DID YOU KNOW OR NO, YA KNOW?: The more you know the less you know because as you come to know what you now know you also come to know what you don't know. The trick is to know now what you don't know now and what you didn't know then... ya know?
Didn't think so.
What we do know is that even a gallon of hot sauce isn't going to make our keyboard more palatable after our misguided ingestion pledge last week.
Civil Beat's (CB) robo-calling poll accurately predicted an astonishing 20+ point win by Tulsi Gabbard (54.0%) over Mufi Hannemann (33.6%) in the 2nd US Congressional District Democratic Primary, proving to be more accurate than the Honolulu Star-Advertiser "real live person" poll, which had Mufi up by10. The fact that the difference was apparently due to exceptionally low totals for Esther Kia`aina (5.7%) and Bob Marx (3.7%)- who had been predicted to come in closer to 10% each- doesn't make our esophagus any wider or teeth any sharper.
But the results may have had little or nothing to do with the polling method because in the US Senate race it was the reverse with CB predicting a virtual tie and the S-A prognosticating a 12% margin for Mazie Hirono who actually won by 17% over Ed Case.
Go figgah.
Another thing we we got wrong, albeit a year ago, was our support for the winner of this year's Corrupt Pol of the Year award, Kaua`i Councilmember KipuKai Kuali`i. Though he didn't actually win in 2010 he wound up being appointed to the council. But the worst part is that he finished in the money this Saturday with an appropriate 666 finish - 6th place with 6.6% of the vote.
We do know now what we didn't know then- that asking people to "plunk" for Kuali`i in 2010 joins our qwerty-chewing pledge as one of our more bone-headed moves because he's turned out to be a first-class hack who's traded in his political soul in support of Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's prosecutorial crime spree.
He now blindly follows Iseri adherent, her boot-licker-in-chief Mel Rapozo. Together they lead the goose-stepping cadre that champions our favorite race-baiter, "Ms Shay it, don't spray it."
That support grew out Kipukai's apparent back room deal for the redirection of a Victim-Witness program grant from Iseri's office to Kualii`s employer at the YWCA.
It's become laughingly obvious to anyone who watches the council in action that Kipukai has now gone to the dark side. But not only did he trade various votes to allow Iseri to get away with a slew of shenanigans and outright unlawful activity, it has cost the county a hefty chunk of cash in the form of an EEOC settlement for the firing of Victim Witness Counselor Erin Wilson.
Wilson was succinctly described by Joan Conrow as "the single mom who moved here all the way from Colorado to work as a victim witness coordinator, only to be fired a couple of months into the job because there supposedly wasn't enough work."
Of course there wasn't enough work because Iseri shuffled the job over to the "Y" in exchange for Kipukai's undying support for Iseri in the slew of past, present and we presume, future Shay-related scandals.
We do know that, unbelievably enough, for now, Kuali`i finished 1/10% (102 votes) ahead of Gary Hooser and 2/10% (152 votes) ahead of Tim Bynum in Saturday's useless election.
What we don't know is how to make sure that by Nov. 6 everybody knows about Kualii's little pact.
Showing posts with label Mel and Shaylene. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mel and Shaylene. Show all posts
Monday, August 13, 2012
Friday, June 8, 2012
PLENTY OF NOTHIN'
PLENTY OF NOTHIN': It's gonna be the best of elections. It's gonna be the worst of elections.
Yes it's a dickens o' pickin's and a tale all too sh*tty when it comes to the most dismal number of candidates for the seven seats on the the Kaua`i County Council in memory. Yet on the plus side the enumeration of only nine names includes Gary Hooser, a politician who makes us reluctant to use the term to describe Gary since it's usually reserved for corrupt cronies and despicable despots.
Hooser, who started his public service career on the council from 1998-2002 before becoming the Kauai's State Senator from 2002-2010, is returning to his roots. His presence will no doubt bring the level of council discourse and accomplishment, if not to the highest rung of the ladder of good governance, a least out of the existing swirling sewer of percolating pestilence.
The problem is that the rest of the list is made up of the same old seven incumbent-hacks we've grown to, in some cases loath, in others tolerate, plus local and UH baseball hero, Ross Kagawa, who has two chances- the proverbial slim and none, with slim nursing a terminal illness.
So we're down to a proverbial game of musical chairs and the only reason to vote in the election- the one in November that is because all will get past the August 11 "primary"- is to see who gets dumped when Hooser is inevitably added.
While we are tempted to just "plunk" for Gary (a term for not using all seven votes and simply "plunking" down only the names of those who one truly likes) and may do so in November, for now we will list the rest of those running based on exactly how much of a worthless piece of crap each one is and why.
So for all you dumpers out there (and if you're not one, please register now) here's our list of dumpees in order of dump-worthiness.
1) Dickie Chang. This is probably the hardest choice- whether to make our good friend Dickie our least favorite or save that honor for Mel Rapozo. It's like trying to decide whether you like the guy who is repeatedly plunging a knife in your back or prefer the guy who is standing there watching, trying to decide when and whether to either encourage the stabber or condemn him... although it would certainly never occur to him too stop him.
Dickie is the proverbial man who, like former State Rep Ezra Kanoho for whom the phrase was created, "never met a hotel he didn't like." Dickie's penchant for lap-dog behavior- usually in the service of Chair Jay Furfaro- is infamous and when he does take a stand it is clearly taken with clay feet planted firmly on both sides of the fence. The one thing we can say about Dickie is that this is exactly what we expected from him. That of course makes-
2) Mel Rapozo the next one to not vote for. Mel manages to play politics with the simplest of no-brainers, using his unique blend of bamboozical logic and contortionistic, convoluted unreasoning as his moral compass- a compass that continually points in one direction... toward Mel. Perhaps the most emblematic representation of this bit of Kabuki is his recent attempt to change the charter because he didn't like an opinion from County Attorney Al Castillo’s office regarding the legal use of the word "shall." Rapozo didn't like what Castillo told him the law said and what the courts have consistently ruled on the matter, so he first tried to get his cohorts to hire Mel's own personal choice of outside lawyer to tell him what he wanted the law to say. When that failed he unsuccessfully tried to garner enough votes to put the matter before the electorate even though if it did pass it would be moot from the day it was enacted because it doesn't matter what our charter says when the state courts have already ruled on the matter.
Rapozo's "are-you-going-to-believe-me-or-your-lyin'-eyes" defense of Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho as she "took the fifth" and demanded a private attorney to represent her rather than openly discuss her budget with the council- has known no bounds, making for some fascinatingly fractured farces... quintessential Rapozo.
That brings us to the aforementioned "larger than life" (both girth-wise and in his own mind-wise) current Chair-
3) Jay Furfaro. Furfaro managed to eek out a 4-3 vote for chair last election, something that he may not be able to do with Hooser on the council. More on that later.
Furfaro is a throwback to the old style Hawai`i "orator" whose chest-thumping, credit-taking, egotistical style of expression is endlessly enigmatic to watch especially as lunch and sometimes dinner breaks are approaching. As the clock ticks toward noon it invariably throws him into incoherent ramblings and rushed decision making, commensurate with the decibel level of his stomach growling. To be fair, he is diabetic but his munching-vs-governing meter is out of whack even for someone who has "the sugar." Speaking of sweetness, the next on our bottoms-up itemizing is someone who turned out to be NutraSweet. That would be-
4) Kipukai Kuali`i. Kipukai was appointed after current State Representative and then Councilmember Derek Kawakami was appointed to fill Mina Morita's spot when she was appointed to be the head the Public Utilities Commission. People expected a lot from his "win" of 2010's post-election version of musical chairs and got virtually nothing. He has turned out to be simply a little less of a political animal than Rapozo and seems quite content to learn more at Mel's feet. Although he has gone after some of the more absurd council appropriations- when they suit his political bent- the last straw was his unshakable support for Iseri after she fired the Victim/Witness Counselors in her office. That eliminated the long-time county positions and instead she contracted out the duties to (drum roll please) Kualii's employer, the YWCA, ensuring his support before the council. He not only sold his political soul but he then refused to recuse himself from participating in the council's deliberations regarding Iseri. And speaking of disappointments there's-
5) Nadine Nakamura, although in her case disappointment may be a bit strong because we never expected any more than we got. The would be a politically malleable councilmember who doesn't seem to have a position on anything other than compromise, even when one of the options is at best unpalatable, at worst patently absurd. Her prime directive for the past two years has apparently been to take good legislation and introduce difficult-to-reject amendments that make the original unacceptable, even in cases when the votes are there for passage. Even if she did govern from a progressive viewpoint no one would know it because her experience as a facilitator and mediator have made her into a gutless wonder who makes one question whether there is any substance there at all. And speaking of substance there's-
6) Tim Bynum. Some would have him positioned at the bottom of this list for his effort to allow transient vacation rentals (TVRs) on Ag land, not to mention his previous work to allow them to be grandfathered on all otherwise zoned land. We can hardly ignore that and other positions he's taken. On the other hand he was, with then Councilmember Lani Kawahara, primarily responsible for the plastic bag ban and also successfully took on then Council Chair Kaipo Asing over open governance issues. What we can say is that at least they have apparently been taken because he believes in whatever he has supported. But if for no other reason than his persecution-prosecution by political enemy Iseri in the Ricecooker-gate scandal- an abuse of power on her part that we hope will end in November with the election of Justin Kollar (more on that race in a future post)- we have positioned him among the keepers this time. He could have folded but his persistence has unveiled alleged criminal activity on Iseri's part. All that pretty much also goes for-
7) JoAnn Yukimura. It's not that our disappointment with JoAnn has diminished to a level where we enthusiastically rate her the numero uno councilmember- although she has done some really good stuff recently.* But she also went along with Bynum on the Ag TVR issue and was the prime mover behind the grandfathering efforts, preferring to knuckle under to big money developers rather than go to court to enforce the laws apparently forbidding them.
We've questioned the consistency of those we have spoken to who were dead set against supporting Bynum due to the TVR debacle but were equally as supportive of Yukimura. We've simply asked them how they can condemn Bynum on that issue without doing the same for JoAnn.
All we can say is that is, on balance- and especially given the reality of the fact that six of the seven are going to be on the council whether we like it or not- we are forced to rate Bynum and Yukimura as "plunkworthy," to coin a term.
That leaves only one issue to be decided in November when it comes to the council race- the question of council leadership, which hangs in the balance.
After the 2010 election Yukimura challenged Furfaro for chair. Furfaro had Chang's, Rapozo's and, at the time, Kawakami's votes leaving Yukimura with Bynum's and Nakamura's.
In order to wrest control of the chair- assuming either Yukimura or possibly Hooser will challenge Furfaro and that Nakamura will maintain her vote for Yukimura- the addition of Hooser makes a change in the chair a distinct possibility. That also assumes that the odd-man-out is either Chang, Rapozo or Kuali`i. We can't be sure of Kualii's vote but suspect he is politically indebted to Furfaro after Furfaro gave procedural support to Kuali`i and Rapozo during some of the budget hearings regarding Iseri.
If the election were held tomorrow in addition to being shocked, surprised and totally taken aback, we would be forced to plunk for Hooser, Yukimura, Bynum and Nakamura since leadership is the only issue to be decided. But equally as important is NOT to vote for Chang, Rapozo, Furfaro or Kuali`i.
The August primary will tell us something about the strength of each candidate- it has always been like a super-accurate poll since 14 candidates usually get though to the November vote. In this case although all - and only- nine will make it through, we'll certainly know more about the strength of each by August 12.
One thing is all but certain- this mess of a council will make it through this year's election with six or seven intact. And while it gives us plenty to froth and foam about, any plans we've had to be a kinder and gentler rabid reporter may well end up, shall we say, going to the dogs.
*Correction: It was Tim Bynum who, along with Lani Kawahara, was primarily responsible for the single use plastic bag "ban," not, as we originally said JoAnn Yukimura who was not on the council at the time the bill passed. The original on line version has been corrected. We regret the error
-------
We are heartsick over the loss of Rose Schlegel, the daughter of our good friends Sherry and Jim (Pole) Pollock, who lost her life in an apparent freak accident in Kalalau Valley Wednesday. It is horrendous to lose any loved one but to lose a child, even one aged 30, is unimaginably tragic and their pain and sorrow must be unbearable. Please keep them in your thoughts and, if appropriate, prayers. It makes one wonder how such bad things can happen to such good people while selfish and mean people go unscathed. Don't forget to hug your loved ones, especially your keiki, today and every day. Life is fragile, seemingly especially for the righteous. We love you Sherry and Pole and will hold Rose in our thoughts forever.
Yes it's a dickens o' pickin's and a tale all too sh*tty when it comes to the most dismal number of candidates for the seven seats on the the Kaua`i County Council in memory. Yet on the plus side the enumeration of only nine names includes Gary Hooser, a politician who makes us reluctant to use the term to describe Gary since it's usually reserved for corrupt cronies and despicable despots.
Hooser, who started his public service career on the council from 1998-2002 before becoming the Kauai's State Senator from 2002-2010, is returning to his roots. His presence will no doubt bring the level of council discourse and accomplishment, if not to the highest rung of the ladder of good governance, a least out of the existing swirling sewer of percolating pestilence.
The problem is that the rest of the list is made up of the same old seven incumbent-hacks we've grown to, in some cases loath, in others tolerate, plus local and UH baseball hero, Ross Kagawa, who has two chances- the proverbial slim and none, with slim nursing a terminal illness.
So we're down to a proverbial game of musical chairs and the only reason to vote in the election- the one in November that is because all will get past the August 11 "primary"- is to see who gets dumped when Hooser is inevitably added.
While we are tempted to just "plunk" for Gary (a term for not using all seven votes and simply "plunking" down only the names of those who one truly likes) and may do so in November, for now we will list the rest of those running based on exactly how much of a worthless piece of crap each one is and why.
So for all you dumpers out there (and if you're not one, please register now) here's our list of dumpees in order of dump-worthiness.
1) Dickie Chang. This is probably the hardest choice- whether to make our good friend Dickie our least favorite or save that honor for Mel Rapozo. It's like trying to decide whether you like the guy who is repeatedly plunging a knife in your back or prefer the guy who is standing there watching, trying to decide when and whether to either encourage the stabber or condemn him... although it would certainly never occur to him too stop him.
Dickie is the proverbial man who, like former State Rep Ezra Kanoho for whom the phrase was created, "never met a hotel he didn't like." Dickie's penchant for lap-dog behavior- usually in the service of Chair Jay Furfaro- is infamous and when he does take a stand it is clearly taken with clay feet planted firmly on both sides of the fence. The one thing we can say about Dickie is that this is exactly what we expected from him. That of course makes-
2) Mel Rapozo the next one to not vote for. Mel manages to play politics with the simplest of no-brainers, using his unique blend of bamboozical logic and contortionistic, convoluted unreasoning as his moral compass- a compass that continually points in one direction... toward Mel. Perhaps the most emblematic representation of this bit of Kabuki is his recent attempt to change the charter because he didn't like an opinion from County Attorney Al Castillo’s office regarding the legal use of the word "shall." Rapozo didn't like what Castillo told him the law said and what the courts have consistently ruled on the matter, so he first tried to get his cohorts to hire Mel's own personal choice of outside lawyer to tell him what he wanted the law to say. When that failed he unsuccessfully tried to garner enough votes to put the matter before the electorate even though if it did pass it would be moot from the day it was enacted because it doesn't matter what our charter says when the state courts have already ruled on the matter.
Rapozo's "are-you-going-to-believe-me-or-your-lyin'-eyes" defense of Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho as she "took the fifth" and demanded a private attorney to represent her rather than openly discuss her budget with the council- has known no bounds, making for some fascinatingly fractured farces... quintessential Rapozo.
That brings us to the aforementioned "larger than life" (both girth-wise and in his own mind-wise) current Chair-
3) Jay Furfaro. Furfaro managed to eek out a 4-3 vote for chair last election, something that he may not be able to do with Hooser on the council. More on that later.
Furfaro is a throwback to the old style Hawai`i "orator" whose chest-thumping, credit-taking, egotistical style of expression is endlessly enigmatic to watch especially as lunch and sometimes dinner breaks are approaching. As the clock ticks toward noon it invariably throws him into incoherent ramblings and rushed decision making, commensurate with the decibel level of his stomach growling. To be fair, he is diabetic but his munching-vs-governing meter is out of whack even for someone who has "the sugar." Speaking of sweetness, the next on our bottoms-up itemizing is someone who turned out to be NutraSweet. That would be-
4) Kipukai Kuali`i. Kipukai was appointed after current State Representative and then Councilmember Derek Kawakami was appointed to fill Mina Morita's spot when she was appointed to be the head the Public Utilities Commission. People expected a lot from his "win" of 2010's post-election version of musical chairs and got virtually nothing. He has turned out to be simply a little less of a political animal than Rapozo and seems quite content to learn more at Mel's feet. Although he has gone after some of the more absurd council appropriations- when they suit his political bent- the last straw was his unshakable support for Iseri after she fired the Victim/Witness Counselors in her office. That eliminated the long-time county positions and instead she contracted out the duties to (drum roll please) Kualii's employer, the YWCA, ensuring his support before the council. He not only sold his political soul but he then refused to recuse himself from participating in the council's deliberations regarding Iseri. And speaking of disappointments there's-
5) Nadine Nakamura, although in her case disappointment may be a bit strong because we never expected any more than we got. The would be a politically malleable councilmember who doesn't seem to have a position on anything other than compromise, even when one of the options is at best unpalatable, at worst patently absurd. Her prime directive for the past two years has apparently been to take good legislation and introduce difficult-to-reject amendments that make the original unacceptable, even in cases when the votes are there for passage. Even if she did govern from a progressive viewpoint no one would know it because her experience as a facilitator and mediator have made her into a gutless wonder who makes one question whether there is any substance there at all. And speaking of substance there's-
6) Tim Bynum. Some would have him positioned at the bottom of this list for his effort to allow transient vacation rentals (TVRs) on Ag land, not to mention his previous work to allow them to be grandfathered on all otherwise zoned land. We can hardly ignore that and other positions he's taken. On the other hand he was, with then Councilmember Lani Kawahara, primarily responsible for the plastic bag ban and also successfully took on then Council Chair Kaipo Asing over open governance issues. What we can say is that at least they have apparently been taken because he believes in whatever he has supported. But if for no other reason than his persecution-prosecution by political enemy Iseri in the Ricecooker-gate scandal- an abuse of power on her part that we hope will end in November with the election of Justin Kollar (more on that race in a future post)- we have positioned him among the keepers this time. He could have folded but his persistence has unveiled alleged criminal activity on Iseri's part. All that pretty much also goes for-
7) JoAnn Yukimura. It's not that our disappointment with JoAnn has diminished to a level where we enthusiastically rate her the numero uno councilmember- although she has done some really good stuff recently.* But she also went along with Bynum on the Ag TVR issue and was the prime mover behind the grandfathering efforts, preferring to knuckle under to big money developers rather than go to court to enforce the laws apparently forbidding them.
We've questioned the consistency of those we have spoken to who were dead set against supporting Bynum due to the TVR debacle but were equally as supportive of Yukimura. We've simply asked them how they can condemn Bynum on that issue without doing the same for JoAnn.
All we can say is that is, on balance- and especially given the reality of the fact that six of the seven are going to be on the council whether we like it or not- we are forced to rate Bynum and Yukimura as "plunkworthy," to coin a term.
That leaves only one issue to be decided in November when it comes to the council race- the question of council leadership, which hangs in the balance.
After the 2010 election Yukimura challenged Furfaro for chair. Furfaro had Chang's, Rapozo's and, at the time, Kawakami's votes leaving Yukimura with Bynum's and Nakamura's.
In order to wrest control of the chair- assuming either Yukimura or possibly Hooser will challenge Furfaro and that Nakamura will maintain her vote for Yukimura- the addition of Hooser makes a change in the chair a distinct possibility. That also assumes that the odd-man-out is either Chang, Rapozo or Kuali`i. We can't be sure of Kualii's vote but suspect he is politically indebted to Furfaro after Furfaro gave procedural support to Kuali`i and Rapozo during some of the budget hearings regarding Iseri.
If the election were held tomorrow in addition to being shocked, surprised and totally taken aback, we would be forced to plunk for Hooser, Yukimura, Bynum and Nakamura since leadership is the only issue to be decided. But equally as important is NOT to vote for Chang, Rapozo, Furfaro or Kuali`i.
The August primary will tell us something about the strength of each candidate- it has always been like a super-accurate poll since 14 candidates usually get though to the November vote. In this case although all - and only- nine will make it through, we'll certainly know more about the strength of each by August 12.
One thing is all but certain- this mess of a council will make it through this year's election with six or seven intact. And while it gives us plenty to froth and foam about, any plans we've had to be a kinder and gentler rabid reporter may well end up, shall we say, going to the dogs.
*Correction: It was Tim Bynum who, along with Lani Kawahara, was primarily responsible for the single use plastic bag "ban," not, as we originally said JoAnn Yukimura who was not on the council at the time the bill passed. The original on line version has been corrected. We regret the error
-------
We are heartsick over the loss of Rose Schlegel, the daughter of our good friends Sherry and Jim (Pole) Pollock, who lost her life in an apparent freak accident in Kalalau Valley Wednesday. It is horrendous to lose any loved one but to lose a child, even one aged 30, is unimaginably tragic and their pain and sorrow must be unbearable. Please keep them in your thoughts and, if appropriate, prayers. It makes one wonder how such bad things can happen to such good people while selfish and mean people go unscathed. Don't forget to hug your loved ones, especially your keiki, today and every day. Life is fragile, seemingly especially for the righteous. We love you Sherry and Pole and will hold Rose in our thoughts forever.
Friday, May 25, 2012
OFF THE DEEP END
OFF THE DEEP END: Nobody questions whether rats will desert a sinking ship. But how long they will wait before doing so probably depends on the circumstances. But when one starts, the rest usually follow
Obviously they can't take too long, which is why at least two councilmembers decided they'd waited long enough to abandon the SS P.O.H.A.K.U and they'd be damned if they were going down with Captain Spittle of Malaprop.
Councilmember Nadine Nakamura was backpedaling like Michael Jackson on steroids. She apparently didn’t like her political prospects should she let stand as her final word on the subject her recent vote to allow Kaua`i Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri Carvalho to run out the clock. And Chair Jay Furfaro also smelled trouble should he do the same.
Even Kipukai Kuali`i and Dickie Chang silently went along with the program, leaving only Iseri's first Mate Mel Rapozo standing on the deck.
For those who thought last week's vote to pass the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney's (OPA) budget without any resolution to Iseri's scandalous refusal to answer until she got a county-paid special counsel to represent her was going to be the last word on the subject, guess again.
Because Wednesday (go to 9:24:20), after Yukimura introduced a measure to ask the Board of Ethics (BOE) to look into the matter and read a statement written by Bynum (see below) detailing Iseri's misdeeds (Bynum was absent due to the imminent birth of his first grandchild), it became apparent that continuing to allow Iseri to get away with alleged crimes and misdemeanors was a bad idea if they expected to get reelected.
Before Bynum's statement was read, Iseri's First Mate, Councilmember Mel Rapozo, had attempted to defuse potential defections by launching into a "my-my, it's enough to give a lady the vapors" spiel, tying to claim that he'd never seen anything like this level of scrutiny in his political career- seemingly forgetting about his own politically motivated crusade to oust former Chief of Police KC Lum.
He then announced that, anyway, the administration had "launched an inquiry" into the whole matter.
But when Yukimura read Bynum's statement and "corrected" Rapozo by saying the administration was looking into the procurement improprieties but not the general ethics charges, it became apparent that no one was going to stay aboard with Mel and Shay.
Bynum's statement read:
On April 11, 2012 the Council met in executive session on matters that included the POHAKU program. An Executive Session was posted for a briefing related to POHAKU on April 18, 2012. On April 18th Deputy County Attorney Mona Clark responded to members questions in open session. Ms. Clark indicated that the information was time sensitive stating “I think it is important that the Council has as much information as possible, as soon as possible.” Council member Yukimura asked if there were possible liabilities for the Council that could increase if additional time went by. The answer was yes. In spite of this, a majority of the Council voted to delay the discussion for two weeks. On May 2, 2012 the briefing was finally held. However no action was taken.
I have concerns (Bynum continued) among them are:
- The use of county address as the address for the registered agent of a private business.
- The fact that the Pohakuprogram.com website directs payment to a private business and the Council has not been provided with a copy of any contract with that business.
- The Prosecutor has refused to answer questions from the Council related to the Pohaku program until the County provides her special Counsel for legal representation.
Subsequently we heard that the POHAKU program had stopped operating, however Ms. Iseri-Carvalho said last Tuesday May 15, on the Council floor “our office can internally run the P.O.H.A.K.U program, which we will continue to do almost immediately.” As of yet no one is looking into the possible Charter violations. After what, in my opinion, is too much delay the posting for this body to take appropriate action is finally here before us today.
County officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, The Constitution of the State of Hawai‘i and the Kaua‘i County Charter. I have been told by all the County Attorneys that have held the office since I became a Council member that when a question regarding a potential violation of the Charter is raised the Council has a duty to see that an appropriate inquiry is held. The Board of Ethics is an appropriate body for such an inquiry. So I will obviously support this motion.
But rather than outright supporting the call for an ethics referral, Furfaro announced that, at the request of County Attorney Al Castillo, he would support a deferral to either June 6 or 13 until the administration’s "inquiry" was finished.
But it was Nakamura who really started the stampede to the exits when she said she would essentially support the ethics referral saying she would "support the bullet points" contained in Bynum's statement. That caused the other two rats present to get caught up in the stampede and Kuali`i and Chang went along with the deferral since there were not only apparently not enough votes to defeat it but enough to approve, if not the referral to the BOE, then at least the deferral until June.
We'll see what the "inquiry" comes up with but for now there appears to be a growing awareness among councilmembers that, whether the local newspaper is covering the scandal or not, people have been following the story on TV and on-line. And if councilmembers want to maintain a spot on their own SS Council it may be time to abandon Iseri's leaky little POHAKU putt-putt.
Obviously they can't take too long, which is why at least two councilmembers decided they'd waited long enough to abandon the SS P.O.H.A.K.U and they'd be damned if they were going down with Captain Spittle of Malaprop.
Councilmember Nadine Nakamura was backpedaling like Michael Jackson on steroids. She apparently didn’t like her political prospects should she let stand as her final word on the subject her recent vote to allow Kaua`i Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri Carvalho to run out the clock. And Chair Jay Furfaro also smelled trouble should he do the same.
Even Kipukai Kuali`i and Dickie Chang silently went along with the program, leaving only Iseri's first Mate Mel Rapozo standing on the deck.
For those who thought last week's vote to pass the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney's (OPA) budget without any resolution to Iseri's scandalous refusal to answer until she got a county-paid special counsel to represent her was going to be the last word on the subject, guess again.
Because Wednesday (go to 9:24:20), after Yukimura introduced a measure to ask the Board of Ethics (BOE) to look into the matter and read a statement written by Bynum (see below) detailing Iseri's misdeeds (Bynum was absent due to the imminent birth of his first grandchild), it became apparent that continuing to allow Iseri to get away with alleged crimes and misdemeanors was a bad idea if they expected to get reelected.
Before Bynum's statement was read, Iseri's First Mate, Councilmember Mel Rapozo, had attempted to defuse potential defections by launching into a "my-my, it's enough to give a lady the vapors" spiel, tying to claim that he'd never seen anything like this level of scrutiny in his political career- seemingly forgetting about his own politically motivated crusade to oust former Chief of Police KC Lum.
He then announced that, anyway, the administration had "launched an inquiry" into the whole matter.
But when Yukimura read Bynum's statement and "corrected" Rapozo by saying the administration was looking into the procurement improprieties but not the general ethics charges, it became apparent that no one was going to stay aboard with Mel and Shay.
Bynum's statement read:
On April 11, 2012 the Council met in executive session on matters that included the POHAKU program. An Executive Session was posted for a briefing related to POHAKU on April 18, 2012. On April 18th Deputy County Attorney Mona Clark responded to members questions in open session. Ms. Clark indicated that the information was time sensitive stating “I think it is important that the Council has as much information as possible, as soon as possible.” Council member Yukimura asked if there were possible liabilities for the Council that could increase if additional time went by. The answer was yes. In spite of this, a majority of the Council voted to delay the discussion for two weeks. On May 2, 2012 the briefing was finally held. However no action was taken.
I have concerns (Bynum continued) among them are:
- The use of county address as the address for the registered agent of a private business.
- The fact that the Pohakuprogram.com website directs payment to a private business and the Council has not been provided with a copy of any contract with that business.
- The Prosecutor has refused to answer questions from the Council related to the Pohaku program until the County provides her special Counsel for legal representation.
Subsequently we heard that the POHAKU program had stopped operating, however Ms. Iseri-Carvalho said last Tuesday May 15, on the Council floor “our office can internally run the P.O.H.A.K.U program, which we will continue to do almost immediately.” As of yet no one is looking into the possible Charter violations. After what, in my opinion, is too much delay the posting for this body to take appropriate action is finally here before us today.
County officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, The Constitution of the State of Hawai‘i and the Kaua‘i County Charter. I have been told by all the County Attorneys that have held the office since I became a Council member that when a question regarding a potential violation of the Charter is raised the Council has a duty to see that an appropriate inquiry is held. The Board of Ethics is an appropriate body for such an inquiry. So I will obviously support this motion.
But rather than outright supporting the call for an ethics referral, Furfaro announced that, at the request of County Attorney Al Castillo, he would support a deferral to either June 6 or 13 until the administration’s "inquiry" was finished.
But it was Nakamura who really started the stampede to the exits when she said she would essentially support the ethics referral saying she would "support the bullet points" contained in Bynum's statement. That caused the other two rats present to get caught up in the stampede and Kuali`i and Chang went along with the deferral since there were not only apparently not enough votes to defeat it but enough to approve, if not the referral to the BOE, then at least the deferral until June.
We'll see what the "inquiry" comes up with but for now there appears to be a growing awareness among councilmembers that, whether the local newspaper is covering the scandal or not, people have been following the story on TV and on-line. And if councilmembers want to maintain a spot on their own SS Council it may be time to abandon Iseri's leaky little POHAKU putt-putt.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
BLOWING CHUNKS
BLOWING CHUNKS: It seems appropriate that sewage is once again spilling into the ocean at Nawiliwili. After all, all that crap being generated up the hill in Lihu`e this week had to go somewhere.
People all over town were asking "do you smell that?" on Tuesday and it didn't take an olfactorally-advanced detective to discover the source as being the Kaua`i County Council Chambers.
That was when our seven stilted servants once again turned to the budget for what, from all indications, appears to be the biggest criminal enterprise on Kaua`i these days- the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA). Those who have been under a pohaku might want to read up on OPA Godmother Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho and her P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
And another great must-read, blow-by-blow account of Tuesday's session is available via Joan Conrow for anyone who doesn't have the time to watch the debacle... although the latter is well worth the investment of an hour (start about an hour in) if just for the comedic value.
No one expected much in the way of discussion regarding evil mastermind Iseri's all-purpose now-you-see-it-now-you-don't combination misdemeanor diversion program/reelection campaign tool. She's been busy lawyering up and taking the fifth so to no one's surprise, with the aid of her Council(hench)man Mel Rapozo and his refuse-to-recuse sidekick Kipukai Kuali`i, her council nemesis Tim Bynum and his second JoAnn Yukimura once again failed to get any "answers" to the same kinds of questions all the other department heads had to answer in order to receive their yearly budget appropriation.
Lesser Iseri sycophants Council Chair Jay Furfaro, and Councilmembers Dickie Chang and Nadine Nakamura managed to help shut things down out and keep the relevant allegations of crimes and misdemeanors from the public's ears and eyes, running out the clock without any repercussion to the budget... and of course the local newspaper has been too busy promoting flower shows, defunct food banks and poisonous GMO corn to notice the P.O.H.A.K.U. mess.
But while the council busied itself exploring new corners and crevices on the other side of the looking glass, it might well have been County Attorney Al Castillo who stole the show.
This week's prize for "Most Convoluted Abuse of the Law" goes once again to the program "Legal Opinions From Al's Ass," the show that asks the statutory question "did he really just say that?"
This time Castillo actually told Yukimura that the council can't appropriate "line items" in the budget- specific amounts designated for specific uses like a salary for a certain position or a piece of equipment or furniture.
Despite the fact that that's what a line-item budget does by definition, Castillo told the assembled that to restrict department heads as to what the money can be used for would be violate "the separation of powers" and be "interfering with the administration."
After a few "let me get this straight" questions, Yukimura simply gave up, flabbergasted by the notion that a department head like Iseri can now take all money appropriated for her department and spend it on anything her black little heart desires.
Finally things got as curiouser as they could get when Nakamura revealed that, according to the finance director, the P.O.H.A.K.U. was either "pau" or "suspended". But attempted verification of that information apparently depended on how many times one asked the question, so the council spent the next half hour asking over and over until Iseri herself got up and told them it wasn't really pau or suspended but rather being run internally in her office.
By that point everyone was thoroughly confused and befuddled, but it didn't really matter because that was when Furfaro ruled the clock had officially run out, apparently because the only part of the day that matters to Furfaro was beckoning: lunch.
The next move in this monkey chess game will be played at this coming Wednesday's council meeting when, the council will consider the following agenda item:
C 2012-170 Communication (05/17/2012) from Councilmember Yukimura, requesting Council approval of her request that the Board of Ethics conduct an investigation of whether violations of the Code of Ethics have occurred in connection with the creation and operation of the POHAKU Program and related matters.
In addition, the matter is listed for an executive session.
And speaking of wasting time, get ready to once again to vote on a charter amendment that would give these clods four-year terms.
The claim by councilmembers is that "we can't get anything done in two years." But the message from the voters has been "we're not sure we want you to 'get anything done.' If there was a way to give you two month terms, we'd probably go for that."
It's not like Kaua`i voters haven’t said "no freakin' way" way too many times to keep track of over the past few decades. Yet the council is once again apparently going to ask the electorate to approve doubling the time between elections. The last time we said "no" was in 2006 when we also passed "term limits" of eight years.
If you get a chance watch the "debate," do so with an eye toward the unmitigated arrogance and sense of entitlement.
The assumption that these office are theirs once they are elected is palpable. Talk of "slots opening up" when the "eight-years are up" is bandied about with no sense of the fact that they have to run for re-election every two years.
The voters will no doubt reject four-year terms once again and the council will no doubt try again in a few years. If anything, we'd probably pass a charter amendment to prohibit the council from asking us more than once every 20 years.
But if you're looking for the obvious source of the sewage spill it might be the latest "big flush" of $120,000 into the Kaua`i Marathon. Every year it's been the same thing- for no apparent reason the taxpayers have been forced to shovel wads of cash into the event with promises that "this will be the last year." Only it hasn't been and apparently never will be since this year's appropriation seems to be circling the drain with little opposition from council members.
That money could go a long way if it were to be spread wisely among the charitable non-profits that serve the island's neediest. But instead it's shunted directly into the coffers of hotel owners, airlines and other off-island entities, soon to be converted into campaign contributions. Supposedly a few dollars will trickle-down to local businesses and service industry employees, but no one is really quite sure how that works, and council members didn't seem interested in asking any questions so they weren't told too many lies.
It is an election year after all. It can only get worse.
People all over town were asking "do you smell that?" on Tuesday and it didn't take an olfactorally-advanced detective to discover the source as being the Kaua`i County Council Chambers.
That was when our seven stilted servants once again turned to the budget for what, from all indications, appears to be the biggest criminal enterprise on Kaua`i these days- the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA). Those who have been under a pohaku might want to read up on OPA Godmother Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho and her P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
And another great must-read, blow-by-blow account of Tuesday's session is available via Joan Conrow for anyone who doesn't have the time to watch the debacle... although the latter is well worth the investment of an hour (start about an hour in) if just for the comedic value.
No one expected much in the way of discussion regarding evil mastermind Iseri's all-purpose now-you-see-it-now-you-don't combination misdemeanor diversion program/reelection campaign tool. She's been busy lawyering up and taking the fifth so to no one's surprise, with the aid of her Council(hench)man Mel Rapozo and his refuse-to-recuse sidekick Kipukai Kuali`i, her council nemesis Tim Bynum and his second JoAnn Yukimura once again failed to get any "answers" to the same kinds of questions all the other department heads had to answer in order to receive their yearly budget appropriation.
Lesser Iseri sycophants Council Chair Jay Furfaro, and Councilmembers Dickie Chang and Nadine Nakamura managed to help shut things down out and keep the relevant allegations of crimes and misdemeanors from the public's ears and eyes, running out the clock without any repercussion to the budget... and of course the local newspaper has been too busy promoting flower shows, defunct food banks and poisonous GMO corn to notice the P.O.H.A.K.U. mess.
But while the council busied itself exploring new corners and crevices on the other side of the looking glass, it might well have been County Attorney Al Castillo who stole the show.
This week's prize for "Most Convoluted Abuse of the Law" goes once again to the program "Legal Opinions From Al's Ass," the show that asks the statutory question "did he really just say that?"
This time Castillo actually told Yukimura that the council can't appropriate "line items" in the budget- specific amounts designated for specific uses like a salary for a certain position or a piece of equipment or furniture.
Despite the fact that that's what a line-item budget does by definition, Castillo told the assembled that to restrict department heads as to what the money can be used for would be violate "the separation of powers" and be "interfering with the administration."
After a few "let me get this straight" questions, Yukimura simply gave up, flabbergasted by the notion that a department head like Iseri can now take all money appropriated for her department and spend it on anything her black little heart desires.
Finally things got as curiouser as they could get when Nakamura revealed that, according to the finance director, the P.O.H.A.K.U. was either "pau" or "suspended". But attempted verification of that information apparently depended on how many times one asked the question, so the council spent the next half hour asking over and over until Iseri herself got up and told them it wasn't really pau or suspended but rather being run internally in her office.
By that point everyone was thoroughly confused and befuddled, but it didn't really matter because that was when Furfaro ruled the clock had officially run out, apparently because the only part of the day that matters to Furfaro was beckoning: lunch.
The next move in this monkey chess game will be played at this coming Wednesday's council meeting when, the council will consider the following agenda item:
C 2012-170 Communication (05/17/2012) from Councilmember Yukimura, requesting Council approval of her request that the Board of Ethics conduct an investigation of whether violations of the Code of Ethics have occurred in connection with the creation and operation of the POHAKU Program and related matters.
In addition, the matter is listed for an executive session.
And speaking of wasting time, get ready to once again to vote on a charter amendment that would give these clods four-year terms.
The claim by councilmembers is that "we can't get anything done in two years." But the message from the voters has been "we're not sure we want you to 'get anything done.' If there was a way to give you two month terms, we'd probably go for that."
It's not like Kaua`i voters haven’t said "no freakin' way" way too many times to keep track of over the past few decades. Yet the council is once again apparently going to ask the electorate to approve doubling the time between elections. The last time we said "no" was in 2006 when we also passed "term limits" of eight years.
If you get a chance watch the "debate," do so with an eye toward the unmitigated arrogance and sense of entitlement.
The assumption that these office are theirs once they are elected is palpable. Talk of "slots opening up" when the "eight-years are up" is bandied about with no sense of the fact that they have to run for re-election every two years.
The voters will no doubt reject four-year terms once again and the council will no doubt try again in a few years. If anything, we'd probably pass a charter amendment to prohibit the council from asking us more than once every 20 years.
But if you're looking for the obvious source of the sewage spill it might be the latest "big flush" of $120,000 into the Kaua`i Marathon. Every year it's been the same thing- for no apparent reason the taxpayers have been forced to shovel wads of cash into the event with promises that "this will be the last year." Only it hasn't been and apparently never will be since this year's appropriation seems to be circling the drain with little opposition from council members.
That money could go a long way if it were to be spread wisely among the charitable non-profits that serve the island's neediest. But instead it's shunted directly into the coffers of hotel owners, airlines and other off-island entities, soon to be converted into campaign contributions. Supposedly a few dollars will trickle-down to local businesses and service industry employees, but no one is really quite sure how that works, and council members didn't seem interested in asking any questions so they weren't told too many lies.
It is an election year after all. It can only get worse.
Saturday, April 21, 2012
P.O.H.A.K.U.: ROCKIN' IN THE SHAY WORLD; A PNN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
P.O.H.A.K.U.: ROCKIN' IN THE SHAY WORLD;
WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL WANTS ANSWERED ON PROSECUTOR'S SIGNATURE DIVERSION PROGRAM?
A PNN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
(PNN) -- Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's much ballyhooed P.O.H.A.K.U. program to "divert" minor offenders from jail has blown-up recently as two councilmembers have tried to ask questions about the program while the rest have blocked those queries, even refusing to hold closed door discussions of the program.
A PNN investigation has uncovered what some of those questions may be and found both process and monetary improprieties associated with the program as well as false claims on the part of Iseri and conflicts of interest within the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
For those who have not followed the council machinations lately, for weeks now Iseri, her First Deputy Jake Delaplane and her chief ally on the council Mel Rapozo have thwarted Councilmembers JoAnn Yukimura and Tim Bynum from even discussing the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, with the latest dust-up occurring at Friday's budget session for the OPA.
The council has twice defeated requests for an executive session with County Attorney Al Castillo, and when Council Chair Jay Furfaro was at a doctor's appointment Friday morning, Rapozo acted as chair and banned all discussion of P.O.H.A.K.U.
That enraged Bynum and Yukimura with Yukimura forced to withhold a power point presentation she had prepared to expose some of the alleged wrongdoing in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
But Rapozo banned discussion despite its direct relevance to the the agenda item: the OPA's budget, because, he claimed, County Attorney Al Castillo had banned the discussion- something Castillo later denied.
For those who want a blow-by-blow of the multi-level, multi-player chess game of the past month or so, including Friday's budget session, we recommend reading Joan Conrow's Kaua`i Eclectic coverage here, here and here
The overriding question no one has answered is why? What is Iseri so apparently trying to hide? No one can honestly watch the meetings without asking themselves that question. Why are she and Delaplane "running out the clock" with repetitive power point presentations and long winded answers to questions no one asked every time they are subjected to council questioning?
So what are Yukimura and Bynum trying to question her about?
The key to answering that is apparently a company that, despite Iseri's claim that the program is fully of her design and implementation, is apparently the entity that is responsible for the nuts and bolts of the P.O.H.A.K.U. program... a company called Strategic Justice Partners (SJP) LLC of Nevada.
Politically, P.O.H.A.K.U., which has been implemented for a few years now, has been a key to Iseri's campaign for re-election and she has promoted it recently in two articles in the local newspaper touting community meetings and the program's alleged successes. Iseri's official P.O.H.A.K.U. website calls it "a new innovative diversion program that was designed by the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) as an alternative to the traditional court process."
But although SJP has never publicly been mentioned by Iseri or her department's personnel, a look at the bottom of the P.O.H.A.K.U. web site says "Content copyright 2011-2012. Strategic Justice Partners. All rights reserved."
And a visit to the SJP web site reveals where the program really came from. The very first thing you see there on the right side is the statement that:
Strategic Justice Partners is a leader in Alternative Sentencing, Diversion and Early Release Programs.
"Our Diversion programs have a 94% completion rate with over 96% of participants rating their experience as "good" or "outstanding".
And under the "What We Do" button it describes a service that sound exactly like the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, saying they provide:
Diversion Programs
Diversion Programs result in lower recidivism than “Stand in line-Pay a fine” justice while dramatically reducing the burden and costs on Prosecutors and Courts. http://www.strategicjusticepartners.com/What_We_Do.html
And the main program exemplary of their work? At the top of the left had side of the home page of the site is a color photo of a smiling, lei-bedecked Iseri alongside a photo of a Kaua`i-style poi pounder (the symbol of P.O.H.A.K.U.) under the title "Kaua'i County Hawai`i; P.O.H.A.K.U. Program." and a blurb that says "We are pleased to introduce P.O.H.A.K.U., an innovative alternative to the traditional court Process."
It doesn't really say who "we" is but the context demands one interpret it as being SJP especially because it's their web site.
Iseri has recently been holding a series of meetings- meetings dutifully reported upon by the local newspaper- apparently as a part of, or at least in conjunction with, her campaign for re-election in the fall. One example of how she has used P.O.H.A.K.U. for political haymaking at every turn is the wording of a communication to the county council for a special council meeting on April 11.
At the time Iseri was asking the "Council approval to apply for and receive Technical Assistance from the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Vera Institute of Justice's national Cost-Benefit Knowledge Bank for Criminal Justice," although it has since been withdrawn at Iseri's request, apparently because that would have opened the door to questioning about P.O.H.A.K.U.
What would make us say that might be the reason? Well, Iseri had already applied for the "technical assistance" before the item was to have been approved by the council. Not only that but she withdrew the request after all the other delay requests on her part had failed... and she did so in a late night email to the chair, sent the night before the meeting where P.O.H.A.K.U. was to have been discussed.
But it's the rest of the communication that had many laughing at the unique wording that was anything but the usual kind of straightforward "communications for approval." It went on to say that the assistance "will allow the OPA to find innovative programs and develop procedures to ensure that the community is served in the most cost efficient manner and in the best way possible."
Some may say "so what?- it's politics... nothing wrong with that... they all do it." But we bring this up not just to point to the use of the program as a political tool for Iseri but to point out what exactly amounts to wrongdoing here.
It's not clear what precisely SJP's full role is. But what is true is that the association between the OPA and SJP has never come before the council nor has there even been any type of official "procurement process" for SJP's services, as provided by law.
Any "grant" to any department or for that matter any donation of anything, including information or assistance must, by law, come before the county council for approval. It's usually in an official communication for approval to "apply for, accept and indemnify" as the agenda item would normally read. But the words "Strategic Justice Partners" have never been mentioned in even verbal form to the council much less written.
That would be for a grant or donation type of thing. What if the OPA is involved financially with SJP? The fact is that there has never been any official procurement of services from SJP. Nor of course has there ever been a type of contract or "memorandum of agreement" (MOA) which would also have to have been approved by the council.
Finally there have never been any HRS Chapter 91 Administrative Rules promulgated, which according to state law are required to establish procedures for how, say, the OPA would engage with SJP in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
But all that is just procedural. Here's what happens if you, as they say, "follow the money."
Because SJP is a Nevada corporation if it wants to do business in Hawai`i it must file with the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA) and have an "agent" in Hawai`i.
The DCCA filing shows SJP to be a for-profit corporation and the agent in Hawai`i is none other than Iseri's second-in-command, Delaplane.
The filing is simply the initial corporate document and apparently no 2012 report has been submitted. There is nothing to indicate whether Delaplane is being paid for being the sole representative of SJP in Hawai`i. But the fact that he is both their agent and part of the team that is contracting with SJP- the OPA- makes for a blatant conflict of interest.
So who gets what money and where does it come from?
The upcoming OPA's budget for 2013 shows a request for around $20,000 for four different diversion programs although there is no breakdown of how much of that would go to P.O.H.A.K.U. That is one reason why Yukimura and Bynum were asking questions- or want to ask them- in the first place; to find out how much is for each program and in fact what the county funding mechanism(s) for P.O.H.A.K.U. actually are/is. It also "opens the door" so to speak, to discuss the program.
But PNN did learn of one funding source that isn't listed anywhere and certainly has not been communicated to the council.
At Iseri's P.O.H.A.K.U. website those in the program can go to the "Register for Class" page. Under "P.O.H.A.K.U. Class Registration" it says:
You may schedule your P.O.H.A.K.U. class date below.
You must pay your program fees prior to registering.
You may REGISTER with a credit or debit card below or visit any Bank of Hawaii Branch with the deposit slip you were given (emphasis added).
And, PNN has learned, that the "deposit slip" is filled out to deposit $200 to an account bearing the name of, not the County of Kaua`i as one would expect for a program designed and run by Iseri but rather, Strategic Justice Partners.
According to testimony by Delaplane on Friday before the council 49 people have completed the program and so what is clear is that at least that many have paid SJP $200 each for a total of almost $10,000.
What is not clear however is whether the money is refunded if the person doesn't complete the diversion program. The question of how many people failed has, of course, not been discussed because nothing about POHAKU has been able to be discussed, even though both Delaplane and Iseri were permitted to tout it Friday during their "power point" presentation to the council on the budget.
Even- or maybe especially- if the OPA never sees or touches a nickel, improprieties abound with this setup. As we said, P.O.H.A.K.U. itself has never even been approved by the council. Plus, there has never been a procurement of services for SJP nor has there been any MOA, both of which would have to come before the council for approval.
Oh- and one more thing.
The only person listed as a "member" of SJP is one Kirk Barrus. That means he is the sole owner of SJP. Yet a search of SJP's web site does not readily yield Barrus' name- or any other associated with the company.
So who is Barrus? What is his background?
According to David Lazarus' "Consumer Confidential" in the February 20, 2008, Los Angeles Times, Kirk Barrus was the Senior Vice President and spokesperson for a company called American Corrective Counseling Services (ACCS).
In an article in which Lazarus discusses Bush-era court rulings providing full immunity to companies doing business with the government he cites the example of "AT&T and Verizon immunity for their roles in any past and future eavesdropping on the American people."
But ACCS was not granted immunity in the case at hand and Lazarus writes that:
when it comes to public-private canoodling, the most egregious case I've seen recently involved a San Clemente company, American Corrective Counseling Services, that worked with public prosecutors to go after people who bounced checks.
He describes the scam this way:
In contacting consumers, ACCS represented itself as actually being the district attorney's office, even though the cases involved may not have been vetted in advance by an actual prosecutor.
In return for its efforts, ACCS typically would be entitled to a $100 fee and as much as 60% of any fines paid...
Lois Artz, a 72-year-old resident of the Northern California city of Petaluma, received what looked like a very serious letter from the Sonoma County district attorney's office in November 2005.
"The Sonoma County District Attorney's Office has received a CRIME REPORT alleging you have violated Penal Code 476(a) of the California State Statute: Issuing a Worthless Check," the letter warned.
"A conviction under this statute is punishable by up to one (1) year in county jail, or in a state prison, and up to $1,000 in fines," it said.
The letter advised Artz, a former Bank of America branch manager, to enroll in a "bad check restitution program" and to pay $196.62 in fines.
"When I saw that letter, I almost fainted," she told me. "I was beside myself."
Her crime, Artz said, was writing a check for a $26.62 carton of smokes and not having sufficient funds in her bank account to cover it. Artz said she'd been distracted caring for her daughter, who has breast cancer, but she knows that's no excuse.
What troubled her was that her case seemingly was elevated with alarming speed to the level of criminal prosecution without anyone trying to work things out with her.
"I was humiliated and terrified," Artz said. "I felt like any time I turned around, there would be somebody there telling me to come with them."
According to court documents, ACCS went after more than 100,000 Californians in 2001, the latest year for which data are available. And most if not all those people believed they'd been contacted by a government agency, not a private company.
In speaking for ACCS, Barrus
denied that the company acts independently when it chases down suspected check scofflaws.
"We operate under the total control of the district attorney," he said. "We're basically a secretarial service, and therefore should carry the district attorney's immunity.
"They're not letters from a private company," Barrus insisted. "They're letters from a district attorney."
There is another article in The Press Democrat describing the situation in more detail
The fact that the council has questions for Iseri about P.O.H.A.K.U. shouldn't surprise anybody.
We'd certainly like to know a few things.
Did SJP receive other funds such as ACCS did in collecting "as much as 60% of any fines paid" in the California case? Did the OPA either receive or expend any funding directly or indirectly to or from SJP? What exactly is Delaplane's role? What does he do as "agent?" Is he a paid agent? If so, how much? If so, what if anything is Iseri's cut? Doesn't Delaplane or Iseri see an inherent conflict in a operation where someone- so far apparently SJP- is receiving at least $10,000? Why is Iseri so transparently covering up her and the OPA's association with SJP? Is it simply to take credit for a program she didn't really design and implement or is there more?.. perhaps a financial association?
We haven't been able to uncover all the facts or follow all the money. But we sure hope that Rapozo- along with Councilmembers Kipukai Kuali`i, Dickie Chang, and Chair Jay Furfaro- stop blocking at least an executive session but preferably have a full public airing of the issues involved.
Oh by the way- Kuali`i refused to recuse himself from discussions of the OPA's budget despite the fact that the Erin Wilson Victim Witness position cut by Iseri- which is the subject of a complaint by Wilson as we discussed in January - was contracted out to the YWCA where Kuali`i works.
The next thing scheduled for the matter is an executive session set to take place April 30.
WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL WANTS ANSWERED ON PROSECUTOR'S SIGNATURE DIVERSION PROGRAM?
A PNN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
(PNN) -- Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's much ballyhooed P.O.H.A.K.U. program to "divert" minor offenders from jail has blown-up recently as two councilmembers have tried to ask questions about the program while the rest have blocked those queries, even refusing to hold closed door discussions of the program.
A PNN investigation has uncovered what some of those questions may be and found both process and monetary improprieties associated with the program as well as false claims on the part of Iseri and conflicts of interest within the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
For those who have not followed the council machinations lately, for weeks now Iseri, her First Deputy Jake Delaplane and her chief ally on the council Mel Rapozo have thwarted Councilmembers JoAnn Yukimura and Tim Bynum from even discussing the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, with the latest dust-up occurring at Friday's budget session for the OPA.
The council has twice defeated requests for an executive session with County Attorney Al Castillo, and when Council Chair Jay Furfaro was at a doctor's appointment Friday morning, Rapozo acted as chair and banned all discussion of P.O.H.A.K.U.
That enraged Bynum and Yukimura with Yukimura forced to withhold a power point presentation she had prepared to expose some of the alleged wrongdoing in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
But Rapozo banned discussion despite its direct relevance to the the agenda item: the OPA's budget, because, he claimed, County Attorney Al Castillo had banned the discussion- something Castillo later denied.
For those who want a blow-by-blow of the multi-level, multi-player chess game of the past month or so, including Friday's budget session, we recommend reading Joan Conrow's Kaua`i Eclectic coverage here, here and here
The overriding question no one has answered is why? What is Iseri so apparently trying to hide? No one can honestly watch the meetings without asking themselves that question. Why are she and Delaplane "running out the clock" with repetitive power point presentations and long winded answers to questions no one asked every time they are subjected to council questioning?
So what are Yukimura and Bynum trying to question her about?
The key to answering that is apparently a company that, despite Iseri's claim that the program is fully of her design and implementation, is apparently the entity that is responsible for the nuts and bolts of the P.O.H.A.K.U. program... a company called Strategic Justice Partners (SJP) LLC of Nevada.
Politically, P.O.H.A.K.U., which has been implemented for a few years now, has been a key to Iseri's campaign for re-election and she has promoted it recently in two articles in the local newspaper touting community meetings and the program's alleged successes. Iseri's official P.O.H.A.K.U. website calls it "a new innovative diversion program that was designed by the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) as an alternative to the traditional court process."
But although SJP has never publicly been mentioned by Iseri or her department's personnel, a look at the bottom of the P.O.H.A.K.U. web site says "Content copyright 2011-2012. Strategic Justice Partners. All rights reserved."
And a visit to the SJP web site reveals where the program really came from. The very first thing you see there on the right side is the statement that:
Strategic Justice Partners is a leader in Alternative Sentencing, Diversion and Early Release Programs.
"Our Diversion programs have a 94% completion rate with over 96% of participants rating their experience as "good" or "outstanding".
And under the "What We Do" button it describes a service that sound exactly like the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, saying they provide:
Diversion Programs
Diversion Programs result in lower recidivism than “Stand in line-Pay a fine” justice while dramatically reducing the burden and costs on Prosecutors and Courts. http://www.strategicjusticepartners.com/What_We_Do.html
And the main program exemplary of their work? At the top of the left had side of the home page of the site is a color photo of a smiling, lei-bedecked Iseri alongside a photo of a Kaua`i-style poi pounder (the symbol of P.O.H.A.K.U.) under the title "Kaua'i County Hawai`i; P.O.H.A.K.U. Program." and a blurb that says "We are pleased to introduce P.O.H.A.K.U., an innovative alternative to the traditional court Process."
It doesn't really say who "we" is but the context demands one interpret it as being SJP especially because it's their web site.
Iseri has recently been holding a series of meetings- meetings dutifully reported upon by the local newspaper- apparently as a part of, or at least in conjunction with, her campaign for re-election in the fall. One example of how she has used P.O.H.A.K.U. for political haymaking at every turn is the wording of a communication to the county council for a special council meeting on April 11.
At the time Iseri was asking the "Council approval to apply for and receive Technical Assistance from the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Vera Institute of Justice's national Cost-Benefit Knowledge Bank for Criminal Justice," although it has since been withdrawn at Iseri's request, apparently because that would have opened the door to questioning about P.O.H.A.K.U.
What would make us say that might be the reason? Well, Iseri had already applied for the "technical assistance" before the item was to have been approved by the council. Not only that but she withdrew the request after all the other delay requests on her part had failed... and she did so in a late night email to the chair, sent the night before the meeting where P.O.H.A.K.U. was to have been discussed.
But it's the rest of the communication that had many laughing at the unique wording that was anything but the usual kind of straightforward "communications for approval." It went on to say that the assistance "will allow the OPA to find innovative programs and develop procedures to ensure that the community is served in the most cost efficient manner and in the best way possible."
Some may say "so what?- it's politics... nothing wrong with that... they all do it." But we bring this up not just to point to the use of the program as a political tool for Iseri but to point out what exactly amounts to wrongdoing here.
It's not clear what precisely SJP's full role is. But what is true is that the association between the OPA and SJP has never come before the council nor has there even been any type of official "procurement process" for SJP's services, as provided by law.
Any "grant" to any department or for that matter any donation of anything, including information or assistance must, by law, come before the county council for approval. It's usually in an official communication for approval to "apply for, accept and indemnify" as the agenda item would normally read. But the words "Strategic Justice Partners" have never been mentioned in even verbal form to the council much less written.
That would be for a grant or donation type of thing. What if the OPA is involved financially with SJP? The fact is that there has never been any official procurement of services from SJP. Nor of course has there ever been a type of contract or "memorandum of agreement" (MOA) which would also have to have been approved by the council.
Finally there have never been any HRS Chapter 91 Administrative Rules promulgated, which according to state law are required to establish procedures for how, say, the OPA would engage with SJP in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.
But all that is just procedural. Here's what happens if you, as they say, "follow the money."
Because SJP is a Nevada corporation if it wants to do business in Hawai`i it must file with the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA) and have an "agent" in Hawai`i.
The DCCA filing shows SJP to be a for-profit corporation and the agent in Hawai`i is none other than Iseri's second-in-command, Delaplane.
The filing is simply the initial corporate document and apparently no 2012 report has been submitted. There is nothing to indicate whether Delaplane is being paid for being the sole representative of SJP in Hawai`i. But the fact that he is both their agent and part of the team that is contracting with SJP- the OPA- makes for a blatant conflict of interest.
So who gets what money and where does it come from?
The upcoming OPA's budget for 2013 shows a request for around $20,000 for four different diversion programs although there is no breakdown of how much of that would go to P.O.H.A.K.U. That is one reason why Yukimura and Bynum were asking questions- or want to ask them- in the first place; to find out how much is for each program and in fact what the county funding mechanism(s) for P.O.H.A.K.U. actually are/is. It also "opens the door" so to speak, to discuss the program.
But PNN did learn of one funding source that isn't listed anywhere and certainly has not been communicated to the council.
At Iseri's P.O.H.A.K.U. website those in the program can go to the "Register for Class" page. Under "P.O.H.A.K.U. Class Registration" it says:
You may schedule your P.O.H.A.K.U. class date below.
You must pay your program fees prior to registering.
You may REGISTER with a credit or debit card below or visit any Bank of Hawaii Branch with the deposit slip you were given (emphasis added).
And, PNN has learned, that the "deposit slip" is filled out to deposit $200 to an account bearing the name of, not the County of Kaua`i as one would expect for a program designed and run by Iseri but rather, Strategic Justice Partners.
According to testimony by Delaplane on Friday before the council 49 people have completed the program and so what is clear is that at least that many have paid SJP $200 each for a total of almost $10,000.
What is not clear however is whether the money is refunded if the person doesn't complete the diversion program. The question of how many people failed has, of course, not been discussed because nothing about POHAKU has been able to be discussed, even though both Delaplane and Iseri were permitted to tout it Friday during their "power point" presentation to the council on the budget.
Even- or maybe especially- if the OPA never sees or touches a nickel, improprieties abound with this setup. As we said, P.O.H.A.K.U. itself has never even been approved by the council. Plus, there has never been a procurement of services for SJP nor has there been any MOA, both of which would have to come before the council for approval.
Oh- and one more thing.
The only person listed as a "member" of SJP is one Kirk Barrus. That means he is the sole owner of SJP. Yet a search of SJP's web site does not readily yield Barrus' name- or any other associated with the company.
So who is Barrus? What is his background?
According to David Lazarus' "Consumer Confidential" in the February 20, 2008, Los Angeles Times, Kirk Barrus was the Senior Vice President and spokesperson for a company called American Corrective Counseling Services (ACCS).
In an article in which Lazarus discusses Bush-era court rulings providing full immunity to companies doing business with the government he cites the example of "AT&T and Verizon immunity for their roles in any past and future eavesdropping on the American people."
But ACCS was not granted immunity in the case at hand and Lazarus writes that:
when it comes to public-private canoodling, the most egregious case I've seen recently involved a San Clemente company, American Corrective Counseling Services, that worked with public prosecutors to go after people who bounced checks.
He describes the scam this way:
In contacting consumers, ACCS represented itself as actually being the district attorney's office, even though the cases involved may not have been vetted in advance by an actual prosecutor.
In return for its efforts, ACCS typically would be entitled to a $100 fee and as much as 60% of any fines paid...
Lois Artz, a 72-year-old resident of the Northern California city of Petaluma, received what looked like a very serious letter from the Sonoma County district attorney's office in November 2005.
"The Sonoma County District Attorney's Office has received a CRIME REPORT alleging you have violated Penal Code 476(a) of the California State Statute: Issuing a Worthless Check," the letter warned.
"A conviction under this statute is punishable by up to one (1) year in county jail, or in a state prison, and up to $1,000 in fines," it said.
The letter advised Artz, a former Bank of America branch manager, to enroll in a "bad check restitution program" and to pay $196.62 in fines.
"When I saw that letter, I almost fainted," she told me. "I was beside myself."
Her crime, Artz said, was writing a check for a $26.62 carton of smokes and not having sufficient funds in her bank account to cover it. Artz said she'd been distracted caring for her daughter, who has breast cancer, but she knows that's no excuse.
What troubled her was that her case seemingly was elevated with alarming speed to the level of criminal prosecution without anyone trying to work things out with her.
"I was humiliated and terrified," Artz said. "I felt like any time I turned around, there would be somebody there telling me to come with them."
According to court documents, ACCS went after more than 100,000 Californians in 2001, the latest year for which data are available. And most if not all those people believed they'd been contacted by a government agency, not a private company.
In speaking for ACCS, Barrus
denied that the company acts independently when it chases down suspected check scofflaws.
"We operate under the total control of the district attorney," he said. "We're basically a secretarial service, and therefore should carry the district attorney's immunity.
"They're not letters from a private company," Barrus insisted. "They're letters from a district attorney."
There is another article in The Press Democrat describing the situation in more detail
The fact that the council has questions for Iseri about P.O.H.A.K.U. shouldn't surprise anybody.
We'd certainly like to know a few things.
Did SJP receive other funds such as ACCS did in collecting "as much as 60% of any fines paid" in the California case? Did the OPA either receive or expend any funding directly or indirectly to or from SJP? What exactly is Delaplane's role? What does he do as "agent?" Is he a paid agent? If so, how much? If so, what if anything is Iseri's cut? Doesn't Delaplane or Iseri see an inherent conflict in a operation where someone- so far apparently SJP- is receiving at least $10,000? Why is Iseri so transparently covering up her and the OPA's association with SJP? Is it simply to take credit for a program she didn't really design and implement or is there more?.. perhaps a financial association?
We haven't been able to uncover all the facts or follow all the money. But we sure hope that Rapozo- along with Councilmembers Kipukai Kuali`i, Dickie Chang, and Chair Jay Furfaro- stop blocking at least an executive session but preferably have a full public airing of the issues involved.
Oh by the way- Kuali`i refused to recuse himself from discussions of the OPA's budget despite the fact that the Erin Wilson Victim Witness position cut by Iseri- which is the subject of a complaint by Wilson as we discussed in January - was contracted out to the YWCA where Kuali`i works.
The next thing scheduled for the matter is an executive session set to take place April 30.
Thursday, January 26, 2012
POLITICAL THEATER ON RYE... WITH MUSTARD PLEASE
POLITICAL THEATER ON RYE... WITH MUSTARD PLEASE: What with all the fun and games of the Iseri-Bynum circus of the absurd, the status and functionality of the Victim-Witness Program (VWP), the meat of the recent political sandwich, hasn't really received much press.
As we reported two weeks ago (January 12) according to a scathing letter to the Kaua`i County Council by Erin Wilson, a terminated Victim-Witness Counselor at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA, the program is now dysfunctional due to the requirement that all communications with outside agencies and the world in general be channeled through Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, the lack of communications between those performing VWP services and many other issues such as the 17 new faces at the OPA since Iseri came into office.
According to the agenda for last Thursday's council meeting, Council Vice Chair JoAnn Yukimura asked Iseri to come before the council to discuss "the status of the Victim-Witness Program and OPA." And when Councilmember Tim Bynum recused himself due to Iseri's prosecution of him for alleged zoning violations at his home- as we detailed yesterday- Yukimura took over the questioning that, according to Bynum, had been suspended in 2009 when then Chair Kaipo Asing stopped it.
But not before Iseri, trying to direct the show, dragged up her whole department to blow smoke up everyone's butts after demanding that Wilson be questioned, spurring Chair Jay Furfaro to remind her that he was the one running the show.
Instead Yukimura asked for current VWP employee Dianne Gauspohl-White to come up to tesfy. She pretty much backed up most of Wilson's complaints although saying she could only speak from her perspective.
At first Yukimura's questioning elicited mostly red-faced rage, bluster and misdirection on Iseri's part, complaining how she and her staff had to take valuable time to present information they had supposedly already presented.
But after Iseri's right hand man First Deputy Prosecutor Jake DelaPlane- who continually throughout the session pulled her butt out of the sling she had created through her own belligerence- did a PowerPoint presentation with lots of numbers and statistics but almost nothing on the VWP, the questioning of Iseri by Yukimura began, mostly based on Wilson's allegations.
Things were going along swimmingly (not) with Iseri parrying Yukimura's questions with non-responsive "answers" and continual reminders that she had already presented the requested material, when Yukimura finally asked the right questions and hit a jackpot of an answer.
"The Victim Witness Program no longer exists" Iseri told a stunned council.
Seems that Iseri has instituted a program called "vertical prosecution." Formerly deputy prosecutors were assigned to individual courts, not to individual cases. That meant that many times an attorney got the case for the first time when he showed up to court after a case had, for example, been moved from district to circuit court or from the court of one judge to another.
"Vertical prosecution" (VP) is a system where each case is assigned to one attorney who takes it from beginning to end, usually sorted by subject matter- drugs, violent crime, domestic, white collar crime etc.- supposedly creating attorneys with expertise in a certain area.
It actually sounds like a good and long overdue practice.
Under VP each individual attorney has a "team" assigned to him or her- a law clerk, and now, a Victim-Witness (VW) counselor.
And in Iseri's office that apparently has come to mean that there's no cross communication anymore between the various VW employees.
According to White and Wilson, VW employees are now tasked by the attorney who almost exclusively assigns them tasks like calling specific victims and witnesses to let them know about court dates, changes in case status and those kinds of things.
Apparently the actual "counseling" part has fallen through the cracks and not only that but the only victims and witnesses contacted by the counselors are those the attorney on the team tells them to call- and then only to communicate matters regarding the case status.
It used to be that VW employees met every month, traveled to conferences and did a lot of evaluation of whether and how services were being delivered to VWs. But that is a thing of the past with VP where counselors are now "team members" whose actions are dictated by either the attorneys in charge of the team or Iseri herself.
Whereas vertical integration is growing in popularity in the offices of prosecutors and district attorneys across the country- and, according to Councilmember and Iseri ally Mel Rapozo, is by far the most popular management scheme- robust victim witness counseling can wind up being be sacrificed.
Especially if a megalomaniacal, puerile, petty, vindictive, ego-driven prosecutor is the one running the show.
The rest of Yukimura's questioning revealed that, despite requests from the council that statistics and information be presented in an intelligible manner and one that addresses questions the council has- like how all the monies from the various VW programs from the county state and federal governments are actually spent- they are embedded in spread sheets and long narratives where there's little or no possibility of extracting the pertinent information.
It all ended up with DelaPlane- who had taken over much of the question-answering after Iseri's patented self-righteous, rage-filled and spittle-spewing attacks on the questions and questioner became self-defeating- promising to put the statistics in meaningful formats for the new budget... and, importantly, to provide the evaluation forms that victims and witnesses have filled out for those entities providing the grants, which had never been provided to the council previous to the request.
We can expect a repeat performance during the budget hearings starting in March when the OPA presents its budget. But more importantly we just may get some of the issues aired during this year's election campaign where current Deputy County Attorney for the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD), Justin Kollar, is challenging Iseri for the Prosecutor's job.
Iseri won her first and only term as prosecutor in 2008 running unopposed, leaving her position on the county council after four years there.
Although the community has suffered in all this, personally we can't be too distressed with the Bynum matter, the victim witness program questions and other brewing debacles promise that this summer will be anything but a dull one in this space.
So thank you Shay- you're a columnist's dream. So much so that we're torn between supporting Justin for the sake of the community or you for being the gift that keeps on giving.
As we reported two weeks ago (January 12) according to a scathing letter to the Kaua`i County Council by Erin Wilson, a terminated Victim-Witness Counselor at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA, the program is now dysfunctional due to the requirement that all communications with outside agencies and the world in general be channeled through Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, the lack of communications between those performing VWP services and many other issues such as the 17 new faces at the OPA since Iseri came into office.
According to the agenda for last Thursday's council meeting, Council Vice Chair JoAnn Yukimura asked Iseri to come before the council to discuss "the status of the Victim-Witness Program and OPA." And when Councilmember Tim Bynum recused himself due to Iseri's prosecution of him for alleged zoning violations at his home- as we detailed yesterday- Yukimura took over the questioning that, according to Bynum, had been suspended in 2009 when then Chair Kaipo Asing stopped it.
But not before Iseri, trying to direct the show, dragged up her whole department to blow smoke up everyone's butts after demanding that Wilson be questioned, spurring Chair Jay Furfaro to remind her that he was the one running the show.
Instead Yukimura asked for current VWP employee Dianne Gauspohl-White to come up to tesfy. She pretty much backed up most of Wilson's complaints although saying she could only speak from her perspective.
At first Yukimura's questioning elicited mostly red-faced rage, bluster and misdirection on Iseri's part, complaining how she and her staff had to take valuable time to present information they had supposedly already presented.
But after Iseri's right hand man First Deputy Prosecutor Jake DelaPlane- who continually throughout the session pulled her butt out of the sling she had created through her own belligerence- did a PowerPoint presentation with lots of numbers and statistics but almost nothing on the VWP, the questioning of Iseri by Yukimura began, mostly based on Wilson's allegations.
Things were going along swimmingly (not) with Iseri parrying Yukimura's questions with non-responsive "answers" and continual reminders that she had already presented the requested material, when Yukimura finally asked the right questions and hit a jackpot of an answer.
"The Victim Witness Program no longer exists" Iseri told a stunned council.
Seems that Iseri has instituted a program called "vertical prosecution." Formerly deputy prosecutors were assigned to individual courts, not to individual cases. That meant that many times an attorney got the case for the first time when he showed up to court after a case had, for example, been moved from district to circuit court or from the court of one judge to another.
"Vertical prosecution" (VP) is a system where each case is assigned to one attorney who takes it from beginning to end, usually sorted by subject matter- drugs, violent crime, domestic, white collar crime etc.- supposedly creating attorneys with expertise in a certain area.
It actually sounds like a good and long overdue practice.
Under VP each individual attorney has a "team" assigned to him or her- a law clerk, and now, a Victim-Witness (VW) counselor.
And in Iseri's office that apparently has come to mean that there's no cross communication anymore between the various VW employees.
According to White and Wilson, VW employees are now tasked by the attorney who almost exclusively assigns them tasks like calling specific victims and witnesses to let them know about court dates, changes in case status and those kinds of things.
Apparently the actual "counseling" part has fallen through the cracks and not only that but the only victims and witnesses contacted by the counselors are those the attorney on the team tells them to call- and then only to communicate matters regarding the case status.
It used to be that VW employees met every month, traveled to conferences and did a lot of evaluation of whether and how services were being delivered to VWs. But that is a thing of the past with VP where counselors are now "team members" whose actions are dictated by either the attorneys in charge of the team or Iseri herself.
Whereas vertical integration is growing in popularity in the offices of prosecutors and district attorneys across the country- and, according to Councilmember and Iseri ally Mel Rapozo, is by far the most popular management scheme- robust victim witness counseling can wind up being be sacrificed.
Especially if a megalomaniacal, puerile, petty, vindictive, ego-driven prosecutor is the one running the show.
The rest of Yukimura's questioning revealed that, despite requests from the council that statistics and information be presented in an intelligible manner and one that addresses questions the council has- like how all the monies from the various VW programs from the county state and federal governments are actually spent- they are embedded in spread sheets and long narratives where there's little or no possibility of extracting the pertinent information.
It all ended up with DelaPlane- who had taken over much of the question-answering after Iseri's patented self-righteous, rage-filled and spittle-spewing attacks on the questions and questioner became self-defeating- promising to put the statistics in meaningful formats for the new budget... and, importantly, to provide the evaluation forms that victims and witnesses have filled out for those entities providing the grants, which had never been provided to the council previous to the request.
We can expect a repeat performance during the budget hearings starting in March when the OPA presents its budget. But more importantly we just may get some of the issues aired during this year's election campaign where current Deputy County Attorney for the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD), Justin Kollar, is challenging Iseri for the Prosecutor's job.
Iseri won her first and only term as prosecutor in 2008 running unopposed, leaving her position on the county council after four years there.
Although the community has suffered in all this, personally we can't be too distressed with the Bynum matter, the victim witness program questions and other brewing debacles promise that this summer will be anything but a dull one in this space.
So thank you Shay- you're a columnist's dream. So much so that we're torn between supporting Justin for the sake of the community or you for being the gift that keeps on giving.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
BUT WAS IT BASMATI OR LOCAL-KINE STICKY?
BUT WAS IT BASMATI OR LOCAL-KINE STICKY?: Only on Kauai could we have a scandal that revolves around whether having a rice-cooker in the wrong room constitutes a zoning violation.
That's because "Rice-cooker-gate" is a direct result of what happens when a dysfunctional planning department and an ego-maniacal prosecutor collude to "bring down" a councilmember.
The matter- into which we've been delving for the past year or so- has finally spilled over into the local newspaper with an article yesterday that scratched the surface of the prosecution of Councilmember Tim Bynum by Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, after the release of various documents and a back and forth between Iseri and Bynum on the matter.
Despite Iseri's denial of any ill-feeling between the two, the feud between her and Bynum goes back to their days together on the council when she and Councilmember Mel Rapozo were allies and sided with then-Chair Kaipo Asing in the infamous days when Bynum and Asing butted heads with all of them over Asing's paternalistic leadership of the council involving issues of process, staffing, introduction of measures and other issues.
Iseri was then elected prosecuting attorney in 2008.
According to a complaint form we've obtained dated 3/26/10 Bynum was alleged to have an "illegal dwelling multi family" unit at his home which is on agriculturally zoned land.
The problem is that, under "Complainer/Requester" the form notes "*wants to remain anonymous!" (the asterisk and exclamation marks are written on the form)
The complaint has two initializations, one for "inspector" and another for "assigned by" but who they actually are is not readily apparent. However what is known is that, according to Bynum's press release that followed an email from Iseri to current Council Chair Jay Furfaro sent just before last Wednesday's council meeting where Iseri appeared on a budgetary matter related to the Victim Witness program:
Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
That someone is apparently Planning Inspector Sheilah Miyake who was CCed in a series of memos between Iseri and then Planning Director Ian Costa and has been identified by numerous reliable sources close to the investigation as being the "trespasser."
On April 7, 2010, Iseri wrote to Costa:
We received information to corroborate an anonymous complaint dated March 2.6, 2010 that was sent to the Planning Department and our office, that Councilmember Tim Bynum was renting out his house, or a portion thereof. Can you let me know if renting out a portion of his residence is ill~gal given his land status, and what ordinance/statute would he be violating by doing so? Please advise.
Costa wrote back, CCing Miyake, saying
Sorry for delay Shaylene.
The CZO really doesn't prohibit renting portions of structures. Even the issue of "lock-outs" is not addressed.
The CZO does not dictate where locks are permitted and not permitted (thank goodness!). The issue would be whether the area, in question creates a "multi-family" dwelling. What was permitted is a "single-family" dwelling based on "one kitchen". If a second kitchen (area used for the preparation of food) is present, then a violation would exist for an illegal "multi-family" dwelling unit.
I understand Sheila has been assisting and monitoring .......let me know if we can be of further assistance.
Despite Iseri's previous contention that actions on the complaint was initiated by the planning department alone, her memo indicates that now she says the complaint was sent to both planning and the prosecutor's office. She also seems to say that she and Miyake worked together to get the "rice cooker" information that was arguably obtained illegally via Miyake's trespassing.
In a comment on our November 5, 2010 report on Bynum's denial of allgations, Iseri wrote"
Mr. Parx,
Your statements are completely erroneous. I was never involved in the investigation of Tim Bynum's violations. The entire investigation was conducted by the Planning Department.
The memo seems to indicate that it was Iseri who initiated the action in conjunction with Miyake and without Director Costa's prior involvement. It also shows that Costa essentially confirms what people have been told at planning previous to this incident- that a "second kitchen" is what makes it illegal. And, as everyone is told, it is a stove that constituted what a "kitchen" was.
But Iseri wasn't to be stopped by the prior definition of a kitchen by planning. Apparently when Miyake told her she saw a "rice cooker" on the counter when she sneaked onto Bynum's property without his permission- or even asking- Iseri saw her opening and decided that, despite what planning had said ever since the CZO was established in the early 70's, now any device- presumably even a toaster or coffee maker- is a "kitchen."
The most hilarious part of all this is Iseri's continuing contention that there is no feud or even animosity between her and Bynum. Anyone who ever watched those council sessions where she butted heads with Bynum would have no doubt she despises Bynum.
So as to who made the complaint? Well we can't say for sure but for some reason former Chair Kaipo Asing has taken an unusual interest in Bynum's cases, showing up to Bynum's court dates and last week's council meeting where, if Bynum had not recused himself, sparks between Iseri and Bynum would surely have flown.
Was it Asing? Was it Iseri's ally Mel Rapozo whose animosity toward Bynum is thinly, if at all, disguised? Some seem to think the latter is the case but so far Rapozo's name hasn't come up in any documents.
The answer is apparently another question- does it really matter which of them it was? To think that there was no collusion in the matter would strain credulity.
Another question is what will happen when these people are put under oath. We understand that new Planning Director Mike Dahilig is privy to the whole story and even if the others were thinking of perjuring themselves, his testimony would surely be straightforward, the thinking being that Dahilig, a former deputy county attorney, isn't going to lie under oath for anyone.
A final question is why Iseri's office is even prosecuting the case and why she hasn't recused herself and her office by letting the state attorney general's office take it over. It would seem, given the history between Iseri and Bynum, recusal would be a no brainer.
Also, Iseri's email was stamped with a big "Confidential" across the top and the original did not contain any redactions. But under the Sunshine law she has no apparent right to say an email to the council is confidential. All emails to councilmembers are considered public documents.
We'll leave it there for today. Below are the full texts of Iseri's letter asking for Bynum's recusal last Wednesday and Bynum's "press release" that followed this weekend. It should be noted that there may be misprints in Iseri's email. First of all, names of those involved are redacted and second we had to use optical character recognition software to get it in "text" form. There may be redactions that are not noted so the sentences may seem disjointed. But you'll get the gist of it.
----#---
Iseri's letter to Council Chair Jay Furfaro CCed to all councilmembers except Bynum.
January 19, 2011
TO: Council Chair Jay Furfaro
FR: Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho
RE: Conflict Notice Regarding Councilmember Timothy Bynum
This communication serves as a notice to the Council regarding a conflict of interest between Councilmember Timothy Bynum and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This conflict arises from several incidents involving Councilmember Bynum and employees in our office, as well as the pending criminal case filed by our Office against Councilmember Bynum in November 2011.
1. Bynum's Inappropriate Confrontation Of Deputy Prosecuting (redacted)
On September 28, 2011, Councilmember Timothy Bynum attended a court proceeding with his son, David Bynum, at the 5th Judicial Circuit Courthouse in Lihu`e. After the hearing, Mr. Bynum stood outside the courtroom door in the public hallway and confronted Deputy Prosecuting Attorney (redacted) regarding David's case. As (redacted) exited the courtroom, Mr. Bynum stated directly to (redacted) "Do you think justice was done? This was because [expletive] Shaylene doesn't like me and is out to get me." (Redacted) was standing nearby and also witnessed the confrontation.
According to the Kaua`i County Charter section 3.07(D)
The council may, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of its entire membership, suspend without pay for not more than one month any member for disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. The presiding officer or the council by a majority vote may expel any other person who is guilty of disorderly, contemptuous or improper conduct at any meeting.
While this section deals with disorderly and contemptuous conduct that occurs in the presence of the Council, it is also instructive as to the appropriate conduct expected from Councilmembers in their dealings with county employees as well as the general public.
Additionally, Section 3.18 of the Kaua`i County Charter states:
Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor. and neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee or officer either publicly or privately. Any willful violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the council shall be sufficient grounds for an action for his removal from office.
Clearly, Councilmember Bynum did not handle this situation appropriately. If Mr. Bynum had questions or concerns about the case, the appropriate course of action would have been to communicate those to the elected Department Head, which is me, rather than confronting one of our Deputies, who, in fact, was not assigned to handling the case. This confrontation clearly illustrates the undue bias Mr. Bynum harbors toward both me personally, as well as the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. As such, Mr. Bynum must recuse himself from any matter before the Council involving the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney.
2. Bynum's inappropriate confrontation of (redacted)
Before coming to work at the OPA (redacted) was employed by (redacted) as (redacted). She applied to the OPA as a (redacted) and was offered the job in (redacted) . After accepting the position (redacted), who had turned in her 2 week notice (redacted) was confronted by Councilmember Bynum in her office. Bynum stated that he was concerned because it was well known that he and Shaylene did not 'get along' and adamantly believed that the only reason Shaylene hired her was to 'get back at him.' These statements and allegations continued for a prolonged period, leaving (redacted) to feel uncomfortable and offended.
Councilmember Bynum's inappropriate confrontation with (redacted) regarding her employment at the OPA demonstrates Mr. Bynum's continued undue bias toward me and my office. This bias and proclivity to engage in inappropriate conduct with OPA employees further establishes the need to have Mr. Bynum precluded from participating in any matters relating to the operations of the OPA.
3. Bynum's Pending Criminal Case
On November 9, 2011, the OPA filed a criminal complaint in the District Court of the Fifth Circuit against Timothy Bynum, alleging 4 counts of violations of the Kaua`i County Code. Each Count is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,000.000 fine for each. This means that if convicted, Bynum could face up to 4 total years imprisonment and $8,000.00 in fines. There have already been two motion hearings on the case, in which Mr. Bynum has been represented by a private attorney. At each hearing, First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane represented the State and made all arguments on behalf of the State. Councilmember Bynum's criminal case clearly establishes a conflict with the OPA. He has a clear financial interest in the operations of the OPA, as he would directly benefit if the OPA's operations were negatively impacted by any action of the Council. By virtue of being a criminal defendant, he has a vested interest in ensuring that the OPA not operate at peak efficiency. In accordance with Article )0( of the Kaua`i County Charter, this financial interest clearly prohibits Bynum from participating in any matter relating to the OPA that comes before the Council. Further, because Councilmember Bynum is represented by an attorney in his criminal case, our office is prohibited from having direct contact with Bynum without his attorney present; as such contact would violate Bynum's 6th Amendment Right to Counsel and could result in dismissal of his case. Bynum's paranoid belief that the actions taken by our office were calculated personal attacks against him is without any merit and is completely baseless. The criminal case against his son was investigated by the Kaua`i Police Department and referred to our office for prosecution. The case initiated against Councilmember Bynum was investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution. The contact with (redacted) was solely initiated by Councilmember Bynum. Her decision to apply to the OPA and our decision to hire her was purely based on (redacted) exceptional experience and qualifications.
For the above stated reasons, Councilmember Bynum has a clear conflict of interest with the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney and should not be allowed to participate in any Council proceedings involving the OPA. It is our hope that the Council will address this situation in a timely and appropriate manner. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this matter.
SHAYLENE ISERI-CARVALHO
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
---------
Bynum's Press Release
I was elected to legislate for the county and to provide oversight of various government agencies and offices. Among these is the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
However, the OPA has recently filed criminal zoning violations against me and I must now defend those in Court. Since I was charged, the County Prosecutor has now cited those same charges as a basis for having me recused from all legislative oversight over her office. Out of an over abundance of caution I agreed to recuse myself from the January 19th meeting.
Likewise, I believe that it would be appropriate for the Kauai Prosecuting Attorney to be recused from prosecuting my case and allow the Attorney General's office to properly evaluate this case. I believe that this would be the best assurance of a fair proceeding and a fair process that is certain to be governed by the rule of law.
The Prosecuting Attorney states in a Jan 19 letter that her criminal prosecution is not personal, and was a routine matter “investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution.” What I have learned is that as early as April 2010, the Prosecuting Attorney asked the Planning Director in an email for a legal basis on which to prosecute me. I am attaching a copy of emails between the Prosecuting Attorney and then-Planning Department Head Ian Costa. These e-mails establish that the Prosecuting Attorney was involved in the matter before Planning even investigated the “anonymous complaint” and that this was not just a routine Planning Department investigation.
In her email, the Prosecutor refers to an "anonymous" complaint. Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
I hope that through the court-process I will be able to ascertain the identity of this trespasser and learn how this person was able to anonymously commence a criminal investigation - especially when I have previously been assured by the Planning Department that my house was properly permitted. I also hope to find out who, if anyone in government authorized sending someone to peer into the windows of my family home. I believe that the trespasser should be prosecuted, but thus far his or her identity appears to have been protected. The documents provided to my defense attorney so far only state that he or she "wishes to remain anonymous".
Finally, just minutes prior to the January 19, 2012 Special Council Meeting, the Prosecuting Attorney sent a letter marked confidential demanding my recusal. The letter was sent to all Council Members except for me. I was allowed to read the letter in the presence of the County Attorneys but I was not given a copy.
I am now informed that the Prosecuting Attorney intends to release to the public this letter she stamped “confidential.” The letter misrepresents conversations I had with two individuals I have long respected and have had a cordial professional relationship with for years.
The intended subject matter of the January 19 Council Meeting was a valid examination of concerns raised by a number of citizens regarding the Victim Witness program, the reported backlog of cases, finance issues and the high turnover / vacancies of Deputies. Council member Joann Yukimura instigated the request. Anyone who follows the Council knows that this type of oversight agenda item is common and a legitimate Council responsibility.
Additional information regarding the alleged zoning violation:
In 2005, at times there were 4 generations of my family (7 people total) living in my home (my father, myself and my wife, my son, my daughter, our grandson and his mother). We decided to do an addition to our home. We wanted to create a living space that was integrated. We constructed two bedrooms, a bathroom and family room. The addition also included a ramp because my elderly father was increasingly having difficulty negotiating the steps to the front door much less the stairs to the second story where the existing bedrooms were located.
When the drawings were done I took them to the County Planning department and the Building division for informal review. I was told everything was fine as long as no stove was installed. Subsequently we submitted the plans to the County for formal review and approval. The plans were approved after being circulated to and approved by various departments including the Planning department.
We hired a contractor and built according to the plans. The County sent inspectors during construction including a final inspection after which we were issued a certificate of occupancy. The addition is exactly as it was when “final inspection” occurred; nothing has been added or deleted. No installed cooking facilities have ever existed in the addition. Our home has one kitchen; every person that has ever resided in our home has used the one kitchen.
That's because "Rice-cooker-gate" is a direct result of what happens when a dysfunctional planning department and an ego-maniacal prosecutor collude to "bring down" a councilmember.
The matter- into which we've been delving for the past year or so- has finally spilled over into the local newspaper with an article yesterday that scratched the surface of the prosecution of Councilmember Tim Bynum by Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, after the release of various documents and a back and forth between Iseri and Bynum on the matter.
Despite Iseri's denial of any ill-feeling between the two, the feud between her and Bynum goes back to their days together on the council when she and Councilmember Mel Rapozo were allies and sided with then-Chair Kaipo Asing in the infamous days when Bynum and Asing butted heads with all of them over Asing's paternalistic leadership of the council involving issues of process, staffing, introduction of measures and other issues.
Iseri was then elected prosecuting attorney in 2008.
According to a complaint form we've obtained dated 3/26/10 Bynum was alleged to have an "illegal dwelling multi family" unit at his home which is on agriculturally zoned land.
The problem is that, under "Complainer/Requester" the form notes "*wants to remain anonymous!" (the asterisk and exclamation marks are written on the form)
The complaint has two initializations, one for "inspector" and another for "assigned by" but who they actually are is not readily apparent. However what is known is that, according to Bynum's press release that followed an email from Iseri to current Council Chair Jay Furfaro sent just before last Wednesday's council meeting where Iseri appeared on a budgetary matter related to the Victim Witness program:
Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
That someone is apparently Planning Inspector Sheilah Miyake who was CCed in a series of memos between Iseri and then Planning Director Ian Costa and has been identified by numerous reliable sources close to the investigation as being the "trespasser."
On April 7, 2010, Iseri wrote to Costa:
We received information to corroborate an anonymous complaint dated March 2.6, 2010 that was sent to the Planning Department and our office, that Councilmember Tim Bynum was renting out his house, or a portion thereof. Can you let me know if renting out a portion of his residence is ill~gal given his land status, and what ordinance/statute would he be violating by doing so? Please advise.
Costa wrote back, CCing Miyake, saying
Sorry for delay Shaylene.
The CZO really doesn't prohibit renting portions of structures. Even the issue of "lock-outs" is not addressed.
The CZO does not dictate where locks are permitted and not permitted (thank goodness!). The issue would be whether the area, in question creates a "multi-family" dwelling. What was permitted is a "single-family" dwelling based on "one kitchen". If a second kitchen (area used for the preparation of food) is present, then a violation would exist for an illegal "multi-family" dwelling unit.
I understand Sheila has been assisting and monitoring .......let me know if we can be of further assistance.
Despite Iseri's previous contention that actions on the complaint was initiated by the planning department alone, her memo indicates that now she says the complaint was sent to both planning and the prosecutor's office. She also seems to say that she and Miyake worked together to get the "rice cooker" information that was arguably obtained illegally via Miyake's trespassing.
In a comment on our November 5, 2010 report on Bynum's denial of allgations, Iseri wrote"
Mr. Parx,
Your statements are completely erroneous. I was never involved in the investigation of Tim Bynum's violations. The entire investigation was conducted by the Planning Department.
The memo seems to indicate that it was Iseri who initiated the action in conjunction with Miyake and without Director Costa's prior involvement. It also shows that Costa essentially confirms what people have been told at planning previous to this incident- that a "second kitchen" is what makes it illegal. And, as everyone is told, it is a stove that constituted what a "kitchen" was.
But Iseri wasn't to be stopped by the prior definition of a kitchen by planning. Apparently when Miyake told her she saw a "rice cooker" on the counter when she sneaked onto Bynum's property without his permission- or even asking- Iseri saw her opening and decided that, despite what planning had said ever since the CZO was established in the early 70's, now any device- presumably even a toaster or coffee maker- is a "kitchen."
The most hilarious part of all this is Iseri's continuing contention that there is no feud or even animosity between her and Bynum. Anyone who ever watched those council sessions where she butted heads with Bynum would have no doubt she despises Bynum.
So as to who made the complaint? Well we can't say for sure but for some reason former Chair Kaipo Asing has taken an unusual interest in Bynum's cases, showing up to Bynum's court dates and last week's council meeting where, if Bynum had not recused himself, sparks between Iseri and Bynum would surely have flown.
Was it Asing? Was it Iseri's ally Mel Rapozo whose animosity toward Bynum is thinly, if at all, disguised? Some seem to think the latter is the case but so far Rapozo's name hasn't come up in any documents.
The answer is apparently another question- does it really matter which of them it was? To think that there was no collusion in the matter would strain credulity.
Another question is what will happen when these people are put under oath. We understand that new Planning Director Mike Dahilig is privy to the whole story and even if the others were thinking of perjuring themselves, his testimony would surely be straightforward, the thinking being that Dahilig, a former deputy county attorney, isn't going to lie under oath for anyone.
A final question is why Iseri's office is even prosecuting the case and why she hasn't recused herself and her office by letting the state attorney general's office take it over. It would seem, given the history between Iseri and Bynum, recusal would be a no brainer.
Also, Iseri's email was stamped with a big "Confidential" across the top and the original did not contain any redactions. But under the Sunshine law she has no apparent right to say an email to the council is confidential. All emails to councilmembers are considered public documents.
We'll leave it there for today. Below are the full texts of Iseri's letter asking for Bynum's recusal last Wednesday and Bynum's "press release" that followed this weekend. It should be noted that there may be misprints in Iseri's email. First of all, names of those involved are redacted and second we had to use optical character recognition software to get it in "text" form. There may be redactions that are not noted so the sentences may seem disjointed. But you'll get the gist of it.
----#---
Iseri's letter to Council Chair Jay Furfaro CCed to all councilmembers except Bynum.
January 19, 2011
TO: Council Chair Jay Furfaro
FR: Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho
RE: Conflict Notice Regarding Councilmember Timothy Bynum
This communication serves as a notice to the Council regarding a conflict of interest between Councilmember Timothy Bynum and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This conflict arises from several incidents involving Councilmember Bynum and employees in our office, as well as the pending criminal case filed by our Office against Councilmember Bynum in November 2011.
1. Bynum's Inappropriate Confrontation Of Deputy Prosecuting (redacted)
On September 28, 2011, Councilmember Timothy Bynum attended a court proceeding with his son, David Bynum, at the 5th Judicial Circuit Courthouse in Lihu`e. After the hearing, Mr. Bynum stood outside the courtroom door in the public hallway and confronted Deputy Prosecuting Attorney (redacted) regarding David's case. As (redacted) exited the courtroom, Mr. Bynum stated directly to (redacted) "Do you think justice was done? This was because [expletive] Shaylene doesn't like me and is out to get me." (Redacted) was standing nearby and also witnessed the confrontation.
According to the Kaua`i County Charter section 3.07(D)
The council may, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of its entire membership, suspend without pay for not more than one month any member for disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. The presiding officer or the council by a majority vote may expel any other person who is guilty of disorderly, contemptuous or improper conduct at any meeting.
While this section deals with disorderly and contemptuous conduct that occurs in the presence of the Council, it is also instructive as to the appropriate conduct expected from Councilmembers in their dealings with county employees as well as the general public.
Additionally, Section 3.18 of the Kaua`i County Charter states:
Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor. and neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee or officer either publicly or privately. Any willful violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the council shall be sufficient grounds for an action for his removal from office.
Clearly, Councilmember Bynum did not handle this situation appropriately. If Mr. Bynum had questions or concerns about the case, the appropriate course of action would have been to communicate those to the elected Department Head, which is me, rather than confronting one of our Deputies, who, in fact, was not assigned to handling the case. This confrontation clearly illustrates the undue bias Mr. Bynum harbors toward both me personally, as well as the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. As such, Mr. Bynum must recuse himself from any matter before the Council involving the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney.
2. Bynum's inappropriate confrontation of (redacted)
Before coming to work at the OPA (redacted) was employed by (redacted) as (redacted). She applied to the OPA as a (redacted) and was offered the job in (redacted) . After accepting the position (redacted), who had turned in her 2 week notice (redacted) was confronted by Councilmember Bynum in her office. Bynum stated that he was concerned because it was well known that he and Shaylene did not 'get along' and adamantly believed that the only reason Shaylene hired her was to 'get back at him.' These statements and allegations continued for a prolonged period, leaving (redacted) to feel uncomfortable and offended.
Councilmember Bynum's inappropriate confrontation with (redacted) regarding her employment at the OPA demonstrates Mr. Bynum's continued undue bias toward me and my office. This bias and proclivity to engage in inappropriate conduct with OPA employees further establishes the need to have Mr. Bynum precluded from participating in any matters relating to the operations of the OPA.
3. Bynum's Pending Criminal Case
On November 9, 2011, the OPA filed a criminal complaint in the District Court of the Fifth Circuit against Timothy Bynum, alleging 4 counts of violations of the Kaua`i County Code. Each Count is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,000.000 fine for each. This means that if convicted, Bynum could face up to 4 total years imprisonment and $8,000.00 in fines. There have already been two motion hearings on the case, in which Mr. Bynum has been represented by a private attorney. At each hearing, First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane represented the State and made all arguments on behalf of the State. Councilmember Bynum's criminal case clearly establishes a conflict with the OPA. He has a clear financial interest in the operations of the OPA, as he would directly benefit if the OPA's operations were negatively impacted by any action of the Council. By virtue of being a criminal defendant, he has a vested interest in ensuring that the OPA not operate at peak efficiency. In accordance with Article )0( of the Kaua`i County Charter, this financial interest clearly prohibits Bynum from participating in any matter relating to the OPA that comes before the Council. Further, because Councilmember Bynum is represented by an attorney in his criminal case, our office is prohibited from having direct contact with Bynum without his attorney present; as such contact would violate Bynum's 6th Amendment Right to Counsel and could result in dismissal of his case. Bynum's paranoid belief that the actions taken by our office were calculated personal attacks against him is without any merit and is completely baseless. The criminal case against his son was investigated by the Kaua`i Police Department and referred to our office for prosecution. The case initiated against Councilmember Bynum was investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution. The contact with (redacted) was solely initiated by Councilmember Bynum. Her decision to apply to the OPA and our decision to hire her was purely based on (redacted) exceptional experience and qualifications.
For the above stated reasons, Councilmember Bynum has a clear conflict of interest with the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney and should not be allowed to participate in any Council proceedings involving the OPA. It is our hope that the Council will address this situation in a timely and appropriate manner. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this matter.
SHAYLENE ISERI-CARVALHO
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
---------
Bynum's Press Release
I was elected to legislate for the county and to provide oversight of various government agencies and offices. Among these is the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
However, the OPA has recently filed criminal zoning violations against me and I must now defend those in Court. Since I was charged, the County Prosecutor has now cited those same charges as a basis for having me recused from all legislative oversight over her office. Out of an over abundance of caution I agreed to recuse myself from the January 19th meeting.
Likewise, I believe that it would be appropriate for the Kauai Prosecuting Attorney to be recused from prosecuting my case and allow the Attorney General's office to properly evaluate this case. I believe that this would be the best assurance of a fair proceeding and a fair process that is certain to be governed by the rule of law.
The Prosecuting Attorney states in a Jan 19 letter that her criminal prosecution is not personal, and was a routine matter “investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution.” What I have learned is that as early as April 2010, the Prosecuting Attorney asked the Planning Director in an email for a legal basis on which to prosecute me. I am attaching a copy of emails between the Prosecuting Attorney and then-Planning Department Head Ian Costa. These e-mails establish that the Prosecuting Attorney was involved in the matter before Planning even investigated the “anonymous complaint” and that this was not just a routine Planning Department investigation.
In her email, the Prosecutor refers to an "anonymous" complaint. Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
I hope that through the court-process I will be able to ascertain the identity of this trespasser and learn how this person was able to anonymously commence a criminal investigation - especially when I have previously been assured by the Planning Department that my house was properly permitted. I also hope to find out who, if anyone in government authorized sending someone to peer into the windows of my family home. I believe that the trespasser should be prosecuted, but thus far his or her identity appears to have been protected. The documents provided to my defense attorney so far only state that he or she "wishes to remain anonymous".
Finally, just minutes prior to the January 19, 2012 Special Council Meeting, the Prosecuting Attorney sent a letter marked confidential demanding my recusal. The letter was sent to all Council Members except for me. I was allowed to read the letter in the presence of the County Attorneys but I was not given a copy.
I am now informed that the Prosecuting Attorney intends to release to the public this letter she stamped “confidential.” The letter misrepresents conversations I had with two individuals I have long respected and have had a cordial professional relationship with for years.
The intended subject matter of the January 19 Council Meeting was a valid examination of concerns raised by a number of citizens regarding the Victim Witness program, the reported backlog of cases, finance issues and the high turnover / vacancies of Deputies. Council member Joann Yukimura instigated the request. Anyone who follows the Council knows that this type of oversight agenda item is common and a legitimate Council responsibility.
Additional information regarding the alleged zoning violation:
In 2005, at times there were 4 generations of my family (7 people total) living in my home (my father, myself and my wife, my son, my daughter, our grandson and his mother). We decided to do an addition to our home. We wanted to create a living space that was integrated. We constructed two bedrooms, a bathroom and family room. The addition also included a ramp because my elderly father was increasingly having difficulty negotiating the steps to the front door much less the stairs to the second story where the existing bedrooms were located.
When the drawings were done I took them to the County Planning department and the Building division for informal review. I was told everything was fine as long as no stove was installed. Subsequently we submitted the plans to the County for formal review and approval. The plans were approved after being circulated to and approved by various departments including the Planning department.
We hired a contractor and built according to the plans. The County sent inspectors during construction including a final inspection after which we were issued a certificate of occupancy. The addition is exactly as it was when “final inspection” occurred; nothing has been added or deleted. No installed cooking facilities have ever existed in the addition. Our home has one kitchen; every person that has ever resided in our home has used the one kitchen.
Friday, January 13, 2012
GOO-GOO-GA-JOOB
GOO-GOO-GA-JOOB: Apparently all is not well on the SS Minnow.
Seems the Skipper's "little buddy" went temporarily insane and deviated from the script prompting a dressing down for daring to do so on Wednesday's "episode."
It was just before lunch when the Skipper, played by Kaua`i County Council Chair Jay Furfaro, had another of his patented, blowhard, conniption fits of pomposity chiding Gilligan, played by local newspaper government reporter Leo Azambuja, for daring to write something that wasn't pre-approved by Furfaro.
Never known for his knowledge of- or adherence to- the Sunshine Law, Furfaro has continued the tradition of his predecessor, Kaipo Asing, in abusing the law to stifle discussion he doesn't like by arbitrarily and capriciously deciding that such discussions are not "sticking to the agenda item," as the law requires.
The fact that the law is supposed to be liberally construed towards openness never comes into the discussion.
So in typical fashion, Furfaro decided on Wednesday that, despite the fact that it wasn't on the agenda, he was going to discuss the appointment of long-time council "fixer," Rick Watanabe, to the position of County Clerk. And since it wasn't on the agenda he announced he was using what he calls "personal privilege"- a term invented some years ago that loosely translates to "illegal but I'm going to do it anyway" - to talk about it anyway.
Saying "I'd like to congratulate ourselves," he described a supposedly "wide search" that yielded more than 20 candidates in what he and other councilmembers praised as a process that was "historic" for its "openness," despite the fact that none of the names of the 20- nor the 5 finalists- has been or is planned on being released, making the process, for all intents and purposes, the same as always- a backroom deal discussed exclusively in closed-door executive session.
But the real howler was when, saying he had prepared a "press release" regarding the appointment, he actually chided Azambuja for having the nerve to include information that wasn't in his press release in the article in the paper announcing Watanabe's appointment.
Calling it an "editorial" Furfaro lit into "the media" saying "you should print the press release as such," and presumably no other unapproved information along with it.
Azumbuja had the nerve to point out that, before the appointment was announced, Watanabe had said he wasn't interested in the job.
Oh- and he want into a long explanation of the various salaries involved including not just Watanabe's now as County Clerk but the salary cut taken by former County Clerk Peter Nakamura who according to the article is now making $29,420 less in his new job as a "senior planner" in the planning department after he was apparently fired by the council following a series of public allegations of misconduct, a harassment lawsuit and a string of executive sessions to discuss his "job performance."
For the record Nakamura says he chose to take the new job at an almost $30,000 pay cut. Councilmembers have essentially refused to discuss the end of Nakamura's tenure saying it was a "personnel matter" and to do so would violate Nakamura's privacy.
Furfaro insisted that Watanabe had "changed his mind" about the clerk job saying "heck, even (Republican candidate for President Mitt) Romney changes his mind," chiding the media by saying he is always available for press inquires.
Furfaro has consistently refused to answer our email queries for the past three-and-a-half years.
But, being so presumptuous and pompous as to think that the press is there to be his own personal megaphone aside, the Sunshine Law violation is not just blatant but the apparent irony of Furfaro's violation in cutting off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda"- as we described above- and then claiming some kind of personal privilege to do the same, is lost on only one person- Furfaro.
In a followup to yesterdays PNN's news coverage of charges of mismanagement by and maltreatment of employees of Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, we mentioned an Office of Information Practices (OIP) ruling that, a year and a half after the incident, ruled that then Chair Kaipo Asing was wrong to have cut off Councilmember Tim Bynum when he questioned Iseri in May of 2009.
We have since been directed to OIP Memo 11-7 which says that:
To the extent that Requester’s line of questioning wouhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifld have related to whether other sources of funds existed for the VOCA program so that the grant monies did not need to be used for that program, we believe that the line of questioning would have been reasonably related to the agenda item and thus would not have violated the Sunshine Law... (B)ased upon our review of the May 6 meeting minutes we believe that the nexus that Requester subsequently drew between the agenda item and his line of questioning was sufficient under the Sunshine Law to have allowed questioning reasonably related to whether other sources of funds precluded the need to apply the grant monies to the VOCA program.
We point this out because it is archetypical of the type of thing that Furfaro- despite his protestations to the contrary- has continued to allow and even use himself to stifle discussion.
Although the extent of his abuse of the provision in the Sunshine Law that says that discussions must pertain to an agenda item hasn't risen to the heights used by Asing during his notorious 2009-10 feud with Bynum over process and rules, since becoming chair upon the electoral ouster of Asing, Furfaro has, over and over, allowed Councilmember Mel Rapozo- who, along with his political ally Iseri, is a political enemy of Bynum's- to interrupt Bynum and try to stop whatever Bynum is saying that Rapozo doesn't want said in public... especially criticism of Iseri.
It all comes down to something that, on Kaua`i, has been ignored and even apparently intentionally flouted ever since council meetings have been televised when it's convenient in order to prevent certain potentially embarrassing information from reaching the public.
The Declaration of Policy and Intent- the very first paragraph of the Sunshine Law, HRS Chapter 92-1 says, in part,
The formation and conduct of public policy - the discussions, deliberations, decisions, and action of governmental agencies - shall be conducted as openly as possible. To implement this policy the legislature declares that:
(1) It is the intent of this part to protect the people's right to know;
(2) The provisions requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed; and
(3) The provisions providing for exceptions to the open meeting requirements shall be strictly construed against closed meetings.
If we had our druthers that statement would be made into a poster and hung on the wall in the council chambers. Or perhaps tattooed on each councilmembers forehead so that they would see it every time they looked at each other.
But rather, every councilmember has at times bemoaned the existence of the Sunshine Law, especially the part that prevents more than two of them them from discussing public policy behind closed doors.
There's a reason for that provision. It's there so that members of the public are privy to discussions that lead to the laws that govern our lives.
We have yet to hear a good explanation for why we should allow this to be done in "back rooms"- smoke-filled or not- other than that it would be "easier" and that people would be more likely to speak up if they know no one is watching.
Exactly.
Listen up elected and appointed government officials. Maybe you didn't get the memo. This is not your own private little fiefdom. It is government and you are determining public policy and people deserve to hear ALL of the thoughts and reasoning that go into your decision-making so that they can determine whether you are the one they want representing them when passing the legislation that rules their lives.
They want to know that your reasons indicate you are serving for the greater good- not for your uncle's wallet. And we want to know you can articulate how you reached your decision. As your math teach used to say: show your work.
If it is "politically embarrassing" or something you'd rather people didn't hear you say, perhaps you shouldn't say it.
It's the height of hypocrisy to cut off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda" with some obviously convoluted, strict interpretation of what the agenda item is and then claim you have "personal privilege" to talk about anything you damn well please between agenda items.
When it comes to convincing our seven stranded castaways of all this, well, let's just say it's an uphill climb.
Seems the Skipper's "little buddy" went temporarily insane and deviated from the script prompting a dressing down for daring to do so on Wednesday's "episode."
It was just before lunch when the Skipper, played by Kaua`i County Council Chair Jay Furfaro, had another of his patented, blowhard, conniption fits of pomposity chiding Gilligan, played by local newspaper government reporter Leo Azambuja, for daring to write something that wasn't pre-approved by Furfaro.
Never known for his knowledge of- or adherence to- the Sunshine Law, Furfaro has continued the tradition of his predecessor, Kaipo Asing, in abusing the law to stifle discussion he doesn't like by arbitrarily and capriciously deciding that such discussions are not "sticking to the agenda item," as the law requires.
The fact that the law is supposed to be liberally construed towards openness never comes into the discussion.
So in typical fashion, Furfaro decided on Wednesday that, despite the fact that it wasn't on the agenda, he was going to discuss the appointment of long-time council "fixer," Rick Watanabe, to the position of County Clerk. And since it wasn't on the agenda he announced he was using what he calls "personal privilege"- a term invented some years ago that loosely translates to "illegal but I'm going to do it anyway" - to talk about it anyway.
Saying "I'd like to congratulate ourselves," he described a supposedly "wide search" that yielded more than 20 candidates in what he and other councilmembers praised as a process that was "historic" for its "openness," despite the fact that none of the names of the 20- nor the 5 finalists- has been or is planned on being released, making the process, for all intents and purposes, the same as always- a backroom deal discussed exclusively in closed-door executive session.
But the real howler was when, saying he had prepared a "press release" regarding the appointment, he actually chided Azambuja for having the nerve to include information that wasn't in his press release in the article in the paper announcing Watanabe's appointment.
Calling it an "editorial" Furfaro lit into "the media" saying "you should print the press release as such," and presumably no other unapproved information along with it.
Azumbuja had the nerve to point out that, before the appointment was announced, Watanabe had said he wasn't interested in the job.
Oh- and he want into a long explanation of the various salaries involved including not just Watanabe's now as County Clerk but the salary cut taken by former County Clerk Peter Nakamura who according to the article is now making $29,420 less in his new job as a "senior planner" in the planning department after he was apparently fired by the council following a series of public allegations of misconduct, a harassment lawsuit and a string of executive sessions to discuss his "job performance."
For the record Nakamura says he chose to take the new job at an almost $30,000 pay cut. Councilmembers have essentially refused to discuss the end of Nakamura's tenure saying it was a "personnel matter" and to do so would violate Nakamura's privacy.
Furfaro insisted that Watanabe had "changed his mind" about the clerk job saying "heck, even (Republican candidate for President Mitt) Romney changes his mind," chiding the media by saying he is always available for press inquires.
Furfaro has consistently refused to answer our email queries for the past three-and-a-half years.
But, being so presumptuous and pompous as to think that the press is there to be his own personal megaphone aside, the Sunshine Law violation is not just blatant but the apparent irony of Furfaro's violation in cutting off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda"- as we described above- and then claiming some kind of personal privilege to do the same, is lost on only one person- Furfaro.
In a followup to yesterdays PNN's news coverage of charges of mismanagement by and maltreatment of employees of Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, we mentioned an Office of Information Practices (OIP) ruling that, a year and a half after the incident, ruled that then Chair Kaipo Asing was wrong to have cut off Councilmember Tim Bynum when he questioned Iseri in May of 2009.
We have since been directed to OIP Memo 11-7 which says that:
To the extent that Requester’s line of questioning wouhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifld have related to whether other sources of funds existed for the VOCA program so that the grant monies did not need to be used for that program, we believe that the line of questioning would have been reasonably related to the agenda item and thus would not have violated the Sunshine Law... (B)ased upon our review of the May 6 meeting minutes we believe that the nexus that Requester subsequently drew between the agenda item and his line of questioning was sufficient under the Sunshine Law to have allowed questioning reasonably related to whether other sources of funds precluded the need to apply the grant monies to the VOCA program.
We point this out because it is archetypical of the type of thing that Furfaro- despite his protestations to the contrary- has continued to allow and even use himself to stifle discussion.
Although the extent of his abuse of the provision in the Sunshine Law that says that discussions must pertain to an agenda item hasn't risen to the heights used by Asing during his notorious 2009-10 feud with Bynum over process and rules, since becoming chair upon the electoral ouster of Asing, Furfaro has, over and over, allowed Councilmember Mel Rapozo- who, along with his political ally Iseri, is a political enemy of Bynum's- to interrupt Bynum and try to stop whatever Bynum is saying that Rapozo doesn't want said in public... especially criticism of Iseri.
It all comes down to something that, on Kaua`i, has been ignored and even apparently intentionally flouted ever since council meetings have been televised when it's convenient in order to prevent certain potentially embarrassing information from reaching the public.
The Declaration of Policy and Intent- the very first paragraph of the Sunshine Law, HRS Chapter 92-1 says, in part,
The formation and conduct of public policy - the discussions, deliberations, decisions, and action of governmental agencies - shall be conducted as openly as possible. To implement this policy the legislature declares that:
(1) It is the intent of this part to protect the people's right to know;
(2) The provisions requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed; and
(3) The provisions providing for exceptions to the open meeting requirements shall be strictly construed against closed meetings.
If we had our druthers that statement would be made into a poster and hung on the wall in the council chambers. Or perhaps tattooed on each councilmembers forehead so that they would see it every time they looked at each other.
But rather, every councilmember has at times bemoaned the existence of the Sunshine Law, especially the part that prevents more than two of them them from discussing public policy behind closed doors.
There's a reason for that provision. It's there so that members of the public are privy to discussions that lead to the laws that govern our lives.
We have yet to hear a good explanation for why we should allow this to be done in "back rooms"- smoke-filled or not- other than that it would be "easier" and that people would be more likely to speak up if they know no one is watching.
Exactly.
Listen up elected and appointed government officials. Maybe you didn't get the memo. This is not your own private little fiefdom. It is government and you are determining public policy and people deserve to hear ALL of the thoughts and reasoning that go into your decision-making so that they can determine whether you are the one they want representing them when passing the legislation that rules their lives.
They want to know that your reasons indicate you are serving for the greater good- not for your uncle's wallet. And we want to know you can articulate how you reached your decision. As your math teach used to say: show your work.
If it is "politically embarrassing" or something you'd rather people didn't hear you say, perhaps you shouldn't say it.
It's the height of hypocrisy to cut off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda" with some obviously convoluted, strict interpretation of what the agenda item is and then claim you have "personal privilege" to talk about anything you damn well please between agenda items.
When it comes to convincing our seven stranded castaways of all this, well, let's just say it's an uphill climb.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
(PNN) PROSECUTOR ISERI UNDER FIRE FOR MISMANAGEMENT AND MALTREATMENT OF EMPLOYEES OF VICTIM WITNESS PROGRAM
(PNN) PROSECUTOR ISERI UNDER FIRE FOR MISMANAGEMENT AND MALTREATMENT OF EMPLOYEES OF VICTIM WITNESS PROGRAM; LETTER TO COUNCIL FROM LAID-OFF COUNSELOR CHARGES PROGRAM IS INEFFECTIVE, IN DISARRAY
(PNN) 17.
That's the answer usually given by former and current employees at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) to many of the questions as to why there are so many charges of mismanagement and ill-treatment of employees in Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's office.
That's because 17 is the number of "Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA" according to a scathing letter to the Kaua`i County Council by Erin Wilson, a former Victim Witness Counselor at the OPA.
Wilson's letter- which is published here in full (below at the end of this article)- was submitted as testimony on a communication at yesterday's (January 11, 2012) council meeting. The communication asked for Iseri to come before the council to discuss "the status of the Victim Witness Program and Office of the Prosecuting Attorney."
The matter was deferred for two weeks until January 25 however because Iseri submitted a letter saying she was "sick," according to Council Chair Jay Furfaro.
The issues Iseri will discuss in two weeks, according to the agenda, include:
1) Case backlog caused by furloughs.
2) Funding - how utilized and whether sufficient to address concerns.
3) Levels of staffing and level of service for the Victim Witness program.
4) Caseload open, closed and pending
The issue dates back to May 6, 2009 according to Councilmember Tim Bynum when Iseri was summoned to appear before the council to answer the same questions but never did because, Bynum said the minutes of that meeting show, he was cut off from his line of questioning by then Council Chair Kaipo Asing.
Asing claimed Bynum's questioning of Iseri was a Sunshine (open meetings) Law violation because it was off the subject of the agenda. However according to Bynum, more than a year later the Office of Information Practices (OIP), which oversees the Sunshine Law, ruled his line of questioning did not violate the law.
Bynum famously feuded with Asing over many matters of council process and rules during Asing's tenure and is currently involved in a well-known, long-standing feud with Iseri dating back to her days on the council with Bynum.
Until yesterday the latest chapter in the conflict has been what Bynum claims is his malicious, first-of-its-kind prosecution by Iseri for a permitting violation, apparently spurred by Bynum having had a rice cooker in a family room of his home which, Iseri claims, is a zoning violation because technically, with the presence of a sink, it created a unpermitted separate living unit.
Wilson spoke of the number "17" by saying:
After asking many employees at OPA why the delay on the above referenced case and others I had been assigned to, I was consistently referred to one number...17. This number was significant because there had been 17 Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA. 17 was a significant number because the prosecutor’s office is a relatively small office to begin with. 17 was a significant number because all of these 17 former employees had left the office since the current OPA Leadership was elected into office. Most importantly, 17 was a significant number because it answered some of my questions about why a large backlog of cases had either sat for long periods of time without victims being contacted, defendants being indicted, or passed on from deputy to deputy through the revolving door at OPA.
Some of the allegations in Wilson's letter are that:
- NOTHING could be done without the direct approval and oversight of the elected prosecutor. In fact, office staff received an email from the Prosecutor’s Office leadership, stating that staff was not to send emails to any outside agencies unless discussed with the OPA leadership prior to sending. Furthermore, OPA Leadership asked to be cc’ed on all other emails to outside agencies.
- The process by which OPA would receive completed investigations and then assigned to the appropriate Deputy and Victim Witness Counselor was ambiguous. The time frame with which the assignment would take place was even more vague and varied week to week. Sometimes cases would be reviewed by the Prosecutor and assigned to a Deputy Attorney and Victim Witness Counselor right away. Other times, as I found out with my caseload, would take months upon months before even being assigned to a Deputy or Counselor for any action to be taken.
- In a letter to County Council dated January 19, 2011 regarding furloughs, the Elected Prosecutor, Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, states that as a result of furloughs,
'OPA, the sole agency to file the criminal documents with the court and/or prepare for hearings, wasn’t able to accomplish its duties in a number of cases because there was insufficient staff to prepare them in an expedited and timely manner.'
I beg to differ. I would suggest instead, it is the constant revolving door of employees that has caused a tremendous backlog of cases at OPA. Even the office letterhead is constantly changing and currently reflects that about half of the Deputies that were listed on the above referenced letter, dated January 19th, 2011, have left OPA within the past year. All, I would suggest, to the detriment of Kauaiian families and community.
- The elected prosecutor demoted the former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and effectively eliminated the Director position altogether. What did this mean for the Victim Witness program? It meant that our Victim Witness program no longer had a leader in Victim Witness services to provide oversight of day to day operations and management of the program. It also resulted in drastic changes in the scope of services that Victim Witness Counselors were allowed to offer... After the Victim Witness Director position was eliminated, these components of our comprehensive program diminished or ceased to exist.
- The current OPA Leadership also promotes the perception that Victim Witness Counselors have little importance within the office and are perceived as such by many of the attorneys, clerks, and other staff at OPA.
- I am no longer employed with the Prosecutor’s Office as I was informed on November 9th that I was being laid off and my position as Victim Witness Counselor was being eliminated from the office due to “lack of work”. This “lack of work” described in the letter that OPA gave me is in stark contrast to the much needed Victim Witness Counselor that the elected prosecutor requested monies for, in her letter (just a few months ago) to County Council dated June 13th, 2011. Despite this “lack of work” the office has hired several people including a Receptionist, a Process Server, two (2) Law Clerks, and a Law Office Assistant position which was created for the previous Secretary--all since my last day of employment, November 23rd, 2011. Furthermore, OPA has done nothing to preserve my employment despite that the County of Kauai Employee Handbook (page 17) Layoff Policy states that they will give 90 days’ notice prior to instilling a Reduction in Workforce or Layoff. I am certain that the victims who call OPA on a daily basis requesting an update on their case status or the victims of the most recent surge of crime on Kauai, could have used the services I provided as a Victim Witness Counselor.
At yesterday's meeting, while Bynum was trying to give the history of the issues being aired before the council and the Asing/Sunshine Law/OIP matter, Councilperson Mel Rapozo, famously an extremely close ally and employee of Iseri's, tried to stop Bynum from speaking by claiming the statement he was making violated the Sunshine Law, interrupting Bynum twice and appealing to Furfaro to stop Bynum.
After getting huffy at the notion that he was being accused of ducking the issue- even though Bynum said no such thing- Furfaro allowed Bynum to finish his statement.
Rapozo serves summonses for Iseri's office despite a ban on councilmembers doing more than $500 worth of work for the county. He and Iseri have thus far successfully circumvented the provision by breaking the contracts up into parcels of less than $500 each and also have claimed that Rapozo is the only one on the island who can do the work based on the fact that no one else bid on it.
Part of the intent of the law is to make sure that councilmembers cannot use their power to intimidate others from bidding on a contract upon which the councilmember is bidding.
Council Vice Chair JoAnn Yukimura- who sent the communication to the council requesting Iseri's presence- referred to Wilson's letter and asked that staff contact former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and request that she be present to testify at the January 25 meeting.
Iseri is up for reelection this year and will face current Deputy County Attorney with the Kaua`i Police Department, Justin Kollar.
-------
Erin Wilson's letter to the Kaua`i County Council
Date: January 10, 2012
To: Jay Furfaro, Chair
Joann Yukimura, Vice Chair
Tim Bynum
Dicky Chang
KipuKai Kuali’i
Mel Rapozo
Nadine Nakamura
From: Erin Wilson, Former Victim Witness Counselor at OPA
Re: Council Meeting Agenda Item C 2012-08
First of all let me say thank you for your time and providing an opportunity for public comment on the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) and Victim Witness Program (VWP) at your meeting today. I believe my circumstance is unique to any other and I appreciate the opportunity to share some of my experiences with you in hopes that you will consider what I have to say as an opportunity to improve services at OPA and the Victim Witness Program.
I am a single mom who moved to Kauai in August 2011 from Colorado with my 6 year old son because I was offered a position as a Victim Witness Counselor at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This was in my mind, a dream job, where I could use my passion for helping others, advocating for victims of crime. Within a few days of working, I was assigned to work on the most serious of crimes including murder, negligent homicide, assault, robbery, theft, etc. In this position, my responsibilities included making contact with victims to find out how they were coping, finding out what their needs are, helping victims apply for Crime Victim Compensation, finding local resources, getting victims registered for SAVIN (a victim notification system), and let victims know about other civil remedies. Most importantly, my job was to listen to our victims.
I quickly learned at OPA that NOTHING could be done without the direct approval and oversight of the elected prosecutor. In fact, office staff received an email from the Prosecutor’s Office leadership, stating that staff was not to send emails to any outside agencies unless discussed with the OPA leadership prior to sending. Furthermore, OPA Leadership asked to be cc’ed on all other emails to outside agencies. I was very surprised by this as I had not worked in such an environment where communication with related agencies (agencies we interface with) was restricted in such a manner.
The process by which OPA would receive completed investigations and then assigned to the appropriate Deputy and Victim Witness Counselor was ambiguous. The time frame with which the assignment would take place was even more vague and varied week to week. Sometimes cases would be reviewed by the Prosecutor and assigned to a Deputy Attorney and Victim Witness Counselor right away. Other times, as I found out with my caseload, would take months upon months before even being assigned to a Deputy or Counselor for any action to be taken.
In one case that was assigned to me, there were several victims of a violent crime. Prior to making initial contact with the victims, I reviewed the police reports so as to be fully prepared when I contacted the victims and their families, being fully aware of what happened. What I was unable to prepare for was the anger and frustration these families felt when I met with them the first time in our office and learned that after 17 months, I was the first person to contact them from the Prosecutor's Office. In those 17 months, none of the victims or their families had been contacted by anyone at the Prosecutor’s office to offer condolences (there had been a death resulting from the crime) or inform the families about their rights to Victim Witness services, Crime Victim Compensation, or any other related community services that they were entitled to. It was not that the Deputies or Victim Witness Counselors were not working hard on their caseloads, but rather, the victims’ receipt of services could have occurred much earlier in this case and many others, had the case(s) been assigned by OPA Leadership in a timelier manner. Many of the cases I came across had sat waiting for screening and prosecution or declination for long periods of time. Cases had sat for so long that in some situations, the statute of limitations had run out on certain counts of crimes and the defendants could no longer be charged, leaving victims helpless.
After asking many employees at OPA why the delay on the above referenced case and others I had been assigned to, I was consistently referred to one number...17. This number was significant because there had been 17 Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA. 17 was a significant number because the prosecutor’s office is a relatively small office to begin with. 17 was a significant number because all of these 17 former employees had left the office since the current OPA Leadership was elected into office. Most importantly, 17 was a significant number because it answered some of my questions about why a large backlog of cases had either sat for long periods of time without victims being contacted, defendants being indicted, or passed on from deputy to deputy through the revolving door at OPA.
In a letter to County Council dated January 19, 2011 regarding furloughs, the Elected Prosecutor, Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, states that as a result of furloughs,
“OPA, the sole agency to file the criminal documents with the court and/or prepare for hearings, wasn’t able to accomplish its duties in a number of cases because there was insufficient staff to prepare them in an expedited and timely manner.”
I beg to differ. I would suggest instead, it is the constant revolving door of employees that has caused a tremendous backlog of cases at OPA. Even the office letterhead is constantly changing and currently reflects that about half of the Deputies that were listed on the above referenced letter, dated January 19th, 2011, have left OPA within the past year. All, I would suggest, to the detriment of Kauaiian families and community.
There was another significant factor that limited the scope of Victim Witness Services at OPA. The elected prosecutor demoted the former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and effectively eliminated the Director position altogether. What did this mean for the Victim Witness program? It meant that our Victim Witness program no longer had a leader in Victim Witness services to provide oversight of day to day operations and management of the program. It also resulted in drastic changes in the scope of services that Victim Witness Counselors were allowed to offer. For example, before the Director position was eliminated, the VWP offered services such as Outreach programs, crime scene support upon request, alliances with multiple community agencies. After the Victim Witness Director position was eliminated, these components of our comprehensive program diminished or ceased to exist. Another downfall to eliminating the Director position was the inability to maintain relationships with agencies that the VWP interfaces with on Kauai, in the state of Hawaii (ex. Victim Witness Coordinator meetings) as well as nationwide organizations such as National Organization for Victim Advocacy (NOVA). These former relationships made our Victim Witness program at the Prosecutor’s Office stand out among others in the Pacific region.
Losing the Victim Witness Director at OPA, we also lost accountability for an equitable distribution of workloads among the Counselors. For example, each Counselor is assigned to certain types of cases such as Property, Crimes Against Persons, Firearms, etc. without regard to the intensity of the case or the needs of the victims and witnesses. The current OPA Leadership also promotes the perception that Victim Witness Counselors have little importance within the office and are perceived as such by many of the attorneys, clerks, and other staff at OPA. For example, in one conversation I had with a Deputy Attorney at OPA, two Victim Witness Counselors were referred to as “worthless.” In a separate conversation I had with a Prosecutor, it was stated that ‘Victim Witness Counselors were not needed because deputy attorney’s already make contact with their victims, without the help of a Counselor.’ Based on my experience working at OPA, I disagree. Furthermore, the notion that the Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys have the same job responsibilities as a Victim Witness Counselor, is misleading.
Other responsibilities of the Victim Witness Director that also took a backseat included the onboarding of new Counselors, ongoing training of new skills, knowledge of trends in the field, and ensuring that advocates took turns attending national conferences.
I am no longer employed with the Prosecutor’s Office as I was informed on November 9th that I was being laid off and my position as Victim Witness Counselor was being eliminated from the office due to “lack of work”. This “lack of work” described in the letter that OPA gave me is in stark contrast to the much needed Victim Witness Counselor that the elected prosecutor requested monies for, in her letter (just a few months ago) to County Council dated June 13th, 2011. Despite this “lack of work” the office has hired several people including a Receptionist, a Process Server, two (2) Law Clerks, and a Law Office Assistant position which was created for the previous Secretary--all since my last day of employment, November 23rd, 2011. Furthermore, OPA has done nothing to preserve my employment despite that the County of Kauai Employee Handbook (page 17) Layoff Policy states that they will give 90 days’ notice prior to instilling a Reduction in Workforce or Layoff. I am certain that the victims who call OPA on a daily basis requesting an update on their case status or the victims of the most recent surge of crime on Kauai, could have used the services I provided as a Victim Witness Counselor.
I request of you today, to re-evaluate the Victim Witness Program and consider that victims are not being served in this community in the full scope that they should be served, due to the changes and restraints that the elected prosecutor is putting on the Counselor’s abilities to communicate with local agencies and organizations, conduct outreach to victims, and serving victims in a timely manner through the prosecution of crimes. I believe that the County of Kauai has excellent resources to support the victims of our community. My hope is that my words will be a starting point for restoring the full scope of the Victim Witness Program back to its intended purpose for our victims, community, and ohana.
Sincerely,
Erin Wilson
(PNN) 17.
That's the answer usually given by former and current employees at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) to many of the questions as to why there are so many charges of mismanagement and ill-treatment of employees in Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's office.
That's because 17 is the number of "Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA" according to a scathing letter to the Kaua`i County Council by Erin Wilson, a former Victim Witness Counselor at the OPA.
Wilson's letter- which is published here in full (below at the end of this article)- was submitted as testimony on a communication at yesterday's (January 11, 2012) council meeting. The communication asked for Iseri to come before the council to discuss "the status of the Victim Witness Program and Office of the Prosecuting Attorney."
The matter was deferred for two weeks until January 25 however because Iseri submitted a letter saying she was "sick," according to Council Chair Jay Furfaro.
The issues Iseri will discuss in two weeks, according to the agenda, include:
1) Case backlog caused by furloughs.
2) Funding - how utilized and whether sufficient to address concerns.
3) Levels of staffing and level of service for the Victim Witness program.
4) Caseload open, closed and pending
The issue dates back to May 6, 2009 according to Councilmember Tim Bynum when Iseri was summoned to appear before the council to answer the same questions but never did because, Bynum said the minutes of that meeting show, he was cut off from his line of questioning by then Council Chair Kaipo Asing.
Asing claimed Bynum's questioning of Iseri was a Sunshine (open meetings) Law violation because it was off the subject of the agenda. However according to Bynum, more than a year later the Office of Information Practices (OIP), which oversees the Sunshine Law, ruled his line of questioning did not violate the law.
Bynum famously feuded with Asing over many matters of council process and rules during Asing's tenure and is currently involved in a well-known, long-standing feud with Iseri dating back to her days on the council with Bynum.
Until yesterday the latest chapter in the conflict has been what Bynum claims is his malicious, first-of-its-kind prosecution by Iseri for a permitting violation, apparently spurred by Bynum having had a rice cooker in a family room of his home which, Iseri claims, is a zoning violation because technically, with the presence of a sink, it created a unpermitted separate living unit.
Wilson spoke of the number "17" by saying:
After asking many employees at OPA why the delay on the above referenced case and others I had been assigned to, I was consistently referred to one number...17. This number was significant because there had been 17 Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA. 17 was a significant number because the prosecutor’s office is a relatively small office to begin with. 17 was a significant number because all of these 17 former employees had left the office since the current OPA Leadership was elected into office. Most importantly, 17 was a significant number because it answered some of my questions about why a large backlog of cases had either sat for long periods of time without victims being contacted, defendants being indicted, or passed on from deputy to deputy through the revolving door at OPA.
Some of the allegations in Wilson's letter are that:
- NOTHING could be done without the direct approval and oversight of the elected prosecutor. In fact, office staff received an email from the Prosecutor’s Office leadership, stating that staff was not to send emails to any outside agencies unless discussed with the OPA leadership prior to sending. Furthermore, OPA Leadership asked to be cc’ed on all other emails to outside agencies.
- The process by which OPA would receive completed investigations and then assigned to the appropriate Deputy and Victim Witness Counselor was ambiguous. The time frame with which the assignment would take place was even more vague and varied week to week. Sometimes cases would be reviewed by the Prosecutor and assigned to a Deputy Attorney and Victim Witness Counselor right away. Other times, as I found out with my caseload, would take months upon months before even being assigned to a Deputy or Counselor for any action to be taken.
- In a letter to County Council dated January 19, 2011 regarding furloughs, the Elected Prosecutor, Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, states that as a result of furloughs,
'OPA, the sole agency to file the criminal documents with the court and/or prepare for hearings, wasn’t able to accomplish its duties in a number of cases because there was insufficient staff to prepare them in an expedited and timely manner.'
I beg to differ. I would suggest instead, it is the constant revolving door of employees that has caused a tremendous backlog of cases at OPA. Even the office letterhead is constantly changing and currently reflects that about half of the Deputies that were listed on the above referenced letter, dated January 19th, 2011, have left OPA within the past year. All, I would suggest, to the detriment of Kauaiian families and community.
- The elected prosecutor demoted the former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and effectively eliminated the Director position altogether. What did this mean for the Victim Witness program? It meant that our Victim Witness program no longer had a leader in Victim Witness services to provide oversight of day to day operations and management of the program. It also resulted in drastic changes in the scope of services that Victim Witness Counselors were allowed to offer... After the Victim Witness Director position was eliminated, these components of our comprehensive program diminished or ceased to exist.
- The current OPA Leadership also promotes the perception that Victim Witness Counselors have little importance within the office and are perceived as such by many of the attorneys, clerks, and other staff at OPA.
- I am no longer employed with the Prosecutor’s Office as I was informed on November 9th that I was being laid off and my position as Victim Witness Counselor was being eliminated from the office due to “lack of work”. This “lack of work” described in the letter that OPA gave me is in stark contrast to the much needed Victim Witness Counselor that the elected prosecutor requested monies for, in her letter (just a few months ago) to County Council dated June 13th, 2011. Despite this “lack of work” the office has hired several people including a Receptionist, a Process Server, two (2) Law Clerks, and a Law Office Assistant position which was created for the previous Secretary--all since my last day of employment, November 23rd, 2011. Furthermore, OPA has done nothing to preserve my employment despite that the County of Kauai Employee Handbook (page 17) Layoff Policy states that they will give 90 days’ notice prior to instilling a Reduction in Workforce or Layoff. I am certain that the victims who call OPA on a daily basis requesting an update on their case status or the victims of the most recent surge of crime on Kauai, could have used the services I provided as a Victim Witness Counselor.
At yesterday's meeting, while Bynum was trying to give the history of the issues being aired before the council and the Asing/Sunshine Law/OIP matter, Councilperson Mel Rapozo, famously an extremely close ally and employee of Iseri's, tried to stop Bynum from speaking by claiming the statement he was making violated the Sunshine Law, interrupting Bynum twice and appealing to Furfaro to stop Bynum.
After getting huffy at the notion that he was being accused of ducking the issue- even though Bynum said no such thing- Furfaro allowed Bynum to finish his statement.
Rapozo serves summonses for Iseri's office despite a ban on councilmembers doing more than $500 worth of work for the county. He and Iseri have thus far successfully circumvented the provision by breaking the contracts up into parcels of less than $500 each and also have claimed that Rapozo is the only one on the island who can do the work based on the fact that no one else bid on it.
Part of the intent of the law is to make sure that councilmembers cannot use their power to intimidate others from bidding on a contract upon which the councilmember is bidding.
Council Vice Chair JoAnn Yukimura- who sent the communication to the council requesting Iseri's presence- referred to Wilson's letter and asked that staff contact former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and request that she be present to testify at the January 25 meeting.
Iseri is up for reelection this year and will face current Deputy County Attorney with the Kaua`i Police Department, Justin Kollar.
-------
Erin Wilson's letter to the Kaua`i County Council
Date: January 10, 2012
To: Jay Furfaro, Chair
Joann Yukimura, Vice Chair
Tim Bynum
Dicky Chang
KipuKai Kuali’i
Mel Rapozo
Nadine Nakamura
From: Erin Wilson, Former Victim Witness Counselor at OPA
Re: Council Meeting Agenda Item C 2012-08
First of all let me say thank you for your time and providing an opportunity for public comment on the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) and Victim Witness Program (VWP) at your meeting today. I believe my circumstance is unique to any other and I appreciate the opportunity to share some of my experiences with you in hopes that you will consider what I have to say as an opportunity to improve services at OPA and the Victim Witness Program.
I am a single mom who moved to Kauai in August 2011 from Colorado with my 6 year old son because I was offered a position as a Victim Witness Counselor at the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This was in my mind, a dream job, where I could use my passion for helping others, advocating for victims of crime. Within a few days of working, I was assigned to work on the most serious of crimes including murder, negligent homicide, assault, robbery, theft, etc. In this position, my responsibilities included making contact with victims to find out how they were coping, finding out what their needs are, helping victims apply for Crime Victim Compensation, finding local resources, getting victims registered for SAVIN (a victim notification system), and let victims know about other civil remedies. Most importantly, my job was to listen to our victims.
I quickly learned at OPA that NOTHING could be done without the direct approval and oversight of the elected prosecutor. In fact, office staff received an email from the Prosecutor’s Office leadership, stating that staff was not to send emails to any outside agencies unless discussed with the OPA leadership prior to sending. Furthermore, OPA Leadership asked to be cc’ed on all other emails to outside agencies. I was very surprised by this as I had not worked in such an environment where communication with related agencies (agencies we interface with) was restricted in such a manner.
The process by which OPA would receive completed investigations and then assigned to the appropriate Deputy and Victim Witness Counselor was ambiguous. The time frame with which the assignment would take place was even more vague and varied week to week. Sometimes cases would be reviewed by the Prosecutor and assigned to a Deputy Attorney and Victim Witness Counselor right away. Other times, as I found out with my caseload, would take months upon months before even being assigned to a Deputy or Counselor for any action to be taken.
In one case that was assigned to me, there were several victims of a violent crime. Prior to making initial contact with the victims, I reviewed the police reports so as to be fully prepared when I contacted the victims and their families, being fully aware of what happened. What I was unable to prepare for was the anger and frustration these families felt when I met with them the first time in our office and learned that after 17 months, I was the first person to contact them from the Prosecutor's Office. In those 17 months, none of the victims or their families had been contacted by anyone at the Prosecutor’s office to offer condolences (there had been a death resulting from the crime) or inform the families about their rights to Victim Witness services, Crime Victim Compensation, or any other related community services that they were entitled to. It was not that the Deputies or Victim Witness Counselors were not working hard on their caseloads, but rather, the victims’ receipt of services could have occurred much earlier in this case and many others, had the case(s) been assigned by OPA Leadership in a timelier manner. Many of the cases I came across had sat waiting for screening and prosecution or declination for long periods of time. Cases had sat for so long that in some situations, the statute of limitations had run out on certain counts of crimes and the defendants could no longer be charged, leaving victims helpless.
After asking many employees at OPA why the delay on the above referenced case and others I had been assigned to, I was consistently referred to one number...17. This number was significant because there had been 17 Deputy Attorneys who had been hired and either terminated or left on their own accord from OPA. 17 was a significant number because the prosecutor’s office is a relatively small office to begin with. 17 was a significant number because all of these 17 former employees had left the office since the current OPA Leadership was elected into office. Most importantly, 17 was a significant number because it answered some of my questions about why a large backlog of cases had either sat for long periods of time without victims being contacted, defendants being indicted, or passed on from deputy to deputy through the revolving door at OPA.
In a letter to County Council dated January 19, 2011 regarding furloughs, the Elected Prosecutor, Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, states that as a result of furloughs,
“OPA, the sole agency to file the criminal documents with the court and/or prepare for hearings, wasn’t able to accomplish its duties in a number of cases because there was insufficient staff to prepare them in an expedited and timely manner.”
I beg to differ. I would suggest instead, it is the constant revolving door of employees that has caused a tremendous backlog of cases at OPA. Even the office letterhead is constantly changing and currently reflects that about half of the Deputies that were listed on the above referenced letter, dated January 19th, 2011, have left OPA within the past year. All, I would suggest, to the detriment of Kauaiian families and community.
There was another significant factor that limited the scope of Victim Witness Services at OPA. The elected prosecutor demoted the former Victim Witness Director, Diana Gausepohl-White and effectively eliminated the Director position altogether. What did this mean for the Victim Witness program? It meant that our Victim Witness program no longer had a leader in Victim Witness services to provide oversight of day to day operations and management of the program. It also resulted in drastic changes in the scope of services that Victim Witness Counselors were allowed to offer. For example, before the Director position was eliminated, the VWP offered services such as Outreach programs, crime scene support upon request, alliances with multiple community agencies. After the Victim Witness Director position was eliminated, these components of our comprehensive program diminished or ceased to exist. Another downfall to eliminating the Director position was the inability to maintain relationships with agencies that the VWP interfaces with on Kauai, in the state of Hawaii (ex. Victim Witness Coordinator meetings) as well as nationwide organizations such as National Organization for Victim Advocacy (NOVA). These former relationships made our Victim Witness program at the Prosecutor’s Office stand out among others in the Pacific region.
Losing the Victim Witness Director at OPA, we also lost accountability for an equitable distribution of workloads among the Counselors. For example, each Counselor is assigned to certain types of cases such as Property, Crimes Against Persons, Firearms, etc. without regard to the intensity of the case or the needs of the victims and witnesses. The current OPA Leadership also promotes the perception that Victim Witness Counselors have little importance within the office and are perceived as such by many of the attorneys, clerks, and other staff at OPA. For example, in one conversation I had with a Deputy Attorney at OPA, two Victim Witness Counselors were referred to as “worthless.” In a separate conversation I had with a Prosecutor, it was stated that ‘Victim Witness Counselors were not needed because deputy attorney’s already make contact with their victims, without the help of a Counselor.’ Based on my experience working at OPA, I disagree. Furthermore, the notion that the Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys have the same job responsibilities as a Victim Witness Counselor, is misleading.
Other responsibilities of the Victim Witness Director that also took a backseat included the onboarding of new Counselors, ongoing training of new skills, knowledge of trends in the field, and ensuring that advocates took turns attending national conferences.
I am no longer employed with the Prosecutor’s Office as I was informed on November 9th that I was being laid off and my position as Victim Witness Counselor was being eliminated from the office due to “lack of work”. This “lack of work” described in the letter that OPA gave me is in stark contrast to the much needed Victim Witness Counselor that the elected prosecutor requested monies for, in her letter (just a few months ago) to County Council dated June 13th, 2011. Despite this “lack of work” the office has hired several people including a Receptionist, a Process Server, two (2) Law Clerks, and a Law Office Assistant position which was created for the previous Secretary--all since my last day of employment, November 23rd, 2011. Furthermore, OPA has done nothing to preserve my employment despite that the County of Kauai Employee Handbook (page 17) Layoff Policy states that they will give 90 days’ notice prior to instilling a Reduction in Workforce or Layoff. I am certain that the victims who call OPA on a daily basis requesting an update on their case status or the victims of the most recent surge of crime on Kauai, could have used the services I provided as a Victim Witness Counselor.
I request of you today, to re-evaluate the Victim Witness Program and consider that victims are not being served in this community in the full scope that they should be served, due to the changes and restraints that the elected prosecutor is putting on the Counselor’s abilities to communicate with local agencies and organizations, conduct outreach to victims, and serving victims in a timely manner through the prosecution of crimes. I believe that the County of Kauai has excellent resources to support the victims of our community. My hope is that my words will be a starting point for restoring the full scope of the Victim Witness Program back to its intended purpose for our victims, community, and ohana.
Sincerely,
Erin Wilson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
