GED program is path to success for many

A letter to the editor asked that funding for adult education not be cut ("BOE wrong to cut adult education," Star-Advertiser, Letters, June 12).

I can relate to this and support that position. Two of my family members benefited from that program, which helps those who want to get a diploma and further their education.

My son dropped out of school but then decided he needed a diploma in order to succeed in life. He got his GED (general educational development) certificate and joined the Fire Department, and later started his own business.

My brother dropped out of school in his junior year and went to work as an apprentice at Pearl Harbor. He got his diploma attending the adult education program at night. While in the Army he took college courses whenever he could and got his diploma. After retiring he became a professor at Clark University.

Both my son and my brother were able to become successful and contribute to society because of the adult education program.

Would it be better to have individuals end up as contributing citizens or to be supported by the state’s other programs?

Alex Brenner
Pearl City

Don’t let people vote on every spending option

Garry P. Smith wrote that in addition to rail, we should have been given an option of other ways to spend our money ("Voters not given options to rail," Star-Advertiser, Letters, June 13).

While I agree that we desperately need the items mentioned, and there are many more, I don’t agree that the public should vote every time money needs to be spent. Those decisions should be left to our elected City Council members and the mayor.

The problem is not how our money is being spent. The problem is whom we have elected to spend our money. If we don’t like how our money is being spent, we should elect someone who will spend our money more wisely.

Perhaps the next time we have City Council elections and an election for mayor, those who have better plans for our money will be elected.

Wim Blees
Mililani

City seems to go easy on child sexual abusers

The people of Hawaii deserve to know why the city and federal governments have such different philosophies when it comes to prosecuting child sexual offenders in this state. Cases in point:

» The city prosecutor allows a University of Hawaii professor to walk (no jail time), for the heinous offense of sexual assault against a 7-year-old girl over a period of years ("Ex-professor admits sexually assaulting child," Star-Advertiser, Feb. 19).

» A federal prosecutor assures a mandatory 20-year term for the sexual assault of a 12-year-old boy over a two-month period ("Sex offender gets 20-year prison term," Star-Advertiser, June 2).

The city prosecutor need to explain to the people of Hawaii this insidious attitude toward prosecuting sexual offenses against children. Can it be that a UH professor has more standing in the state or possibly friends in high places?

James Robinson
Aiea

Hawaii likely always will be tourism-centric

Many thanks to Cynthia Oi for her comments on tourism ("Deference to tourism is wrecking what makes Hawaii special," Star-Advertiser, Under the Sun, June 16).

The article references Richard Lim’s report on tourism, summarizing the negative effects that strongly influence the economy, politics, land use and other related concerns.

The dependence on tourism and the need for diversification have been known since the days of Gov. John A. Burns, who was in favor of a more balanced economy. About 10 years ago, then-Gov. Ben Cayetano convened an economic conference to seek other sectors to strengthen the economy. Two of the primary recommendations were enhancing the quality of the University of Hawaii and developing alternate energy resources. They were ignored.

Judging from these experiences and the entrenchment of the tourist industry, the probability of any change in commitments is remote.

Tony Locascio
Honolulu

Coastal development can’t be rolled back

The governor should sign House Bill 117 into law. This bill provides a reasonable solution for the shoreline property owner.

Throughout the history of these islands, we have built communities and developed businesses, many along the coast. This has been essential to our economic vitality. But along the way, that development has interfered with beach processes, causing most of the beach erosion in Hawaii.

There is no way to reverse the events of the past. Unfortunately, there are small fringe groups who want to force those living on the coast to retreat. They provide questionable data to bolster their position. They want different standards for coastal owners than for other parts of the community.

Eroding beaches do not have enough sand due primarily to human activities and storms.

Building an erosion control structure is a reasonable alternative, whether for a private property or public property.

Albert Morgan
Kailua