The trustee selection system for Kamehameha Schools is undergoing its first reassessment since the major controversies of the 1990s highlighted significant issues within the 140-year-old institution aimed at educating Native Hawaiian youth.
Currently, the process involves a panel appointed by the court that evaluates candidates and presents three finalists, from which a state judge ultimately selects a new trustee. However, the identities of the selection committee members are typically not disclosed, resulting in a lack of transparency in how trustees are chosen.
For the past two years, a state probate court, along with court-appointed special masters, has been scrutinizing the existing selection methodology for Kamehameha Schools. The developed recommendations suggest a new framework that would enhance transparency in managing one of the largest private trusts in America, making the names of the selection committee public and allowing for community feedback.
Alumni of Kamehameha Schools, however, are advocating for much more profound changes. They propose that the selection committee should consist of teachers, former students, and parents of beneficiaries who rely on the trust. Additionally, existing trustees have expressed a desire for more involvement in the selection process.
The trust, valued at over $11 billion, was established by Bernice Pauahi Bishop, a member of the Hawaiian royal family, back in 1883 to provide education for Native Hawaiian children. Beyond schools, the trust also manages more than 300,000 acres of land across Hawaii, which includes shopping centers and vast areas of underutilized land, factors that contributed to the catastrophic fires in Lahaina in 2023.
As it stands, there are no stipulations that those responsible for choosing trustees must have an investment in the future of Kamehameha Schools or be of Native Hawaiian descent.
An alumni member named Jan Dill articulated the sentiments of many when he stated, “It’s part of our struggle for self-determination and controlling our own destiny rather than having others control it for us.”
State Circuit Judge Jeannette Castagnetti indicated in November that she is likely to approve changes to the appointment system, although a definitive ruling has yet to be issued. School officials remain in anticipation of the court’s decision and appreciate the suggestions put forth by beneficiaries and other stakeholders.
Princess Pauahi’s will entrusted the selection of trustees to the five justices of the Hawai?i Supreme Court. Historically, this has led to appointments of individuals who aided the justices’ campaigns, including instances from the 1990s when the board featured a former House speaker and Senate president, some of whom were implicated in “Broken Trust,” a report detailing financial mismanagement at the Bishop Estate.
In 1997, the state Supreme Court Chief Justice Ronald Moon and his fellow justices opted out of the trustee selection process entirely, following the backlash from the “Broken Trust” controversies, which led to the estate being overseen by court-appointed special masters. Subsequently, a new process was put in place where a seven-member committee advises the probate court judge on filling board vacancies.
Calls for reform to the selection system have surfaced repeatedly over the years. In 2019, lawmakers introduced a resolution aimed at increasing stakeholder involvement in the process, advocating for the inclusion of parents, alumni, educators, and others from the Native Hawaiian community. Despite these efforts, no changes were finalized at that time.
The scrutiny resurfaced in 2022 when the committee tasked with screening candidates discarded its initial list of prospects. The trustees approached the court and special masters for a review, citing that the process had been unchanged for two decades.
In their petition, the trustees highlighted the necessity for periodic reviews of the selection process to ensure that Kamehameha Schools benefits from the best candidates and that board transitions are carried out efficiently.
In June, the special masters released their report on the selection framework, suggesting that the trustees notify the court one year before a vacancy arises and the court should make public the names and resumes of individuals selected for the screening committee.
To be effective, committee members should be well-versed in Pauahi’s will and the strategic direction of Kamehameha Schools, while also possessing expertise in large charitable trusts or financial institutions. Interviews with current trustees and the Kamehameha Schools CEO would provide further insight into the institution and a trustee’s responsibilities.
The current framework would essentially remain, allowing the committee to narrow down candidates to three finalists. There would be opportunities for public engagement with those finalists before a court interview and the final selection is made.
Additionally, the trustees have expressed that they believe the majority of the committee should consist of Native Hawaiians, with at least one member being a Kamehameha alumni. They also suggested that candidates be permitted to interact with trustees to gain insight into the institution and their oversight role.
However, the special masters chose not to incorporate these recommendations in their report, indicating that such matters, along with others raised by alumni groups, should be submitted as separate petitions to the court.
Alumni organizations are advocating for a completely stakeholder-driven process that is managed internally by Kamehameha Schools itself. Dill, associated with a group named Swell the Echo, envisions a system akin to those which govern other major trusts aimed at benefitting Hawaiians, like the Lunalilo Home and Lili?uokalani Trust, in the selection of their trustees.
He and other advocates suggest that the selection should be handled internally, with requirements for public disclosure concerning the identities of committee members and trustee candidates. In this internal setup, the committee would also choose the finalists rather than entrusting that responsibility to the probate court.
“It’s a process driven by the beneficiaries,” Dill emphasized. “That’s what we’re suggesting. That’s what we’re asking for.”