Civil Beat has asked candidates for the Hawaiʻi General Election on Nov. 3 to answer a survey about where they stand on various issues and what their priorities will be if elected.

The following comes from Karl Veto Baker, nonpartisan candidate for Office of Hawaiian Affairs at-large trustee.

His opponents are Adrian Kealiʻi Akina, Ikaika Anderson, Shelby Billionaire, Jackie Burke, Michelle Costello, Kanekoa Crabbe, Brickwood Galuteria, Clifford Kauaula, Brendon Kalei’āina Lee, Philip Martin, Ronald Nihipali, Kalena Parish, Keoni Souza and John Waiheʻe IV.

Go to Civil Beat’s 2026 Elections Guide for general information, and check out the other candidates on Civil Beatʻs 2026 Hawaiʻi Primary Ballot.

Why are you best suited for the job of OHA trustee? And why do you want the job?

As a mortgage banker for 38 years, I bring financial expertise and a commitment to responsible budgeting. As a Kumu Hula for the past 30 years, I make decisions from my naʻau, guided by the values, culture and traditions that have shaped my life and service to our community.

What do you see as the most pressing problem facing Native Hawaiians, and what is the first thing you would do to address it in the first six months after being elected.

To maintain a path toward long-term prosperity, I will work diligently with the Legislature to determine how and when OHA will receive its rightful share of the Public Land Trust. These funds should be invested in critical initiatives, including affordable housing, health care and higher education, to improve opportunities and well-being for our community.

Her’s a question from a constituent: What are your plans to economically uplift more Hawaiians? Protect the ʻāina?

If OHA receives its fair share of the Public Land Trust, a portion of those funds could be distributed directly to our people, similar to Alaska’s dividend program. I will also work with the state and DLNR to protect our forests and streams, support local farmers and strengthen Hawaiʻi’s food security and self-sufficiency.

OHA Trustees received a salary increase of 62% last June. Do you support the raise, and what will you do to ensure you are worth the money?

While I support the raise due to the long-standing lack of compensation increases for trustees, I believe it comes with a greater responsibility to serve. I will work hard every day and make decisions that reflect the needs and interests of our people.

What should OHA advocate for as negotiations continue over Army training land leases?

Because these are Public Trust Lands, I believe OHA should have a seat at the table during any negotiations. I also believe the military should pay fair market rent for the use of these lands, and I do not support the continued use of live explosives on them.

OHA dropped two lawsuits last year over Mauna Kea and decided that those resources would be directed to stewardship of that mountain. What types of activities or programs should those funds support?

The protection of our sacred sites must be prioritized. Lease agreements that currently reflect nominal payments, such as one dollar per year, should be renegotiated to reflect fair market value, with resulting revenues used to benefit our Lāhui.

A new 12-member authority that includes members of the protest movement who opposed the TMT, as well as astronomers is set to take over stewardship of Mauna Kea by 2029. Could the new management structure help resolve long-standing disputes? And how do you see OHA working with entities that have interests in Mauna Kea, including major landowners at lower elevations?

I believe that with sustained effort, this stewardship group can lead to positive outcomes. But it will only succeed if it is truly inclusive, with all voices represented and respected. Everyone must have a seat at the table to talk story, share ideas and listen to one another. By following the example of our kūpuna, we can build trust and find solutions that reflect the needs of the entire community.

For decades, OHA believes the state has shortchanged its beneficiaries on payments from the use of public lands. The Legislature has cleared a way for a working group to determine an annual amount of revenue due to OHA. What do you want to see come out of that process? And what should OHA allocate any additional revenues toward?

The law clearly states that the state is to provide OHA with 20% of Public Land Trust revenues, and I believe OHA must receive its full and fair share. Those funds should be managed strategically — some allocated to the portfolio, some invested for long-term growth and some returned directly to the Hawaiian people. As in Alaska, beneficiaries should see direct returns from these resources, which they have not yet received since OHA’s establishment.

OHA has attempted to develop residential towers in Kakaʻako Makai. However, those efforts have been repeatedly rejected by the Legislature, stalling any development for the last 20 years. How should OHA move forward on lands it owns in this area?

I believe OHA should develop a Hawaiian Cultural Center, as we are the indigenous people of Hawaiʻi — just as other groups have their own cultural centers. OHA also has remaining parcels that should be developed. Instead of standard high-rises, I would prefer building two Hawaiian-themed hotels from the ground up for both malihini and kamaʻāina, while ensuring we retain ownership of the land.

Last year, the Hawaiʻi Supreme Court ruled that OHA trustees are subject to the state ethics code that governs the conduct of state employees and is intended to prevent things like nepotism, fraud and conflicts of interest. How would you, as a trustee, uphold the ethics code and ensure transparency at OHA?

I have spent 38 years as a mortgage banker in one of the most highly regulated and transparent industries. That experience has reinforced for me that transparency is not optional — it is essential. I believe the chair of the Board must not only support but fully embrace this principle in their leadership.

There has often been tension between the Board of Trustees and OHA administrators. In just the latest example, the current chief executive officer has sued the board. What can be done to ease those tensions between administrators and trustees?

The Board establishes policy, and the administrator is responsible for implementing it. While both have clear and separate roles, there are instances where an administrator may attempt to exercise policy-making authority, which is inappropriate. Clear safeguards must be in place — or strengthened where needed — to ensure these boundaries are maintained.

Are there ways for the office to work more collaboratively with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to address the housing shortage for Native Hawaiians?

I believe OHA provides substantial support to DHHL, but at times the tone in negotiations can feel overly rigid, which makes collaboration more difficult. We should set aside differences and focus on developing solutions that benefit our people.