Post #86792 by christiki295 on Sat, Apr 17, 2004 3:51 PM

On 2003-09-26 20:17, Kailuageoff wrote:
Bishop museum was set up and is run -- as far as I can recall -- by the Bishop Trust established by Eunice Bishop who was descended from Hawaiian royalty. . . . . I believe it is still run in essence for the benefit of the Hawaiian people.

The Bishop Estate would have a fiduciary duty for the benefit of creators of the trust - the Hawiian people -- even at the expense of everyone else. Consequently, the museum, by virtue of the governing principles of its own trust, would have to relinquish the antiquities, bones, tikis, etc.

Ironically, the Bishop Estate, trustees of the Kamahameha Schools, is subject to litigation by a plaintiff claiming that the schools' admission policies are biased in favor of native Hawaiians and, therefore, are discriminatory, violate Title VII, etc.

One one hand the Bishop Museum is placing the overall community's interests over the native Hawaiians'. On the other hand, the Kamahameha Schools are placing the interests of native Hawiians first.

In another scenario, the Bishop Estate has emphasized its fiduciary duty to the estate over the interests of landowners by their business decisions to maximize the profit by the sale of the land. The estate has been criticized for selling its leasehold estates, basically the land upon which it had rented condos, to the condo owners at a fixed, take-it-or-leave it price which is often far higher (and some would say exorbitant) price than the owners could afford.

Interesting, complex issue(s).