advocates for Hawaiians, OHA should be holding the state accountable instead of funding their shortfalls.
Trustee Mossman asked whether the timing for this proposal had anything to do with the Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homelands Assembly’s (SCHHA) recent opposition to OHA’s negotiated settlement bill at the state legislature. Trustee Heen assured the trustees that there was no “quid pro quo.” However, I agree with Trustee Mossman that the timing is awfully suspicious. Not to mention the fact that Haunani Apoliona is running for re-election this year. Make no mistake, I am NOT against giving grant money away. However, in order to stay within our budget, we must cut costs elsewhere.
At present, our budget is approximately $41 million. Add to that all of the recent budget realignments and the budget will probably climb to well over $50 million a year. This is a ridiculous figure. Besides all this, OHA is too top heavy with “special assistants” who are getting contracts to work on “special projects” that are taking up a great deal of our inflated budget.
The scariest thing of all is that Apoliona is supporting the increase in spending all the way through 2012. In other words, these realigned budgets are being approved using money that we have yet to receive. With the economy in the “drink,” our people struggling with high gas prices and unable to drive to work or losing their homes and being forced to live under freeway overpasses and beaches, OHA continues to spend money like “drunken sailors.” The question is why? At present, we are already $5 million overspent in our current budget. Wouldn’t our people understand if we explained how important it is to tighten our belts at this time? We should be leading by example.
One of OHA’s attorneys for our failed ceded lands negotiated settlement with the state and the OHA v. State II case was paid a total of $414,533.84 in attorney’s fees. A second attorney was paid a total of $423,840.16. As you may recall, the ceded lands negotiated settlement was shot down by the state senate and OHA lost the OHA v. State II case.
OHA’s Washington D.C. law firm that was hired to lobby for the passage of the Akaka bill was paid over $2,000,000 (that we know of, a request for a monthly billing statement would be much more accurate – these numbers are conservative). A special consultant for the Akaka bill was paid an additional total of up to $450,000. That is a total of up to $2,450,000 (conservatively) which have been paid to lobbyists who have not been able to deliver the votes. Make no mistake, I support the passage of the Akaka bill, but I have also suggested many times that we hire people who are able to deliver.
According to a June report from one of our money managers, global equity markets fell by more than 8%, with US and European equity markets returning -8.4% and -11.7% respectively. As of July 9, 2008, the estimated preliminary return for their share of OHA’s portfolio in the month of June was –4.95% compared to benchmark performance of –4.48%. They also stated that the growth outlook for the US economy remains weak, as increased unemployment, a weak dollar, and further pressure on the financial markets contribute to expectations of higher inflation over the next year, with expectations beyond that more restrained. Given all of this bad news, it is now more important than ever to bring our spending under control.
Heen was present at all of the executive session meetings where I expressed concerns regarding the waiver provision. Further, all of the OHA trustees, along with the administrator, received a letter from me, in advance, which explained why I could not support the settlement bill and that I would be submitting testimony to the legislature in opposition to the bill.
I hope that Heen will make sure that OHA has lined up its “ducks” next time for the 2009 legislative session since he is now part of the negotiating team. Further, I question why OHA’s negotiating team is still negotiating with the Governor’s office when she has publicly stated that she will not reconsider her proposal – a proposal that our beneficiaries have overwhelmingly rejected. Why not just work with the legislature?

References: v. 
 § 5
 § 4
 v. 
 v. 
 v.