Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 14, Number 5, 1 May 1997 — Hee outlines vision for Hawaiian economic viability [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Hee outlines vision for Hawaiian economic viability

by Claytori Hee Chairman, OHA Board of Trustees As OHA negotiates the legal debt owed Hawaiians, we recognize the State's dismal eeonomie situation. The State is cash poor and the economy is flat. At the same time Hawaiians remain among the highest consumers of government subsidies including welfare, food stamps, unemployment, Medicaid and Medicare. Further, part-Hawaiians are overrepresented in prisons and we have more health problems than most others. OHA beheves that Hawaiians must become selfsufficient, get off the government subsidies, and climb the social, eeonomie, and educational ladders. To do so requires ideas, it requires courage and risk, most of all it requires vision. As part of its settlement with the State, OHA should consider taking back ceded lands with eeonomie potential. These lands include areas frequented by many tourists and where the State receives little (if any), compensation for the land's use. Examples include Diamond Head, the Pali Lookout, the Makapu'u Lookout, the Hālona (Blow Hole) Lookout, and Molokini Island. Further, as part of the negotiations the State should return historic and eulturally important sites beginning with 'Iolani Palaee and the Royal Mausoleum. Why shouldn't OHA consider Diamond Head, a so-called "wilderness area" that is more accurately an urban eyesore of Utter, haole koa, lantana, kiawe trees and other foreign species - a privileged backyard for those who live in exclusivity at Black Point, Diamond Head, Pāpū, and Royal Circle and Kahala Beach. Why should Diamond Head remain the "home" of the Federal Aviation Administration and Civil Defense? Think of it. A landscaped Diamond Head could l

be hke Yosemite and Yellowstone National Parks, where people pay a fee for the privilege of entering its confines. And while visiting that Iandmark, why shouldn't they be able to refresh themselves with Hawaiianmade beverages and purchase Hawauan-made garments or other reminders of Hawai'i? Why shouldn't they be able to get married in a unique setting that is symbolic of their stay in

Hawai ī? Why shouldn't OHA take control of the Pali Lookout? As with Hanauma Bay, what's wrong with having the nearly 5 million tourists who visit this historic site pay a nominal entrance fee? And after they marvel at the scenic vista, they could purchase a video depicting the history of the Battle of Nu'uanu or a book about the exploits of Kamehameha the Great. Every day, Molokini Island is visited by private charter boats whieh moor and thousands of visitors who pay their operators for the privilege of snorkeling, diving, and enjoying the beauty of the reefs that surround the islet. Why shouldn't Hawaiians be allowed to control Molokini and the mooring rights alongs its shores and derive a share of the ineome from visitors who enjoy an oeean activity fundamentally linked to Hawaiian culture and heritage? Why shouldn't military golf courses be given back to the Hawaiians? We don't want them to feel unwanted, we only want them to pay for playing games on our land. After all, in 1983 President Rea-

[ gan offered to pay the Philippine Government $900 million for five years as rent for Subic Bay and Clark Air Force Base. In 1989 President Bush offered nearI ly a half a hillion dollars eaeh year as rent for the bases. Why should Hawaiians be treated differently when it comes to paying rent for the use of our land? Fair is fair. Why anyone would argue that 'Iolani Palaee and ; the Royal Mausoleum shouldn't be returned to the ; Hawaiian people is astounding. These places remain | the focaI point and living symbols of the wrongs committed against the Hawaiian people in 1893. People who dismiss such proposals ignore the eeonomie sense behind them. Transferring title to j these lands will not cost the taxpayers of Hawai'i a ' single dollar since the State currently derives little or no revenue from their use. Instead, OHA would merely put to use and enhanee untapped eeonomie resources to satisfy a long overdue obligation. At a time when the federal government has given welfare recipients five years to get off, when the State is reducing aid to the poor and the disabled, the challenge before us is eeonomie self-suffi-ciency. OLLA must become the eeonomie engine of our people and provide enhanced opporhmities to lift our people from the dependency of government subsidies. The new Hawaiian eeonomie engine will benefit everyone as the increase in tax revenue is paid to the State. Hawaiians don't want handouts - we want the opportunity to succeed, to take the profits and pour them into housing programs, to pay for education, for health and elderly programs. If Hawaiians are to achieve true sovereignty we must be self-sufficient. Leadership demands it because poliheal sovereignty without eeonomie sovereignty is simply a meaningless facade.

Ceded !ands, Se!f-Sufficiency & Sovereignfy

Ka Wai Ola a OHA M* (May) '97 *

Clayton Hee