Monthly Archives: June 2009

Thursday (2)….Tales of the Neilmobile

3 Replies

[Note: Please see the correction published June 20, 2009.]

From the Campus Beat column in Ka Leo, student newspaper at UH-Manoa (June 17 issue):

Sunday, June 7

Congressman Neil Abercrombie reported that his car had been stolen from the UH President’s residence. He had left his car at the unoccupied house while on a trip to Washington, D.C. HPD responded and discovered that his car had been towed. In the “Old Days,” when Abercrombie drove a giant yellow taxi with checkerboard designs, security would have known it belonged to a special man and left it alone.

Thursday…Missing the juicy part of the story on the bid for Hawaiian Telcom

4 Replies

“Sandwich Isle Communications proposes taking over all neighbor island telephone service.”

Okay, I would have had to tweak that a bit to be really accurate, but something along those lines could have been the lead of this weeks stories on the company’s talk of a takeover bid for Hawaiian Telcom.

Mainstream reporting, focused on just a summary and lacking specifics, missed the most interesting part of the Sandwich Isles story. In my view, at least.

The reporting illustrated the same problem with lots of reporting on the forest and its surroundings but little about the actual trees.

Take a look at how the story was treated by the mainstream media. In each case, there were sketchy summaries of the highlights, and I’m guessing much of this came from a press release.

Pacific Business News reported as much about the proposed deal itself as anyone.

Sandwich Isles Communications Inc., a company founded in 1995 to take advantage of government subsidies that pay for the installation of broadband cable in rural areas, said in a court filing last week that it wants to buy all of Hawaiian Telcom’s assets.

The PBN story also reported:

A deal with Sandwich Isles would require the approval of a bankruptcy judge, the Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communication Commission.

The Advertiser’s Rick Daysog reported the same day:

A deal with Sandwich Isles would require the approval of the bankruptcy court, the state Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communication Commission.

Daysog also added considerable context and background on Hawaiian Telcom and Sandwich Isles.

The Star-Bulletin chimed in a day later:

Sandwich Isles, a creditor, said in a court filing Friday that it would offer $250 million in cash plus $150 million in a debtor-financed note to buy out Hawaiian Telcom’s assets.

The deal would have to be approved by U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Lloyd King, the state Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communications Commission.

Once again, none of the stories actually dig into the offer itself, made in a legal filing and several attachments submitted in the bankruptcy proceedings. I may be mistaken, but I believe there weren’t any quotes from the documents, only paraphrases, and then reactions to paraphrases.

The thing about the Sandwich Isles bid is that it is really much more interesting than it appears in these stories and likely to raise much more controversy if reported fully.

Sandwich Isles’ bid, unreported so far, is that it rests on a proposal to expand the company from providing services in a “local exchange area” comprised of Hawaiian Home Lands to one covering all of the neighbor islands.

Critical to Sandwich Isles’ plan to acquire the Debtors’ assets is being able to obtain FCC’s expansion of Sandwich Isles’ existing service area to include all of the neighbor islands. This would provide access to necessary federal resources for the acquisition of existing rural telephone lines, and upgrades or rebuilding of the rural neighbor island infrastructure which is essential to the long term viability of the debtor. By including the rural areas of the Debtors’ service areas, especially the neighbor islands, into Sandwich Isles’ business plan, Sandwich Isles is offering a plan that will help reduce the expenses currently incurred by the Debtors on the rural neighbor islands and also allow continued capital improvements, which Sandwich Isles anticipates will result in an overall business plan that will be financially viable.

In other words, Sandwich Isles’ proposes becoming the primary local telephone company, and using its access to low cost federal loans to finance neighbor island system upgrades, and use a guaranteed rate of return to pay off those lower cost loans.

The plan seems to envision that if Hawaiian Telcom is relieved of the costs of neighbor island service, it will be in a better position to assure long-term survival.

Sandwich Isles describes itself as a Rural Telephone Carrier eligible for low cost loans from the Rural Utilities Service program, and would pursue such financing for the deal.

RUS provides loan funds for acquisition of systems, lines or facilities “when the acquisition is necessary and incidental to furnishing or improving rural telephone service….Such funding is in addition to funding for the improvement and extension of telephone service in rural areas.”

In any case, this is another case where attention to the details, and a little time with the documents, would have provided a lot more information to readers. It may be that current space limitations, as well as the prevailing editorial style, make this difficult.

In any case, here are links to the Sandwich Isles’ petition to the bankruptcy court for rulings that would allow it to proceed with due diligence and presentation of its bid, and an accompanying declaration by Al Hee, president of Sandwich Isles and its parent company, Waimana Enterprises.

Wednesday (3)…Overlooked data can clarify furlough issues

4 Replies

Just to demonstrate that reporting on the the furlough debate doesn’t have to be restricted to “he said, she said”, how about a little data?

Fortunately, the National Conference of State Legislatures has compiled state-by-state data on furloughs and layoffs.

The 3 furlough days per month for two years called for by Gov. Lingle appears to be more than is being implemented in any other state in the country.

Is that relevant to the local debate? Should it encourage more comparisons to the actions being taken as states across the country cope with similar fiscal pressures?

Wednesday (2)…What’s missing from the furlough lawsuit coverage?

Leave a reply

I finally realized what was bothering me about today’s coverage of the union lawsuits over the governor’s furlough plan.

I read the Advertiser and Star-Bulletin this morning, and went back to check broadcast coverage from last night.

It looks as if everyone simply worked for a press release and perhaps a press conference, as the stories are full of “he said, she said” comments from different sides or perspectives. Everyone seemed to have something to say about the suits and either their prospects or their repercussions.

So what’s missing? Actual news coverage of the content of the lawsuits. I didn’t see a single quote from any of the three complaints, nor any indication that any of the reporters had actually read the complaints. Since the supposed subject was the lawsuits, wouldn’t you expect to actually learn a bit substantive about them?

The Advertiser reports:

The HGEA, the state’s largest public-sector union, contends the governor cannot unilaterally impose furloughs and circumvent the collective bargaining process. The HSTA and the UPW claim the governor’s furlough plans are unconstitutional violations of the right to organize for collective bargaining and the separation of powers with the state Legislature, which has the authority to appropriate state money.

The Star-Bulletin:

The unions — the Hawaii Government Employees Association, United Public Workers and Hawaii State Teachers Association — filed separate lawsuits against Lingle yesterday.

They contend furloughs had not been negotiated and that the governor cannot unilaterally implement them.

KHON said:

All three lawsuits claim the governor has failed to negotiate future wages and other issues in good faith under the state’s collective bargaining agreement. The unions are asking for a preliminary injunction, preventing Lingle from moving forward with her furlough plan.

That’s it. The reporting seems to reflect a view that the actual content of the legal complaints is somewhat irrelevant to the story they want to present. I can’t help finding fault with that. I’m a documents kind of reporter. I want to see the paperwork. I want the substance. Once you’ve got that down, then you can seek reactions. It seems to me that this litigation is important enough to report on directly, not simply limiting the news to reactions from different interested parties.

And there are interesting things in the complaints, in addition to quite a whirlwind tour of the history of public employee collective bargaining rights in Hawaii. It would have been simple, for example, to derive a timeline of the development of bargaining rights drawn directly from this history.

Here’s another interesting example. The UPW suit notes that since 1989, furlough policies have been a matter of negotiation. Section 38.02 of the current contract provides a process for “leaves without pay to delay a reduction-in-force”.

The union then alleges that the administration never indicated its interest in amending this provision or any other contract provision to provide for the three day per month furlough.

It remains to be seen what will happen in court. In the meantime, pay attention to what isn’t being reported.