Ceded Lands Controversy
Price of Paradise · Hawaii Public Radio · aired 1997-04-20
Guests: Clayton Hee (Chairman, Office of Hawaiian Affairs); Ed Case (State Representative)
Duration: 1:05:06

[00:00:00] Randall Roth: Aloha. I'm Randy Ross, host of the Price of Paradise radio show. We're sponsored by the Hawaii Community Foundation, an organization that encourages grassroot efforts to improve the quality of life in Hawaii, and that manages charitable funds with efficiency and compassion. Our topic today is the ceded land controversy, and we're going to define that term in just a moment. But first, I want to tell you a little bit about the guest that I have with me in the studio this morning. Clayton Hee, currently is Chairman of OHA. That's the office of Hawaiian affairs, and I'll also ask Clayton to tell us a little bit about that organization. He is a graduate of Kamehameha Schools, a former member of the Hawaii State House and Senate. He was the chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He's been the chair of OHA since 1992 and recently was reelected for another two-year term.
[00:00:49] Randall Roth: Uh Ed Case is a Democrat who was elected by the good people of Manoa. Um, he serves the 23rd district. He's from a, um, long time Hawaii family, a Kamaina family that goes back many, many, many years, went to public schools on the Big Island and then HPA, Williams College, Hastings Law School. He worked in Washington D.C. for Spark Matsunaga for 3 years, and he clerked for Chief Justice William S. Richardson here in the Hawaii Supreme Court for a year. He's currently with the law firm of Carlsmith, uh, oh, there's a bunch of names there, and I'll just say the Carlsmith law firm. And he also currently is chair of the Hawaiian Affairs Committee. Clayton, good morning.
[00:01:27] Clayton Hee: How are you, Randy? Just fine.
[00:01:30] Randall Roth: And Ed, I just botched your introduction a bit, but what is the name of your law firm now?
[00:01:36] Ed Case: Carl Smith, Ball, Wickman, Case and Ichiki.
[00:01:38] Randall Roth: Okay. Um, Ed, could you start by just giving us a little bit of history in as neutral a fashion as possible? And Clayton, I'm going to ask you as soon as Ed is finished that to to comment on anything that you think is subject to different interpretation. Uh Ed, tell us what this this controversy is all about.
[00:01:57] Ed Case: Sure Randy. I think I think basically what we're talking about here are what are referred to as as the ceded lands, which are about a million 2 acres of state-owned land consisting of somewhere around 30% of our total land area. Now, the reason that they're so controversial is that their origins are in the government and crown lands uh which were which were transferred to the Republic of Hawaii in 1893 under under conditions that uh many people uh were concerned with.
[00:02:23] Randall Roth: That was the overthrow.
[00:02:24] Ed Case: That's that's correct. Now, um the history is that they were they were conveyed to the federal government initially and then from the federal government back to the territory and at statehood were conveyed to the state, the new state of Hawaii, in trust for one or more of five purposes. And those purposes are public education, uh native Hawaiians, farm and home ownership, public improvement and public use. Over the last 20 years, basically, the state and the native Hawaiian community have been engaged in a in a debate off often controversial over how to allocate a portion of the revenues from the ceded lands to native Hawaiian uses. And over the last few years, it's become particularly acute with a number of lawsuits that have been brought. I think I think what we are all trying to accomplish is some global resolution of this controversy. Uh I think we probably agree on that where we probably disagree is how to get through this interim period while we're we're trying to get ourselves to that global resolution.
[00:03:18] Randall Roth: Okay, so I so to make sure I've got it, there was a lot of land which I guess currently adds up to about 1.2 million acres that belonged either to the Crown or to the government at the time of the overthrow. Uh it went through the hands of a number of governmental bodies, but now it's with the State of Hawaii.
[00:03:35] Ed Case: It's owned by the state and it's administered by the state in trust for one or more of five purposes.
[00:03:40] Randall Roth: Okay, but somewhere along the line, the State legislature has said, well, let's go ahead and carve out 20% of something for native Hawaiians.
[00:03:48] Ed Case: Yeah, basically what happened was in 1978 as a result of the constitutional convention in 1978, the first thing of course that happened was that the Office of Hawaiian Affairs was created in that ConCon. The second thing that happened was because nobody had really defined what portion if any of this public land trust should be allocated to native Hawaiians, the legislature said uh a pro rata portion shall be 20%. But over that decade of the 1980s really they were the legislature was trying to flesh out, well 20% of what? Exactly how do you define the revenue? By the time 1990 came around, we passed an act which we referred to as Act 304, which defined those revenues. Now that act has really been the subject of a lot of controversy over the last 7 years.
[00:04:30] Ed Case: And in fact, I think a lot of our listeners will recall last year, 1996, there was a a case where Judge Heeley rendered an opinion which now we're not sure exactly what the dollar amount is, but his interpretation of what Act 304, which is enacted in 1990, his interpretation of that has resulted in a a large liability on the part of the State of Hawaii. Some people say as much as $1.2 billion and as I understand it, you feel that Judge Heeley was just wrong in interpreting what the legislature was doing in 1990. Yeah, I I think that's essentially it. I mean essentially what's going on is that Act 304 was passed by the legislature. It's a matter of statutory law, it's a matter of law enacted by the state legislature. What Judge Heeley did was to take what the what the state legislature did and in my view, expand well beyond the definition of revenue to create some liabilities that were never intended by the state uh to OHA or to anybody else.
[00:05:23] Ed Case: So the the entire attitude here is that the legislature should come in and fix this problem. It really should not be in the courts. It's a matter of state interpretation, allocation of state resources and the legislature is the proper place to solve that problem.
[00:05:36] Randall Roth: And and last piece of information before we ask Clayton to to comment on all of this, it's my understanding that right now the legislature is looking at a bill and I think it's called House Bill 2207, which you are, I think, generally perceived as being the the prime mover behind that and you're the chair of the primary committee that has um uh listened to testimony about that. Tell us a little bit about what that bill would do and then we'll get Clayton's thoughts on all of this.
[00:06:01] Ed Case: Sure, 2207 really has 3 purposes. The first the first purpose is to move us towards a global resolution, a resolution that will will resolve up all of the past claims and try to put a better allocation formula in place for the future, something that works a lot better than Act 304. That's the first thing that uh the bill tries to do. The second thing that the bill tries to do is to provide for some interim uh funding uh to OHA, which would essentially continue uh the revenue stream to OHA at basically double what OHA is getting right now. So it would go to $15 million. OHA is getting about 7 million right now as a result of a number of circumstances that we'll probably get into. The third thing that uh that uh 2207 does is as I said earlier, take this dispute out of the courts and put it back into the legislature and say look, no this is a legislative matter.
[00:06:49] Ed Case: So it it really strives for number 1, a longer term picture which sets up a settlement mechanism and a global resolution and take care of the interim problems which are creating so many concerns from the point of view of state finances.
[00:07:01] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, that took 5 minutes but uh we're talking about a very complicated subject. Clayton, is there anything that Ed said in describing the background of this controversy that you would take issue with?
[00:07:13] Clayton Hee: Well, not surprisingly, Ed's uh view of history is is different from mine. Not withstanding, we're both local local boys. Uh he used the word that uh his his words are a little different than what I would use. He indicated that in 1893 the lands, the ceded lands were transferred. In fact, they were stolen. It's a matter of history, it's a matter of record. I'm not going to sit here and debate whether they were what he calls transferred is what he really means as stolen because the fact is, Grover Cleveland himself indicated that the overthrow was illegal. Uh while while he may be looking for a global resolution, in fact uh I think uh as far well and not and not that I think but I as far as I am concerned, they're they're tinkering with Act uh with uh 304 which is now become Chapter 10 uh primarily because of economic conditions of the state. I think that's wrong, number one.
[00:08:10] Clayton Hee: Number two, I think it's wrong as a former member of the House and former judiciary Chairman of the Senate to suggest that that the the courts did not, uh, understand or interpret what the legislative intent was. In fact uh uh uh, my good friend Ed Case was, in fact, not even a member of the legislature when Chapter 10 was created, uh through Act 304. And and it is because of the judicial branch of government that people have a means to seek redress for what they believe to be uh injustices and in fact, it's totally appropriate for the office of Hawaiian Affairs to seek justice from the judicial branch of government to interpret in fact what the legislators may or may not have uh uh done when uh uh Act 304 was created in 1990.
[00:09:06] Clayton Hee: And to to suggest that Judge Heeley was wrong, I believe takes too much license over the judiciary branch of government. I think it's an insult frankly. Uh Judge Dan Heeley as far as I am concerned, not because of this this issue, but because of his reputation in the in the judiciary branch of government, is an outstanding jurist. I I'm not sure that anyone would disagree with that comment because his decision may have been contrary to what what I believe is an anti-Hawaiian element in the legislature uh exists. Uh some kind of what is being couched as a global resolution has been created when in fact uh as history would suggest, since 1778 when Cook first arrived, from a Hawaiian point of view, don't do us any favors. Allow us to succeed, and allow us to fail as we as we would.
[00:10:01] Clayton Hee: You know, uh we just went through, Randy, an audit by Mary Higa. And it was a year long audit and of all the State departments, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is the only, and I mean the only state department which came out fiscally and absolutely uh on target with respect to our responsibilities to handling of uh of of of resources. And it flies in the face of stereotypes about Hawaiians and about our about who we are. And so, you know, the effort that's being couched under 304 is in my mind an effort to uh derail the uh the uh uh income stream by an anti-Hawaiian element in the state legislature.
[00:10:44] Randall Roth: Clayton, let me ask you, when you you use the word stolen, are you suggesting then that that a just resolution of what we're calling the ceded land controversy is for the entire 1.2 million acres to be transferred to to some group of Hawaiians and and, you know, I I was going to ask you to to describe to our listeners just what OHA is. Could you briefly tell us what OHA is and is it OHA's position that the entire 1.2 million acres of land should be transferred to it and that 1.2 billion or whatever the dollar amount would come up to under Judge Heeley's decision would be transferred to it as well?
[00:11:19] Clayton Hee: It is not OHA's position that 1.2 million acres of the ceded land trust be be transferred in its entirety to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs on behalf of Native Hawaiians. Period. Let's not even get into that. Uh it is my contention and it is President uh Grover Cleveland's contention that the lands were stolen by an, and I'll quote him, an illegal act of war enacted by the United States against the Republic the Kingdom of Hawaii.
[00:11:47] Randall Roth: But but you you see that as a a related, but a separate issue in the sense that that you're not now asking for 1.2 million acres. You're trying to work out some sort of settlement to this controversy.
[00:11:57] Clayton Hee: In fact, we have been trying to work it out and in 1993, we settled an initial settlement settlement of about 150 million, but there were some issues we disagreed with and and those issues the state refused to continue negotiating with the Native Hawaiians. So, it was our duty and obligation then to seek remedy from the judicial branch of government. Judge Heeley did rule in in July of 1996 and you know, for the record, I mean this is not anything new. I the public should know that Marjorie Bronster, the State Attorney General has yet to win a case against Native Hawaiians and that's the record.
[00:12:33] Randall Roth: Okay. Ed Case, you've listened to uh to Clayton for 5 or or so minutes. Is there anything that he said that that you would want to take issue with before we invite calls?
[00:12:42] Ed Case: Well, maybe just respond to a little bit. Um, some of what he said I agree with. For example, I agree that OHA is is being run well. Um, I read the audit and I and I as I've said to chair Hee on occasion, um I I trust Mary and Higa and if Mary and Higa says they're running a good show, I think they are running a good show. I agree with Clayton that what we are trying to do in the big picture is is move the Native Hawaiian community and generally, and OHA specifically towards a greater degree of self-determination and self-sufficiency. The legislature has been working on that for some years now. Uh what what has happened really since statehood, if if you look at some of the things that that have happened through the legislature again, uh there have been tens of thousands of acres uh transferred over to either well not to OHA but to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
[00:13:28] Ed Case: Uh in 1993, we settled uh past seated land revenue payments due to OHA at the to the tune of $140 million. OHA has wisely invested those monies and now has a cash corpus of something like $245 million. Uh they have $10 million of annual revenues through interest and dividends. They have an additional average 13 million in ceded land revenues, so they have 20 $25 million a year coming in. They're spending about 12 to 15 million. The remaining 10 million, they're reinvesting back into the corpus. Now, that's good financial planning, but not all of the money that they're taking in is going back into the native Hawaiian community. I would assume at some point they would try to get some of that a more money back into the native Hawaiian community.
[00:14:08] Ed Case: So I think we're talking about the same overall goals, which is to strengthen OHA and and develop some self-determination. I do want to talk a little bit about history because I think that that uh that's one thing that we tend to focus too much on in in this particular issue, and I know it's a very uh emotional and important issue. I think we most of us agree, most of us that have studied history, I certainly agree, that what happened in in 1893, at least by current standards, was probably wrong. You know, that was an era of imperialism, lots of bad things were going on in the world and this was probably one of them. But the question is how do we deal with that situation today?
[00:14:43] Ed Case: I mean, history is littered with situations in which basically things have happened of this nature and people have come back and recovered from it and gone on into the future. I think what I'm trying to do, and I think I think what the overall goal of many people is is to is to is is to leave that behind and move into the future. somehow come to some kind of a catharsis, some kind of uh emotional catharsis if you can put it that way. Also back it up with some from some some hardcore corpus and agreement on on on responsibilities that would be retained by OHA. You know, and move into the future already. Let's quit talking about 100 years ago. I think that just diverts from where we're trying to go right now.
[00:15:21] Randall Roth: I'm going to remind listeners that this is the Price of Paradise radio show, and before I tell you a little bit about each of our guests, I'm going to ask Clayton Hee in 30 seconds, Clayton, can you tell all of our listeners what the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is?
[00:15:34] Clayton Hee: Well, as uh Ed had indicated earlier, it's it's an office that began in 1978 through the Constitutional Convention. It a it created Article 12 of the present State Constitution. And in 1980 through enabling legislation, was created by the legislature, and in a nutshell, it is it it is established to serve quote for the betterment of conditions of Native Hawaiians, unquote.
[00:15:56] Randall Roth: Okay. And and so it's a state agency in the sense that it was created by the state and it's received funding from the state. Uh some people see it as a form of sovereignty, um, but for now, how would you describe it?
[00:16:10] Clayton Hee: I get I I would agree that it is the closest thing to sovereignty that exists today only because political sovereignty without economic autonomy is a facade. And we are we have the economic means and and other sovereign groups simply at this point in time do not have the economic autonomy to to to truly be politically sovereign.
[00:16:29] Randall Roth: Okay. Well, this is the point in our show when we invite people to call to uh ask questions or make brief comments. We're talking about the ceded land controversy. With me in the studio is Ed Case, who is a Democrat member of the legislature, chair of the Hawaiian Affairs Committee, and Clayton Hee, who is the chairman of OHA, that's the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. If you would like to ask a question or make a brief comment, our number is 955-8821. If you're on a neighbor island, the number is 1-800-955-8821. Let's go first to Alvin in Niuli'i on the Big Island. Good morning, Alvin.
[00:17:06] Speaker 1: Yeah, I wanted to direct this comment both to Ed and both to Clayton. First of all, many Native Hawaiians don't recognize OHA. OHA is still beholden to the state because the money that is given from the state, they can still yank the strings. And but Clayton is correct, the land is stolen. I wish they would get away from that word ceded. It was stolen. Uh I believe Secretary Blount put down the annexationist uh party of safety or whatever they were called. But the main issue still remains is when is more money going to be given to the Hawaiian people so that they can become independent, fund their own programs, vote on everything they want to vote on, not having people tell them who they I mean who they can vote for, what they vote for such as Kelwin say. And in regard to what Ed is saying, he's taking the perspective, and I love Ed very much. I've known him half my life. Um, you know, he's taking the perspective of Western law and it's more Eurocentric view than anything else. You know, we've got to get back and look at what really happened and 100 years ago, a thousand years ago, it's still wrong, it's still immoral to overthrow a government.
[00:18:14] Randall Roth: Alvin, uh I'm going to take that as a a comment. I think uh it's it's a real good comment, but I'm going to move on to another caller, and if uh Clayton or Ed want to comment on Alvin's comment in just a moment, they're welcome to. But let's see if we can get to a number of callers. Let's go to Ka'ehu in uh Nu'uanu. Good morning.
[00:18:32] Speaker 2: Good morning. Uh I had a question, I'm part Hawaiian but I'm less than 50%. Um, the thing I don't quite understand about all this, I understand that the Admissions Act, you have to be 50% Hawaiian to get the benefit from the ceded lands, that's what the law says. The ceded lands also, part of it you have the Hawaiian Homelands. Uh we've already promised to pay 600 million under that. Uh as I look at the number of 50%
[00:19:00] Speaker 3: as compared with every Hawaiian is probably a small percentage. Even a smaller percentage when you look at the population whole state. I mean, I don't know what the number is, but I wouldn't be surprised, let's say it's 5 or 6%. So I'm kind of confused how the legislature work the math to say that Native Hawaiians 50% should get 20% of the seated lands revenue when they're such a small number, and they're also getting the Hawaiian Homelands, lands and revenue from that. Could either of your speakers answer the question?
[00:19:29] Ed Case: Uh let me start with with Ed Case, then we'll see if Clayton wants to add anything. The issue of blood quantum is one of the toughest issues that we're going to have to work through in the next five years in terms of the Native Hawaiian community. There are a number of tough issues that are that are coming up. You know, the ceded lands is just one of them. Uh we've got the overall question of sovereignty. We have Native Hawaiian gathering rights, we have uh the administration of the Department of Hawaiian Homelands and OHA. Um, in terms of blood quantum, the caller is technically correct. The the definition of Native Hawaiians in the Statehood Act uh is native small and Hawaiians, which is the defined term as 50% or more. And similarly, in our Constitution, uh the one setting up OHA, OHA is mandated to serve native small and Hawaiians 50% or more. Now the question is we are looking to OHA, to to really be the the the engine to develop self-determination and self-sufficiency notwithstanding that many many Native Hawaiians as already indicated by one of the callers, may not recognize OHA in that status, but as Clayton says, it's the closest thing we have. For now, we've got to work with something. That's a major issue that we're going to have to walk through. I think uh Clayton correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the figures are something like 40,000, 50% or more and perhaps 180 to 200,000 of any kind of uh of of Hawaiian ancestry. So the question is, how are we in fact serving the remaining uh portion of the Native Hawaiian community. And and personally, I think that's one of the main things that I want to walk through in the next few years with the office of Hawaiian affairs is how do we make sure that we have that we are serving the entire Hawaiian community.
[00:21:00] Clayton Hee: Clayton? Well, I agree with Ed to a certain extent. Uh the blood quantum issue for me is an issue is a non-issue in the sense that uh the 50 percenters and more uh definitely are a diminishing population. Uh there's about 200,000 less than 50 percenters and about 40,000 or so more than 50 percenters. But you know, as far as I'm concerned and I'm sure the Kupuna would agree, a Hawaiian is a Hawaiian is a Hawaiian is a Hawaiian. And you know, it's very difficult, but on the other hand, OHA should not be held accountable to that because number one, that was the bill of goods which were given to the office at its creation. And number two, OHA does not have the authority by statute or any other means to change the blood quantum issue. We did a uh we did do a a polling several years ago and it's clear that from the perspective of the less than 50 percenters, clearly they would wish for us to be to serve all Hawaiians. And to that to that extent, we have we have done so by giving certain programs latitude, less than 50 percenters have uh also benefited by our programs.
[00:22:08] Ed Case: Okay. Kaihu, thank you for your call. We appreciate it. Let's go to George in Kapahulu. Good morning, George.
[00:22:14] Speaker 4: Yeah. Good morning, Aloha.
[00:22:15] Ed Case: Aloha.
[00:22:16] Speaker 4: Uh yes, would you uh define the word mahaoi and apply this to annexation and the Newlands Resolution.
[00:22:27] Ed Case: Uh Clayton, here you want to take a swing at that one?
[00:22:30] Clayton Hee: Well, Mahaoi means way you you you put your nose where it doesn't belong basically. And uh I think the caller uh is revisiting history with respect to the the the uh overthrow and the resolutions associated with them and uh I'm not sure that um I would disagree that that in fact uh it fits but uh for the purposes of moving forward, I I'm not you know, I think frankly, I made my point with regard to the land being stolen. I don't know if anything more needs to be said at the only because uh, you know, we talk about the uh the overthrow, but actually with uh annexation 1898, that's why we have a ceded lands issue. We became Americans. We became a part of America.
[00:23:17] Ed Case: Okay. George, let's take that as a comment, and I appreciate it. Uh, if listeners haven't yet looked at the Honolulu Advertiser, on page B3, that's in the focus section, the large headline is the Ceded Lands controversy. There's an attempt to summarize the history at the top and then articles by our guests. First, Clayton He's article where the headline says, All will benefit when Hawaiians become self-sufficient, and then Ed Case's article where the headline says, Legislature should take ceded lands dispute out of court. Also, there are two related letters to the editor immediately below that. There is one from a Paul Lemke from Kawai where the headline is, Cayetano slights Hawaiian Uh Hawaiians, and another one from an Art Todd from Kaneohe, where the headline is, Hawaiians demands quote outrageous. I would really encourage listeners to take a look at the advertiser. This is a very complex topic, but I think if you read the advertiser summary, the articles by Clayton He and Ed Case, the letters to the editor to get a flavor for some of the even more extreme voices from the community. I think it'll give you a good sense for just where we are on this issue. Clayton He.
[00:24:22] Clayton Hee: Well, let me let me just make a comment on on on your uh remarks about the uh articles in this morning's paper. I it it it for me, summarizes the legislative point of view and the Hawaiian point of view. You know, uh with uh all due respect to my friend Ed Case, you know, his view that the legislature should take the ceded lands issue out of court really is on point. And it is absolute on point on why the Hawaiians insist to be in court. If Hawaiians were to were to rely on the legislature to to better their conditions as Hawaiians, we would find a diminishing of our resources. History has taught us so. History is showing us with House Bill 2207. It is imperative that Hawaiians have an opportunity to seek judicial relief against anyone and everyone whom we disagree with. It's not to say we're right, it is to say we are we are entitled to take our case before a jurist who is supposed to be non-partial for a ruling. And if if we disagree if we disagree with the ruling, to appeal the ruling. That's our function in American democracy.
[00:25:32] Ed Case: Okay, I've got a feeling you've got more to say about my comments on the paper, but I want to get Ed Case's reaction to that and then I'll come back to you, Clayton. Yeah, I I I think I think Clayton does crystallize the issue. You know, we're talking about the proper roles of different uh branches of government. Of course, we got the executive, legislative, and judicial. Again, in this situation, the legislature passed a law a legis the legislature enacted a law. The legislature has to allocate very scarce physical resources all over the state. Uh you know, we are in a budget crisis. We are trying to work ourselves through it. We are trying to balance. Um, basically, that again, the attitude is the legislature is the place to fix a legislative enactment, not the courts. One of the one of the issues that we've been struggling with for for 10 years, probably at this point, is when the state, and this doesn't just impact Native Hawaiians, when the state can be sued. Many people would say the state has opened it up open itself up too far to suit so that it's basically getting sued for anything and everything nowadays. We did pass a bill in 1988 called the Native Hawaiian Judicial Relief Act, where the state basically said we waive sovereign immunity. The the the the the Native Hawaiian community on very specific situations can sue us, can have redress in court. One of the issues uh that that has arisen before Judge and I think it's a it's a good solid issue is whether that bill allows OHA. The bill the the the bill actually does say, OHA cannot sue the state over questions of allocation of revenue. So clearly the state uh tried to reserve the question of allocating those ceded land revenues to to the legislature. I do want to say because it's the second time it's come up and I want to I want to complete something that uh Chair Hee has said uh and one of the callers referred to and that is that that these things cannot be redressed by the legislature. And let's just run down the list of things in the last 10 years or 20 years that the legislature has done. Um perhaps starting with the con con in 78. Of course, we tried to work out the ceded lands. You know, the the the the the the the question of seeded land revenues allocation in Native Hawaiians, that the Statehood Act says, he mentions acts says, one or more. We could we could apply those exclusively to public education. We choose not to. We don't. We allocate them to Native Hawaiians and to other uses. Um like I said, you know, we've we've transferred thousands of acres over to DHHL. In 95, we approved a $600 million settlement with DHHL where where we pay them 30 million a year over 20 years. In 97, this year, the State House proposes to double that amount payable to DHHL. DHHL now has a corpus uh a cash corpus of about 170 million. It plans to spend hundreds of million dollars on the Hawaiian Home lands over the next next three or four years putting in in improvements. I think if you ask Calli Watson, the director of uh Department of Hawaiian Homelands, he'd say that the legislature is doing a darn good job. Every single bill that DHHL asked to be passed through uh the House was passed through my committee and the House. Uh we deferred the substantive um legislation proposing to address the pash issue. That was something that OHA agreed with us on.
[00:28:30] Ed Case: Uh you know Ed, I can see you got a a long long list there.
[00:28:33] Clayton Hee: I was finished with my list. I there are a few others. I the point is you know the legislature's been doing a lot. You've been generous with respect to Native Hawaiians in your opinion?
[00:29:02] Ed Case: I think we've been walking through what we've had to walk through. We've tried to provide. We've been trying to get to the global resolution. Okay. Clayton, here reaction, we got a bunch of callers and I want to get to you.
[00:29:10] Clayton Hee: You know, I was in the legislature in 1982 and in 1988, I was the judiciary chairman when the right to sue bill was enacted into law. The suggestion that Hawaiians should be grateful to the legislature is really insulting. Let's look at the legislative history. Let's not just look at the last 10 years, let's look at since 1959 what has happened to the Department of Wine Homelands. $600 million to DHHL wasn't a gift. It was a negotiated settlement for breaches of trust enacted by the state of Hawaii. Let's get that straight here. I mean, let's not start to as Hawaiians start to feel like we should be ever so grateful to the lawmakers. The suggestion that that uh that the admissions Act, the 20% revenue was for one or more of five purposes and the implied threat that we could do it exclusively for public education is just that an implied threat. If the lawmakers want to do that, then by all means, go ahead and do it and we'll deal with it on that basis. Judge Heely ruled on the basis of the state's contention that they were sovereign, they couldn't be sued. The state lost. That's a matter of judicial record. That's not what the Hawaiians wanted. It's what Judge Heely ruled.
[00:30:01] Ed Case: Okay. Um, you're listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. My name is Randy Roth. we're talking land controversy. I have Ed Case, a Democrat from Minoa, who is the chair of the Hawaiian Affairs Committee. Ed is from uh Kama Aina family. He was born and raised in Hilo, went to public schools, HPA, Williams College, Hastings Law School. He's worked for Spark Matsunaga and CJ Williams Richardson. Also, Clayton Hee, who is the chairman of OHA, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. He's a graduate of Cameamea Schools, a former member of the State House and Senate. He was the Senate judiciary chair. He's been chair of OHA since 1991 and just a few days ago was reelected for another two-year term. We have people who've been waiting uh to get on the air and we're going to go to them in just a few seconds, but we have a couple empty lines and if you'd like to call in and ask a question or make a brief comment, our number is 955-8821. Or if you're on a neighbor island, it's 1-800-955-8821. Let's go to Brian from Maui. Good morning, Brian.
[00:35:24] Speaker 5: Good morning, gentlemen. Uh, very very enjoyable show. I just want to make a comment, uh uh I'm not I'm not part Hawaiian blood uh per se, uh but however I work with organizations here um who are working with OHA. Uh, we're starting a chapter of Habitat for Humanity over here and that we're aware of how OHA works with DHHL, uh uh and Habitat for Humanity and other islands to uh provide affordable housing of and here on Maui it's going to begin soon up in Hawaiian homelands and the County of Maui supports all this too. There's great partnerships occurring with OHA and the the governments of the uh counties and uh DHHL. So this is really encouraging because it does benefit the people. OHA from our experience uh does operate a number of programs which serve Hawaiians of less than 50% blood. And by the uh audit as Mr. H mentioned earlier, by the audit of the uh Mary Heiga, uh they certainly are an efficient an efficient uh uh group. So I just want to applaud OHA for what they are doing and I hope that all Hawaiian groups uh realize that OHA does work with any and all of them.
[00:36:41] Ed Case: Okay. Brian, we're going to we're going to have to move on, we got a bunch of people waiting. Thank you. We appreciate your comment. Let's go to Stan in Ainaina. Good morning, Stan.
[00:36:48] Speaker 6: Good morning. Uh I had uh comment actually about what the prior speakers said about the various Hawaiian groups being present. I'm wondering uh whether OHA can really negotiate for all of them. Also, I wonder about when the land was stolen and it increased value uh that land uh for example, wasn't a golf course uh how's that going to be figured in in the settlement and and can a settlement really be final when the uh groups are so divided?
[00:37:17] Ed Case: Um, okay. And Stan, I'm going to take that as a comment. Uh, Clayton, did you have something you wanted to to say in response?
[00:37:23] Clayton Hee: Well, let me let me just say that uh when we negotiate, the Stan, when we did the first negotiations and we started negotiating over land, we had uh the state had an independent appraiser, we had an independent appraiser. We uh we tried to uh find a third party if the appraisals were different. And then uh a change in title would eventually occur which would uh give the title to uh the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. And when a new sovereign entity is created, uh uh regardless of how it is created, the assets of OHA, in my view, will more likely than not be transferred including land and and liquid assets into the new sovereign government.
[00:38:00] Randall Roth: Okay, Stan, thank you for your call. We moved to Dick in IA. Good morning, Dick.
[00:38:03] Speaker 7: Good morning. I have been around for over 30 years and I think very highly of this effort to bring hope and promise for the Hawaiian native, Hawaiian part Hawaiian. However, I wondering sometimes, you look at the Oha, its resources, expenditure, department Homeland, Bishop estate. Then you look at the department education, social services, department of Health, and all the other things that that are should be done or are being done. I wondering whether the quote native Hawaiians, part Hawaiian are actually indeed uh getting uh a reasonable share, or maybe not. Uh we all look at the total picture, and we ought to make sure that what is needed is done. And I only hear Oha talk about what they have and what they do, and I think that's great. And I want to see them do more, and it is the best instrument we have. But I think one final comment, uh besides asking that question, uh about two comments. One, I think there has been a deterioration in the past 30 years in in the attitude in relationship, and that's sad. And I remember Sammy and Malo saying writing once, uh he's all for bringing back the monarchy on one condition that he's the king, and I think that's one of the problems. We must go forward and we must make a better Hawaii for the native Hawaiians as well as for all the other people who are here. Thank you.
[00:39:26] Randall Roth: Okay, thank you for your comment, Dick. Clayton, let me read to you a couple sentences from the letter to the editor in this morning's paper that appeared uh right below your and and Ed's articles. Uh it says, 'further demands for more and more state revenues from these lands will pour salt in the wounds of our citizens already hurting. This will eventually mean less services and higher taxes for the rest of our population. The people of Hawaii are growing very apprehensive by the continuing strident demands for a bigger and bigger piece of Hawaii, by and her revenue, by Oha and other Hawaiian activists.' How do you respond to non-Hawaiians in Hawaii who are saying whatever happened 100 years ago was not our fault, why take from us to benefit others?
[00:40:09] Clayton Hee: Well, let me read I would respond the same way I suppose the uh Jewish community would respond in with regard to the Holocaust. The same way Japanese uh ancestors would respond to being uh imprisoned in places like Manzanar during the war, that uh you know, it's not an effort to put pour salt in any wounds, but the wounds will always be there until we are made whole. And we're not there yet. Secondly, what the what I believe the writer is saying is that we have an opportunity at hand that unless we take advantage of these opportunities will result in less services and higher taxes. And let me give you just one example. These people are talking at the legislature about economics, not justice. And if you want to solve the economic problem, it requires courage, vision, and risk. Now let me uh give you an example that doesn't require much of either. In any other country you visit, before you leave to come back to Hawaii, you pay a departure tax. The departure tax is somewhere between $20 and $25. 7 million tourists come to Hawaii. 7 million tourists times $20 is $140 million. 7 million tourists, in addition to Hawaii business people, leave to go to other countries. I just came back from New Zealand. I've been to Japan, I've been to London. Each time I paid the tax. No complaints from me, because that's part of the deal. It it doesn't require much imagination. It requires a fair amount of courage. It requires some risk, but not much. Before we look at using less services and higher taxation as reasons not to, not to deliver justice, we should be looking at ways to raise revenue which won't hurt the local people. It's simple.
[00:41:58] Randall Roth: You know, Ed, one of the questions I have and I think it's related to what what Clayton just said in in response to my question of him, is that I think there are a lot of people who support in one degree or another shifting funds over to Oha, in part because they've they've lost faith in the state government's ability to deal with a lot of problems, problems dealing with public education and and the the the needs of disabled and and other people on on welfare. Um how do you, as a member of the State legislature, deal with that in the context of this attempt to settle the ceded lands controversy?
[00:42:33] Ed Case: Well, let let me let me distinguish between my role and uh Clayton's role. Clayton is the chair of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs responsibility and sole responsibility is to provide for the betterment of native Hawaiians. That's the goal. That's the role of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Clayton fulfills his role fine. I don't have that luxury. I don't have the luxury of a single constituency. I'm trying to, I'm trying to sit in the legislature and balance a lot a lot of various and every one of them very legitimate needs in a very, very tough economic time. Now, that that that that's going to upset everybody. That's the problem that we have in the legislature right now. If we if frankly, if we're doing if we're doing what we should be doing, everybody will be a little or a lot upset at what we're doing. I mean I mean talk to somebody that is having their general assistance cut off for example and say, 'oh, sorry, we've got to take some more of this general assistance money and shift it on over to solve another problem,' whether it's related to native Hawaiians or not. Talk about public education for all people in Hawaii, not just native Hawaiians. Talk about public safety, you know, I mean uh look at look at the crime rate. You know, should we build more prisons? Should we provide for more prison space? Should we not do that so that we can achieve some other goal? Talk about the environment, talk about marine resources. I mean, talk about talk about fish and coral and things like that, you know, that that that are basically getting pillaged because there's no enforcement authority over current laws. These are complicated and difficult balancing acts that we have to do and I don't think that simply as as as chair he suggests raising revenues through a departure tax is a way to go. We're having to allocate fewer resources over a broader range. This is in in in in in terms of Native Hawaiians specifically is both about the economic realities today and about justice. I think both of those things are involved in what we're trying to accomplish. We're trying to get to a global resolution that I think will accomplish justice. But you've got to walk through an interim time when it's real tough.
[00:44:29] Randall Roth: Okay, you're listening to Price of Paradise radio show. We're talking about the Ceded Land controversy with Ed Case and Clayton Hee. Our numbers are 955-8821, or on a neighbor island 1-800-955-8821. Jim, on the Big Island, thank you for waiting patiently. Good morning.
[00:44:44] Speaker 8: Good morning. I was calling because it seems that in all of this, um, the building of sovereignty or toward sovereignty and resolving the problems that Hawaiians have historically had that there hasn't been anything done to see if there's any conflict with the federal constitutional issues. Uh, one of them comes to mind of course is the fact that the Federal Constitution, the 15th amendment, uh prohibits having racial qualifications for any uh federal, state, or local election. And in the case of uh Oha, of course, it's a department of the state and it has racial restrictions. I think there are other constitutional problems with taking lands and creating a sovereign state with them. I mean we had a civil war at one time. So, I was wondering if anything is being done to address these issues so that the whole thing doesn't collapse after everyone's gone way down the line.
[00:45:45] Randall Roth: Jim, I appreciate your comment. We did a show about six months ago where we addressed that and there's there's difference of opinion on that issue. And uh other than to say that's a whole another subject, uh I just want to thank you for your comment and we have to move on. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Jim from Monoa. Good morning. Or Steve, Steve from Monoa. Good morning.
[00:46:05] Speaker 9: Good morning. Hello? Yes, Steve, you're on the air. I have a very quick and simple question, and I've asked this question to a number of your guests over the years as you've had this issue and other issues up, and so I just ask again and I have yet to get a really clear answer, except to answer, 'well, everybody disagrees.' And that question is, since we're talking about dividing up a pretty big piece of pie, who is a Hawaiian? How does one determine who is a Hawaiian? Is a Hawaiian a self designation, uh do you have to have some qualification minimally? Somebody who was hanai to a Hawaiian family who doesn't have any Hawaiian lineage, are they Hawaiian? That's my general question, who who who gets the bennies?
[00:46:47] Randall Roth: Okay. Clayton Hee, that's a tough one and we don't expect you to give us the the definitive word on that, but uh what you're thinking?
[00:46:55] Clayton Hee: Well, for me, a Hawaiian is someone who can trace his ancestry back to 1778 when Captain Cook arrived. You know, it's not hard for me. My father's Chinese, my mother's Hawaiian. My father's not hung up about being non-Hawaiian. In his mind, he's Chinese, he's not Hawaiian. He's local for generations here. But it's not a he's not hung up over that that and he wants Hawaiians to succeed. After all, he's married to a Hawaiian. On the other side of the coin, my mother will not accept sovereignty unless it is inclusive. And that includes non-Hawaiians, because she will not turn her husband away for sovereignty. It is, you know, the kingdom at the time of the overthrow uh consisted of non-Hawaiians as well. But Hawaiians are Hawaiians, they were Hawaiians when Cook arrived and they're still Hawaiians today.
[00:47:44] Ed Case: Well, I think the caller is is I I would suspect almost a rhetorical question. There's lot lots of different definitions of Native Hawaiians or Hawaiians, I should say. Clayton has alluded to some of them. We are talking though again, I would emphasize about some very specific legal definitions of native Hawaiians under the federal law and under state law that that that that again, I I addressed earlier in terms of the blood quantum issues. So it it, you know, it's very complicated overall issue to sort out exactly who will in fact uh benefit.
[00:48:13] Randall Roth: Okay. Thank you Steve for your call. Let's go to Sam who's calling from Hawaiian Beaches in Hilo. Good morning, Sam.
[00:48:19] Speaker 10: Good morning.
[00:48:20] Randall Roth: You're on the air.
[00:48:22] Speaker 10: Okay. I want to make a one comment, uh uh to this guy Case who uh is a Westerner, he acts like a Westerner, talks like a Westerner, uh for our boy uh, he is a Hawaiian, Hawaiian is a Hawaiian. Continue the work. You're doing the right thing. If the legislature want to take care of the the state of Hawaii from the governor on down to the smallest agency. You cannot get a whole loaf, so take a half a loaf. Each guy from the governor on down, cut their pay before they cut anybody else's benefit. To lead, you must lead by setting the example. That's simple.
[00:49:06] Randall Roth: Sam, let's get a reaction on what you've said from Ed Case.
[00:49:09] Ed Case: Well, Sam, I I was born and raised about 10 miles away from where you are. You know, how am I supposed to characterize myself in all of this? You know, I was born and raised in this state. I'm not trying to be native Hawaiian, but I was born and raised in this state. I've got everything in my life vested in this state and so does my family. I think I'm doing the right thing, too. I mean, how do how do you how do you discount that, Sam? I mean, I know this is a tough issue. A lot of different people have a lot of different solutions and the solution is probably not going to satisfy anybody. But to say that but to say that really none of us are trying to do the right thing um and that this goes for somebody that arrived in in in in Hawaii yesterday and intends to spend the rest of their lives here. This state has a lot of different people in it and this state does recognize special status for Native Hawaiians and I think we're trying to do the right thing.
[00:49:57] Clayton Hee: You know, there again we we have an opportunity to see that dichotomy and difference between Ed Case and myself. Ed is not Hawaiian. He's married to a Hawaiian. He was born and raised here just like my dad was born and raised here. But my dad is not Hawaiian, and he's not hung up about not being Hawaiian. His wife's Hawaiian. You know, what what Sam's point is right is good is that you know who ought to be audited? The legislature ought to be audited. It's the legislative auditor that audits all state departments. Oha is the only state department that came out squeaky clean. No one mentions in the legislature about the $10 million missing from the DOE, the $11 million missing from the State of State uh Department of Health State Hospitals division, the non-bid process of the Department of Defense, the fact that UH professors don't teach enough time, which Marion Heeger just concluded. The legislature ought to be audited. The legislature ought to cut their resources for their offices, their employees, and their travel. I was a member of the House and I was a member of the Senate. I clearly understand the benefit benefits that the legislature appropriates for themselves as the first act of business on the first legislative day.
[00:51:09] Randall Roth: Clayton, why would we believe that that Oha would function better than the legislature? Why would we believe that moneys would be used more productively, that people would benefit more through Oha than through the state government?
[00:51:23] Clayton Hee: Because our record shows us, Marion Heeger, all one needs to do is get an audit report from Marion Heeger. The proof is in the pudding. One thing we do, which I believe other state departments don't do, is we have on retention, and an external auditor is Deloitte and Touche. We've had Deloitte and Touche for 15 years. They're not an employee of Oha. They are an external auditor that's retained by Oha. The Department of Education has an internal auditor that's paid by the Department of Education. Talk about the fox guarding the hen house. It makes no sense at all why the legislature would look at us with a jaundiced view, with a higher standard in the face of every other state department, every other state department, screwing up, wasting money, being unaccountable to the law and the people of the state of Hawaii, period.
[00:52:14] Randall Roth: Ed, I asked you the question uh earlier and obviously what Clayton is saying is resonating with with a lot of people. This is an age of cynicism. There are a lot of people who've who've lost faith in in state government's ability to deal with these problems. Real quickly, how do you respond? And then I want to give each of you an opportunity to add some issues to this conversation that haven't yet been mentioned.
[00:52:33] Ed Case: Well, obviously, excuse me, state, the the efficiency of state government is a major issue today uh in politics. And it's not just the legislature, it's the legislature, it's the executive, it's right across the board. That's one of the issues that of course we're trying to deal with on the bigger picture is how do we make more, you know, how do we make fewer resources go farther? And we have obviously in the throughout the 1970s and the 80s, really if you want to go back to statehood, you can go back to that in the last 35 years. We have obviously run a little too fat. We have obviously wasted money. We are obviously having to do, you know, do with less and to make it go farther. But that doesn't that doesn't, you know, that doesn't equate to just automatically paying more to any one group and forgetting about the bigger picture. So I I I think what I want to do is, you know, bring it back to the focus here, which is what are we going to do about the immediate problem of the Ceded Lands in terms of uh the the the the the the the um impact that it's having on some of the state finances and and again, this is just one of many, many controversial and complicated issues that the state legislature is having to deal with.
[00:53:39] Randall Roth: Okay. Um we've got one more person who's been waiting. We're going to go to him and then I'm going to give each of my guests in the studio an opportunity to um to add a few thoughts and to sum up their positions. Rick, on the windward side, good morning, Rick.
[00:53:51] Speaker 11: Yeah, good morning. Um I was thinking that um you know, a lot of everybody's talking about all these issues and race and everything and it it's not really your race, but it's your relationship to the the to Aina, you know? And see, because I think our basic economic system is flawed because it's based on never-ending growth. So, that has all its attendant problems. Most people's jobs are relying on this place becoming a big city. And where do you, of course we're going to get all the problems we have. We're not dealing with carrying capacity.
[00:54:27] Randall Roth: Okay. Rick, I I appreciate your your comment. I'd like to see I like to say what hear what they say about that. Well, I'll invite them to address that if they want, but we're down to the last eight minutes and I promise thank you, Rick. I've promised each an opportunity to um add what hasn't been said that needs to be said, or um elaborate or anything else you want to say in the last few minutes. Uh, Clayton Hee.
[00:55:02] Clayton Hee: Well, let me thank you, Randy, it's the second time I've had the privilege of being on your radio show and and also thank the listeners who you have a loyal following. Uh this is not as complicated as most people would like it to believe. This is not an economic issue in my opinion, it's an issue of justice. Economics is not an issue of justice in my view. If you want to solve justice, you do it justly. If you have an economic financial crisis, you look for creative ways to do so to solve the problem. We have been successful because Hawaiians no longer have to throw wind throw rocks at the courthouse window. We are now walking in arm in arm with our own lawyers, we're taking on Marjorie Bronster in the State Attorney General face-to-face. We're not asking the judge for any favors. We're presenting our case, and frankly, we're winning our case. Yeah, I agree, we should not dwell on the past, but the past should always be a reminder of the future and the past is not a happy one for us. We we know who we are. We we're confident, we're we're centered, we're Hawaiian people, we're not a tribe, we are a people. And part of the solution requires us to take back control of what resources were ours and that involves the Ceded Land Trust.
[00:56:11] Randall Roth: Okay, and and just again, for those who may have tuned in late, our guests wrote articles in this morning's paper. And Clayton, your article among other things is suggesting that Diamond Head, the Pali lookout, uh Makapu lookout and some other um places be transferred to Oha, and it suggests that this would be part of of your economic engine that would drive uh self-sufficiency for Native Hawaiians. Quick thought or two about that, then we'll go to Ed.
[00:56:36] Clayton Hee: Basically, the Ceded Land negotiations must uh uh avail itself to to lands that have economic potential. The state is woefully derelict in its in its economic uh uh revenue. We must be the economic engine. If if 5 million people go to the tourists and the city can charge people to go to Hanauma Bay, why isn't the state uh getting some revenue from the tourists who visit uh the Pali Lookout?
[00:57:00] Speaker 3: I can't remember when I've been to the Pali lookout. The same with Makapu'u Lookout. Why isn't the state generating revenue if, in fact, they say we need money? What the state ought to do is look at itself before it looks at Hawaiians and says, "We're going to take it take some more money away from you."
[00:57:15] Speaker 12: Okay. Ed Case, you've got about three minutes. Anything you want to comment on that you've heard? Add to the conversation? It's all yours. Go for it.
[00:57:23] Ed Case: Well, I think I feel like we should ask Clayton to come back into the state legislature. He has so many ideas on the overall state finances. I also want to thank you, Randy. You know, I I have a nagging feeling that we haven't gotten to the heart of the Ceded Land controversy here and haven't adequately explained or discussed that particular issue to your listeners, although we've ranged over a a number of much bigger uh uh picture issues.
[00:57:46] Speaker 12: Can you tell us what we've missed? What it, you know, even just to ask the question if we don't have?
[00:57:51] Ed Case: Well, I I think I think what we've missed is the situation that we are facing right now. We are facing essentially what has has has has been a deterioration in the relationship between OHA and the state that has resulted from a formula for the allocation of ceded lands that is proved unworkable and is resulted in repeated litigation and that has has come down to a point where liabilities against the state may well exceed a billion dollars, and where because of actions by the federal government, for example, at the airports, we may in fact lose this entire formula. We have a initial interim problem that we have to solve that is that is of concern to our state finances.
[00:58:30] Ed Case: I think that Clayton and I agree on the big picture. I think we agree on where we want to end up. I think we agree that we want to get into settlement discussions. I think we agree that we want a global resolution. I think we agree that the global resolution may well include the the the the the allocation of some of the ceded lands to OHA in replacement for this unworkable allocation formula. I'm I'm not going to dismiss some of his ideas about about what land should be conveyed over. I think we have to be creative about it. So I think that on many many areas, we agree. But I think where we disagree and where we're not focusing our our our energy to solve our disagreement is, what in fact do we do in the next one to two years about the problem that we face?
[00:59:11] Ed Case: Now, that's what we have to solve. That's where we disagree and that's where I hope we that I hope we solve that that in the next week because I think there's a real opportunity for us to get together and set up a solution that will work over the long run, but we got to get through the interim.
[00:59:24] Speaker 12: And and you're saying it's it's not realistic for OHA to say we want the 1.2 million or whatever the courts say the figure is.
[00:59:32] Ed Case: I I'm saying it's not responsible for me as a legislator to sit there and say that I'm going to accept a liability, an immediate liability to the state of an excess of a billion dollars. I'm not going to accept that. I'm going to have to solve that as part of the my responsibilities to the larger state. Now, if we can solve that problem, I think the rest of this will flow pretty nicely.
[00:59:50] Speaker 12: Clayton, you're shaking your head. I've got to give you 10 seconds to say something and then we'll sign off.
[00:59:54] Clayton Hee: We're not demanding 1.2 billion. That was a scare tactic by scare tactic by Jeff Watanabe on on behalf of the state. We're demanding justice. Simple. It's really simple.
[01:00:04] Speaker 12: Don't put a price tag on it. We want justice. That's bottom line.
[01:00:07] Clayton Hee: That's the bottom line. That's the only line.
[01:00:10] Speaker 12: Uh Ed Case, I've got to give you 10 seconds. Go ahead.
[01:00:12] Ed Case: Well, my 10 seconds are simple. Clayton, what are you doing after this? Maybe we can get together and have coffee and work it all out.
[01:00:18] Clayton Hee: You know, uh his point is well taken. OHA is on record. We've been waiting for the governor to to name his members to the negotiating team. The House and Senate should be included, frankly.
[01:00:27] Ed Case: We have to enact that legislation so I need your help to get the legislation that will set up that settlement group.
[01:00:32] Speaker 12: Well, I'll tell you what. We're going to sit and have some coffee. In just one minute. Listeners, thank you very much. This was the Price of Paradise radio show and I especially want to thank Ed Case and Clayton Hee. They've been uh very interesting guests. Uh the topic is is fascinating. The topic couldn't be more important to the people of Hawaii. If it's something that you don't yet know enough about to form an opinion, make an effort. Uh start with this morning's advertiser. It's I I just cannot overstate how important this issue is to the future of this state. Uh Ed Case is in the state legislature. He's the chair of the Hawaiian Affairs Committee. Clayton Hee is the chair of OHA, the office of Hawaiian Affairs. Has been in that position since 1991. Recently was re-elected for another two years.
[01:01:17] Speaker 12: The Price of Paradise Radio Show producer is Suzy Roth. Hawaii Public Radio's director of operations is Jeff Ilardy. Our sponsor is the Hawaii Community Foundation. Next week, we're going to be talking about privatization. What is the role of government? What sorts of services should it be providing? What sorts of services should it provide through private contractors? It's a very interesting issue. It was spiced up a lot two months ago when the Hawaii Supreme Court made a decision that basically made privatization illegal unless the legislature looks directly at it and specifically says that's okay. Linda Lingle from from Maui is going to be here. We're trying real real hard to get Gary Rodrigues or somebody from UPW to join her. You've been listening to the Price of Paradise Radio Show. I'm Randy Roth. Aloha.