Honolulu Weekly

Gov. Linda Lingle’s State of the State speech offered an ideal opportunity to relearn one of the fundamental lessons of political life: Listen to what politicians say, but pay special attention to what they actually do.

This is especially true in Lingle’s case because her administration is supported and packaged by a world-class public relations team far more sophisticated than those of her predecessors, creating the potential for a widening gap between spin and reality.

In her annual speech, the governor pitched a seductive tale of Hawai’i’s people breaking away from their past and dumping the constraints of the old political economy that was grounded in land development in favor of a new position of innovative leadership in a global high-tech economy.

It’s a nice story that quickly trips over the reality.

Is our economy really one based on land development? It might seem that way from the governor’s office since developers dependent on the discretionary decisions of government agencies have traditionally been over-represented among large campaign contributors.

But a quick look doesn’t confirm the ‘land development’ hypothesis. Construction and real estate are certainly important segments of the economy but do not overwhelm the role of tourism, retail sales, transportation, education, health care, defense and agriculture, all economic mainstays.

And there’s a little irony here. While denouncing land development generally, Lingle almost immediately proposed buying a 500-acre tract of land in Kalaeloa for, well, development, including both a high-tech research park and housing (with the label of ‘workforce housing’). She followed it by pushing a 2,600-home residential and commercial project being developed by the Dept. of Hawaiian Home Lands in Kona.

These may be good ideas, but identifying land development as something to avoid and then proposing to give priority to your own land development deals seems less than intellectually honest.

What’s worse, the university is still trying to figure out how to pay for the last high-tech research boondoggle promoted by politicians, the new medical school and ‘wellness’ complex in Kaka’ako. The Legislature rushed to support that high-tech vision after backers of the Kaka’ako project promised millions in outside funds would flow in as local biotech startups bloomed and mainland companies eagerly relocated their research jobs and dollars into the state. But the wave of support never materialized and the build-it-and-they-will-come project has left the University of Hawai’i scrambling to cover a large operating deficit that is sucking money and resources from other parts of the system to keep the med school complex afloat.

And while the governor’s broader call for ‘innovation’ is appealing, she perhaps needs to understand and eliminate obstacles to innovation within state agencies before offering this as the cornerstone of a new economic era.

A national organization of facilities professionals was shocked at conditions found during a visit to the UH-Manoa campus last year and described the problem.

‘The setting of the campus, while marvelous and in a treasured location, was generally clouded by litter, debris, pealing paint, broken and heaved concrete, tripping hazards, graffiti in restrooms, burned-out light fixtures and an observed general state of disrepair,’ their report said.

The poor conditions reflected the impact of long-term budget cuts, as well as the failure of management to modernize administrative systems and attitudes. Lack of training and professional development, failure to implement current technology and management techniques, and lack of internal communication all contributed to a dysfunctional atmosphere that prevented employees from getting their jobs done properly, the group’s report found.

A state audit released last year found similar conditions in the enforcement branch of the Dept. of Land and Natural Resources, including lack of communication, lack of planning, absence of modern management systems, lack of a strategic plan or vision, chronic understaffing and resulting low morale. It’s likely similar conditions can be found in many state offices.

These are management problems that ultimately are the responsibility of the state’s top officer, the governor. Instead of public relations promises, we all might be better off if the governor spent her next four years providing the back-to-basic leadership needed to bring modern management and innovation into existing state departments and offices. The payoff might be more real, immediate and lasting than slick promises to reshape our collective destiny.