The crux of the issue comes from this sentence in the article: "Both sides come from somewhat undefined positions of power and hardly ever agree on how an 1896 charitable trust should be applied to the park, which sits on land formerly held by heirs of sugar magnate William Irwin, the Kapiolani Park Association and the Republic of Hawaii." 
It has been my experience that KPPS and the City talk over each others heads when it comes to addressing anything related to the park. Because both sides want to be seen as  the first authority over the park, the interests expressed by both sides are frequently contradictory. It has been said in other circles that either the Supreme Court needs to finally determine who is the No. 1 authority over the Park, or the City needs to give KPPS the ability to buy the park outright from the City if they feel that they can do a better job in managing the property than the City has. 
But in some way, some resolution needs to be found.