It’s disappointing that Kapolei has failed to become our Second City. What I see happening is a retail marketplace slowly building. Lots of retail jobs, but the majority of people drive to town for work.

I drove to town for an 8:30 a.m. appointment recently and it took three hours. Thousands make that drive to work. They have no time to enjoy life.

Ho‘opili is going to add thousands more battling that traffic. Something needs to be done to bring big businesses out to the Second City now. It would reduce the amount of commuters. Give them good-paying jobs close to home.

When I hear about all the jobs they’re going to create with Ho‘opili, I wonder what our leaders are thinking. All they offer are jobs at shopping centers and big-box stores. They need to focus on bringing large businesses in downtown out to Kapolei to make it a true second city, where people can work and thrive without battling horrendous traffic.

Jan Adam
Maili

Express Yourself

» Write us: We welcome letters up to 150 words, and guest columns of 500-600 words. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and length. Include your name, address and daytime telephone number.

» Mail: Letters to the Editor
Honolulu Star-Advertiser
7 Waterfront Plaza, 500 Ala Moana, Suite 210
Honolulu, HI 96813

» E-mail: letters@staradvertiser.com
» Fax: 529-4750
» Phone: 529-4831

Senators support ‘sanctuary cities’

Hawaii’s U.S. Sens. Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono voted “No” on a bill creating penalties for “sanctuary cities” (“How your lawmakers voted,” Star-Advertiser, Oct. 25).

They defeated the advancement of S 2146, which “would deny certain types of federal financial aid to any police department or other unit of state or local government that refuses to help the federal government enforce federal immigration laws.”

Could this mean that our U.S. senators approve of Honolulu as a “sanctuary city”? That Honolulu would welcome illegal — please excuse me, “undocumented” — immigrants without any enforcement of any state or federal laws? This is a simple “Yes” or “No” question.

I am guessing my simplicity is many levels beneath our elected officials. Maybe the Star-Advertiser can find out why and editorialize on the “why” and explain their vote.

Steve Allen
Waianae

Will Navy leave if it pollutes aquifer?

The Navy says that the Red Hill aquifer is safe from contamination; the Sierra Club says it is not (“Fuel feud,” Star-Advertiser, Insight, Oct. 25). Well, is the Navy willing to abandon its bases on Oahu if it is wrong?

If the aquifer is safe from contamination, the Navy stays; if the aquifer becomes polluted, the Navy abandons its bases and leaves. With a contaminated aquifer, the potable water supply for Oahu will be greatly decreased.

Since the Navy is betting that it won’t be contaminated, have it agree to leave Oahu as a penalty for being wrong.

That will decrease the number of people who will need water from the Red Hill aquifer and give the rest of us sole reliance on Halawa’s aquifer.

Robert Gillchrest
Pawaa

Don’t discount utility alternatives

Regarding the recent commentary supporting the NextEra Energy-Hawaiian Electric merger (“It’s time for us to define what matters for Hawaii’s energy future,” Star-Advertiser, Island Voices, Oct. 26), NextEra is not spending $4.3 billion out of any sense of aloha its shareholders might have for Hawaii. Rather, that company will derive significant benefit from the reliable revenue stream that Hawaiian Electric generates annually.

While NextEra’s promise to comply with state energy policy will require that company to make a significant expenditure to upgrade HECO’s aging infrastructure, it eventually will seek to recoup those costs from us through additional fees and rate increases.

Therefore, we would be shortsighted to dismiss the concept of a municipally-owned utility or utility cooperative because of an irrational fear that it’s too expensive.

We’re going to absorb these costs anyway, and it’s foolish to assume someone else’s mortgage when we can instead make that same investment in our own selves.

Donald R. Koelper
Kuliouou Valley

Bush was warned prior to 9/11 attack

Donald Trump recently said that 9/11 happened on former President George W. Bush’s watch.

Understandably, this drew a sharp retort from Jeb Bush, who went one step further and said that his brother kept us safe. If that were true, then how did 3,000 people lose their lives on that day?

The Bush administration was warned two months prior to the attack by CIA Director George Tenet. The warning was virtually ignored by national security advisor Condoleezza Rice. No one was held accountable.

Later, then-U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton tried to find out if President George W. Bush knew of the impending attack.

This may be another reason she is being targeted relentlessly by the GOP for the Benghazi incident that claimed four lives.

Trump’s statement revisiting who was responsible for 9/11 is something the GOP would not like to be associated with because of the presidential race.

Gary Takashima
Waipahu

Gamergate pushes for honest reporting

Regarding the article about Gamergate (“2 sessions on gaming canceled after threats,” Star-Advertiser, Oct. 27): Gamergate is a consumer movement begun by gamers to expose cronyism, bribery and political propaganda in the gaming press.

Some of the press involved have tried to derail the debate by claiming the whistleblowers are sexist because some of the people under scrutiny for ethical breaches of conduct are female.

In the past, false bomb threats have been called in on several establishments that have given Gamergate supporters a platform to speak. It seems it’s in the interest of some people to attempt to silence debate on this issue with anonymous threats of violence.

This debate isn’t about “sexism in the industry”; it’s about honesty and transparency in journalistic reporting.

Katherine Ott
Kailua