Letters to the Editor - Letters

You hear the rhetoric all the time -- "Education is our highest priority" -- and it is more apparent especially in election years.

[Big John-Hawaii Kai]

Ref David Chappell's ltr.

I am of the firm opinion that the use of instructional days for furloughs was initiated by the DOE to embarass the Lingle administration. Several questions come to mind. Why didn't the DOE/BOE start with the non-instructional days? Why didn't they shorten some of the paid holidays? Why didn't they rescind or cancel some of the paid six-month breaks for teachers (called sabbatical leaves) which would save the DOE over $2 MILLION dollars? Why didn't they trim the $1+ MILLION dollars for substitute clericals, or the $2.4 MILLION dollars for substitute custodians?

Why has the DOE budget grown from $972 MILLION dollars in FY 99-00, to $2.4 BILLION dollars in FY 08-09, while enrollment and test scores have both declined?

[cruiselady]

Of course Will Page supports the changes to the B&B rules since he's one of the illegal operators.

[drwaikiki]

Big John-Hawaii Kai wrote:

Ref David Chappell's ltr.
I am of the firm opinion that the use of instructional days for furloughs was initiated by the DOE to embarass the Lingle administration. Several questions come to mind. Why didn't the DOE/BOE start with the non-instructional days? Why didn't they shorten some of the paid holidays? Why didn't they rescind or cancel some of the paid six-month breaks for teachers (called sabbatical leaves) which would save the DOE over $2 MILLION dollars? Why didn't they trim the $1+ MILLION dollars for substitute clericals, or the $2.4 MILLION dollars for substitute custodians?
Why has the DOE budget grown from $972 MILLION dollars in FY 99-00, to $2.4 BILLION dollars in FY 08-09, while enrollment and test scores have both declined?

This is the same as your post to the Advertiser. The answer hasn't changed. Get your facts straight before you disparage people. The furloughs were demanded by Lingle, and given the number of days and budget cuts involved, could not be implemented without losing instructional days. Sabbaticals have already been cancelled. "Substitute" clericals and custodians fill critical positions that are not sufficiently funded to hire permanent staff. Why the increase in budget over nearly a decade? NCLB, for one thing. Increased cost of just about everything, for another. An attempt to pay teachers a little closer to a competitive salary, for a third.

BTW, overll test scores have NOT declined.

If you don't want to pay your fair share in supporting education, that's your issue. Spreading misinformation to try to support your prejudice is dishonest.

[GREEDY]

Mea Heffernan....Get your story straight! Furloughs for school children are not what the public wanted. The public wanted the teachers to take a straight pay cut with no furlough days. Our second choice was for teachers to take furlough days using their own many, many vacation or planning days. It is the teachers that decided to STICK IT TO THE KIDS in retaliation. You have showed your true colors and you did the wrong thing. Most of us have had our hours cut or are taking less money for the same job. You teachers would rather hurt the kids than to do the right thing and all the spin in the world won't change the facts.

[duh]

Funny that we get ruffled over rail running at a loss. Do you really think the roadways aren't running at a loss? Maybe not, must be why they're in such great shape.

[Majority says NO]

Will Page stated at that hearing that no neighbors object to mini hotels in their neighborhoods. Which is ironic because everyone at the hearing opposing this bill is a neighbor of this industry and knows the devasation that it does to our residential communities.

Further more, the planning commission after many many hours of testimony voted unanimously NO. Every neighborhood board that voted on this issue (particularly those in beach areas) voted NO - not one said yes. Institute of human services said NO because it takes homes away from our residents who are already misplaced. Local 5 - 11,000 members strong says NO because it takes business away from the already struggled legal tourist businesses and many of them are being laid off. Lani-Kailua Outdoor circle - 500 members - NO. There were many other groups that said NO and thousands of individual residents who signed petitions that were delivered to the Council - said NO.

The ONLY groups that have supported this bill are the illegal industry and some of our City Council members - Anderson, Apo, Garcia, Okino, and Tam. Call them and ask them why - ask them why they aren't listening to the majority.

[alice]

cruiselady wrote:

Of course Will Page supports the changes to the B&B rules since he's one of the illegal operators.

he sure is,,yikes

[ksgrad]

GREEDY wrote:

Mea Heffernan....Get your story straight! Furloughs for school children are not what the public wanted. The public wanted the teachers to take a straight pay cut with no furlough days. Our second choice was for teachers to take furlough days using their own many, many vacation or planning days. It is the teachers that decided to STICK IT TO THE KIDS in retaliation. You have showed your true colors and you did the wrong thing. Most of us have had our hours cut or are taking less money for the same job. You teachers would rather hurt the kids than to do the right thing and all the spin in the world won't change the facts.

Take a straight paycut...get real? with what teachers already make and the crappy resources they have to teach..C'mon, get your facts straight

[ksgrad]

It so funny how the teachers are getting the blame for this unfortunate situation. Why don't you blame and antagonize and call names for the real key player in all this nonsense???hmmm, maybe the Legislators or the Governor.

To tell the teachers to use their own vacation time for the furloughs. Get real? Don't blame the teachers. Its not their fault. The situation is what it is...The Governor has put us here, so call her up and grumble

[ksgrad]

GREEDY wrote:

Mea Heffernan....Get your story straight! Furloughs for school children are not what the public wanted. The public wanted the teachers to take a straight pay cut with no furlough days. Our second choice was for teachers to take furlough days using their own many, many vacation or planning days. It is the teachers that decided to STICK IT TO THE KIDS in retaliation. You have showed your true colors and you did the wrong thing. Most of us have had our hours cut or are taking less money for the same job. You teachers would rather hurt the kids than to do the right thing and all the spin in the world won't change the facts.

BTW...its not the teachers hurting the kids...its the Governor who did.

[ksgrad]

drwaikiki wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the same as your post to the Advertiser. The answer hasn't changed. Get your facts straight before you disparage people. The furloughs were demanded by Lingle, and given the number of days and budget cuts involved, could not be implemented without losing instructional days. Sabbaticals have already been cancelled. "Substitute" clericals and custodians fill critical positions that are not sufficiently funded to hire permanent staff. Why the increase in budget over nearly a decade? NCLB, for one thing. Increased cost of just about everything, for another. An attempt to pay teachers a little closer to a competitive salary, for a third.
BTW, overll test scores have NOT declined.
If you don't want to pay your fair share in supporting education, that's your issue. Spreading misinformation to try to support your prejudice is dishonest.

Amen to that!

[Yeah]

drwaikiki wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the same as your post to the Advertiser. The answer hasn't changed. Get your facts straight before you disparage people. The furloughs were demanded by Lingle, and given the number of days and budget cuts involved, could not be implemented without losing instructional days. Sabbaticals have already been cancelled. "Substitute" clericals and custodians fill critical positions that are not sufficiently funded to hire permanent staff. Why the increase in budget over nearly a decade? NCLB, for one thing. Increased cost of just about everything, for another. An attempt to pay teachers a little closer to a competitive salary, for a third.
BTW, overll test scores have NOT declined.
If you don't want to pay your fair share in supporting education, that's your issue. Spreading misinformation to try to support your prejudice is dishonest.

Furloughs.... Cuts....

Furloughs.... Cuts....

Furloughs.... Cuts....

Furloughs.... Cuts....

Pick one. Only choices available.

[alice]

it is so complex

[ksgrad]

Yeah wrote:

<quoted text>Furloughs.... Cuts....
Furloughs.... Cuts....
Furloughs.... Cuts....
Furloughs.... Cuts....
Pick one. Only choices available.

Yup dats right..Furloughs vs. Cuts...and the state workers made their choice. But some of the public believes they should have the right to choose for the state workers. Don't work like that

[ksgrad]

GREEDY wrote:

Mea Heffernan....Get your story straight! Furloughs for school children are not what the public wanted. The public wanted the teachers to take a straight pay cut with no furlough days. Our second choice was for teachers to take furlough days using their own many, many vacation or planning days. It is the teachers that decided to STICK IT TO THE KIDS in retaliation. You have showed your true colors and you did the wrong thing. Most of us have had our hours cut or are taking less money for the same job. You teachers would rather hurt the kids than to do the right thing and all the spin in the world won't change the facts.

Where did it say the public wanted for furloughs for the children? public wanted furloughs for the state workers and this is the downside of that effect...now the kids suffer, now the public in general who need services suffer.. the point is everyone will be affected by the Furloughs, so other actions i.e. raise in general excise tax, hurricane relief fund should have been used to avoid the consequences of the Furloughs.

[Yeah]

ksgrad wrote:

<quoted text>
Where did it say the public wanted for furloughs for the children? public wanted furloughs for the state workers and this is the downside of that effect...now the kids suffer, now the public in general who need services suffer.. the point is everyone will be affected by the Furloughs, so other actions i.e. raise in general excise tax, hurricane relief fund should have been used to avoid the consequences of the Furloughs.

Nope. No one deserves additional funds if they can't account for $2.4B. If they can't even show how they spent the money they were allocated in the first place, what makes anyone think they'll do a better job by giving them more money? Add to that the state of the economy and they need to deal with their own problems as wisely as they can.

Begging for more money is not an option.

[Neighborhood Friend]

As an illegal Vacation rental operator himself, Will Page advocating for B&Bs is like a parish priest advocating for sex with a choir boy.

[tell the truth]

Will Page, keep your mini hotel out of our residential neighborhoods. If you can't afford it without renting you should have bought in a commercial area. You and your tourist guests are not welcome here.

[alice]

let it go..it is a bore for most residents here

[Candy]

What happened to the 2.4B? How can someone like te state auditor, NOT notice that there was this "hard not to miss" amount running all of hawaii's citizens into the red?