LEGALLY SCHMEGALLY: You'd think we'd have learned by now.
But because the lackluster MidWeek advertising rag- the one that's shoved in everyone's mailbox and overflows the trash cans at the Post Office on Tuesdays and Wednesdays- generally has so little relevant content past the puff pieces, we've been tossing them ourselves occasionally without skimming for the rare relevant content.
And in doing so, we'd have missed former Police Commissioner Tom Iannucci's impossibly befuddled and schizophrenic piece on the latest Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) sexual harassment debacle if it weren't for Kaua`i Eclectic's Joan Conrow, who herself only noticed it as she was throwing it out.
Calling Iannucci's tome"an obtuse piece," as she did, is an act of kindness.
Iannucci rambles on with vague analogies about hotel management and all you get out of it is that he- surprise surprise- is yet another troglodytic troll who thinks sexual harassment is best swept under the rug, calling Perry and the two suspended Assistant Chiefs, Ale Quibilan and Roy Asher "wrongly accused," having the unbelievable nerve to state:
Two wrongs don’t make a right. And a wrong may have truly occurred, but to what degree the whip should extend and whom it should consume comes into question, and the motives behind it....
These three officers are men who do care and, in my opinion, their actions and motives are being wrongly accused, and the quicker this is resolved, the better for our island and our department. I stand behind them and their integrity. But they are just the top tiers of a problem whose inception, whose roots are deeper in many different ways.
When all is stripped away and peeled back, we will have to ask: Did it really need to go this far, or was it just opportunity and ability to extend the whip and cause hurt for the sake of doing so? Maybe it will all be buried in legal findings and judgments, and we may never know.
As Perry's biggest supporter- and an ex-Marine with the well-known requisite attitude toward women that goes with it- Iannucci can be expected to take a "boys will be boys" attitude.
But Conrow? We're sure that that isn't the case, at least consciously. But could her admiration and staunch support for Perry be clouding her reasoning? Read on.
Conrow tells the story that we've heard, albeit second hand because the story is apparently being told by, guess who, Perry himself who, we understand, is the source of most of the anonymous quotes in the press since the day he was put on leave by Mayor Bernard Carvalho, Jr.
She re-tells Perry's cockamamie story about asking to work from home and instead being publicly disgraced by Carvalho who "illegally," according to many, put him on leave... all because Carvalho sees Perry as his biggest potential rival not just for power, as Iannucci would have us believe, but in his 2014 re-election bid.
She also adds a new wrinkle that was brought to our attention over the weekend and that is that current Acting Chief Michael Contrades is the son of Tommy Contrades, "whom the mayor already generously rewarded by creating especially for him the new, highly-paid position of managing the county's capital improvement projects," Conrow reports.
Although we have no direct knowledge of Conrow's source, she, unlike us, has a "hot-line" relationship with the chief as she has written many times. Perry would no sooner take a call from us than respond by-the-book to a sexual harassment complaint.
But she does tell two seemingly incongruous stories.
She first tells the story as to how, as we said a couple of weeks back,
It all started when Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa reportedly rebuffed Quibilan's sexual advances, and he allegedly retaliated by making mean, sexually-oriented cracks to and about her in front of others, including the kids she works with in the Kauai Police Explorers program. She complained to Asher, who reportedly did nothing to separate the two — as is required under a rule in the county handbook — or chastise Quibilan, whose alleged harassment then reportedly worsened.
And she follows that by acknowledging that:
She next took her concerns to the chief, who allegedly twice tried to dissuade her from pursuing a formal EEOC complaint and allegedly expressed resistance at placing Asher and Quibilan on leave. Instead, he reportedly urged her to try to work things out internally.
That, right there, according to the county's own handbook on sexual harassment- as well as the EEOC's- is reason enough for suspending Perry and placing him on administrative leave. Instead, by law and policy, he should not have tried to get her to withdraw her complaint, as apparently he had been doing since she filed the complaint last October.
But then Conrow says that:
Dissatisfied with his response, Officer Darla then took the matter to the mayor, who reportedly directed Perry to put Asher and Quibilan on leave while the complaint was investigated, which Perry did. Now here's where politics rears its ugly head.
The chief then reportedly said that since the complaint involved him, he also should stay away from the cop shop, and would instead work at home.
Uh, well, actually no. Perry's misconduct in trying to dissuade Abbatiello made it mandatory that whomever was in charge formally suspend Perry for misconduct. It's called an attempted cover-up. Don’t forget either, the second complaint was also sent to the police commission which had failed to act before Carvalho took action. It was only after Perry was placed on leave that the commission scheduled a meeting, one for a Sunshine Law mandated six days later despite the fact that they could have acted under emergency provisions of the Law to meet immediately and confirm any action taken when the properly noticed meeting took place with the required six days notice.
The story that Conrow tells- which could only have come from Perry or Carvalho- and it's doubtful it was the latter- is that:
the mayor disagreed (with allowing him to work from home) and told Perry to come into the office. The two, who have long been at odds, reportedly argued, and Perry stood firm by his decision and stayed home. The mayor then suspended Perry without pay for seven days for insubordination, after which he was placed on paid leave with Asher and Quibilan, pending an investigation of Officer Darla's complaint.
Conrow first cites Carvalho's desire to put Contrades in as acting chief and then explains the politics behind Carvalho's move. As she sees it:
it was appropriate for Carvalho to take some immediate action when Officer Darla came directly to him. Not only was it appropriate, it was mandatory, from a staunch-the-bleeding legal standpoint.
But it was Carvalho's responsibility only to ensure that Officer Darla's complaint was appropriately handled once it came to his attention. It's really a stretch to say that his kuleana also included getting into a power struggle with his political enemy, the police chief, and ultimately suspending him.
Surely, once the chief placed Asher and Quibilan on leave, as he is authorized to do, he could have been allowed to take vacation, comp or personal leave until the police commission could be convened to sort out the issues that specifically involved him.
Instead, Carvalho took the opportunity to thuggishly grab power and mete out some political pay back against Perry. Unfortunately, by taking that particular approach he threw the police department and community into a tizzy, caused Officer Darla to be dragged into the spotlight by those seeking to make sense of the turmoil, possibly exposed the county to litigation by Perry, created a lot of ill will and made our island once again the subject of statewide derision.
As we said two weeks ago, it certainly fits the narrative across the island of the politically motivated Carvalho screwing the beloved Chief Perry for political gain.
It seems like Conrow is of two minds- one in which she says that Carvalho's action was "mandatory" and one in which he should have allowed Perry to "work from home,"
Has her belief in Perry has clouded her judgment?
Maybe. Because the real story as we've heard floating around is that Perry, Quibilan and Asher all threatened Abbatiello that if she didn't drop the October complaint she might just lose her beloved position in administrative services working with youth and heading up the police recruitment program with the Explorer Scouts (sorry to bury the lede). Maybe not in those stark terms but the general idea was broadcast loud and clear.
Either story cold be true. A vindictive, politically ruthless mayor seizing the opportunity to repay a supporter or a chief who is known to try to "smooth over" conflicts in order to "boost morale" going too far and violating the law- one that has cost the county millions already.
But the latter is the story that makes sense here, not the one that Iannucci is pushing on Perry's behalf and that Conrow wants desperately to believe- that Bernard's well known penchant for rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies has gone over the line and is threatening to destroy the reputation of the chief.
We could be wrong- but we doubt it.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Monday, February 20, 2012
GIVE THAT MAN AN EXPLODING CIGAR
GIVE THAT MAN AN EXPLODING CIGAR: Sometime you've gotta wonder what happens when people start breathing the air around the state capitol when the legislature is in session.
While it seems to imbue many reps and sens with a tone-deafness that often yields bills like this year's slew of anti-ethics measures, such as the one that would have literally legalized bribery, we're talking about the tendency of public interest lobbying groups- the ones supporting things like good governance and environmental protection- to look at a difficult route for good legislation and decide to take the path of least resistance.
So it was bad enough when, as we wrote late last month:
we heard that rather than ban those one-time-use, white, plastic grocery bags like Kaua`i and Maui have done, the bill streaking through the legislature aims to simply put a 10 cent fee on them- to go to 25 cents if it doesn't decrease the use significantly.
At that time we were kvetching about how
the corporate media is framing any controversy over the bill as whether in fact to institute a fee and if so how much it should be, is that our own people have sold us down the river once again.
But to our surprise soon thereafter we received a "Capitol Watch" email from the state Sierra Club (SC) asking us to get behind the effort rather than pushing the type of legislative ban many of us worked hard to institute on Kaua`i, Maui and the Big Island and has now been introduced in Honolulu.
What no one has reported is the behind-the-scenes controversy it caused, not just among SC members but among other organization cited as supporting the bill such as the Surfrider Foundation.
Apparently one of those problems of bi and tri-level organizations hit the fan and the press wasn't interested in making it clear that it was Surfrider's Honolulu chapter that was supporting the fee while others, like the Kaua`i chapter, were holding out for a total ban.
They weren't the only ones who felt like the SC was screwing up. Email overflowed the in-boxes of those who worked for a year or more to pass the bans on the neighbor islands. They were worried that, despite the fact that the original bill would have allowed the county bans to stand, their efforts may have been usurped by one of those all-too-common, last-minute, conference committee switcheroos.
But despite all the buzz, apparently the word hadn't reached the SC's desk as they announced that "A Bill’s Death Leaves Citizens Stunned"
The piece said that:
in a surprising and astonishing move, HB 2260 was recommitted, and in a casual vocal floor vote, the single-use bag and watershed initiative fund bill experienced a swift death on the House floor, rendering it impossible for the bill to pass the First Lateral deadline. We’re not sure why this occurred, but the move was completely unexpected and came as a shock to its ample and optimistic supporters.
Astonishing? Surprising? Stunned?
How about Tone-deaf. Out of Touch. Oblivious.
While the death of the "fee" bill has been characterized as "a mistake" by some there is evidence it may have been anything but.
Maybe no one at SC noticed that Honolulu City Council Chair Ernie Martin has introduced and a bill that would ban single use plastic bags which, if it passes, would create a de facto state-wide ban by virtue of having bans in all four counties. If they had surly it would have alerted them that their piddly little fee-instituting bill was hopelessly out-stripped by current events.
But even without the Honolulu measure how far did they think they would get without the support of those who on the three neighbor islands?
These citizens prevailed in the face of big money being poured into the state by the national chemical industry which air-lift in lobbyists to unsuccessfully try to convince three sets of councilmembers that it was an issue of "choice"... that people should be free to "choose" to create visual land blights, turn the ocean into a death trap for aquatic life and further contribute to the ever-growing Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
Did they think we were now going to give up and support a half-assed "fee" bill?
The Sierra Club does great work and without their lobbying efforts we probably wouldn't even have a Hawai`i Environmental Protection Act any more- something they are trying to again prevent from happening this year again.
But when they do things like this by deciding to start off supporting a weak bill- not to mention one that many of their members view as wholly inadequate and possibly destructive of activists' previous efforts- it might be wise to examine, not why the "fee" bill was voted down but exactly why they shocked in the first place when it happened.
-----------
As you can probably tell from the above we're still in need of a new editor. If you have some experience- or even if you are just literate and can tell when it's its and when it's it's- and can determine if that phrase is "clear as mud" or "clear like mud"- and can spare a spell to check our spelling and such sometime around noon on weekdays, email us at gotwindmills(at)gmail.com. It would also help if you're familiar with local names, places and political machinations.
We can't offer recompense beyond the satisfaction of dealing with an impossibly demanding crazy person but we're still hopeful that there's someone equally insane out there somewhere.
While it seems to imbue many reps and sens with a tone-deafness that often yields bills like this year's slew of anti-ethics measures, such as the one that would have literally legalized bribery, we're talking about the tendency of public interest lobbying groups- the ones supporting things like good governance and environmental protection- to look at a difficult route for good legislation and decide to take the path of least resistance.
So it was bad enough when, as we wrote late last month:
we heard that rather than ban those one-time-use, white, plastic grocery bags like Kaua`i and Maui have done, the bill streaking through the legislature aims to simply put a 10 cent fee on them- to go to 25 cents if it doesn't decrease the use significantly.
At that time we were kvetching about how
the corporate media is framing any controversy over the bill as whether in fact to institute a fee and if so how much it should be, is that our own people have sold us down the river once again.
But to our surprise soon thereafter we received a "Capitol Watch" email from the state Sierra Club (SC) asking us to get behind the effort rather than pushing the type of legislative ban many of us worked hard to institute on Kaua`i, Maui and the Big Island and has now been introduced in Honolulu.
What no one has reported is the behind-the-scenes controversy it caused, not just among SC members but among other organization cited as supporting the bill such as the Surfrider Foundation.
Apparently one of those problems of bi and tri-level organizations hit the fan and the press wasn't interested in making it clear that it was Surfrider's Honolulu chapter that was supporting the fee while others, like the Kaua`i chapter, were holding out for a total ban.
They weren't the only ones who felt like the SC was screwing up. Email overflowed the in-boxes of those who worked for a year or more to pass the bans on the neighbor islands. They were worried that, despite the fact that the original bill would have allowed the county bans to stand, their efforts may have been usurped by one of those all-too-common, last-minute, conference committee switcheroos.
But despite all the buzz, apparently the word hadn't reached the SC's desk as they announced that "A Bill’s Death Leaves Citizens Stunned"
The piece said that:
in a surprising and astonishing move, HB 2260 was recommitted, and in a casual vocal floor vote, the single-use bag and watershed initiative fund bill experienced a swift death on the House floor, rendering it impossible for the bill to pass the First Lateral deadline. We’re not sure why this occurred, but the move was completely unexpected and came as a shock to its ample and optimistic supporters.
Astonishing? Surprising? Stunned?
How about Tone-deaf. Out of Touch. Oblivious.
While the death of the "fee" bill has been characterized as "a mistake" by some there is evidence it may have been anything but.
Maybe no one at SC noticed that Honolulu City Council Chair Ernie Martin has introduced and a bill that would ban single use plastic bags which, if it passes, would create a de facto state-wide ban by virtue of having bans in all four counties. If they had surly it would have alerted them that their piddly little fee-instituting bill was hopelessly out-stripped by current events.
But even without the Honolulu measure how far did they think they would get without the support of those who on the three neighbor islands?
These citizens prevailed in the face of big money being poured into the state by the national chemical industry which air-lift in lobbyists to unsuccessfully try to convince three sets of councilmembers that it was an issue of "choice"... that people should be free to "choose" to create visual land blights, turn the ocean into a death trap for aquatic life and further contribute to the ever-growing Great Pacific Garbage Patch.
Did they think we were now going to give up and support a half-assed "fee" bill?
The Sierra Club does great work and without their lobbying efforts we probably wouldn't even have a Hawai`i Environmental Protection Act any more- something they are trying to again prevent from happening this year again.
But when they do things like this by deciding to start off supporting a weak bill- not to mention one that many of their members view as wholly inadequate and possibly destructive of activists' previous efforts- it might be wise to examine, not why the "fee" bill was voted down but exactly why they shocked in the first place when it happened.
-----------
As you can probably tell from the above we're still in need of a new editor. If you have some experience- or even if you are just literate and can tell when it's its and when it's it's- and can determine if that phrase is "clear as mud" or "clear like mud"- and can spare a spell to check our spelling and such sometime around noon on weekdays, email us at gotwindmills(at)gmail.com. It would also help if you're familiar with local names, places and political machinations.
We can't offer recompense beyond the satisfaction of dealing with an impossibly demanding crazy person but we're still hopeful that there's someone equally insane out there somewhere.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
DEALING WITH IT
DEALING WITH IT: Yesterday's shooting of Richard Ernest "Dickie" Louis was a classic "suicide-by-cop" according to sources close to Kaua`i Police Department (KPD).
Although most are tight-lipped as to the details of exactly how Louis was shot and killed, it wasn't hard to predict. Many say Louis had been making "they won't take me alive" types of statements for a year or more and yesterday that's the apparently way it played out.
Louis was convicted in early December almost four and a half years after an arrest for illegally cutting Koa in Koke`e which led to the discovery of "two rifles, ammunition and a shaving kit containing 23 grams of crystal methamphetamine, marijuana, paraphernalia and $3,541 in cash."
But though some of his family and friends are surely grieving for Louis whose slow downhill fall can be traced, sources say, by the evolution of his mug shots over the four and a half years, the biggest tradgedy is that for the officer or officers who went to work yesterday to do their job, went home last night with a weight on their psyches that will most likely haunt them the rest of their lives.
Oh sure there'll be counseling, although we understand that a counselor will have to be brought in from Honolulu because Kaua`i is thankfully small enough for "suicide by cop" to be a rarity.
We often get so busy with criticism of the few bad actors on the force- those who abuse their power jacking up sovereignty activists and native American Church members, the ones who can't seem to stop harassing female officers and department civilian employees and others still who can't seem to maintain the professionalism that asks them to walk a sometimes impossibly thin line between appropriate and inappropriate use of force- we can forget that the vast majority of sworn officers on Kaua`i are conscientious, just-plain working-class folks whose lives can suddenly be turned upside down through circumstances like those presented yesterday where they are forced to take a life in protecting us all.
Louis might have been one or the "bad guys" or could have been a good guy who fell under some bad influences, made some really bad choices, got involved with drugs... and, some say, didn't have the courage to "do the job" himself.
But there's a high likelihood that those who were forced to take his life were doing a job that we thank our stars for every time we are threatened, assaulted or robbed, when someone wraps their car around a telephone poll, when a tourist simply can't find their way to "lye-heh-you-eeee" or when we otherwise find ourselves in need of protection or service.
We know it will be a long hard road to emotional recovery for the officers at the scene yesterday. It always is. They are men and women, not rocks. And we know it's hard for many of them to read some of the things that others in the department do that reflects poorly on them.
That's going to happen again- we can't prevent it and if we didn't write about it we wouldn't be doing our job.
But there is one thing we can do. And that's to sometimes just say "thanks guys and gals" for being there when we need you.
---------
Due to circumstances beyond our- or theirs- control, we find ourselves, for the second time in a year, in need of someone who can do another impossible job- act as editor for our daily scribblings.
If you have any experience with wordsmithing- and dealing with a scribe who think every word is divinely influenced (not really but you may feel that way at times)- and can spare a short spell around noon on weekdays let us know at gotwindmills(at)gmail.com.
Although most are tight-lipped as to the details of exactly how Louis was shot and killed, it wasn't hard to predict. Many say Louis had been making "they won't take me alive" types of statements for a year or more and yesterday that's the apparently way it played out.
Louis was convicted in early December almost four and a half years after an arrest for illegally cutting Koa in Koke`e which led to the discovery of "two rifles, ammunition and a shaving kit containing 23 grams of crystal methamphetamine, marijuana, paraphernalia and $3,541 in cash."
But though some of his family and friends are surely grieving for Louis whose slow downhill fall can be traced, sources say, by the evolution of his mug shots over the four and a half years, the biggest tradgedy is that for the officer or officers who went to work yesterday to do their job, went home last night with a weight on their psyches that will most likely haunt them the rest of their lives.
Oh sure there'll be counseling, although we understand that a counselor will have to be brought in from Honolulu because Kaua`i is thankfully small enough for "suicide by cop" to be a rarity.
We often get so busy with criticism of the few bad actors on the force- those who abuse their power jacking up sovereignty activists and native American Church members, the ones who can't seem to stop harassing female officers and department civilian employees and others still who can't seem to maintain the professionalism that asks them to walk a sometimes impossibly thin line between appropriate and inappropriate use of force- we can forget that the vast majority of sworn officers on Kaua`i are conscientious, just-plain working-class folks whose lives can suddenly be turned upside down through circumstances like those presented yesterday where they are forced to take a life in protecting us all.
Louis might have been one or the "bad guys" or could have been a good guy who fell under some bad influences, made some really bad choices, got involved with drugs... and, some say, didn't have the courage to "do the job" himself.
But there's a high likelihood that those who were forced to take his life were doing a job that we thank our stars for every time we are threatened, assaulted or robbed, when someone wraps their car around a telephone poll, when a tourist simply can't find their way to "lye-heh-you-eeee" or when we otherwise find ourselves in need of protection or service.
We know it will be a long hard road to emotional recovery for the officers at the scene yesterday. It always is. They are men and women, not rocks. And we know it's hard for many of them to read some of the things that others in the department do that reflects poorly on them.
That's going to happen again- we can't prevent it and if we didn't write about it we wouldn't be doing our job.
But there is one thing we can do. And that's to sometimes just say "thanks guys and gals" for being there when we need you.
---------
Due to circumstances beyond our- or theirs- control, we find ourselves, for the second time in a year, in need of someone who can do another impossible job- act as editor for our daily scribblings.
If you have any experience with wordsmithing- and dealing with a scribe who think every word is divinely influenced (not really but you may feel that way at times)- and can spare a short spell around noon on weekdays let us know at gotwindmills(at)gmail.com.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
ASSORTED SECRET VALENTINES
ASSORTED SECRET VALENTINES: Although those involved with events surrounding the harassment compliant and subsequent shakeup in the Kaua`i Police Department have been tight lipped as to the "result" of Tuesday's Kaua`i Police Commission executive sessions on the matter, the Kaua`i County Council will apparently get some kind of closed-door briefing their own selves tomorrow, if only a session with the county attorney discussing the legality of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.'s "removal" of Police Chief Darryl Perry a couple of weeks back.
Apparently Perry, along with Roy Asher and Ale Quibilan- the two Assistant Chiefs Perry he put on leave the day before Carvalho's ax similarly fell on him- remain on paid administrative leave pending who knows what.
But the council has scheduled its own closed door briefing tomorrow with an agenda notice that reads:
ES-524 Pursuant to HRS sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4), and section 3.07(e) of the Kaua'i County Charter, the Office of the County Attorney, on behalf of the Council, requests an executive session with the Council to provide the Council with a briefing on the Mayor's authority to exercise direct supervision over or discipline of the Chief of Police. The briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
But although the public will not be privy to what presumably County Attorney Al Castillo tells them, citizens will be permitted to public vent their frustrations, not just for the council's edification but for that of the viewing public.
Also on the agenda is an interesting little item that, although also scheduled for a clandestine confab, reveals that someone in the county has been busy with shenanigans of their own.
Communication 2012-52 requests council's "authorization to expend funds up to $50,000.00 to retain special counsel to represent the Board of Ethics in BOE 11-003 and BOE 11-004 and related matters."
And what exactly are BOE 11-003 and 11-004? According to the December 9, 2011 Board of Ethics agenda:
BOE 11-003 Letter dated 11/25/11 requesting the BOE to initiate an investigation into allegations that an employee or officer of the county has improperly used county resources
BOR 11- 004 Letter dated 11/25/11 alleging an employee or officer of the county has improperly disclosed information and used their (sic) position to secure a benefit, privilege or exemption for them selves (sic) or others
This of course could be anything from simple theft to abuse of power. But it could also have to do with the alleged misconduct, primarily in the Department of Personnel, regarding filings for sick and vacation leave, as we reported the day the story of the suspension of the two assistant chiefs broke.
Whichever it is, it will certainly be one to watch.
And, in a followup to the story of the closing of the Jailhouse Pub and Grill and how it will effects the county's efforts to somehow return the municipal Wailua Golf Course to it's "enterprise fund" status- essentially a place where the county at least breaks even on running it, money-wise- one problem, albeit apparently a political one, is that has been that the way because of the way the charter reads and how fee setting has "worked" since the golf course's inception.
Currently it is the council that sets the rates per round. But a public discussion of the matter has already been held and it's obvious that the council doesn't want to be held responsible for raising ridiculously low rates for seniors and youth- especially in an election year. Yet the county attorney has verbally opined that they are somehow stuck doing it due to charter provisions that disallow the administrative setting of the rates by the Department of Parks and Recreation- where the council would much rather the authority reside.
The argument is that the rates need changing over and over in order to find the "point of diminishing returns"- the place where the cost of a round will not discourage people from playing in Wailua rather than the half a gazillion commercial golf courses- thus finding the "just right price" to optimize revenue.
Why they need to do this in executive session is anyone's guess but apparently the verbal expression of the legal situation by Castillo wasn’t enough and so tomorrow they will be:
consult(ing) with the County Attorney regarding the Council's release of the County Attorney's written legal opinion dated January 17,2012, regarding the delegation of fee setting for Wailua Golf Course and related matters.
As usual all the "good stuff" tomorrow will be done in executive session. Although the Minotaur has departed the labyrinth, "Uncle Kaipo Potter's Council Chamber of Secrets" is alive and functioning well. There's an unsubstantiated rumor going around (spread by us) that they’re working on creating a banner- costing $5,000 and to be funded in executive session- saying "Under New Management."
Perhaps they can borrow a practically brand new one from the Jailhouse Pub and Grill.
Apparently Perry, along with Roy Asher and Ale Quibilan- the two Assistant Chiefs Perry he put on leave the day before Carvalho's ax similarly fell on him- remain on paid administrative leave pending who knows what.
But the council has scheduled its own closed door briefing tomorrow with an agenda notice that reads:
ES-524 Pursuant to HRS sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4), and section 3.07(e) of the Kaua'i County Charter, the Office of the County Attorney, on behalf of the Council, requests an executive session with the Council to provide the Council with a briefing on the Mayor's authority to exercise direct supervision over or discipline of the Chief of Police. The briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
But although the public will not be privy to what presumably County Attorney Al Castillo tells them, citizens will be permitted to public vent their frustrations, not just for the council's edification but for that of the viewing public.
Also on the agenda is an interesting little item that, although also scheduled for a clandestine confab, reveals that someone in the county has been busy with shenanigans of their own.
Communication 2012-52 requests council's "authorization to expend funds up to $50,000.00 to retain special counsel to represent the Board of Ethics in BOE 11-003 and BOE 11-004 and related matters."
And what exactly are BOE 11-003 and 11-004? According to the December 9, 2011 Board of Ethics agenda:
BOE 11-003 Letter dated 11/25/11 requesting the BOE to initiate an investigation into allegations that an employee or officer of the county has improperly used county resources
BOR 11- 004 Letter dated 11/25/11 alleging an employee or officer of the county has improperly disclosed information and used their (sic) position to secure a benefit, privilege or exemption for them selves (sic) or others
This of course could be anything from simple theft to abuse of power. But it could also have to do with the alleged misconduct, primarily in the Department of Personnel, regarding filings for sick and vacation leave, as we reported the day the story of the suspension of the two assistant chiefs broke.
Whichever it is, it will certainly be one to watch.
And, in a followup to the story of the closing of the Jailhouse Pub and Grill and how it will effects the county's efforts to somehow return the municipal Wailua Golf Course to it's "enterprise fund" status- essentially a place where the county at least breaks even on running it, money-wise- one problem, albeit apparently a political one, is that has been that the way because of the way the charter reads and how fee setting has "worked" since the golf course's inception.
Currently it is the council that sets the rates per round. But a public discussion of the matter has already been held and it's obvious that the council doesn't want to be held responsible for raising ridiculously low rates for seniors and youth- especially in an election year. Yet the county attorney has verbally opined that they are somehow stuck doing it due to charter provisions that disallow the administrative setting of the rates by the Department of Parks and Recreation- where the council would much rather the authority reside.
The argument is that the rates need changing over and over in order to find the "point of diminishing returns"- the place where the cost of a round will not discourage people from playing in Wailua rather than the half a gazillion commercial golf courses- thus finding the "just right price" to optimize revenue.
Why they need to do this in executive session is anyone's guess but apparently the verbal expression of the legal situation by Castillo wasn’t enough and so tomorrow they will be:
consult(ing) with the County Attorney regarding the Council's release of the County Attorney's written legal opinion dated January 17,2012, regarding the delegation of fee setting for Wailua Golf Course and related matters.
As usual all the "good stuff" tomorrow will be done in executive session. Although the Minotaur has departed the labyrinth, "Uncle Kaipo Potter's Council Chamber of Secrets" is alive and functioning well. There's an unsubstantiated rumor going around (spread by us) that they’re working on creating a banner- costing $5,000 and to be funded in executive session- saying "Under New Management."
Perhaps they can borrow a practically brand new one from the Jailhouse Pub and Grill.
Monday, February 13, 2012
IT'S A BIRD, IT'S A PLANE. IT'S AN EYESORE
IT'S A BIRD, IT'S A PLANE. IT'S AN EYESORE: Although it's probably been more than a decade, we remember a certain drive though San Francisco quite clearly.
Having lived there in the early 70's, we just assumed that we could find the old freeway entrance. But while cruising from "the Haight" to "downtown" we found ourselves suddenly coming around the block for the third time looking for the ramp that led to one of the elevated freeways that made much of the city center a dark, gloomy, drug and crime-filled morass.
"They did what? They tore it down? They whole thing?" "Yes," we were told, "there are no more raised thoroughfares north of Market Street."
As the years went by we noted the trend continuing across the country with cities not only refusing to build new raised monstrosities but actually tearing the old ones down.
So it was no surprise that when Honolulu's traditional lack of planning combined with its time-honored corrupt procurement process and long-standing adherence to urban design concepts 40 years out of date combined to yield yet another plan for the long-delayed, on-again-off-again mass transit project, they decided it was going to be constructed a hundred feet in the air.
Admittedly we haven't been to Honolulu in a decade or more and plan on avoiding it like the proverbial plague for the foreseeable future. Once one sets foot outside of the tourist mecca of Waikiki- and not very far- the sidewalks crack and crumble and the streets are not just filthy but filled with potholes large enough to rent for $1700 a month.
Why would we go? Just the price of a last minute plane ticket approaches that of a direct flight from Kaua`i to SF- a city of similar population where the areas known as "slums" are aesthetically more pleasing than most of "town" on O`ahu.
In their infinite wisdom, the city fathers decided on a "plan," not to spruce it up and start carefully planning- complete with pubic input (gasp!)- the city's future development but rather, to plunge most of it into darkness so no one can see how truly decrepit it actually is.
And that's just the physical limitations. The political ones are worse.
Not only was the first fully-funded, ready-to-go attempt at simply building a system to move people to and from work every day aborted a couple of decades back after a particularly entertaining dance-of-the-headless-chickens but, according to a poll reported today, support for the current similarly ready-to-commence project is dropping faster than the price of stock in the companies that lost the contract to construct it.
According to the poll in the pay-wall protected Honolulu Star Advertiser, support for the project has dropped from 49% last May to 43% now.
And as if that wasn’t enough of a sign that the denizens of Honolulu are fed up with the way the project has evolved- the way its back-room planning and pay-to-play system put into place the most expensive, ugliest system possible, not to mention one that bucks a 20 year trend in urban design- former Governor and anti-rail candidate Ben Cayetano is leading the race for mayor over the two pro-rail candidates by a wide margin.
For those that forgot or weren't around, by the time he left office, Cayetano had burned so many bridges and offended so many supporters, he's been left for politically dead ever since.
Yet current Mayor Peter Carlisle, like the rest of the tone-deaf, steel-on-steel, elevated rail supporters, still clings to the notion that the only problem is that "we haven't done as good a job as we should have in showing people exactly what all the accurate information is (on rail)."
Ah, the last refuge of a delusional pol- the notion that "if people were just 'educated' they would see it from my warped, power-hungry vantage point."
We probably have no right to even write this column today- we don't live on O`ahu and would rather be homeless on any neighbor island than live in a Waikiki luxury high rise.
Honolulu citizens seem to be saying "we want mass transit, perhaps even rail- we just don't want THIS mass transit and THIS rail." Kaua`i people have similarly spoken this way about a certain bike path, a certain electricity co-op and a dozen other projects that have been forced down our throats by smug, paternalistic officials.
The "City and County" seems to have a penchant for hiring those who graduated at the bottom of their class from the Rube Goldberg School of Urban Design. Then, when the worst of them are forced to leave in disgrace, they seem to find their way into the equally befuddled, clueless and crony-filled Kaua`i County government.
All we can say is thanks but no thanks. We've got our hands full now.
Having lived there in the early 70's, we just assumed that we could find the old freeway entrance. But while cruising from "the Haight" to "downtown" we found ourselves suddenly coming around the block for the third time looking for the ramp that led to one of the elevated freeways that made much of the city center a dark, gloomy, drug and crime-filled morass.
"They did what? They tore it down? They whole thing?" "Yes," we were told, "there are no more raised thoroughfares north of Market Street."
As the years went by we noted the trend continuing across the country with cities not only refusing to build new raised monstrosities but actually tearing the old ones down.
So it was no surprise that when Honolulu's traditional lack of planning combined with its time-honored corrupt procurement process and long-standing adherence to urban design concepts 40 years out of date combined to yield yet another plan for the long-delayed, on-again-off-again mass transit project, they decided it was going to be constructed a hundred feet in the air.
Admittedly we haven't been to Honolulu in a decade or more and plan on avoiding it like the proverbial plague for the foreseeable future. Once one sets foot outside of the tourist mecca of Waikiki- and not very far- the sidewalks crack and crumble and the streets are not just filthy but filled with potholes large enough to rent for $1700 a month.
Why would we go? Just the price of a last minute plane ticket approaches that of a direct flight from Kaua`i to SF- a city of similar population where the areas known as "slums" are aesthetically more pleasing than most of "town" on O`ahu.
In their infinite wisdom, the city fathers decided on a "plan," not to spruce it up and start carefully planning- complete with pubic input (gasp!)- the city's future development but rather, to plunge most of it into darkness so no one can see how truly decrepit it actually is.
And that's just the physical limitations. The political ones are worse.
Not only was the first fully-funded, ready-to-go attempt at simply building a system to move people to and from work every day aborted a couple of decades back after a particularly entertaining dance-of-the-headless-chickens but, according to a poll reported today, support for the current similarly ready-to-commence project is dropping faster than the price of stock in the companies that lost the contract to construct it.
According to the poll in the pay-wall protected Honolulu Star Advertiser, support for the project has dropped from 49% last May to 43% now.
And as if that wasn’t enough of a sign that the denizens of Honolulu are fed up with the way the project has evolved- the way its back-room planning and pay-to-play system put into place the most expensive, ugliest system possible, not to mention one that bucks a 20 year trend in urban design- former Governor and anti-rail candidate Ben Cayetano is leading the race for mayor over the two pro-rail candidates by a wide margin.
For those that forgot or weren't around, by the time he left office, Cayetano had burned so many bridges and offended so many supporters, he's been left for politically dead ever since.
Yet current Mayor Peter Carlisle, like the rest of the tone-deaf, steel-on-steel, elevated rail supporters, still clings to the notion that the only problem is that "we haven't done as good a job as we should have in showing people exactly what all the accurate information is (on rail)."
Ah, the last refuge of a delusional pol- the notion that "if people were just 'educated' they would see it from my warped, power-hungry vantage point."
We probably have no right to even write this column today- we don't live on O`ahu and would rather be homeless on any neighbor island than live in a Waikiki luxury high rise.
Honolulu citizens seem to be saying "we want mass transit, perhaps even rail- we just don't want THIS mass transit and THIS rail." Kaua`i people have similarly spoken this way about a certain bike path, a certain electricity co-op and a dozen other projects that have been forced down our throats by smug, paternalistic officials.
The "City and County" seems to have a penchant for hiring those who graduated at the bottom of their class from the Rube Goldberg School of Urban Design. Then, when the worst of them are forced to leave in disgrace, they seem to find their way into the equally befuddled, clueless and crony-filled Kaua`i County government.
All we can say is thanks but no thanks. We've got our hands full now.
Friday, February 10, 2012
ME OR YOUR LYIN' EYES
ME OR YOUR LYIN' EYES: We've made no secret regarding our take on any purported health issues with so called "smart meters." As we wrote on December 1, 2011, when it comes to the science behind claims of cumulative health problems caused by "non-ionizing 'radiation'"- "radiation" being a sort of misnomer since it is not in any way, shape or form the same as the "ionizing" radiation in radioactive substances- there really is no "there there."
Despite almost a century and a half of man-made RF beginning with the telegraph, although it can burn the crap out of you if the waves are long enough and it's placed right next to human tissue, studies have failed to find any accumulation of these waves that are generated by everything from cell and cordless phones to remote controls to radio and television broadcasts.
And, even if somehow it could be shown that there was a "cumulative effect," the amount and proximity to people of the signals in smart meters pales in comparison to placing a cell or cordless phone next to your brain.
It is certainly not "a hundred times worse" as the self-proclaimed "biggest smart meter activist in the state" told the county council on Wednesday.
So why then are so many otherwise rational people on Kaua`i going nuts over the Kaua`i Island Utilities Co-op (KIUC) purchase and imminent installation of these new wireless meters which should be welcomed as a way to increase the amount of "intermittent" energy generation (such as wind and photovoltaic) we can reliably accommodate?
Opponents have been successful by basically telling others that any information on health effects or other issues such as "privacy" are all generated by "the industry" and "the government"- even though that is patently false- asking "how can you trust the 'electric companies'" or the "'big brother' of government" to tell you the truth.
Of course that is what's called an "ad hominem" attack which, according to Wikipedia, "is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy."
But the fallaciousness of an ad hominem argument is dependent on how much the source is worthy of trust. If the track record of an individual or organization for truthfulness, honesty and open, transparent dealings with controversies is that they have never been truthful, open, honest or transparent in the past, people tend to take the old "how do you know if KIUC is lying?- because their lips are moving" joke as gospel.
Well we're pretty sure you can see this one coming up Rice St. because when it comes to a track record for deceit and opaque decision-making, KIUC is very model of modern major mismanagement.
We don't really have to go through the liturgy do we? Whether the bungling of the roll-out of proposed hydroelectric power projects by imposing the potential for federal meddling in local state environmental protections or the lack of any membership consultation- supposedly the hallmark of cooperatives- in the decision-making that preceded the underhanded manipulation of the petition-driven ballot effort to overturn the board's decision, KIUC has been exemplary in how not to gain the trust of the people of Kaua`i.
Even KIUC's inception was fraught with controversy with a group of hand-picked members of the "good old boys and girls" political elite offering an absurdly high- and later to be rejected by the PUC- original bid and eventually paying former owners Citizen's Electric of Connecticut what many say was up to twice what was shown to be the "book value," of Kaua`i Electric... as our "highest in the nation" electricity rates can attest.
Is it any wonder that, no matter how silly, no matter how unscientifically-based, no matter how self-defeating the rush to ban smart meters is, it has gained the support of so many otherwise rational people?
The reason is clear. It's because KIUC is a cooperative in name only when it comes to governance.
KIUC is what's called a "Consumers' Cooperative" in which, according again to Wikipedia, "(m)embers vote on major decisions and elect the board of directors from amongst their own number."
A normal cooperative board simply oversees the day-to-day operations but any major decision- such as strategic planning or even the decision to sign a power purchase agreement with a news solar or wind farm- is supposed to be made by the members.
How hard is that concept to understand? Apparently it's like reading hieroglyphics for the majority of the board of directors which has yet to consult the membership on any decision much less ones of great magnitude, in direct violation of the precepts of a co-op.
According to the same article:
Cooperatives are based on the cooperative values of "self-help, self-responsibility, democracy and equality, equity and solidarity" and the seven cooperative principles:
-Voluntary and Open Membership
-Democratic Member Control
-Member Economic Participation
-Autonomy and Independence
-Education, Training and Information
-Cooperation among Cooperatives
-Concern for Community
Does that sound like KIUC? Just ask yourself if there is true "Democratic Member Control" or is the nature of board decision-making that it's done behind closed doors often citing "proprietary" information- a concept directly in opposition to the basics of co-op decision-making principles.
Education, Training and Information? Information is anything but free-flowing at KIUC and, as a matter of fact, the flow of information from individual board members is tightly controlled through a gag rule preventing them from speaking publicly unless the content is approved by the board's chair or- get this- the CEO, meaning that the employees are telling the employers what they can and can't say.
Voluntary and Open Membership? People are automatically members as soon as they sign up for electric service and, although there is a way to "opt out," users are told they will pay more if they do so because they will not receive the "patronage capital"- a sort of rebate that represents the "profit" that would be there if it was an investor owned company. And there certainly isn't an "open membership." The majority of electricity consumers are not members because membership is reserved for those who pay the electric bill. Assuming the average household is between two and three people that means that most people cannot become members.
Concern for Community? The concern seems to be for the company rather than the community with the community being kept in the dark about major decisions and even routine matters through the gag rule and a general attitude of paternalism left over from the plantation days that is at the very root of the origins of KIUC.
Is it any wonder that when KIUC says "white" people assume "black?" When they say "up" can't we say with some certainty that the likelihood is that the real answer is "down?"
And when KIUC tells us "smart meters are safe," even if they are, it's no wonder more and more people are willing to believe that they are not.
Despite almost a century and a half of man-made RF beginning with the telegraph, although it can burn the crap out of you if the waves are long enough and it's placed right next to human tissue, studies have failed to find any accumulation of these waves that are generated by everything from cell and cordless phones to remote controls to radio and television broadcasts.
And, even if somehow it could be shown that there was a "cumulative effect," the amount and proximity to people of the signals in smart meters pales in comparison to placing a cell or cordless phone next to your brain.
It is certainly not "a hundred times worse" as the self-proclaimed "biggest smart meter activist in the state" told the county council on Wednesday.
So why then are so many otherwise rational people on Kaua`i going nuts over the Kaua`i Island Utilities Co-op (KIUC) purchase and imminent installation of these new wireless meters which should be welcomed as a way to increase the amount of "intermittent" energy generation (such as wind and photovoltaic) we can reliably accommodate?
Opponents have been successful by basically telling others that any information on health effects or other issues such as "privacy" are all generated by "the industry" and "the government"- even though that is patently false- asking "how can you trust the 'electric companies'" or the "'big brother' of government" to tell you the truth.
Of course that is what's called an "ad hominem" attack which, according to Wikipedia, "is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it. Ad hominem reasoning is normally described as a logical fallacy."
But the fallaciousness of an ad hominem argument is dependent on how much the source is worthy of trust. If the track record of an individual or organization for truthfulness, honesty and open, transparent dealings with controversies is that they have never been truthful, open, honest or transparent in the past, people tend to take the old "how do you know if KIUC is lying?- because their lips are moving" joke as gospel.
Well we're pretty sure you can see this one coming up Rice St. because when it comes to a track record for deceit and opaque decision-making, KIUC is very model of modern major mismanagement.
We don't really have to go through the liturgy do we? Whether the bungling of the roll-out of proposed hydroelectric power projects by imposing the potential for federal meddling in local state environmental protections or the lack of any membership consultation- supposedly the hallmark of cooperatives- in the decision-making that preceded the underhanded manipulation of the petition-driven ballot effort to overturn the board's decision, KIUC has been exemplary in how not to gain the trust of the people of Kaua`i.
Even KIUC's inception was fraught with controversy with a group of hand-picked members of the "good old boys and girls" political elite offering an absurdly high- and later to be rejected by the PUC- original bid and eventually paying former owners Citizen's Electric of Connecticut what many say was up to twice what was shown to be the "book value," of Kaua`i Electric... as our "highest in the nation" electricity rates can attest.
Is it any wonder that, no matter how silly, no matter how unscientifically-based, no matter how self-defeating the rush to ban smart meters is, it has gained the support of so many otherwise rational people?
The reason is clear. It's because KIUC is a cooperative in name only when it comes to governance.
KIUC is what's called a "Consumers' Cooperative" in which, according again to Wikipedia, "(m)embers vote on major decisions and elect the board of directors from amongst their own number."
A normal cooperative board simply oversees the day-to-day operations but any major decision- such as strategic planning or even the decision to sign a power purchase agreement with a news solar or wind farm- is supposed to be made by the members.
How hard is that concept to understand? Apparently it's like reading hieroglyphics for the majority of the board of directors which has yet to consult the membership on any decision much less ones of great magnitude, in direct violation of the precepts of a co-op.
According to the same article:
Cooperatives are based on the cooperative values of "self-help, self-responsibility, democracy and equality, equity and solidarity" and the seven cooperative principles:
-Voluntary and Open Membership
-Democratic Member Control
-Member Economic Participation
-Autonomy and Independence
-Education, Training and Information
-Cooperation among Cooperatives
-Concern for Community
Does that sound like KIUC? Just ask yourself if there is true "Democratic Member Control" or is the nature of board decision-making that it's done behind closed doors often citing "proprietary" information- a concept directly in opposition to the basics of co-op decision-making principles.
Education, Training and Information? Information is anything but free-flowing at KIUC and, as a matter of fact, the flow of information from individual board members is tightly controlled through a gag rule preventing them from speaking publicly unless the content is approved by the board's chair or- get this- the CEO, meaning that the employees are telling the employers what they can and can't say.
Voluntary and Open Membership? People are automatically members as soon as they sign up for electric service and, although there is a way to "opt out," users are told they will pay more if they do so because they will not receive the "patronage capital"- a sort of rebate that represents the "profit" that would be there if it was an investor owned company. And there certainly isn't an "open membership." The majority of electricity consumers are not members because membership is reserved for those who pay the electric bill. Assuming the average household is between two and three people that means that most people cannot become members.
Concern for Community? The concern seems to be for the company rather than the community with the community being kept in the dark about major decisions and even routine matters through the gag rule and a general attitude of paternalism left over from the plantation days that is at the very root of the origins of KIUC.
Is it any wonder that when KIUC says "white" people assume "black?" When they say "up" can't we say with some certainty that the likelihood is that the real answer is "down?"
And when KIUC tells us "smart meters are safe," even if they are, it's no wonder more and more people are willing to believe that they are not.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
PRESUMPTUOUS ASSUMPTIONS
PRESUMPTUOUS ASSUMPTIONS: The outrage is palpable over the actions of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. in placing ever popular Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief Darryl Parry on leave pending investigation of a reported "hostile workplace" complaint by Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa against Perry's two assistant Chiefs- Roy Asher and Ale Quibilan.
It fits the narrative- one we admit to perpetuating- of a pompous, politically-motivated. power-hungry mayor, yet again overstepping his authority and perhaps, as many have speculated, going after a potential 2014 political opponent with Perry's name being bandies about by many as the only person who could successfully challenge Carvalho for his job in two years.
But what if the narrative is wrong? What if there was misconduct on Perry's part in handling Abbatiello's complaint- actions that violated the county's own policies on how to handle a complaint?
One thing we can report is that, although Perry's first and only statement to the press- or at least on-the-record comment- stressed that he had "the utmost trust in the... decision-making" of Asher and Quibilan and that "they’re beyond reproach,” literally dozens of people will tell you that it is in fact Abbatiello that has a sterling reputation for being a "straight shooter" and beyond reproach.
And another dozen will tell you that they have no difficulty at all in believing that either Asher or Quibilan were the types who would think they are so "beyond reproach" that they could get away with harassing Abbatiello even after she had successfully sued the county for just such actions by other KPD officers and brass in the past.
It is certainly strange then that Perry's first reaction was to tell the local press he apparently fully supported his two assistants despite what had to be an extremely credible complaint from "Officer Darla" as she is affectionately known.
Remember that a hostile workplace complaint was filed internally by Abbatiello, reportedly against Asher, in October. That complaint seems to have been all but ignored and was apparently mishandled with, at minimum, no "separation" of Asher and Abbatiello as county policy calls for.
The county's 2010 edition of their "Policy Against Discrimination and Harassment" says that “(p)ending investigation, the investigator(s) shall take immediate and reasonable action to limit the work contact between employees where there has been a complaint of discrimination or harassment.”
Seemingly the fact that going up the chain of command in October- a chain that ends with Perry- met with no success led to Abbatiello's January 31 complaint, reportedly against Quibilan, being sent to both the police commission and the mayor.
While we're not privy to the contents of the complaint, the scenario that makes the most sense is that, after finding out about the complaint- and presumably its contents- Perry tried to stop the bleeding by placing Asher and Quibilan on leave. But he felt compelled to side with them against Abbatiello in a comment to the press even after being warned, according to the same article, not to comment on the matter.
So put yourself in Carvalho's place. Assuming the complaint included the fact that Perry had filed to act properly in the October complaint, the "beyond reproach" comment was too much for the politically-oriented Carvalho. But more importantly consider that the comment exacerbated the situation intimating that Officer Darla was a liar. Having the department head take sides against the complainant would be yet another violation of the sexual harassment guidelines.
And we're pretty sure Carvalho was reminded of all this by County Attorney Al Castillo who has also been under fire for allowing these sexual harassment suits to be mishandled and even ignored.
The fact that the complaint was addressed to the mayor left him in a place where, if he failed to act by putting Perry on leave- and not just allowing him to "work from home" as Perry claimed he had demanded- he would be doing what the county has done in similar sexual harassment complaints- at best just ignore them and worse put pressure on the complainant to drop the charges by allowing Perry's statement to stand as the county's only reaction to the complaint.
While we've gone back and forth on the subject of whether Carvalho had the authority to discipline the chief, it's a subject that has even received scrutiny in Honolulu with an exchange between blogger Ian Lind- who asserted Carvalho did not have the authority- and, in comments on the post, former local Kaua`i newspaper reporter and current "Civil Beat" correspondent Mike Levine.
Levine essentially said "not so fast" in pointing out that, while the authority might seem to be with the police commission which hires and fires the chief, it's a leap to say they are the only ones who can discipline the chief since there is no clear written authority to do so anywhere in the Kaua`i County Charter.
The most popular narrative on Perry in the community is that, after a recently reported 61 official grievances having been filed during the brief tenure of his predecessor KC Lum- who was essentially "quitted" for allowing "low morale" to spread through the department- Perry has been able to cut those grievances to a negligible level. But among those who thought Lum got a raw deal, the narrative is that the reason why there were so many grievances under Lum is that he was actually processing them by the book, encouraging an atmosphere where employees felt their complaints would actually be heard, causing the number to snowball not because of morale but because there was so much misconduct.
They say that the reason why the grievances have slowed to a trickle under Perry is that he has sought to "smooth things over" and either ignore the complaints until they went away or intervening and using his authority to intimidate complainants into withdrawing their complaints so as not to "make waves" and "rock the boat."
That, some say, has allowed some "bad apples" to remain in place and created a "don't bother to complain" atmosphere under Perry's permissive reign.
Is that the situation here? While we can speculate and even state that Perry's public handling of Abbatiello's latest complaint was in violation of the county's workplace policy- making them a violation of the law since the law requires employers to have a policy and stick to it- we have no direct evidence other than the public statements to believe one way or the other.
But if others, as they have in almost unanimity, want to speculate that Hizzonah is once again on the wrong end of an issue of process, they would be wise to consider that there is another narrative that, while it doesn't fit the observable past, may just have the quality of the proverbial broken clock- one that right at least twice a day.
It fits the narrative- one we admit to perpetuating- of a pompous, politically-motivated. power-hungry mayor, yet again overstepping his authority and perhaps, as many have speculated, going after a potential 2014 political opponent with Perry's name being bandies about by many as the only person who could successfully challenge Carvalho for his job in two years.
But what if the narrative is wrong? What if there was misconduct on Perry's part in handling Abbatiello's complaint- actions that violated the county's own policies on how to handle a complaint?
One thing we can report is that, although Perry's first and only statement to the press- or at least on-the-record comment- stressed that he had "the utmost trust in the... decision-making" of Asher and Quibilan and that "they’re beyond reproach,” literally dozens of people will tell you that it is in fact Abbatiello that has a sterling reputation for being a "straight shooter" and beyond reproach.
And another dozen will tell you that they have no difficulty at all in believing that either Asher or Quibilan were the types who would think they are so "beyond reproach" that they could get away with harassing Abbatiello even after she had successfully sued the county for just such actions by other KPD officers and brass in the past.
It is certainly strange then that Perry's first reaction was to tell the local press he apparently fully supported his two assistants despite what had to be an extremely credible complaint from "Officer Darla" as she is affectionately known.
Remember that a hostile workplace complaint was filed internally by Abbatiello, reportedly against Asher, in October. That complaint seems to have been all but ignored and was apparently mishandled with, at minimum, no "separation" of Asher and Abbatiello as county policy calls for.
The county's 2010 edition of their "Policy Against Discrimination and Harassment" says that “(p)ending investigation, the investigator(s) shall take immediate and reasonable action to limit the work contact between employees where there has been a complaint of discrimination or harassment.”
Seemingly the fact that going up the chain of command in October- a chain that ends with Perry- met with no success led to Abbatiello's January 31 complaint, reportedly against Quibilan, being sent to both the police commission and the mayor.
While we're not privy to the contents of the complaint, the scenario that makes the most sense is that, after finding out about the complaint- and presumably its contents- Perry tried to stop the bleeding by placing Asher and Quibilan on leave. But he felt compelled to side with them against Abbatiello in a comment to the press even after being warned, according to the same article, not to comment on the matter.
So put yourself in Carvalho's place. Assuming the complaint included the fact that Perry had filed to act properly in the October complaint, the "beyond reproach" comment was too much for the politically-oriented Carvalho. But more importantly consider that the comment exacerbated the situation intimating that Officer Darla was a liar. Having the department head take sides against the complainant would be yet another violation of the sexual harassment guidelines.
And we're pretty sure Carvalho was reminded of all this by County Attorney Al Castillo who has also been under fire for allowing these sexual harassment suits to be mishandled and even ignored.
The fact that the complaint was addressed to the mayor left him in a place where, if he failed to act by putting Perry on leave- and not just allowing him to "work from home" as Perry claimed he had demanded- he would be doing what the county has done in similar sexual harassment complaints- at best just ignore them and worse put pressure on the complainant to drop the charges by allowing Perry's statement to stand as the county's only reaction to the complaint.
While we've gone back and forth on the subject of whether Carvalho had the authority to discipline the chief, it's a subject that has even received scrutiny in Honolulu with an exchange between blogger Ian Lind- who asserted Carvalho did not have the authority- and, in comments on the post, former local Kaua`i newspaper reporter and current "Civil Beat" correspondent Mike Levine.
Levine essentially said "not so fast" in pointing out that, while the authority might seem to be with the police commission which hires and fires the chief, it's a leap to say they are the only ones who can discipline the chief since there is no clear written authority to do so anywhere in the Kaua`i County Charter.
The most popular narrative on Perry in the community is that, after a recently reported 61 official grievances having been filed during the brief tenure of his predecessor KC Lum- who was essentially "quitted" for allowing "low morale" to spread through the department- Perry has been able to cut those grievances to a negligible level. But among those who thought Lum got a raw deal, the narrative is that the reason why there were so many grievances under Lum is that he was actually processing them by the book, encouraging an atmosphere where employees felt their complaints would actually be heard, causing the number to snowball not because of morale but because there was so much misconduct.
They say that the reason why the grievances have slowed to a trickle under Perry is that he has sought to "smooth things over" and either ignore the complaints until they went away or intervening and using his authority to intimidate complainants into withdrawing their complaints so as not to "make waves" and "rock the boat."
That, some say, has allowed some "bad apples" to remain in place and created a "don't bother to complain" atmosphere under Perry's permissive reign.
Is that the situation here? While we can speculate and even state that Perry's public handling of Abbatiello's latest complaint was in violation of the county's workplace policy- making them a violation of the law since the law requires employers to have a policy and stick to it- we have no direct evidence other than the public statements to believe one way or the other.
But if others, as they have in almost unanimity, want to speculate that Hizzonah is once again on the wrong end of an issue of process, they would be wise to consider that there is another narrative that, while it doesn't fit the observable past, may just have the quality of the proverbial broken clock- one that right at least twice a day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
