Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 18, Number 8, 1 August 2001 — Bad judgement [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Bad judgement

Criticism of the selection of OHA's new administrator is not directed at the new administrator himself but the process the chair used to appoint him. The process was already suspect as two of the flnalists had ties to the chair of OHA — one was her campaign manager another is an aide to the chair. Another flnalist had close ties to the chair of the budget and Ananee committee. It is questionable as to whether this was an impartial process. To add to this, the most qualifled candidate who has a law degree, was sixth on the list of flnalists. The interviews were held at an exclusive private club. For OHA to sanction this is ahominahle. It was decided after the last interview by those of us present, excluding Trustees Hee and Ota, that we would meet in executive session the following day to discuss eaeh candidate and take votes. The first candidate with five votes would be the new administrator, and further

that the other members whose eandidate did not win would cast their votes for the candidate with five votes to publicly show unity for the new administrator. The chair, however, followed another process without notifying the other trustees that she did not intend to follow the plan agreed to earlier. The chair and four other trustees selected Clyde Nāmu'o as the new administrator by making a motion and voting, in open session, declining to allow discussion on the matter. The other four trustees were completely left out of the process with no debate or consensus. The vote was taken while I had taken a phone eall from Trustee Hee who had asked that I ask the Board for a fifteen-minute delay as he was on his way. He had stopped at the home of former Trustee Aiona, who had just passed away earlier that morning. As I walked back to the boardroom, the Chair announced that I was too late and the Board had been called to order and the

vote already taken. Trustee Apoliona chairs by railroading the new administrator in without debate, consensus, and in effect excluding four of the trustees. This was followed and compounded by the selection of the interim acting administrator, Ron Mun. The chair along with four other trustees affixed their signatures to a document that appointed Mr. Mun as the acting administrator, effectively excluding four trustees onee again. Additionally, the whole board should be involved in the terms of what Mr. Nāmu'o's contract will include. However, four members were excluded. Five members are obligating nine members to any actions that may arise later in legal entitlements or any lawsuits. It has always been the kuleana of the whole board to decide the terms of the contract. It is clear to me that the personal interests of at least three trustees on the Board take precedence over everything else.

These trustees are not benefiting the beneficiaries but are representing other interests who want to eontrol OHA assets. Keeping OHA intact for our people and nation is a must. Giving our assets and responsibilities to other agencies and entities appears to be the focus of this leadership. The beneficiaries need to have their assets protected from this kind of manipulation. It is the very subtle kind of undermining that took plaee one hundred years ago, when the Queen found herself surrounded by enemies who helped take the kingdom from her with the aid of self-serving Hawaiians. This needs to be changed if OHA is to continue to be a vital force in helping Native Hawaiians achieve their full potential. Hawaiians must be maka'ala and not allow another Bishop Estate fiasco to occur. Beware of the shiny image — for underneath lies a wolf in sheep's clothing. ■

Rowena Akana Trustee, At-large