Tag Archives: linda lingle

Editorial calls Lingle Superferry speech “sour grapes”, Kona Blog out front on Sandwich Isles story

Did you catch the Maui News “sour grapes” editorial this week in response to Gov. Lingle’s speech to the Native Hawaiian Chamber of Commerce? Lingle had blasted the business community for not providing enough active political support for the Superferry.

The Maui News responded by pointing to its own reporting and strong support by the Maui Chamber of Commerce.

But the editorial then calls Lingle’s failure to follow established environmental procedures the “fatal flaw” in the Superferry affair.

Frankly, we are tired of politicians who will not admit they made a mistake. Fess up, governor, your administration blew it. The Superferry may not have made it even with an EIS, but without one, it was doomed. And your administration is the one that let it sail without one.

So, governor, the next time you are looking for someone to blame for the failure of the ferry, try looking in the mirror. Without that personal admission, everything else is just sour grapes.

Strong words from the heart of Lingle’s home turf, Maui County.

You also shouldn’t miss Rick Daysog’s story in yesterday’s Honolulu Advertiser concerning Sandwich Isles Communcations, the local company run by Al Hee, brother of State Senator Clayton Hee, which has tapped into a special federal fund to finance its provision of communications services to Dept. of Hawaiian Home Lands areas. Good story, and I was glad to see it in the newspaper.

But readers of Aaron Stene’s The Kona Blog read this same news at the end of August, complete with links to the official documents.

And he moved ahead again with an entry yesterday about another huge funding request from Sandwich Isles.

Good job, Aaron.

Wednesday (2)…California professors plan symbolic walkout, administrative salaries lead college costs higher, UH plans for program cuts proceed, potential retirement savings, and Lingle on Lingle

University of California faculty are planning a one-day walkout on September 28 to protest the UC administration’s “program of tuition hikes, enrollment cuts, layoffs, furloughs, and increased class sizes that harms students and jeopardizes the livelihoods of the most vulnerable university employees.”

Faculty across the county are smarting at a new report showing administrative salaries, already far higher than most faculty salaries, are also rising at a higher rate.

According to the annual Higher Education Price Index, reported by the Chronicle of Higher Education:

Administrative salaries rose by 5.4 percent, up from 5 percent a year earlier; fringe-benefit costs went up by 3.6 percent, down from 5.5 percent in the previous year.

Salaries for faculty members rose by 3.4 percent, down from the previous year’s rate of 4.1 percent.

And at UH, Manoa Chancellor Virginia Hinshaw is pushing ahead with plans for program cuts and consolidations, according to an update distributed via email yesterday.

Among the proposed actions that could lead to faculty and staff layoffs:

• Provide ready access to high demand core courses by eliminating low demand courses, certificates, and majors: a number of specific examples with low enrollments were identified in the VC recommendations and supported by the committee. Continue to evaluate identified certificates that require faculty time but are not well subscribed.

• Ensure intellectual critical mass by consolidating majors/programs. The committee supported maintaining the Marine Option Program through a merger with Marine Biology to strengthen both programs and improve administrative efficiency. NOAA has also generously provided resources to support this endeavor.

• Merge smaller units with larger, related schools/colleges to strengthen impact and economize on administration. The committee supports the reconsolidation of the School of Travel Industry Management with Shidler College of Business to enhance UH Mânoa?s service to the tourism industry in Hawai?i and strengthen the impact of TIM?s significant ties to the business economy.

•Streamline administration by reorganization/merger of units, common activities, and schools/colleges, including closure of small units whose services and ctivities could be accomplished by existing units.

Several proposals also would lead to higher student costs.

• Explore differential tuition rates for professional schools as in
peer institutions.

• Determine appropriate campus fees to match actual costs.

The UH Professional Assembly, which represents faculty throughout the UH system, has identified retirements as a potentially significant source of savings.

According to a summary prepared by the union, there are 693 faculty eligible to retire (age 62 and above with at least 10 years of service). Of that number, 345 have been at UH for 30 years or more. There are an additional 332 faculty members between the ages of 55 and 61 with at least 20 years of service.

This points to a significant number of retirements over the next five years, and the union believes retirement incentives could create major savings in the short term.

Salaries of those 62+ eligible to retire total just under $70 million annually, while the total salaries of those 55-61 are over $32 million.

Governor Lingle has so far failed to include retirement incentives among the available ways of achieving cost savings. It isn’t clear whether UH officials are taking them into account.

I recall writing sometime back: “Will the real Linda Lingle please stand up!

Now I’m back with the same question. Lingle is now blaming a “lack of political leadership” for the demise of the Hawaii Superferry, according to a story in Pacific Business News.

Of course, she doesn’t mean the lack of leadership of her own administration. Once again, it’s always others at fault, in her view. Forget her administration’s decision to circumvent the law, forget their refusal to heed warnings from within that routine environmental procedures were being ignored, forget those pesky Supreme Court rulings.

PBN quotes the governor:

“There were consequences for the political leadership here not stepping up and coming out strong and saying, ‘We need this. If there were steps that weren’t followed, let’s get that handled; but we’re for this alternative for our people.’ ”

Duh!

If Lingle had reacted as she proposes here, we might have been spared a lot of grief. Instead, her administration said, “If there were steps that weren’t followed, pretend they really were followed, or loudly say that they weren’t required, and then claim we’re doing everything possible.”

The governor’s actions, in my view, speak louder than Lingle’s words.

Friday…reacting to Gov. Lingle’s surreal webcast

Lingle’s web blast yesterday, timed just before the arbitration hearing with HGEA and on the eve of the Labor Day weekend, reminded me of that old lawyer joke.

If you’ve got the law on your side, pound on the law.

If you’ve got the facts on your side, pound on the facts.

If neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound the table.

And Lingle did a fine job of pounding the table.

Unfortunately, Lingle’s administration is nowhere near as good at actually working with others to create a workable solution as it is in locking the governor away from the pesky media to make a one-way web appearance.

When so many others who have roles in this process are saying that Lingle doesn’t know the meaning of “collaboration” or “compromise”, I’m confident that there is a problem there.

It may be that as a lame duck, she has decided that her political future is not in Hawaii and, therefore, is willing to risk our well-being to create this image of the tough conservative politician willing to walk the “no new taxes” gangplank. It’s for consumption by the GOP base on the mainland. She’s simply not as worried about the local impact.

Then there’s the issue of the media’s handling of this “no questions allowed” appearance. A reader’s comment overnight said it better than I could:

The Advertiser provided the governor with an exclusive platform for a politically charged monologue, then posted a verbatim transcript that had obviously been prepared beforehand, included no analysis or response from any union representatives or others, and provided no indication that it ever even sought any. It’s been six hours so far. They did this despite the governor’s prior stated refusal to take any questions on the content of her announcement or provide specific details. That’s not even close to responsible journalism. Or even journalism at all. Not by a long shot.

Make no mistake, this was no fireside chat or scheduled state of the state speech covering a variety of topics and issues of general interest. The timing and subject matter make it very clear that this was a direct shot across the bow and a public threat on the eve of a crucial arbitration hearing.It’s as if the Advertiser was so enamored of the technological ABILITY to post a live video broadcast by the governor and a prepared transcript that its managers never stopped to consider whether that’s something they SHOULD do as a credible news organization.

And for purposes of this observation, I’m not even commenting on whether the governor’s position or that of the unions deserves public support.

The point is this: the Advertiser today took a dangerous step across an important line between objectively covering government as a news organization and becoming a willing vehicle of government and a specific government leader’s strong-arm tactics. Such willful acquiescence to Orwellian manipulation is truly sickening, especially when it’s courtesy of people who claim to be journalists.

So it goes. Enjoy your Labor Day extended weekend.

Friday (2)…On the chopping block– A political agenda behind Lingle’s budget moves?

[This is a continuation of yesterday’s notes of a discussion with several very knowledgeable sources at the State Capitol held on a “not for attribution” basis.

To clarify–they agreed to take “on the record” questions after providing an overview of the issues, but once there it seemed to me that airing their more candid comments would be most useful to readers at this point in time. So maintaining the “not for attribution” basis was my own call and not something they insisted on.]

From a “big picture” perspective, the feeling in the room was that under the cover of this fiscal emergency, Gov. Lingle’s administration is pursuing a fundamentally conservative strategy of privatization, by undermining the civil service system through layoffs while contracting out, often at significantly higher cost, for legally mandated services, favoring mainland for-profit companies over local nonprofit service providers, and eliminating regulation by laying off the regulators.

One example is in the area of public health nursing, including providing nursing services in schools, for special ed students, and other populations. Although these services are required by law, the administration is cutting regular civil service positions and putting additional money into a private nursing services contract to replace people who will be or have been laid off.

“The worst part is that it’s going to cost us more, a whole lot more,” one of the participants said.

They ticked off other areas of state government where required services are being marked for elimination–vector control (think rats, flies, mosquitoes, ticks, and other disease carriers), agricultural inspection, clean air and water monitors, early intervention services, etc.

In many case, they said the state has given assurances that the functions are not being eliminated while cutting the people who do these jobs.

So, you’re going to eliminate the people who are most experienced and most likely to do the job well, and going to replace them with, who? We don’t know….They say the function will continue, but they can’t tell you…they’re cutting people, but these are the people who do the job. I don’t know how they’re going to do the job going forward.”

“It’s really like this slash and burn at the worst possible time,” another commented.

Another example pointed to is the dismantling of parts of the Information and Communication Services Division in the Department of Accounting and General Services.

ICSC is “responsible for comprehensively managing the information processing and telecommunication systems in order to provide services to all agencies of the State of Hawaii.”

But while cutting back the IT functions of ICSD, the state has proceeded to issue several large contracts to private companies for a “data warehouse” system.

Although the Lingle administration is not releasing funds from the tobacco settlement for the Healthy Start program, they’re spending money from the same tobacco settlement on the data warehouse project, one of the legislators said.

With President Obama pushing a national reorganization and restructuring of computerized health information services, and the private sector expressing keen interest in this initiative, these legislators wondered why we’re spending state dollars in large amounts at this time while simultaneously eliminating key health services.

“The public health function of the data is very insignificant compared to the providing of care and the insurance aspects. So if you facilitate the private sector guys accelerating their activities, you would get the state benefit off the back end because they’re going to collect the data at the point of delivering services,” one legislator explained.

This is really a pattern in this administration,” one said. “They don’t like the local companies, they try to bring in outside for-profit companies. We saw it with Summerlin in terms of health insurance, we’ve seen it in other areas where they’ve bent over backwards to write the contracts in such a way a for-profit company on the mainland can do it cheaper than a local company that is having to deal with all the other precurement and tax and other issues.”

They also complained that the state procurement office has taken cuts and lost positions.

“So in this decentralized model, where departments are able to do their own procurements, it’s almost like taking the procurement office out of the loop, maybe as one consequence of that highly publicized hydogen fund investigation. Now, a year and a half later, the SPO is not doing as many of the direct procurement oversight as it used to. So its kind of, all across the board, an assault.”

One of the legislators had this very blunt assessment:

People on the layoff list are the people who would provide the regulatory function of corporate safety and all that kind of stuff, in various capacities. They’re getting the pink slips and they’re getting wiped out.

In the meantime, they’re contracting with for-profit guys and there’s nobody left inthe system to verify that the guy is doing the job that he said he would be doing in the way that he said. And at the end of the day, the consumer is left holding the bag because they’re supposed to be getting services, may or may not be, and there’s nobody to identify if they are or they aren’t because all those guys are gone.

Several referred to anecdotal evidence that layoffs have targeted union stewards and older workers, among others. They cite scattered reports of supervisors being directed to make up lists of stewards and those employees closest to retirement, with many of those same employees later getting layoff notices.

Of course, targeting older workers would raise issues of age discrimination, but, they say, unions are swamped with complaints and lack the resources to respond to all of the requests for assistance.

But in the midst of layoff notices and upcoming furloughs, the state is still hiring.

In some cases, these legislators say, civil service employees are on the layoff list in order to protect other “exempt” employees in the same departments.

Normally you would reduce your exempt and noncivil service staff first, and then civil service, and then you have bumping rights and other protections in place. And in this go around, it’s the exact opposite. Civil Service staff are the most on the chopping block, and there seems to be exempts still being hired, there are still recruitments going on, I think you look at some of the labor employeement recruitment web sites, there still are positions they’re still processing. Then you’ve got this contracts category, where the departments are doing a lot of conversion of what were previously government employee types of positions into services that are now being provided by contract.

“So it’s almost like they’re dismantling civil service,” one concluded.