Windmills might not be so ‘clean’

The notion of increasing SunEdison’s “bag limit” for Hawaiian hoary bats and nene is completely misguided (“Maui wind farm owner wants higher limit on bat, nene kills,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 9). The goal should instead be zero deaths.

Rather than fining SunEdison for incidental deaths of animals, I propose that we not condone the deaths in the first place.

Let’s add Hawaii’s endangered, beloved animals to our desecration discussions. We have extinguished enough endemic species. We should insist that SunEdison design and employ effective bird and bat deterrents. This Missouri-based company should be helping Hawaii to preserve its fauna as it conserves its resources.

No one can call wind power “clean energy,” if it entails the killing of our precious birds, bats or other Hawaiian animals.

If SunEdison cannot generate wind power without sacrificing lives, I do not want its bloody wind power.

Joe Herzog
Kailua

What a joy to see child reach goal

I read with interest in Sunday’s paper that Margie Tupper, a fourth-grade teacher, asked her class, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” (“Mariota’s NFL dream comes to life Sunday in Tampa Bay,” Star-Advertiser, Ferd’s Words, Sept. 13). When one student wrote that he wanted to be an NFL quarterback, Tupper tried to talk him out of it.

“Isn’t there something else that you’d also like to be?” she asked.

The student answered, “No … that’s all I want to be.”

Kudos to the student who stood by his dream. It is an example for all of us to heed in life, and go for it.

Joyce Cassen
Aina Haina

Homeless keiki should come first

Once again, we read that Utah and cities elsewhere have been successful in reducing homelessness.

It is unnecessary and even deceptive to travel to the mainland to see what “they” are doing: Virtually anything we need to know about homelessness solutions elsewhere can be found on the Internet (“Mainland cities tapped for homeless tips,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 13).

There is also a bigger question here that involves our priorities, something that is missing from many discussions. The Utah 2014 Point-In-Time report for 14,000 homeless statewide notes a 61 percent reduction in chronically homeless adults, compared with only an 11 percent reduction in the number of homeless families with children since 2009. Utah ended 2014 with only 500-plus chronically homeless adults, compared with 12,171 homeless school children in that same year.

Let’s halt mainland visits to places where children are clearly not a priority. If we care about the future for our young people, preventing homelessness for families with children should come first.

Luanna H. Meyer
Hawaii Kai

Some homeless taking advantage

So “everybody has to bear the brunt of homelessness,” according to a city official (“Kakaako homeless move out as sweeps begin,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 9).

And Cutter Auto Group now has to pick up loads of trash deposited by homeless when they cut a hole in their fence (criminal property damage).

And we have to pay more for goods and services at grocery stores to cover the cost of stolen shopping carts (theft).

Sweeps appear not to be the answer. They relocate. The cycle repeats itself. The state continues to provide free quarterly housekeeping service.

Absolutely, families with kids must be a priority; veterans, too, for their service to our country. But any able-bodied person with a sound mind should have to submit to drug testing and do a little community work (clean parks, etc.) in exchange for the EBT cards. In other words, be a productive member of society.

Lisa Adlong
Hauula

Have co-signers read resolution?

Now that the Kentucky marriage license controversy has been settled in the way it should have been done without jailing Kim Davis, one wonders why it hadn’t been properly addressed in the first place.

The federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and similar legislation in more than 20 states allows for reasonable accommodation when there is a conflict between an individual’s religious convictions and job requirements. This has worked for decades in schools and businesses. Davis’ name has been taken off the marriage license applications and five of the six deputy clerks will issue licenses.

So why have Hawaii’s U.S. senators and representatives signed on to the so-called Equality Act (HR 3185, S.1858), which provides in Section 1107 that RFRA cannot be appealed to by individuals, businesses, educational institutions, or religious institutions in matters of sexual orientation or gender identify?

Perhaps U.S. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard and Mark Takai, and U.S. Sens. Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz had not read the bill before signing on as co-sponsors.

Carol R. White
Punchbowl

Kudos to Akina for filing lawsuit

Mahalo to Keli‘i Akina and the plaintiffs who filed a lawsuit that will hold organizations and individuals accountable for claiming that they serve to benefit the majority of Hawaiians when, in reality, they do not (“Federal lawsuit filed to block Native Hawaiian election,” Star-Advertiser, Aug. 13).

This lawsuit is not divisive. We’re divided because we discovered that we are either the “haves” or the “have nots,” and the vast majority fall into the latter group. Many kanaka maoli are outraged but feel powerless to initiate change.

Kana‘iolowalu and Na‘i Aupuni present specious claims at best. Tens of thousands of Hawaiians, despite stating objections, had their names involuntarily placed on their roll call. I confirmed that without permission, they used my identity to legitimize their existence.

In violation of my constitutional rights, I was subjected to “compelled speech” as the appearance of my name meant I made declarations against my will. This lawsuit is necessary to protect us, and it’s long overdue.

Kahala Motoyama
Manoa Valley

Rail not based on honest voting

A definition of “cynical” is “showing contempt for accepted standards of honesty or morality by one’s actions, especially by actions that exploit the scruples of others.”

City Council Chairman Ernest Martin asking his colleagues whether they should revote the 11 questionable measures is the best example of this definition (“Council might redo disputed rail votes,” Star-Advertiser, Sept. 6).

A fine does not begin to cover this problem when you consider the money spent, and lives and businesses disrupted by the rail’s missteps, with no end in sight. Perhaps if an honest vote had been taken, the citizens would not be looking at an enormous tax burden to support unknown costs into the future.

This kind of political, wink-wink, greasing of palms, you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours, goes beyond sloppy, lazy or dark politics. It is malfeasance, fiscally irresponsible and should be prosecuted.

Andrea W. Bell
Kailua