Rep. Meyer Squashes Ag Ban
of Local Business' Products

"Thanks to Rep. Colleen Meyer's (46th District - R) efforts, I'm still in business," enthused Roger Crow, local distributor for Bug-Ban insect repellant products. On March 10, 1998, Bug-Ban Hawaii products were ordered off the shelves of major retailers in Hawaii by the Pesticide Division of the Department of Agriculture despite the fact that the products were being sold in all the other 49 states. After a great deal of bureaucratic stonewalling and red tape, Crow went to Meyer for help.

Representative Meyer is a recognized and outspoken advocate for small business development in Hawaii and has been since she was first elected in 1994. "Until I talked with her and her staff, I believed that the Department of Agriculture was going to run me out of business permanently," Crow commented. "After she decided to take on my cause, I felt sure that she would get something done."

On Friday, June 26, Meyer and Crow met at the TruValue Hardware store in Kaneohe. With the cooperation of TruValue manager, Leonard Hughes, and assistant manager, Lee Nobriga, Meyer and Crow placed Bug-Ban Hawaii products back on their shelves.

According to Rep. Meyer, this was just another example of business-unfriendly attitudes and actions by the state. Bug-Ban Hawaii's products- ECO TECH BUG-BAN and ECO TECH BUG-BAN FOR KIDS- contain no harmful chemicals. In fact, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers them 'exempt' products under FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act). "On the other hand," Meyer said, "Hawaii law places a complicated set of labeling restrictions on anything the Department of Agriculture calls a pesticide, and the law makes no distinction between dangerous or toxic pesticides and those which are neither."

"My staff researched the legal aspects of the situation and we determined that HRS 149A-23 provided a way out for everyone. This 'cooperation' section would allow the Department of Agriculture to license Bug-Ban products under the idea of cooperating with federal agencies because the EPA already exempted these products. The federal statute contains the same kind of 'cooperation' clause. It took a good deal of effort to convince the Department that this was the better way to go, but they finally gave in once Bug-Ban agreed to provide the additional labeling necessary to comply with Hawaii statutes."

The Department of Agriculture didn't try to work out some kind of solution that would have allowed Mr. Crow to continue his business. If Meyer's office had not intervened, Crow would not have been allowed to sell his safe, non-toxic insect repellant products in Hawaii. "That is not in the best interest of helping our beleaguered economy or of helping our citizens who have the desire and courage to take the entrepreneurial route of creating their own businesses," according to Meyer.

Crow added, "It's a real shame that it takes such a major effort just to allow a small business person to sell a safe product here in Hawaii. But I'm awfully glad that Rep. Meyer was committed enough to small business development to go to bat for me with the Agriculture Department. Other small businesses should be happy about it too."

The Strange Case of The Honolulu
Advertiser and "Conflicts of Interest"

The recent and continuing revelations about false and made-up reporting (CNN, The Boston Globe, The Washington Post, etc.) and increasing errors in the media are not limited to the Mainland. Take this very strange case involving the local morning paper.

On Sunday, June 28, 1998, The Honolulu Advertiser published a front page story authored by experienced writer and Capitol Bureau Chief, William Kresnak, and Kevin Dayton, relating to conflicts of interest in the State Legislature. The story continued inside with a detailed listing of financial disclosures for all 76 lawmakers and additional text regarding real, and perceived, conflicts of interest.

A quote attributed to Republican Senator Sam Slom about Democrat Senator David Ige was never made, was horribly garbled and just plain wrong. Slom called The Advertiser (on Sunday) to correct misstatements about Ige, and left messages for Kresnak, wrote and mailed a letter to the editor, and called Ige at his home.

Days went by and the letter was not published. It turned out Kresnak was on vacation. David Polhemus of the Editorial Department spoke with Slom on several occasions, but did not print the letter, nor offered any explanation. He said Kresnak was returning to "check his notes." Slom offered to assist. Editorial page editor Jerry Burris, according to Polhemus, was going to call Slom about the matter but never did. Kresnak never responded.

The letter was never published. Why? Is this simply a coverup of sloppy reporting or is there something more? Is The Advertiser somehow in conflict? You be the judge. Slom's letter, as sent and received by the paper, follows:

"Dear Sirs:

More than a month ago William Kresnak called me and interviewed me by telephone regarding my views on conflicts of interest in the State Legislature. We talked for quite awhile and covered a wide range of subjects related to conflicts.

Imagine then my surprise and chagrin when I read the published story Sunday, June 28 by Kresnak and Kevin Dayton; specifically relating to Senator David Ige with quotes attributed to me. According to the story, I called Ige's employment with GTE Hawaiian Telephone "an example of a blatant conflict of interest." Further, Kresnak writes, "I sat with him (Ige) in (the) commitee, and we dealt with telecommunications and he didn't (excuse) himself."

I know why the public is generally skeptical of politicians; this report reinforces their equal skepticism of the media. I pride myself on being clear and direct in any and all questions asked of me, by a constituent, colleague or the media.

There could have been no mistake or confusion as to what I told Kresnak regarding Senator David Ige: (1) the only "blatant" conflicts I saw during the past two years occured in the State House relating to the Bishop Estate; (2) Specifically, I told Kresnak that while The Honolulu Star-Bulletin had attacked Senator Ige by article and editorial, I felt strongly he had done nothing approaching a conflict; (3) since I sat with him every day, in at every hearing in the Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee, I NEVER saw him vote or discuss issues in a manner to raise a reasonable belief of a conflict and that, (4) when matters relating to GTE did come up, he always, to the best of my personal knowledge, RECUSED himself.

I have been known to be critical of issues, institutions, and on occasion, my elected colleagues. But not this colleague on this issue. No one could have interpreted criticism of Ige from my repeated remarks.

Despite leaving several messages, Mr. Kresnak has not returned my calls. I personally apologized to Senator Ige. The Advertiser owes him an apology as well. The only thing "blatant" about this story is the totally false impression left with the public."

Top of this Page | Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4

SBH Home Page | Small Business News Index | Hawaii's H4 Homepage

Copyright 1998 Small Business Hawaii. All rights reserved.