Tag: Trustee Robert Lindsey

OHA turmoil: Trustee Akana says staffers told of flagrant disregard for policies

NOTE: This op-ed was originally printed in the Honolulu Star Advertiser on February 25, 2018

LINK:  http://www.staradvertiser.com/?p=722471?HSA=44dec0285d36f9e93efa1bd7b3c84c45c183bddf

In January 2017, as then-chairwoman of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ board of trustees, I and four other trustees offered OHA CEO Kamana‘opono Crabbe a buyout of his contract so that we could have a fresh start with a new CEO and correct many of the issues that have now been revealed by the state auditor.

However, three trustees fought us hard: Colette Machado, Bob Lindsey and Dan Ahuna went above and beyond to protect the CEO. They all refused to deal with the problems plaguing OHA and lacked the political will to make the necessary changes.

Over the past few years, OHA has had a problem with a mass exodus of administrative staff. Whole divisions were gutted and we lost our most capable and experienced staff.

Several of these employees confided in trustees they trusted and shared their horror stories of unqualified managers, friends of the CEO, who flagrantly disregarded policies and procedures. When they brought up their concerns, they were threatened, bullied and reprimanded. Most of them left for greener pastures.

There were always at least a few grant applicants who complained to trustees about the application process during every grant-giving cycle. They sent us emails and personally testified at the board table about the unfairness of the whole process. Many of them said their grants were denied based on technicalities. And yet, at the same time, many of the organizations that received grants were not properly evaluated on their deliverables. Many of the institutions that did receive grants had some sort of personal connection to the CEO. Beneficiaries constantly urged the trustees to do something, but the trustees in power believed the CEO was doing a good job and ignored the complaints.

In February 2017, I was removed as the board chairwoman because, I believe, of the sweeping changes I intended to make within the organization. The efforts to reform OHA came to a halt and things went back to the status quo when Machado was chosen as my replacement, and the CEO was back in business.

At the time of my ouster, I warned OHA’s new leadership that one cannot hide the truth, that it was only a matter of time before the public found out about what was really going on here. I believe the recent state auditor’s report says it all.

A year has passed since the new faction took over and, as predicted, nothing has changed.

Further, legislative measures such as Senate Bill 1303, which calls for amendments to the OHA election process, are dangerous because many of the reform-minded trustees calling for fiscal responsibility, such as Trustees Hulu Lindsey, John Waihee IV and myself are up for re-election this year. SB1303 specifically targets our races. Those who want to maintain the status quo are hoping that the new voting format will help them knock us out of office. Proponents of the bill say they want a head-to-head race with the three at-large candidates, but this already happens in the primary election. Six candidates will move on to the general election for three seats.

Gagging Dissenters

`Ano`ai kakou…  This could be the last time you read any hard truths about OHA in my columns.  On August 24th, the BAE Committee and OHA’s CEO proposed a new policy called “One Voice, One Message,” which requires that all external communications be submitted to the CEO for review and approval prior to execution or engagement.

If this policy is approved, Trustees will no longer be able to publically voice their opposition to any board decision without facing severe sanctions for speaking out against the majority.  So if five Trustees vote to approve a position, the remaining four Trustees will be forced to go along with the majority.

While it should be forehead slapping obvious why this is a terrible idea, allow me to list some of the reasons why:

  • WE ARE A DEMOCRACY. The First Amendment guarantees we can express our opinions.  Beneficiaries and voters who put us in office demand it.  Only petty Dictators in third world countries gag dissent.  First world democracies allow full and free discussions to take place.  Just imagine if Democrats had tried to gag Republicans after Obama Care was passed.  They wouldn’t stand for it!
  • WHY IS A PR FIRM WRITING OHA POLICY? – The proposed “One Voice, One Message” policy was prepared by Neal Yokota, President and CEO of Stryker Wiener & Yokota Public Relations, Inc. OHA policy must always be written in-house with the input and review of OHA attorneys.
  • TRUSTEES ARE REQUIRED BY LAW TO VOICE THEIR DISSENT. According to The Uniform Custodial Trust Act (HRS §554A-6), if we don’t express our dissent in writing before a vote is taken, we will be liable for the illegal or negative actions taken by the majority.
  • THE POLICY IS SHORT SIGHTED. Future Trustees could use “One Voice, One Message” to stifle dissent while they funnel millions in Trust dollars (grants, contracts, high-paying positions, leases) to their family and friends.
  • WHISTLE BLOWERS. “One Voice, One Message” conflicts with HRS 378-62, which protects employees who report violations of law by their employers.
  • THE MAJORITY IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT. If you had a vote on the mainland, I am sure that the majority would vote to outlaw interracial marriage.  Does that mean dissenters should just go along with the majority?  Hell no!  Wrong is wrong no matter what the majority says.
  • IT’S MISLEADING. “One Voice, One Message” sounds like Orwellian doublethink.  It’s not about unity at all; it’s really about eliminating all dissenters, whether they are OHA Trustees or employees.

It’s clear this is all part of a greater scheme by the Board Chair and the CEO.  They recently passed another policy on sanctioning Trustees who go against any OHA policy.  Now it’s painfully obvious they did that to give serious teeth to this new policy gagging dissenters.  “One Voice, One Message” is the final piece they need to empower the CEO at the expense of the Board of Trustees.

Thankfully, due to controversy, the proposal was deferred to the next BAE meeting.  I will continue to strongly oppose it and I pray my fellow Trustees won’t go along with such foolishness.

Bring back the Land Committee

`Ano`ai kakou…  By the time you read this article you will have voted in the Primary Election.  I hope you took my advice and voted for new people.  Let me tell you why this is important, especially in the OHA races.

About a year ago, at the urging of the current Board Chair, two committees were collapsed into one.  The Budget Committee and the Land Committee became the Committee on Resource Management chaired by Trustee Colette Machado.   The excuse was to save time and effort, but the real reason was to consolidate power.

Since that time very little, if anything, has happened in the new combined committee.  Trustees have received little or no information on our land negotiations.  For instance:

  • MAUNA KEA: On May 26, 2015, Governor David Ige announced that he asked UH, which subleases the Mauna Kea summit area from the state, to make ten changes to improve its stewardship of Mauna Kea.  One of the changes included UH voluntarily returning to the state more than 10,000 acres that are not specifically needed for astronomy.  I believe UH should turn the lands over to OHA, since all 11,300 acres of land within the Mauna Kea Science Reserve are public land trust lands classified under section 5(b) of the Admissions Act.  What better solution could there be than to put Hawaiian lands in Hawaiian hands?  OHA has now put the State and UH on notice that we are considering legal action against both.
  • KAKAAKO MAKAI: In 2012, when OHA received Kakaako lands in our settlement with the State over past-due ceded land revenues, none of us knew that the Hawaii Community Development Authority (HCDA), which has jurisdiction over development in the area, planned to lease the harbor in Kakaako.  OHA has been negotiating with the HCDA to get them to compromise on their plans to put “finger piers” in front of our Fisherman’s Wharf property.
  • LEGISLATIVE THREATS: Earlier in the year, the legislature tried to pass a “forced land sales” bills.  If HB 1635 and HB 2173 had become law, developers could use it to forced Hawai‘i’s landowners to sell leasehold lands to their lessees.  Kamehameha Schools led the charge against the legislation since nearly 80 percent of their commercial properties are leased.  Also, our ceded lands controlled by DLNR could have been threatened and it would have also hurt the ability of Native Hawaiian organizations and trusts to fulfill their missions.

No matter what explanation is given for all of the missed opportunities that OHA has had this past year to fulfill its mission, it all comes down to leadership and the lack of it.  To top all of this off, a five to four vote is hardly a vote of confidence to hire back an OHA Administrator who many Trustees feel lacks the business and economic development experience to move OHA forward in the black column instead of the steady red.

These are the reasons OHA needs a breath of fresh air.  VOTE FOR CHANGE.  IMUA!

Are you satisfied with the status quo?

`Ano`ai kakou…  After serving on legendary boards that worked hard to build OHA and strengthen its ability to serve our beneficiaries, it frustrates me that we’ve become so stagnated in the last few years.  If you don’t agree that OHA is standing still, ask yourself this – When’s the last time you’ve seen OHA in the news?

In the past, OHA accomplished big things with less staff and less money.  OHA was frequently in the news doing important things that mattered like establishing a state-wide property tax exemption for Native Hawaiians living on Kuleana lands (an effort which I spearheaded); providing $4.4 million in grants to Hawaiian Focused Public Charter Schools; preserving 25,000 acres of Native Hawaiian rainforest known as Wao Kele o Puna on Hawaii Island; and saving the 1,875-acre Waimea Valley.

We also haven’t been getting anywhere at the state legislature.  This was one of the first years I can think of that none of the bills in the OHA legislative package passed.  This should be a cause for concern that OHA’s clout at the legislature is waning.

OHA is the only advocate at the legislature for all Native Hawaiian issues, such as water rights, gathering rights, or land rights.  Few organizations have the resources, staff and expertise to speak to legislators on our beneficiaries’ behalf.  If OHA doesn’t do something fast to reverse its shrinking clout at the legislature, caused in no small part by inconsistent decisions and our Administration making decisions for Trustees, we will be in danger of becoming inconsequential, insignificant and insolvent.

There is so much we can do to help our beneficiaries who are suffering under the lack of affordable housing, the high cost of living, lack of fresh local produce, and the continuing degradation of our fragile environment.  We just seem to lack the will to do anything.  I miss the passion and drive that previous Trustees had in years past.  Sure we got into a few scraps with each other, but we got things done and our hearts were always in the right place.  Everything we did was for the benefit of our people.

The Board of Trustees needs new energy

We must not be content with just sitting back and letting the Administration plod along without any direction.  We need to get the fire back in our bellies and go back to doing big things.  If we don’t, we will no longer be relevant to our beneficiaries and the state might decide to get rid of us by transferring all of our assets to the general fund.

So this election, seek change and elect new blood!  Don’t be satisfied with the status quo.  Elect New People!  Electing the same Trustees will not bring any meaningful change to OHA!  Aloha Ke Akua.

Help OHA reach its full potential: Look for Change

`Ano`ai kakou…  As the longest serving Trustee, it saddens me that OHA is no longer the proactive advocate for our beneficiaries that it once was.  When I was first elected to the board in 1990, OHA was at the forefront of many issues involving native rights, housing, education, and health.

Past Trustees were actively involved, spearheading major projects, and holding OHA’s Administration accountable.  Now everything seems, for want of a better term, “stagnant.”  While I’m sure the Board Chair can produce a long list of “great” things happening at OHA, to me it’s just all public relations fluff.  Make no mistake – This is not the OHA of old that used to get results.  I’m sure that every Trustee would agree that OHA could do more for our beneficiaries.  Much more.

So what’s the solution?  It’s simple: Restore the Board’s oversight over the Administration.  Right now, there are only THREE Trustees that are holding the Administration accountable:

  • The Asset & Resource Management Committee Chair, who oversees all of OHA’s fiscal, policy, economic development, land, and administrative matters;
  • The Beneficiary Advocacy & Empowerment Committee Chair, who has responsibility over federal and state legislation, on-going programs in health, housing, and education; and
  • Last, but not least, the Board Chair, who basically just acts as the liaison between the Administration and the Board instead of providing oversight and direction. In fact, the CEO has BANNED Trustees without committees from having direct contact with Administrative staff. All requests for information must go through the Chair’s office.

So basically, the rest of the Trustees have to depend on the three Trustees above for updates and reports at the board table – There are no other opportunities for us to get information.

We could easily increase the amount of Trustees providing oversight over the Administration by going back the five committee system.  Subject matters included (1) Land, (2) Policy & Planning, (3) Program Management, (4) Legislative & Government Affairs, and (5) Budget & Finance.  Bringing back these five committees would instantly double the amount of Trustees overseeing the Administration from three to six.

The increased oversight over the Administration would finally put an end to the frequent complaints by Trustees that they are not being kept in the loop or getting regular updates on important issues.

As many of my long time readers know, this is not a new proposal.  I pushed for this change last year but the current Board Chair decided to go in the opposite direction.  He actually got rid of the Land and Property committee!

OHA is simply too big for three Trustees to control the organization.  And, as a result, crucial information is able to stay hidden.  For example, under the old five committee structure, the Budget & Finance committee chair actually had the time to take our budget out to the community for comments and suggestions.  Every line litem of the budget was presented and none were hidden in “cost centers.”  Nothing could stay hidden in the budget with that much scrutiny.

So this election, seek change and elect new blood!  Ask OHA candidates what they think about how OHA is run.  Question them on their ideas to improve the office and the services we provide.  Vote wisely or we’ll continue to be stuck in the same stagnation for years to come.  Our beneficiaries deserve better!  Aloha Ke Akua.