Aloha a nā hoaloha, e nā ʻohana o ka lāhui. I’m going to speak to you plainly and from my puʻuwai (heart) because it’s the only way I know how.
This situation among our Board members has left me confused. It has left me saddened and, frankly, a bit embarrassed. Not because of disagreement. Disagreement can be healthy and productive. What concerns me is how far some of this information has traveled without real understanding. More importantly, I’m concerned about the cost to our lāhui.
I pray that what you take away from this column is that nobody has been silenced.
Our trustees and our procedures are structured to ensure that when we disagree, we bring those disagreements to one another first – in our meetings, in the open, where our beneficiaries can see them and weigh them for themselves. That’s not silence. That’s accountability.
What troubles me is that several of our trustees chose to put their names on a court filing containing legal admissions without first bringing the matter before the full Board.
When statements are made that could affect OHA’s legal position or expose the trust to potential liability, those decisions deserve to be discussed by the full Board – not developed privately and then presented in a courtroom or through the local news.
I worry about the precedent that’s being established right now. The same trustees who have criticized the Board for not being open enough in its discussions have themselves coordinated a legal filing without first convening a Board discussion.
If openness is the standard we expect of one another, then it must be the standard to which we hold ourselves. Every one of us.
Another important detail that hasn’t gotten enough attention is that the requirement to attempt mediation before litigation has existed for years. It was included in the former CEO’s employment agreement before our current chair ever joined the Board.
Although the agreement was executed by then-Chair Hulu Lindsey on OHA’s behalf, the mediation provision reflected a policy decision approved by the Board at the time. That context is important as we consider today’s disagreement.
The fact that some who supported that framework are now challenging its application naturally invites questions about why a process once considered appropriate is now being criticized.
I know this has been difficult for our community to watch. It has been difficult for me as well. But this is still your trust. It is a kuleana passed down to us by those who came before and entrusted to us for those who will come after.
Right now, we have real work before us: representing our beneficiaries during the military land lease negotiations, reestablishing the I Ola Relief Fund to help families in times of need, and ensuring that the $55 million in Public Land Trust revenues owed to OHA is secured and reinvested into programs and opportunities for our people.
Every hour and every dollar spent fighting a personnel dispute that already has an established process for resolution is time and money diverted from the mission OHA was created to fulfill.
Here’s what I’m asking – not only of my fellow trustees, but of all of us – let us bring our disagreements home, to the Board table, in front of the people we serve, the way we have always been entrusted to do. That is not weakness. It is accountability. It is respect. It is good governance.
Not I. Not me. Us. We. Lāhui.
That is a principle I believe in and one I hope will guide us toward healing, resolution, and a renewed focus on serving the Native Hawaiian people.
ʻO wau nō me ke haʻahaʻa.
 because it’s the only way I know how.){kind=link}