 |
Who & why
Hawaii Business invited six influential people in Hawaii to talk about power in the Islands and how to create positive change. The moderator was Jerry Burris, editor-at-large of Hawaii Business. The panelists were:
Haunani Apoliona
chairperson, Office of Hawaiian Affairs
Ben Cayetano
former governor
Kitty Lagareta
CEO, Communications Pacific and former chairwoman of UH Board of Regents
Colbert Matsumoto
CEO of Island Insurance Co. and
court-appointed master of Bishop Estate/Kamehameha Schools, 1996 to 2001
Peter Ho
president, Bank of Hawaii
Randy Perreira
executive director, Hawaii Government
Employees Association, and president of state AFL-CIO
For the version of this Hawaii Business forum that appeared in print, click here.
Burris: There’s a certain nostalgia about how things worked in the old days. There’s a story about Jack Burns (governor 1962 to 1974) and how he decided the Community Chest wasn’t functioning properly, so he summoned Jack Hall (former ILWU union leader) and Lowell Dillingham (a leading businessman) and said, “Make it work.” And they said, “OK, boss,” and they did. There was kind of an easier way to see where effectiveness and power rested. It appears that things are a little more diffuse now. So the purpose of this is not just to be gossipy about who has power, but how do you get things done? How do you make change in Hawaii – positive change? Who do you go through? What institutions? What individuals? What groups? If we assume that change is a positive thing – that there are things that need to be fixed to move ahead – where do you go to make things happen? It doesn’t have to be politically. It could be community people getting together to do something, although I think, eventually, politics come into it.
Cayetano: I’m not sure I know the answer right now. My experience has always been in the political arena. Whether it has to do with business or other things, politics does have an impact. So if you’re asking where to go, you go to the governor and you go to the Legislature to make your case and try to get things done. But it’s not that simple. This being the state that it is, interpersonal relationships count a lot. I think that is very, very important. I don’t want to sound like this is nepotism, but when my wife chaired the Chamber of Commerce, she managed to get passed one of the really important bills for businesses – and that was the moratorium on the unemployment trust fund. It worked. It was a coming together of unions and business. She told me afterwards that one of the reasons why the chamber couldn’t get anything done in the past was because the people who represented the chamber had very little connection, in interpersonal terms, with the members of the Legislature.
Burris: So, even today, relationships with political people in the Legislature are critical to getting things done.
 |
Six influential Hawaii leaders talk about how change happens |
Cayetano: Well, this is probably the same for business and everything else because when you talk about power, for example, and you look at business, historically, you can look back to the days of the Big Five. They had these interlocking directors. You’ve got basically the same things today except the faces are different. The complexions of the faces are different. Whether it’s choosing the university president or the football coach – the people who are usually brought together tend to be the same people.
Burris: So if you wanted to get something done, you’d expect to go to the same people?
Cayetano: This is in politics now. Yes, it’s important that you make that connection so you can sell your idea.
Burris: Peter, I told our staff this story. Years ago, some guy came into town. He was researching Honolulu for a business that was going to come to Hawaii. He wouldn’t tell me what business it was. I think it was Costco, but I don’t really know. He was interviewing people and asking them, “Who do you think runs things here?” and “How do things work?” And I said, “I’ll cooperate if you tell me your observations once you’re finished.” And he later said, “I’m amazed how important the banks are in Hawaii. Think about the old Western movies where you’ve got the sheriff and the banker who ran everything in town.” He said, “In most places across the Mainland, the banks don’t really have much of an importance in the community; they just do banking, whereas in Hawaii, they’re very important, particularly the two big ones.” Do you think that’s still true?
Ho: I think listening to Gov. Cayetano talk about the importance of relationships, I think that’s a truism that’s withstood the test of time when you talk about how things get done in the state. So I don’t think it’s coincidental that the banks play a major role in the community if you believe that relationships are important because the banks are really – when you get down to it – receptacles of relationships. We try to be as unbiased as possible. We have 250,000 customers. It’s probably not good business for us to be too positioned one way or another, so it’s better to kind of just keep your thoughts to yourself. Then you get into the business community, and it’s even more so. Then you get into organized labor. We have a big relationship with Randy’s outfit and a lot of others. We’re almost trained to be kind of sitting back on the sidelines and in a lot of ways, I think we do act as relationship conduits, if you will.
Burris: If someone is looking to get something done or to change something, would the banks be a good place to start?
Ho: No.
Matsumoto: I think it boils down to leadership – community leadership. The example that you used about Jack Hall and Lowell Dillingham, in their day, they were acknowledged leaders in the labor sector and the business community. Because of that, I think Gov. Burns knew the capacity that they had to reach into the sectors that they had influence over. So change happened because they were leaders. I think what’s happened in Hawaii is that the banks tend to hire very capable leaders, so as a result of that, they play significant roles in the community. If you look at Walter Dods, he’s a business leader that straddles the community, as well as the business sector and government – and does it effectively. But I think Walter saw it as his role as head of the largest financial institution – if not the largest company in Hawaii – to play that kind of a role. So I think it really boils down to leadership and whether or not we still have leaders of that caliber in the community that can pull together diverse groups and push forward different initiatives.
Burris: Is it your feeling that we don’t have as much as we used to?
Matsumoto: Yes, I think that’s definitely the case. We don’t have the same kind of concentration of influence that we had in the past. The labor sector, I think at one time, you had David Trask (former head of the HGEA), Jack Hall, these were guys who had tremendous influence among a broad range of labor leaders. I don’t know that even Randy, no difference to you, claim to have the same mantle that David had.
Burris: Randy, is that a deliberate approach on the part of the unions to be a little less front and forward? If you think about it, a David Trask or an Eddie Tangen (former ILWU leader) – if you did this exercise 25 years ago, you could easily identify who the power players were. Are the unions trying to become more of a general part of the community and less of a focus?
Perreira: I think part of it is that was a different time. Back then, we were in a much different stage of development as a state. You go back that far and that was really the dawn of the public sector and collective bargaining – 30 years ago. The times were different so it dictated a different kind of leadership that was needed. Today, things are different and I would agree that whether it’s in the banking industry or in the community, it’s really the personal characteristics of individuals that allow them to rise and influence the community – not just the position, although the position helps.
Burris: Haunani, as we were setting up for this roundtable, we talked about pre-OHA – pre-1978. If you say today, “Something’s going to happen” or “Something’s going to get done,” the interests of Hawaiians have to be taken into account. That was not the case prior to ’78. Today, I don’t think anyone would suggest or try something big and important without thinking how the Hawaiians feel about it. Do you think that’s true? Do you feel this responsibility?
Apoliona: I think 1978 and the constitutional convention and the changes that established OHA, rose out of that sentiment (Hawaiians’ lack of power). Previously, in the 1900s, there was the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which was the federal legislation focusing on homesteaders and rehabilitation. After that, public-policy-wise, there wasn’t much. The idea and the concept of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs rose because of the gap between 1959 and 1978. Since OHA began in 1978, it’s had its evolution. We’re now 30 years old. We’re trying to work within the community – both across the state and with Hawaiians that are out of the state of Hawaii. I think there is a definite positive evolution because we try to do our best in the fiduciary duties the trustees are responsible for. We also are imparted with responsibilities by laws that say you have to protect and be part of the consultation as it relates to any development. So I think we are a voice; a strong voice; a constitutional voice for the Hawaiians. We are not simply a nonprofit. We are constitutionally created and elected. So that sets OHA in a place that is different from any other native group throughout the country. Now, is it always agreeable to the Hawaiian community or the non-Hawaiian community what OHA does? No, but as fiduciaries, we try to examine the issues, try to make the best decisions possible based on the talent at the table of the board, as well as all of the work we can do with our staffers and linkages and communications with the community.
Burris: If we went back 30 years and had this discussion about where the power centers are in Hawaii, do you think anyone would have said the Hawaiian community?
Apoliona: I don’t know. My path to this policy making and political arena is really young and only began in the mid ’90s for me, although I have worked with Alu Like for 18 years. The work of Alu Like began in the ’70s. It came out of large efforts of Hawaiian community leaders. So yes, I think Hawaiian community leaders wanted to create a future for Hawaiians, and as a result, started to move then.
Burris: Let me put it another way: Today, if something major is going to happen in Hawaii – a major policy decision, a major social decision – would you expect to be consulted?
Apoliona: Absolutely! Sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. Cayetano: What kind of major decision?
Burris: Well, it could be anything, and this is probably a bad example – but the Superferry. Were you guys consulted?
Apoliona: No, but I believe one of the trustees reviewed the question. No one asked us what they should do. I’ll just say, as it relates to the military – the Department of Defense – there’s a building of better communication that’s consistent and regular, and that’s nice. That’s not to say that you can’t do anything in this town. And part of it comes from the fact that the federal rules, regulations and statutes require some of these consultations. It is happening. We are grateful for that. We appreciate it and it allows us to do our duties.
Burris: Sometimes people will say that it’s not real clear where the power is in Hawaii, and I wonder if they’re somehow speaking metaphorically about the fact that after 40 years, we had political powers diffused. In other words, we had a Republican governor and a Democratic legislature. What they’re really saying is, “We don’t know where to go now.” Do you think that’s true?
 |
Lagareta: A lot of stuff that’s coming up. I was thinking back 30 or 35 years ago when my first job was at Alu Like. I was loaned out from the YWCA to go help there for a year. We had a very strong feminist movement then, so if you wanted stuff done, you had to go talk to the women – people like Donnis Thompson (first female athletics director at UH) and Jean King (lieutenant governor). But when I look at the question of what is power and how do you get things done right now, the first thing that comes to mind is grassroots – what the very active and some very professional activists in the community, representing different positions on different things. I think you have to take that into account. You may not always agree, but I think it brings a good level of transparency and more involvement from more people. I think people who disregard those communities or voices in the community also run into trouble. When you look at it, whether they’re environmental groups – some of which are very proactive on very good things; some of them reactive; some of them just trying to stop any type of thing they’re against – you have a wide variety. Sometimes they come together in different configurations and learning who comes together in different configurations, learning how big they can get to start or stop something is really important. Look at Kanu, which I think is a great organization. I think they’re doing a lot of really good things and look at how widely they’ve gotten their message out. You look at the power of the Maui Tomorrows or the Stop Honolua or those types of groups and there’s a lot of firepower there. Whether it’s policy groups like Outdoor Circle, I think they have been a voice. If you look at that, I think that’s one big way of how you get things done still. I think you cannot ignore the government at all, but the power is definitely diffused as community voices gain momentum. I worked with unions and I think, obviously, they’re very strong and powerful in Hawaii. I’m interested to see, with this financial crash and sort of the failings of corporate America, my instinct is that the unions will get stronger as a result of that, in some ways. I think people are going to look to unions to protect them more. It worries me in Hawaii because we’re a small-business state and a lot of people running small businesses didn’t take $800 million salaries or get big bonuses. I look at the Native Hawaiian community and I remember working with George Kanahele a number of years ago when they were trying to start the Native Hawaiian Hospitality Association. George’s mantra then was, “We have to have a seat at the table,” and if I look at what’s happened, sort of the activism that you found in the ’70s and ’80s here, those people are now sitting at the table making decisions from the inside. I think that’s a huge change for Hawaii – for the better. I personally see some of the activism now as more fringe with the real Hawaiian activism being on the inside making decisions.
Burris: Are the grassroots groups stepping into a vacuum or did they just mature?
Lagareta: The business community has been missing in action for a long time. I think what Vicky (Cayetano) said is important. I don’t think it’s that they don’t have the relationships. I’ve personally been involved in the Chamber of Commerce and other groups for years. They always go up hat in hand saying, “Please can you do this for us?” and accept whatever they get and nobody raises a fuss because they don’t want to step on toes. That’s how I see it.
Matsumoto: I think Kitty’s point about the business community is correct because our business community has changed significantly from 30 years ago. You don’t have the same number of major companies that are still locally based and locally owned. And as a consequence, I think that impacts the effectiveness of the business community in dealing with government, influencing the Legislature and accessing the governor. You might have the banks, but the banks aren’t going to take on every issue. You have other major players that don’t have the same kind of community perspective or community interest that a CEO whose home is Hawaii, and whose kids grew up and go to school here, and intends to live here for the rest of his or her life is going to have, in terms of what is going on in government and the community at large. I think that has changed significantly and there’s an imbalance now as a result of that. Definitely, I think the business community is not as effective, in terms of interacting with government as in the past.
Burris: Is there a fix for that paradigm? I remember years ago, it probably was Walter Dods who was complaining that when they’re trying to raise money for something, they can’t get money out of the hotels because they’re all run by Kenji Asano and they don’t really care about Hawaii.
Cayetano: Not only tourism. If you go down to the University of Hawaii and you look at the names on the buildings, it’s usually some distinguished faculty member. You go down to the Loyola Marymount and you look at the building with its Italian and Irish names. These are people who gave money. We don’t have that and I think that’s one reason why the banks in this state – especially the two big banks – really have a lot of influence, in the political arena, anyway.
Burris: Because there was a Johnny Bellinger (former CEO of First Hawaiian Bank) who was from here?
Perreira: Whether or not you’re from here, it’s going to be difficult to change, there are fewer Kittys and Colberts who have dedicated their lives to living here, so you have absentee ownership. They don’t have the commitment to the community. They may, like Walmart, give money, but they’re not wed to the community. They’re making no attempts to grow roots, if you will. As a result, the business community will struggle until it gains that balance.
 |
Matsumoto: I’ll tell you one way that we can try to address this. For a long time, I think our government was a lot more interested in helping local businesses. If you took a governmental sector, in terms of opportunities, a lot of major contracts have been awarded to major companies. The local companies have been outbid, outmaneuvered, for one reason or another, and not necessarily because they couldn’t do the job. Yes, maybe they couldn’t offer the lowest price, but you have to look at the total package, in terms of what is the benefit of giving the award to a local player as opposed to somebody from the Mainland who’s just going to hit-and-run and that’s it. I think that is a big problem. I was just talking to a contractor yesterday who was telling me about how they lost a government contract to some multinational company. Later on, people connected to that institution asked the manager and he said, “Well, we don’t do that kind of stuff.”
Cayetano: The government, their constraint, is the need for transparency. That’s why you have this big process where the lowest bidder supposedly gets the job. That’s not necessarily the best guy, but you can’t give a job to a local company simply because they’re local.
Matsumoto: Look at Hunt (Texas-based Hunt Development Group). They get the contract to the UH-West Oahu College and then walk away from it.
Cayetano: What the government needs to do is get the contractor to hire local guys – local subcontractors – to do the work. Some of this work may be specialized, as in the case of Aloha Stadium; the unions are running ads, and you got these guys from Kentucky coming in here and doing the work. The government has to find some way to put some pressure on the companies and say, “Why don’t you hire some local people?” I remember when I was in the Legislature and there was a big concern about the Japanese taking over the hotels. The one thing about the Japanese, they were much more sensitive to local pressure to get local people in than when the American companies came. At least the Japanese companies, but not without pressure from the local people, would open some doors for locals at the higher levels. Like you had [Ernest] Nishizaki running the Royal Hawaiian and for a long time, Stan Takahashi was running the Kyo-ya operation over here. Granted, the Japanese companies mostly chose Japanese Americans, but it’s better than the Mainland companies.
Matsumoto: I tell you, I used to work for (attorney) Wally Fujiyama. When I worked for Wally, he represented a number of major Japanese investors in Hawaii, as well as Duty Free Shoppers. Wally used to make it a condition that if a client wanted his services, he expected that they would give back to the community. For a lot of Japanese corporations, that wasn’t in their culture.
Cayetano: And they did, right?
Matsumoto: He insisted, and they did. He got them to make major donations to different schools and community organizations. He basically set up a charitable foundation targeting only Hawaii organizations. I think community leaders who have influence with these people that come into town, need to impress it on them. They need to educate them to make them understand that if they want to play and do business in Hawaii, you have a responsibility to give back to the community – and not just profit from us.
Cayetano: I think you made a good point when you talked about Jack Hall and all those guys. That was a different time and the dynamics politically, socially and otherwise, were a little different. I’m surprised you could tell Walter Dillingham what to do because Mr. Dillingham didn’t think much of guys like me and Colbert, but that’s OK. It’s a different time now and some of the people who are in charge, even local people, maybe they don’t have the same connection to the past, the same feeling. A guy like Wally, he suffered discrimination and all kinds of things when he was growing up. For him, it was kind of like, “OK, I have power in this community and I’m going to try to make some changes.”
Lagareta: I struggle with this idea that we’re losing something because a lot of big companies aren’t locally owned, and, of course, we want people to hire local workers. But I struggle with it because when construction is bad, I know a lot of people leave our state and they go find construction jobs in Las Vegas or whatever, I don’t see anybody saying, “You guys can’t come in; you’re not local,” so I struggle with it. I think we should employ our local citizens in every way we can, but we are in a global economy and I think kind of skipping to one of the last thoughts here, when we talk about who’s going to lead us, I think it’s going to ultimately be the person who can help us define who we are and who we want to be because we never have. Basically, I think we’ve defined who we don’t want to be and who we aren’t. I just don’t think we’re going to get clarity on some of these things – what do we keep out; what do we keep in – until we do that. The other issue is that I work with a lot of companies and like everybody else, I run into the ones who come in here like, “We’re from New York and we’re going to tell you how we do things and that’s how we’re going to do it.” It’s obnoxious. But I have to say, Target came in here 3 1/2 years before they ever opened a store. They started by meeting with people in the community and talking with them at the community level and saying, “What do you need? How do we work with you?” before they did a single thing. Even though they didn’t have any revenue here, they were giving away hundreds of thousands of dollars before they even came here. And there are other companies like that. I don’t want to paint everybody with that brush, but it does take somebody – in Target’s case, that’s just how they are. In other cases, they’re willing to do it, they just have to understand how it is and how it works. We think of Longs as one of the most local companies and actually, I don’t think Longs was ever locally owned. We need clarity there. We tend to talk about non-local versus local and it gets blurry these days.
Matsumoto: In Longs case, though, I think they have independent managers.
Burris: Well, when I go into Longs, it feels local (everyone agrees).
Matsumoto: Well, take Meadow Gold – Glenn Muranaka (president of Meadow Gold Dairies). They’re a subsidiary of a multinational company, but Glenn is very committed to the local communities. They provide a lot of support to sports teams and youth organizations. I think it’s because they have local management that has the discretion and authority to make those kinds of decisions. You look at a lot of the other players, they only have managers, they don’t have people in executive positions who can make those kinds of decisions.
Burris: Someone made a point the other day that whoever runs Costco here is probably a very bright person, but he or she is only responsive to Costco – back in Seattle.
 |
Cayetano: But Costco takes good care of its employees. They have a turnover rate, according to what I read in Fortune magazine, of about 2 percent, which is the lowest in retail, and they provide benefits. If a company does that, you know most of the workers in that company, are going to be there, and if you are fair to your workers, that’s all you can ask of any company.
Burris: Unless, of course, the top executive for Costco in Hawaii sits on the Chamber of Commerce board.
Cayetano: I don’t even know who it is.
Matsumoto: See, that’s the problem. I don’t agree with you that even though they treat their employees well and they’re a well-run organization, that’s enough. To me, that’s what distinguishes a local company from one that’s not so-called local. Local companies are led by management that have the understanding that their role, with respect to the company, is not just to make a profit, but also to improve the community they live in. As a result, they conduct their business and they conduct themselves in a manner that allows that. It’s because they’re a part of the community. They care about the community. This isn’t just a place to make money. So because of that, it’s not just about donating. It’s about participating, volunteering, providing leadership.
Cayetano: Let’s take Meadow Gold. They certainly weren’t acting in the interest of the local people when they faced the Heptachlor crisis. It took a guy from the Mainland to come over here and tell the local guys to cooperate with the state and get everything straight. The two people that were running the place, one retired and the other got shipped off to Idaho someplace. But you know, Meadow Gold does a lot of good things, but it’s in the interest of them to do those things, too.
Burris: So, do you just have to wait and hope that enlightened people like Target will come in or is there some way this community can simulate that type of leadership?
Lagareta: If we had good leadership, we could find the Targets and tell them we want them here. We’d find those companies, although they’re not all willing to come here, but we also don’t make it easy.
Ho: I think the lens needs to change. We talk about Mainland companies that don’t give as much as local companies, and so forth. While that’s true, when you add up all of those dollars, in the end, it’s not that much money. You can argue whether having local management is better or not – and you’ll get some mixed results – but I think the real issue is once we lost our business community being local, what we really lost was strategic control of the business community. So now we find ourselves in a very different situation. Now it’s not call Walter Dillingham and get together with [David] Trask and get this thing done, now it’s who out there in the world do we need to attract in to create jobs, create capital, to make the economy work, and in my own view, we’re not there yet.
Cayetano: A part of it, you take the developers, it takes a long time to get things done here, and it’s true. If you want to get a permit, it takes a long time. If you want to get things done quickly, go to Houston. You don’t need so many permits in order to have a service station next to a $5 million home, but from the competing side and the part that makes it difficult, is that in the ’70s if you folks remember, development was going so strong that there was a reaction that people that were concerned about environmental resources and things like that, and that’s why some of the land use stuff that was put in place earlier by people like Gill, who probably saw this coming. It does make it make it difficult for developers to get things done as quickly as on the Mainland. But to me, that’s the cost of living in Hawaii. There are things we can do to change things. I think if you left it up to the business community today and asked them, “What do you want us to get rid of?” the first thing they’d say is the pre-paid health plan. That’s the biggest cost.
Lagareta: Some would say the Legislature first (everyone laughs).
Cayetano: See, I think if you come here to do business, you have to understand that the government, elected by the people, wants a pre-paid health plan for the people. These people that come in from the Mainland, they have a hard time dealing with that kind of stuff.
Apoliona: It kind of speaks to the whole, the over-arching idea of “So what do you want Hawaii to be like?” What the governor is saying, what Colbert is saying, it all interconnects. People giving back to the community, what does that mean? What is the quality of life in Hawaii going to be? To create this balance, that’s what at issue here, and how do we balance it for the future? The spirituality of this place – what is it that we want Hawaii to be? And in that process of trying to balance it out, we’ll likely not go one stream or the other, and that’s the challenge. That’s the tension.
Lagareta: I don’t object to the fact that it takes time to get things done. I wish there was some type of development master plan somewhere because we still have service stations and fast-food restaurants next to our houses, but I think we could do better on the process. The rules change too arbitrarily and I think people in business can live with the rules if they know what the rules are. I think the upside and downside of the grassroots voice that’s become stronger is that everything gets taken to the judiciary and court these days and we don’t seek out another mechanism. You think you’re following the rules and then somebody takes you to court and things keep changing. I think that’s an issue in terms of attracting business.
Matsumoto: I think, again, it boils down to leadership. Leadership has to have vision. It’s not just about getting things done and getting things done faster. It’s to what end are you trying to get things done? I think, what I see as being a problem, is that a lot of public decision making has been very ad hoc. It doesn’t tie in to some vision, in terms of where we’re going and why we’re trying to get there. I’m kind of reminded of something that Nainoa Thompson talks about when he talks about wave finding. When you sail on a voyage, it’s really important to know where you’re going, why you’re going there and what you’re going to take with you on that voyage. But it’s also really important to think about what are you leaving behind and why are you leaving that behind? For us, I don’t think we’ve thought enough about those things. I think if we do it just for economic reasons, then I think we’ll be going down the wrong path because I lose the quality of our lives and all the things that made us choose to live here. I think we have to be real careful about that.
Apoliona: From the principles, the philosophies, these decisions and engagements occur. The future is not reliant on one personality leading the charge. I really think this is the time for collective leadership.
Burris: How do you achieve that?
Matsumoto: I was kind of hoping that the Hawaiian community would provide the spiritual and cultural guidance because clearly, I think for most of us, it’s that cultural foundation that’s made Hawaii a special place.
Apoliona: I think that as the host culture or the native people, it is the foundation of how life proceeds and moves forward, but it doesn’t just stop with the Hawaiians. These type of values are a lifestyle of living in the Islands and has to cut across all of our communities. In the essence of the Hawaiian culture, there’s at least a spark. And there are tried and true practices over the ages that have historically helped in living in these Islands.
Cayetano: May I ask you, such as?
Apoliona: I think we have to look at how we’re going to balance the natural resources; how we work with each other. You talk about character and leadership, there are some lessons and guideposts in leadership and interaction between policy makers, business leaders, community leaders, grassroots leaders. It’s about interrelationships. This is my manao.
Burris: Hooponopono?
Apoliona: Well, hooponopono in the very broad sense in trying to keep things on a good path in working with each other. But when you say you’re going to do something, you do it. You don’t make commitments and then not deliver. That’s an example. When you try to communicate in a way that’s civil, respectful. Also, the term haa haa (humility) doesn’t mean being a doormat. It’s understanding when you have to lead something and understanding when you have to be a player on a team. And all of that makes a difference. So those are examples of how we should interact as people – whether they’re Hawaiian or non-Hawaiian; local or non-local. People can instill that and carry it with them in their interactions here and outside of Hawaii – but here in particular. We might have something greater going, but that doesn’t happen over night.
Matsumoto: To me, those of us who were born and raised here or have lived here most of our lives, we develop a certain consciousness. I think it has to do with the fact that we live on an island. And I think what Haunani’s talking about is basically that we’re very conscious and sensitive to the fact that we have limits. As a result, we act with restraint, both in relation to how we use our resources as well as how we interact with each other. Then we become very conscious of our interrelationship and our interdependence. Because of that, we realize that we have to resort to collective action. So it’s not about one person or leader. It’s about all of us coming together as a community to accomplish things. To me, those are the kinds of qualities that define our culture and our lifestyle in Hawaii. I think we’re losing that because we have a lot of guys coming from the continent who have a continental perspective. They think there’s unlimited opportunity, unlimited resources and they can just exploit it all.
Perreira: What it comes down to is like what Kitty said a little earlier about the environment being different. We’re in a global economy. We need to find a way to protect the spirit of living here while adjusting to a much different world around us. I agree completely. We all have developed – whether we were born and raised or have lived here a long time – a sense of what it means to live here. For example, helping your neighbor out when you really don’t have to, which doesn’t happen elsewhere. But I for one am afraid. I have three teenage kids – three daughters – that I fear will not stay. They all love living here. My wife’s from West Virginia, so they have a different perspective when we’ve gone to visit the Mainland, but if we lose that sense. ... So without making the adjustments, we’re in for a tough future.
Lagareta: I agree with everybody. When something bad happens here, whether it’s in your neighborhood or across the state, everybody’s together. We just look after each other. Everything you said is true, Colbert. But I can’t reconcile that all the time with the fact that I’ve seen some of the ugliest power players and battles in the state that I think you see anywhere, and you see it consistently. I think they’re ugly; they’re about personal power; they’re about personal agendas, and they go on constantly. So there’s a certain part of who we are on one level and there’s another struggle about who’s going to run this small pond; who’s going to have the power? And it’s inconsistent with what we all say and love about Hawaii.
Apoliona: There lies the challenge.
Cayetano: I think what Haunani was talking about is not so much a question about whether the person lives her or was born and raised here. I know people from the Mainland who come here, and they’re much more concerned about, for example, the resources and the environment than local people who take things for granted. I remember when I appointed Charlie Ota (vice president, military affairs, Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii) to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. It created a little ruckus (everyone laughs), but Charlie said, “All my life, I felt like I was a Hawaiian.” It’s like what FDR said: Americanism is not a matter of your skin; it’s a matter of your heart. That’s what should be kept in mind. I’ve got to tell you, Haunani, some of the people who are leading the fight for Hawaiians are hardly humble and they’re very antagonistic, and if you go to the University of Hawaii, they teach people how to hate other people.
Apoliona: Just to be clear, I’m talking about the values and the culture. People, whether they’re Hawaiian or not, can live, discard and abuse the values and the culture. It’s like what you said, governor, come from someplace else, and you got it; the values are with you. That’s why some people never leave here.
Matsumoto: I think what you’re saying is true, Kitty. I take back what I said about being born here. A lot of people that I know who were born and raised here, don’t have that consciousness; don’t have that sensitivity. So, it really is about education, culturalization. It’s about whether or not we create the context that will foster that kind of sensitivity and consciousness. To create that context, we have to have a vision. We have to know what you’re aiming for.
Burris: Now, to bring things back a little bit to the over-arching theme of power – and by that, we don’t necessarily mean political power – we’re talking about the ability to get things done in a community. Maybe we’ll just go around the table and I’ll ask you folks, do you have any hope or optimism that there are institutions, individuals or procedures that will get Hawaii moving in a good direction? Is it the unions? You know, I saw Calvin Say in the elevator, and he said, ‘Oh, it’s the university.’ So, is there an institution or individuals or collection of ideals that can move Hawaii forward for the next 10 to 20 years that will be seen as what makes things happen? I don’t want to pick on you, Randy, but why don’t you go first.
Cayetano: Ha, he’s the most powerful guy right now in this room (everybody laughs).
Perreira: I don’t know about that. But I’m not sure. I think part of the challenge lies in the lack of political leadership and really the need to try to bring people together. For example, one of the points Kitty made earlier about Hawaii being a very small-business state is very true. There continues to be an antagonism at some times between different forces, whether it be legislation or other issues that impact the business community. And I’m not suggesting a partisan thing because there will always be partisanship, but I think so far, we just lack elected officials in this recent generation that are willing to make hard decisions, and not short-term decisions that are premised on getting re-elected.
Lagareta: I couldn’t have said that better, Randy, honestly. It’s true. It seems like it’s all about what you need to do to get re-elected and then going on to higher things. But then, where is the public served in that?
Cayetano: You know, Randy, you guys are very, very hard on people who have supported you for many, many years, when on occasion, they don’t agree with you guys. You know, we can talk 30,000 feet in the air forever. Let’s get down to ground level. For example, when we passed the new healthcare bill that was supposed to be a major reform. As it turns out, it hasn’t happened quite that way. But I remember, I was going to have a public signing upstairs. You know, it’s ceremonial. Usually, whenever we pass a big bill, the legislators flock to get their pictures taken. So here I am, getting ready to sign this historical bill and nobody showed up. I remember waiting and waiting, and nobody showed up. Then somebody asked Bobby Bunda (former state Senate President Robert Bunda), “How come nobody showed up?” and he said, “Why rub salt in the union’s wounds?” That’s what I’m talking about. This man is a little shy (pointing to Perreira), but the union is the most powerful force in this state right now.
Lagareta: If you look at the grassroots level, with all due respect, look at the Democratic Party offices throughout the year – I used to walk by it every day – there’s like two people in there. But when an election comes, there are 8,000 union members who staff everything.
Cayetano: But that’s the union’s right to do that.
Lagareta: Absolutely. But I’m just saying that it’s too bad you can’t disagree. It’s a reality here and that’s why it’s so hard to challenge anybody.
Matsumoto: I don’t think that’s what Randy’s saying. And I’m actually surprised at how candid Randy’s being. It’s his responsibility to advocate for his members, so he’s going to push for whatever is best for them.
Perreira: Well, and therein is a different challenge because one thing that we’ve seen now, at least to some degree, some leadership change in the public sector and to some degree the private-sector unions, but the challenge that we all face internally is the same challenge we face in the community and that is generational differences. There are individuals within the organization who have been around and have went through the Cayetano years, the Ariyoshi years, who have a mindset that is markedly different from our members that are from the Kanu generation, and the internal clash is very real and unfortunately, it creates different challenges trying to change the agenda.
Burris: Does that diminish the union’s effectiveness as an agent for change then?
Perreira: I don’t think so. It’s just a challenge we face in trying to move the group as time moves.
Cayetano: Let me give you an example of how sometimes things can be done. I remember sitting down with Gary Rodrigues and Russell Okata (former leaders of the United Public Workers and the Hawaii Government Employees Association) and we were talking about the union contract and I said, “You know, the benefits are too big upfront – 21 days sick leave, 21 days vacation and 13 holidays. That’s 55 days.” So I asked Gary and Russell, “Why don’t we put five days at the back end so the member who’s worked 25 years gets 26 days instead of 21 days, but the guy who just started has to work five years until he gets his 21 days,” and they agreed to that. And it was in our contract. Well, somebody has to fall off and today it’s no longer there. But it’s an example of how I think we can do some things.
Lagareta: Yeah, absolutely. You know, when you say workers, Randy, this is where I have a big issue because when I hear the union say workers. I have workers, private businesses have workers, especially with all the small businesses we have. All these people are workers who we value and who we also want to benefit. And this is not just unions, but when we constantly hear about profits in the private sector and all of that, we all invest a lot into our employees, with 401Ks and all of that. My guys took pay cuts and shorter hours and stuff back in December, essentially, because we saw what was coming and our private-sector clients were hurting. I have nothing against state workers, but I have a real issue when somehow private sector workers are differentiated from the state workers. I hear this in the state a lot – I hear this from the Legislature – and I think that divides us, and it bothers me a lot and I know it does a lot of business people. I just think we need to come together.
Matsumoto: I think what it shows is a significant break down in trust among these different institutions, so the relationships we were talking about earlier are frayed. They’re not conducive to having the kind of dialogue the governor talked about, in terms of reaching out to the head of the UPW and the HGEA. (Pointing to Cayetano) They respected you. They may not have agreed with you, but they respected you. They knew you were a man of your word. I think that’s what Randy was referring to.
Cayetano: For example, on the furloughs, we consulted the unions. You have to. If you don’t do it and you just come out and say you’re going to lay off 1,200 workers – or 10,000 workers, whatever the number is – you’re going to have problems.
Perreira: Well, I think integrity today is a lost virtue. For some, integrity lasts a minute after you walk out the door. The challenge there is that as many issues that I’ve personally disagreed with Gov. Cayetano about, I’ll say this – heaven forbid I’m defending him (everyone laughs) – he always acted on the strength of his convictions. Whether right or wrong by the way we viewed the world, he always acted and that’s not indictment of any individual that’s in elected leadership today, but just in total, if you look at what we face, that’s missing.
 |
Ho: I think that’s what more public officials need to appreciate. It doesn’t mean you make enemies with the other side. It actually means that sometimes saying “no” wins you the respect of the people on the other side. If you have good reason and you’re able to articulate it and you’re willing to stand on your convictions, how can somebody not respect that?
Perreira: Well, unfortunately, some people don’t. It’s just human nature.
Burris: OK, this is getting a little depressing. Is everybody so afraid and fragmented that it’s impossible to move forward? Or is there something on the horizon?
 |
Ho: To get back to your question, which is what can be done? I think it will be circumstance. And the circumstance that created what was a terrific run is gone. You can peel away pieces, such as statehood, and you can see what the outcome of that was. I think maybe the depressing piece of that is the element that is going to drive that circumstance is going to be not so pleasant. We could face tough times in this state – in this community – for a long time. And if things don’t go so well for a period of time, then circumstance will bring people together. I have absolute conviction that will happen.
Burris: You mean like an economic slap in the face or a physical disaster?
Cayetano: Take 9/11. Right after 9/11, the Republican Minority Leader Galen Fox came up to see me and said, “We want to work with you folks.” I thought that was really sincere, so we worked together – for about two months (everybody laughs) – and then it was over. But you know, there was an election coming up. People should’ve put that kind of thing aside because the state was suffering at the time. That was a heart-warming time for me because I was on my way out.
Burris: You talk about circumstance and the implication is that something tough will happen – a crisis of some kind where everybody pulls together. But could it be a positive thing that could pull everyone together?
Ho: I think nothing pulls people together like crisis.
Burris: But if you think about it, statehood, was by in large, a positive thing for most people and it pulled everyone together. Everything was centered around that concept.
Apoliona: Hmmm, maybe nationhood.
Burris: Maybe.
Ho: I don’t know what the stimulus will be, but you know what shocked me with all of this 50th anniversary of statehood, there was an article a couple of weeks ago, and within one four-week period, the state became a state, Inouye went to Congress, Ala Moana Shopping Center opens and the first jet plane lands in Hawaii – within four weeks of each other.
Burris: Yes, and Henry Kaiser began working on Hawaii Kai.
Ho: Yeah, and that’s stunning. That’s circumstance that created all of that. It’s not that I don’t worry about the future, but I think there’s a certain element that you can’t control the pieces here, so we need to focus on what are the elements? It’s about cooperation, respect, understanding the other person’s viewpoint. I can tell you, from my standpoint and the standpoint of the bank, we’re trying very hard just to try to understand where everyone’s coming from. I don’t know that you can do better than that right now.
Burris: Could it be something to do with Hawaiians and nationhood?
Apoliona: Well, I think we kind of end where we started about leadership; the character of leadership; the values of leadership in Hawaii; who the leaders are. It’s not just going to be Hawaiian people. It’s going to cut across all of the other groups too. But there is a place for the Hawaiian community. So given that, if people can accept that, then let’s build on it. I think for the future, the leadership issue will always be out front. Lead with integrity, not da kine talk and forget. So leadership and what the leaders themselves embody are going to help to connect or disconnect. The circumstances will offer opportunities. I think we must continue to support the private-sector partnership with public and community. As an example, as initiatives and economic projects may go forward in the community, there’s a ripple – private-sector type funding, public management and operation and maybe even ownership. How do we keep encouraging that? Bottom line, as I said, to me there’s no one personality that’s going to do this. It’s got to be collective. It’s about working together.
Perreira: As Colbert said earlier, there is currently no community leadership. Circumstance may lead us to that point.
Burris: There’s been no shortage of these missions and gatherings and programs – to talk about sustainability and all these things – to do what it is you’re all talking about. Why doesn’t it work?
Apoliona: Maybe, just maybe, there’ll be emerging out of our community, some real significant leaders who will say, “Nuff already. Let’s do something.” And it may not be as an outcome of a conference; it may not have been because of legislation or the creation of a commission. It’s like the people who care are going to step forward and say, “Nuff already. Let’s cut across this stuff. Where do we want to go?” Just maybe.
Lagareta: It sounds like at that time when we were so thrilled with statehood and things happening, it sounds like there must’ve been a very common vision that was drilled in everybody’s energy and perspective causing all this opportunity. We just haven’t had that. When you talk about all these commissions and boards, it always seems like the recommendations are to stay so generalized so nobody gets offended, or they’re specific, but once you get to the implementation, somebody’s ox is going to get gored and it all stops. So we get stuck, but I’m optimistic. I’ve chosen to live here for 35 years and I love this place. I choose to be here and I’ll be here probably until the day I die. So you feel like you have to stand up and be heard on things. I find the people willing to do that are so few and far between because if you get dropped down a couple of times, they don’t want to get back up again. I’m optimistic. I completely agree with Haunani and the others that I don’t think there’s an individual who will come in and save us. I think we’ve tried that many, many times. I’m hoping some of the leadership we’re seeing from the next generation and in the community, I hope they’re studying the past and looking at what challenged us before and I hope they’re learning from it. I hope they’re learning that we don’t move the canoe forward when everybody’s paddling in a different direction. And that yes, maybe there are things that we all disagree on, but let’s start with the things we can all agree on and see what we can do. And maybe there’ll be one or two things.
Matsumoto: There’s no one person that will lead us to the promise land. I think it takes collective action and people have to come together. The leaders have to come together. So, you talk about circumstance, OK, to me, the circumstance that we’re about to face in the course of the next 12 months, it’s not a very pretty picture. It’s going to be really tough and we know that. And so what are we doing about it? To me, there has to be leadership and action now. I would like to see our governor, our legislative leaders, the public-sector unions, as well as the business sector be more collaborative in terms of how we’re going to address the challenges that lay ahead of us. But I don’t see that happening. They’re following the defined legal process, but legal processes are only intended to service people when there’s conflict and they cannot resolve it themselves. But before you get to that, you need to try to informally try to come up with solutions and avoid going down the path, because then you get unintended results.
Burris: So everybody’s talking about that there’s probably no one white knight. Is it my assignment to call Mufi and tell him what you guys concluded (everyone laughs)?
Cayetano: Somebody wrote a book and I just came across it the other day. We’re in a decade now of hyper-polarization. Not just polarization; it’s hyper-polarization. There are tons of reasons for that, whatever, but it’s there. I think these things go in cycles and eventually they will be worked out, but I just don’t see it being something that you can get out of it like that.
Lagareta: But just think about it, in Hawaii, when we do come together, we come together really strong. When I think about the type of polarization you’re talking about, it makes me think isn’t there a way we could change the course and use our strengths and the way we are when we’re at our best? Maybe the rest of the world is going through hyper polarization, but wouldn’t it be nice if one time we could lead and we could show a different way?
Cayetano: We have a local boy (Barack Obama) doing his best to turn things around and he’s not having much success. You know, the morning of 9/11, it was really touching to see the politicians getting together. As soon as they showed it on the news, there were people giving blood already. They were lining up at the blood banks to give. There was no Republicans or Democrats, or whatever.
Lagareta: When you say Republicans, there’s only three, so I wouldn’t worry about it. (Everybody laughs)
Cayetano: Recently, somebody asked me, “Don’t you think it would be better to have a two-party system?” I said, “Yeah, but it’s not my job to elect Republicans.” (More laughter)
Apoliona: Is this meeting adjourned?
Burris: On that happy note, I’d like to thank everybody for coming. This has just been terrific. It’s been very stimulating.
Apoliona: I’m honored to have sat at this table.
Lagareta: I am as well.
Burris: I guess what we’ve learned is that there’s no white knight riding into rescue us; we have to do it ourselves. There’s a lot of inherent strength in this place that we need to capitalize on to make things happen. Yes, there’s lots of ugliness and infighting, but there’s a core strength in Hawaii that should be capitalized on.
Apoliona: There’s going to have to be a stepping forward. We cannot just stand on the sidelines. It’s not always easy, but we have to do it.
Lagareta: Well, if it was easy, everybody would do it.