Mufi Hannemann has challenged voters to examine his record and elect him governor, based on his executive and managerial experience.

The Sierra Club took Mr. Hannemann’s challenge. We sadly found a history of failure.

It is our conviction that good environmental practices lead to a stronger economy. So when Mr. Hannemann consistently made executive decisions that shortchanged the environment, we believe he also shortchanged his taxpayers and our economy. These decisions covered clean energy, protection of conservation land, clean water and recycling.

For example, Mr. Hannemann signed the "Mayors’ Climate Protection Agreement," which called for a 7 percent reduction in greenhouse gas from 1990 levels by 2012. But during Hannemann’s term as mayor, there was no inventory of current emissions and no tangible plan to achieve the energy efficiency or clean energy usage needed to meet the target.

The result? Annual city government electricity usage surged by 20 percent or 9.3 million kwh while he was in office. This pumped an additional 18 million pounds of greenhouse gas into our atmosphere and millions of dollars of avoidable extra expenses onto taxpayers’ backs.

Candidate Hannemann pledged to advance renewable energy in Hawaii. His record says otherwise. He effectively canceled an $8 million "solar bond" initiative that would have reduced the city’s — and therefore taxpayers — energy costs. As mayor he also helped block efforts to reduce your home electricity bill: He actively fought a statewide effort to help average homeowners afford clean energy by paying for it over time through their property taxes. He also terminated a proposal to build a wind farm above Kahe, one of the most wind-rich areas of the island.

Under his leadership, the city supported development at Turtle Bay. This flies in the face of the judgment of our tourist industry leaders who tell us that we must conserve our remaining wild areas and invest in quality, not mass tourism. It was also a Hannemann executive decision to try to divert City Charter-required funds from protecting conservation land.

Let’s take a closer look at one program the former mayor repeatedly takes credit for: Honolulu’s curbside recycling program.

Mr. Hannemann spent his first four years opposing this popular initiative. First he outright canceled implementation of curbside recycling in 2005. More than 10,000 American municipalities successfully run curbside collection systems, but the then mayor insisted it was too difficult and expensive for Honolulu to manage. He preferred to burn recyclable materials, including aluminum cans and glass bottles.

Fortunately, the people had the last say. Nearly three out of every four voters overruled Mr. Hannemann and approved a City Charter amendment creating a curbside recycling program.

Before resigning as mayor, Mr. Hannemann’s administration admitted that curbside recycling is cheaper than regular trash pickup. Unfortunately, his delay in implementing the program cost residents money and wasted thousands of tons of reusable materials.

We are forced to conclude that Mr. Hannemann’s active opposition to this and other green initiatives shows how he would act as governor. His past behavior strongly indicates that sustainability and protection of our aina would not rank high on his list of executive priorities. Want to double-check our facts? Find the sources at www.mufifiles.com.

On his website, Mr. Hannemann promises to protect the environment if elected governor. His past managerial record as mayor proves otherwise.