LET'S GO OUT TO THE LOBBY AND GET OURSELVES A WRIT: The news that the Kaua`i Police Commission has filed suit against Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. to have a court determine whether hizzonah had the power to suspend Police Chief Darryl Perry in February is no surprise.
On March 23 we noted that:
The agenda for next Wednesday's council meeting contains the following item:
C 2012-98 Request (03/13/2012) from the Police Commission for authorization to expend funds up to $10,000.00 to retain special counsel to represent the Police Commission in filing a complaint with the Fifth Circuit Court and asking for a declaratory judgment as to who has the authority to supervise and/or discipline the Chief of Police.
In noting the appropriation we said that:
People are always claiming "I hate to tell you 'I told you so,' but..."
Yet who are we kidding?- we love to do it.
So today we'll set up what will most assuredly be a little "see?" moment, sometime in the near future.
So call this Act 2 of this would-be three-act melodrama that, as we noted, will no doubt finish with a somewhat existential ending where, when it’s all over, the characters wind up right were they started.
Because we're willing to bet the farm that neither of the two 5th Circuit Count judges, Randall Valenciano and Kathleen Watanabe, are going to rule on what is essentially a political matter- a matter that the council could, according to the county charter, decide by themselves if they had once iota of election year political will.
Yeah- that'll happen... about the time Kapa`a traffic is a quaint anachronism.
Both judges have shown a propensity for "punting" whenever they possibly can. As we previously pointed out:
Watenabe has a history of punting these kinds of things. For example, in her decisions regarding various cases of disturbances of `iwi kupuna- the bones of native Hawaiians- by developers, she adamantly refused to rule, saying that the laws and regulations regarding the individual island burial councils and the State Historical Preservation Department (SHPD) that oversees the process, are unclear and that the legislature needs to clear thing up.
Our description is an oversimplification. But what is clear is that Watanabe did indicate that the solution was a political decision, not a judicial one.
As to Valenciano he was recently asked by Council members Mel Rapozo and Kipukai Kuali`i to clear up the use of the word "shall" in a matter regarding the Kaua`i Salary Commission's March 15 deadline for submission of their yearly "recommendations." County Attorney Al Castillo had written an opinion that, in this case, ""shall" was used "administratively" and therefor has to be read as "should."
But when the two council members went before Valenciano's court, he also said that it was a political matter and not only didn't the two have standing but that they should look to changing the law to make things clear rather than asking him to essentially split a baby.
Does anyone think that in this case either of the judges are going to get involved? Both come from a government background and perspective, Watanabe having served as county attorney and in other government jobs and Valenciano having been a long-time council member, even running for mayor one time. Both have a healthy respect for letting the government wheels turn as freely as possible and apparently do not want to get involved in inter-agency squabbles like the one over who should discipline the chief.
The ball here is clearly and fully in the council's court...
Section 7.05 of the Kaua`i County Charter details the "Powers, Duties and Functions" of the mayor.
There are 13 "Powers, Duties and Functions" The very last one reads:
"M. Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as may be prescribed by this charter or by ordinance. (emphasis added)."
This means that the council can actually pass an ordinance regardless of whether the charter defines a specific power of the mayor or not. This is somewhat unusual in that powers not designated in a controlling document cannot normally just be taken in an inferior document (such as the charter and an ordinance respectively)... unless, as it is in this case, it is specifically granted.
The council also has the power to put a charter amendment before the electorate via a resolution.
But either way the problem here is that it exists in the political realm. It is doubly political in that the council must make a political decision as to which entity they want to give that power to- whether they do so via an ordinance or a charter amendment.
Should they give it to the mayor or to the police commission? They will no doubt face criticism for doing either. If they passed an ordinance, first they would have to decide themselves which way to go. If they proposed a charter amendment, they could only propose one or the other for the electorate to vote for- there's no provision for having a referendum type of charter amendment- so they face the same dilemma.
In either scenario, if the council decides to spent the $10,000, the money is completely wasted.
And we're pretty confident that if they do approve the expenditure, we'll wind up with a nice "we told you so" to tack up on the wall with all the others.
At the time we had no illusion that the council would do anything the "easy" way. Then, as now, the seven councilmembers were and are all too aware that public opinion's on the side of the police commission. But not by as wide a margin as many may think.
Despite the brouhaha, Carvalho still has plenty of loyal political adherents who wouldn't take kindly to a charter amendment that would give the disiplining power to the commission.
Make no mistake- everyone in town has an opinion as to whether Carvalho was right or wrong and they're pretty adamant on each side... enough to make it a voting-decision issue.
As a matter of fact just proposing a charter amendment that would give one side or the other the power to discipline or suspend the chief would be a political hazard for councilmember... no matter which way they voted on whichever side the measure would give the power to.
No one on the council can afford to throw away a single "one vote" they're always asking voters to "save" for them. And with the popular former state Senator Gary Hooser in the race there is, with little doubt, going to be one eighth-place-finisher among the incumbents... a vote for one "side" or the other could be the determining factor as to who that "one" is.
The Charter Review Commission (CRC) is still, as far as we know, dithering as to whether to put a measure on the ballot- probably one giving the commission, not the mayor, the power. CRC Chair Sherman Shiraishi actually tried to ask the council what the commission should do earlier this year with no real response forthcoming.
So now that the suit has been filed, as the local newspaper noted this morning, it's conveniently out of the council's hands because supposedly no one is permitted to comment on the matter since it's a "legal" proceeding now.
The paper quoted one of the attorneys filing the suit as saying this.
(Corlis J) Chang said the case is not a complicated one, and they seek to have a 5th Circuit judge decide on who has the authority to discipline the chief of police. The mayor has one view and the police commission has a different view, she said.
“It’s a really simple issue and its one where there are two different viewpoints, and our goal is to get a resolution from the court,” Chang said. “This is straight forward and there are no other agendas here.”
But apparently it is about- well no actually, exactly- 10G's worth of complicated.
This though may just be the key quote in the article:
Chang said it’s very early in the case and once the mayor has responded to the summons they will submit their motions and wait to be assigned a judge and a hearing date. Then she said it would be a matter of presenting legal issues based on documentation and legal precedents.
Apparently getting a ruling that tells the council and police commission to stop wasting the court’s time with what is essentially a political decisions should take until... let's see, subtract the campaign contribution... carry the sign waver... divide by the stack of council certificates and awards... oh we'd say... about... Wednesday, November 7- the day after the election.
Showing posts with label Police Commission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Police Commission. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Friday, March 23, 2012
TAKING THE MINOTAUR BY THE HORNS
TAKING THE MINOTAUR BY THE HORNS: People are always claiming "I hate to tell you 'I told you so,' but..."
Yet who are we kidding?- we love to do it.
So today we'll set up what will most assuredly be a little "see?" moment, sometime in the near future.
The agenda for next Wednesday's council meeting contains the following item:
C 2012-98 Request (03/13/2012) from the Police Commission for authorization to expend funds up to $10,000.00 to retain special counsel to represent the Police Commission in filing a complaint with the Fifth Circuit Court and asking for a declaratory judgment as to who has the authority to supervise and/or discipline the Chief of Police.
In addition the council has scheduled a closed-door, executive session (ES 535) for
a briefing on the retention of special counsel to represent the Police Commission in filing a declaratory action to determine who has the authority to supervise and/or discipline the Chief of Police.
But let us save you some time and money folks- neither judge on Kaua`i is going to even rule on the matter. Both of them will tell you that essentially this is a political matter that needs a political solution.
Fifth Circuit Judges Randall Valenciano and Kathleen Watanabe have both shown this propensity for "punting" before and it's doubtful they will change now.
We've found it amusing that both "sides"- the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. vs. Police Chief Darryl Perry and the Kaua`i Police Commission- both adamantly claim the charter gives them the power to discipline the chief.
But, as we've said a number of times there is nothing in the charter or Kaua`i County Code- or for that matter state law- regarding who has the authority to discipline or suspend the chief.
Hiring and/or firing him or her does rest with the police commission. But otherwise the law is "silent."
Watenabe has a history of punting these kinds of things. For example, in her decisions regarding various cases of disturbances of `iwi kupuna- the bones of native Hawaiians- by developers, she adamantly refused to rule, saying that the laws and regulations regarding the individual island burial councils and the State Historical Preservation Department (SHPD) that oversees the process, are unclear and that the legislature needs to clear thing up.
Our description is an oversimplification. But what is clear is that Watanabe did indicate that the solution was a political decision, not a judicial one.
As to Valenciano he was recently asked by Council members Mel Rapozo and Kipukai Kuali`i to clear up the use of the word "shall" in a matter regarding the Kaua`i Salary Commission's March 15 deadline for submission of their yearly "recommendations." County Attorney Al Castillo had written an opinion that, in this case, ""shall" was used "administratively" and therefor has to be read as "should."
But when the two council members went before Valenciano's court, he also said that it was a political matter and not only didn't the two have standing but that they should look to changing the law to make things clear rather than asking him to essentially split a baby.
Does anyone think that in this case either of the judges are going to get involved? Both come from a government background and perspective, Watanabe having served as county attorney and in other government jobs and Valenciano having been a long-time council member, even running for mayor one time. Both have a healthy respect for letting the government wheels turn as freely as possible and apparently do not want to get involved in inter-agency squabbles like the one over who should discipline the chief.
The ball here is clearly and fully in the council's court as we said in the post cited above.
Section 7.05 of the Kaua`i County Charter details the "Powers, Duties and Functions" of the mayor.
There are 13 "Powers, Duties and Functions" The very last one reads:
M. Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as may be prescribed by this charter or by ordinance. (emphasis added)
This means that the council can actually pass an ordinance regardless of whether the charter defines a specific power of the mayor or not. This is somewhat unusual in that powers not designated in a controlling document cannot normally just be taken in an inferior document (such as the charter and an ordinance respectively)... unless, as it is in this case, it is specifically granted.
The council also has the power to put a charter amendment before the electorate via a resolution.
But either way the problem here is that it exists in the political realm. It is doubly political in that the council must make a political decision as to which entity they want to give that power to- whether they do so via an ordinance or a charter amendment.
Should they give it to the mayor or to the police commission? They will no doubt face criticism for doing either. If they passed an ordinance, first they would have to decide themselves which way to go. If they proposed a charter amendment, they could only propose one or the other for the electorate to vote for- there's no provision for having a referendum type of charter amendment- so they face the same dilemma.
In either scenario, if the council decides to spent the $10,000, the money is completely wasted.
And we're pretty confident that if they do approve the expenditure, we'll wind up with a nice "we told you so" to tack up on the wall with all the others.
Yet who are we kidding?- we love to do it.
So today we'll set up what will most assuredly be a little "see?" moment, sometime in the near future.
The agenda for next Wednesday's council meeting contains the following item:
C 2012-98 Request (03/13/2012) from the Police Commission for authorization to expend funds up to $10,000.00 to retain special counsel to represent the Police Commission in filing a complaint with the Fifth Circuit Court and asking for a declaratory judgment as to who has the authority to supervise and/or discipline the Chief of Police.
In addition the council has scheduled a closed-door, executive session (ES 535) for
a briefing on the retention of special counsel to represent the Police Commission in filing a declaratory action to determine who has the authority to supervise and/or discipline the Chief of Police.
But let us save you some time and money folks- neither judge on Kaua`i is going to even rule on the matter. Both of them will tell you that essentially this is a political matter that needs a political solution.
Fifth Circuit Judges Randall Valenciano and Kathleen Watanabe have both shown this propensity for "punting" before and it's doubtful they will change now.
We've found it amusing that both "sides"- the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. vs. Police Chief Darryl Perry and the Kaua`i Police Commission- both adamantly claim the charter gives them the power to discipline the chief.
But, as we've said a number of times there is nothing in the charter or Kaua`i County Code- or for that matter state law- regarding who has the authority to discipline or suspend the chief.
Hiring and/or firing him or her does rest with the police commission. But otherwise the law is "silent."
Watenabe has a history of punting these kinds of things. For example, in her decisions regarding various cases of disturbances of `iwi kupuna- the bones of native Hawaiians- by developers, she adamantly refused to rule, saying that the laws and regulations regarding the individual island burial councils and the State Historical Preservation Department (SHPD) that oversees the process, are unclear and that the legislature needs to clear thing up.
Our description is an oversimplification. But what is clear is that Watanabe did indicate that the solution was a political decision, not a judicial one.
As to Valenciano he was recently asked by Council members Mel Rapozo and Kipukai Kuali`i to clear up the use of the word "shall" in a matter regarding the Kaua`i Salary Commission's March 15 deadline for submission of their yearly "recommendations." County Attorney Al Castillo had written an opinion that, in this case, ""shall" was used "administratively" and therefor has to be read as "should."
But when the two council members went before Valenciano's court, he also said that it was a political matter and not only didn't the two have standing but that they should look to changing the law to make things clear rather than asking him to essentially split a baby.
Does anyone think that in this case either of the judges are going to get involved? Both come from a government background and perspective, Watanabe having served as county attorney and in other government jobs and Valenciano having been a long-time council member, even running for mayor one time. Both have a healthy respect for letting the government wheels turn as freely as possible and apparently do not want to get involved in inter-agency squabbles like the one over who should discipline the chief.
The ball here is clearly and fully in the council's court as we said in the post cited above.
Section 7.05 of the Kaua`i County Charter details the "Powers, Duties and Functions" of the mayor.
There are 13 "Powers, Duties and Functions" The very last one reads:
M. Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as may be prescribed by this charter or by ordinance. (emphasis added)
This means that the council can actually pass an ordinance regardless of whether the charter defines a specific power of the mayor or not. This is somewhat unusual in that powers not designated in a controlling document cannot normally just be taken in an inferior document (such as the charter and an ordinance respectively)... unless, as it is in this case, it is specifically granted.
The council also has the power to put a charter amendment before the electorate via a resolution.
But either way the problem here is that it exists in the political realm. It is doubly political in that the council must make a political decision as to which entity they want to give that power to- whether they do so via an ordinance or a charter amendment.
Should they give it to the mayor or to the police commission? They will no doubt face criticism for doing either. If they passed an ordinance, first they would have to decide themselves which way to go. If they proposed a charter amendment, they could only propose one or the other for the electorate to vote for- there's no provision for having a referendum type of charter amendment- so they face the same dilemma.
In either scenario, if the council decides to spent the $10,000, the money is completely wasted.
And we're pretty confident that if they do approve the expenditure, we'll wind up with a nice "we told you so" to tack up on the wall with all the others.
Friday, March 2, 2012
AND WE GET ON OUR KNEES AND PRAY...
AND WE GET ON OUR KNEES AND PRAY...: It's no secret among Kaua`i county-watchers. Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.'s attempt at power grabbing is nothing new- this time by claiming authority in disciplining Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief Darryl Perry.
For a few years now Carvalho has been running a different but related proposal up the flagpole, one which would change the Kaua`i County Charter to take the power of appointment of department heads away from the boards and commissions that currently have it and give it to the mayor.
To hizzonah's chagrin though, there wasn't much saluting going on.
Currently the Kaua`i charter gives the power to appoint and remove their respective department heads to the Fire, Civil Service, Planning, Liquor Control and Police Commissions. In the case of the police chiefs of the various counties, it is a set-up that has been mandated by state law, making any charter change to give mayors that power effective only after legislative action.
The common wisdom behind this type of police department set-up (one that is used in most US jurisdictions) is that the local "para-military" constabulary should be under civilian control so as to "take the politics out of the police department."
Carvalho took his proposal to the police commission for their support, saying that, of course, there would first need to be a change in state law- something for which he said he was lobbying.
But the commission rebuffed his request. Of course being political appointees they weren't about to piss off their "boss" so, although they diplomatically said they "trusted" Carvalho himself to not interject politics into department business (perish the thought) were he to have the power to do so, they feared his successors might not be inclined to be as altruistic.
That's been percolating around the back of our mind while watching the current political circus, assuming that any charter change of this nature would have to wait for a change in Hawai`i Revised Statues (HRS).
You'd think we'd have learned by now. To paraphrase another meshugana, fool us 1,274 times... you can still get fooled again... and again... and again.
HRS 52D regulates county "Police Departments." Prior to 2010, HRS Section 52D-2 read "Chief of police. The police commission shall appoint a chief of police. "
However, unbeknownst to many, the 2010 legislature passed SB 2177 SD1, deleting those two sentences and substituting the following words "A chief of police shall be appointed and may be removed as prescribed by the charter of each county."
That means that, although the current charter remains legally binding, were the charter commission or the county council to place a different "prescription" before the electorate and should it pass, it would no longer be illegal to have any structure of control they desire- including of course moving the authority to hire and fire the chief of police from the police commission to the mayor.
Watch out for this one.
The Charter Review Commission (CRC) has been meeting to consider the current Perry vs Carvalho brouhaha as recently as this past Monday when they held a closed door executive session on the matter where presumably they considered a charter change to address the current "constitutional crisis."
As we described a week ago Thursday the current "crisis" is based on the fact that the charter is essentially silent on the disciplining of the police chief allowing both the mayor and the police commission to claim control- even though neither is given that clear authority in the charter.
The CRC used to meet every 10 years but now sits continually until 2016 after a charter change in 2006. Prior to the current election cycle, the CRC has been extremely independent, doing their work without checking with anyone regarding their proposed amendments. However the current CRC has been anything but independent with Chair and noted county lap-dog Sherman Shiraishi constantly coming before the council looking for scratches behind the ear and tummy rubs of approval on every move the commission is considering.
The mayor has had a more direct pipeline, not just as an ex-officio member of the CRC but through the Director of Boards and Commissions who was, until recently, Carvalho's spying eyes, ears and mouthpiece, John Isobe.
All Carvalho has to do is simply tell Shiraishi what he wants on the ballot- something he has not been shy about doing, sometimes even in writing. And in the Shiraishi family tradition, Sherm, like Clint before him, makes no bones about indicating his and the commission's desire to be as accommodating of elected officials as possible. After all it isn't like the Shiraishis haven't been on the receiving end of such largess for generations.
Oh, and even though the CRC is set up to be an independent, alternative to having the council propose charter amendments (they may also be proposed via citizen petition) the CRC has become simply an arms-length method of politically insulating the council from having to propose politically sensitive amendments in an election year.
That could well be the scenario that plays out this year. The council actually could take the reins over who can discipline the chief of police via an ordinance if they wanted to, leaving the appointment scheme the way it is now.
Yeah- right... right after they raise taxes and their salaries. Anyone got a 10 foot pole? Do we hear 20?
With the way the local press is led around by county-installed brass rings through their collective noses we wouldn't put it past the administration to try to get away with proposing an amendment that purports to "clear up" the confusion over who is in charge of disciplining the chief but actually transfers control over hiring and firing.
It wouldn't be the first time that the electorate was hornschwoggled via a "trick question" on the ballot- one that doesn't really reflect what the content of the amendment is. Remember that "conform to the sunshine law" bamboozle that actually did anything but "turn off the dark?"
It's not beyond the realm of possibility that in "clarifying" who has control of discipline of the chief the administration would also try to slip in a provision to give the mayor a little more power.
And if voters did somehow figure it out, the few that actually pay attention can be told that it was an innocent provision to avoid future conflict, resolving it in favor of "accountability to an elected official," the mayor, rather than an appointed group, the commission.
After all, Bernard has put so much effort into his patronage-based, "members only" cronyism, especially in the appointment of all boards members and commissioners, it'd be a shame to see it all go to waste.
For a few years now Carvalho has been running a different but related proposal up the flagpole, one which would change the Kaua`i County Charter to take the power of appointment of department heads away from the boards and commissions that currently have it and give it to the mayor.
To hizzonah's chagrin though, there wasn't much saluting going on.
Currently the Kaua`i charter gives the power to appoint and remove their respective department heads to the Fire, Civil Service, Planning, Liquor Control and Police Commissions. In the case of the police chiefs of the various counties, it is a set-up that has been mandated by state law, making any charter change to give mayors that power effective only after legislative action.
The common wisdom behind this type of police department set-up (one that is used in most US jurisdictions) is that the local "para-military" constabulary should be under civilian control so as to "take the politics out of the police department."
Carvalho took his proposal to the police commission for their support, saying that, of course, there would first need to be a change in state law- something for which he said he was lobbying.
But the commission rebuffed his request. Of course being political appointees they weren't about to piss off their "boss" so, although they diplomatically said they "trusted" Carvalho himself to not interject politics into department business (perish the thought) were he to have the power to do so, they feared his successors might not be inclined to be as altruistic.
That's been percolating around the back of our mind while watching the current political circus, assuming that any charter change of this nature would have to wait for a change in Hawai`i Revised Statues (HRS).
You'd think we'd have learned by now. To paraphrase another meshugana, fool us 1,274 times... you can still get fooled again... and again... and again.
HRS 52D regulates county "Police Departments." Prior to 2010, HRS Section 52D-2 read "Chief of police. The police commission shall appoint a chief of police. "
However, unbeknownst to many, the 2010 legislature passed SB 2177 SD1, deleting those two sentences and substituting the following words "A chief of police shall be appointed and may be removed as prescribed by the charter of each county."
That means that, although the current charter remains legally binding, were the charter commission or the county council to place a different "prescription" before the electorate and should it pass, it would no longer be illegal to have any structure of control they desire- including of course moving the authority to hire and fire the chief of police from the police commission to the mayor.
Watch out for this one.
The Charter Review Commission (CRC) has been meeting to consider the current Perry vs Carvalho brouhaha as recently as this past Monday when they held a closed door executive session on the matter where presumably they considered a charter change to address the current "constitutional crisis."
As we described a week ago Thursday the current "crisis" is based on the fact that the charter is essentially silent on the disciplining of the police chief allowing both the mayor and the police commission to claim control- even though neither is given that clear authority in the charter.
The CRC used to meet every 10 years but now sits continually until 2016 after a charter change in 2006. Prior to the current election cycle, the CRC has been extremely independent, doing their work without checking with anyone regarding their proposed amendments. However the current CRC has been anything but independent with Chair and noted county lap-dog Sherman Shiraishi constantly coming before the council looking for scratches behind the ear and tummy rubs of approval on every move the commission is considering.
The mayor has had a more direct pipeline, not just as an ex-officio member of the CRC but through the Director of Boards and Commissions who was, until recently, Carvalho's spying eyes, ears and mouthpiece, John Isobe.
All Carvalho has to do is simply tell Shiraishi what he wants on the ballot- something he has not been shy about doing, sometimes even in writing. And in the Shiraishi family tradition, Sherm, like Clint before him, makes no bones about indicating his and the commission's desire to be as accommodating of elected officials as possible. After all it isn't like the Shiraishis haven't been on the receiving end of such largess for generations.
Oh, and even though the CRC is set up to be an independent, alternative to having the council propose charter amendments (they may also be proposed via citizen petition) the CRC has become simply an arms-length method of politically insulating the council from having to propose politically sensitive amendments in an election year.
That could well be the scenario that plays out this year. The council actually could take the reins over who can discipline the chief of police via an ordinance if they wanted to, leaving the appointment scheme the way it is now.
Yeah- right... right after they raise taxes and their salaries. Anyone got a 10 foot pole? Do we hear 20?
With the way the local press is led around by county-installed brass rings through their collective noses we wouldn't put it past the administration to try to get away with proposing an amendment that purports to "clear up" the confusion over who is in charge of disciplining the chief but actually transfers control over hiring and firing.
It wouldn't be the first time that the electorate was hornschwoggled via a "trick question" on the ballot- one that doesn't really reflect what the content of the amendment is. Remember that "conform to the sunshine law" bamboozle that actually did anything but "turn off the dark?"
It's not beyond the realm of possibility that in "clarifying" who has control of discipline of the chief the administration would also try to slip in a provision to give the mayor a little more power.
And if voters did somehow figure it out, the few that actually pay attention can be told that it was an innocent provision to avoid future conflict, resolving it in favor of "accountability to an elected official," the mayor, rather than an appointed group, the commission.
After all, Bernard has put so much effort into his patronage-based, "members only" cronyism, especially in the appointment of all boards members and commissioners, it'd be a shame to see it all go to waste.
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
I'M AFRAID I CAN'T DO THAT DAVE
I'M AFRAID I CAN'T DO THAT DAVE: He has no key, no badge, no gun... no office.
Yet, according to sources close to the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Police Chief Darryl Perry is back on the job today although his whereabouts inside police headquarters at any given moment is anybody's guess.
It all started late yesterday when Perry told the TV's Hawai`i News Now (HNN) that he was returning to work today based on unanimous instructions from the police commission Friday, despite a county attorney's opinion that reportedly gives Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. the authority to determine Perry's status after Perry was placed on leave on February 2.
But this morning HNN reported that:
Kauai Police Chief Darryl Perry was turned away from his office when he tried to return to work Wednesday morning in a power struggle with Mayor Bernard Carvalho.
Perry told a Hawaii News Now news crew that he was not allowed to receive his gun and badge and get access to his office Wednesday at police headquarters in Lihue just before 8 a.m.
"I ordered Assistant Chief Mark Begley to open my office and reissue my equipment. He stated to me that under direct orders from the mayor and the county attorney, that he is not to do that," Perry said in an interview at police headquarters.
"The police commissioners have expressed their opinion and also directed the issuance of equipment and my ID card and everything else that comes with it, my weapons. But they have refused," Perry said.
"Right now, I'm actually on duty, but I don't have any equipment with me. I can't get in to my office. I don't have access to my computer," he added.
As of press time we have learned Perry is still "at work" although still locked out of his office
This morning at 9:29:16 a.m. Carvalho's Director Of Communications Beth Tokioka issued a "Statement by Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. Regarding The Kaua`i Police Department," in which Carvalho claims that it was initially Perry's idea to be placed on leave and Carvalho initially disagreed.
In the release Carvalho tells the following story for the first time:
“First of all, I would like to state that it is still my belief, based on advice from legal counsel, that I have the authority to supervise the daily activities of the Chief and that I have acted within my authority for all actions taken regarding this matter. The members of the Police Commission have been advised of this as well.
“As you know, on February 2, I made an announcement that the Chief of Police had been placed on leave pending the outcome of the investigation of the complaint in question. I want to make it absolutely clear that this action was taken upon the request of the Chief. Initially, when the Chief made this request on January 30, I felt that there was no need to place him on leave and that he could continue to lead the department under certain conditions that would preserve the integrity of the compliant investigation. After I advised the Chief that I would not be placing him on leave, he sent an email to the Police Commission on that same day – January 30 - asking them to pressure me into placing him on leave. I am providing you with a copy of that email so that you can see how emphatically he felt about being placed on leave.
“After further discussions on January 31 and February 1, it was determined that the Chief’s concerns had merit, and that an appropriate course of action would be to place him on leave until the complaint was properly addressed. There has been public speculation and statements regarding the type of leave the Chief was placed on. Because this is a personnel matter, I will release no details on that aspect of this matter.
“On Sunday, February 19, I was informed by Police Commission Chair Ernie Kanekoa that the Commission wanted the Chief to return to the job as soon as possible. I listened to his reasons and, although the Chief had previously made a strong case for why he should be placed on leave in the best interests of all involved, I was willing to talk to the Chief and better understand the reasons for his change of heart. I asked that Ernie and the Chief be available to discuss this with me on Tuesday, February 21, at 3:00 pm. My intent was to determine if conditions could be agreed upon that would protect the interests of all involved in the complaint so that Chief Perry could return to work.
“It is important to remember - above all else - that I have been served with a complaint that involves Chief Perry and other high-ranking officials in the department. It is my legal responsibility - which I take very seriously - to ensure that complaint is handled properly.
“Unfortunately, yesterday afternoon Ernie advised us that the Chief, on advice of his attorney, would not meet with us. This meeting was very important before we could even consider bringing the Chief back to work. In earlier discussions I've had with the Chief on this matter, he expressed deep concerns about protecting the integrity of the investigation, the department, County of Kaua`i, and his personal interest with respect to further risk and exposure to himself and his family if he were to continue working while the complaint was being investigated. I had my own concerns for protecting the interests of all involved in the complaint. For those reasons, I feel it is very important to have a shared understanding of the terms under which the Chief could return to work while the complaint is being investigated. Unfortunately for all concerned, the Chief refused to meet and chose instead to communicate through the media.
That is certainly a different story- in fact the opposite of the one told by Perry, who said he asked to be allowed to work from home but it was Carvalho who insisted he be placed on leave.
Carvalho went on to state he was " disappointed in the way this has been handled over the past 24 hours," saying the department "is in capable hands" while reiterating that "the Charter gives me that authority and (I) have been advised as such by the County Attorney," and stating that "(t)he Chief even acknowledges this in his email of January 30."
Perry's January 30 email seems to confirm Carvalho's narrative. It is addressed to individual police commission members, the mayor and some of his senior advisers and community supporters as well as some of the KPD brass.
It reads, in full,
As you know, AC Quibilan and AC Asher were placed on administrative leave with pay at the closing of this business day pending the outcome of the investigations relating to hostile working environment complaints initiated by an officer.
Additionally, at this morning’s meeting I too was placed on notice by the Mayor for my involvement relating to the most recent complaint against AC Quibilan.
In order to protect the integrity of the investigation, the department, County of Kauai, and personal interest with respect to further risk and exposure to myself and family, I too was about to put myself on administrative leave with pay at the close of this business day. However, I was informed by KPD’s legal advisor, Justin Kollar, that I do not have the authority to do that.
Therefore, I am requesting that this body contact the Mayor’s Office as soon as is practical to have my request approved without delay.
In the interim, Deputy Chief Michael Contrades shall be the Acting Chief of Police and Assistant Chief Mark Begley will be the Acting Deputy Chief until further notice and/or modifications are made.
I will send a notification to All KPD at the end of the day and will be turning in my equipment immediately in accordance with policy and procedure.
Because I will not have access to departmental communications systems, you may contact me directly via my cell phone 351-5004, or by email perrys007@hawaii.rr.com.
Mahalo. Chief Perry
Darryl D. Perry
Chief of Police
In not immediately launching an investigation when Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa filed an internal "hostile work environment" complaint against Perry's assistant chiefs, Roy Asher and Ale Quibilan, there's no doubt that Perry's actions were a violation of county policy which has the force of civil law according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) rules.
That, according to sources familiar with the filing, is essentially what Abbatiello's January complaint- this time addressed to the mayor and police commission- said. It also, according to sources, complained that Perry indirectly tried to get the idea across that she might be jeopardizing her beloved work with youth and the Explorer Scouts if she didn't drop the October compliant.
As to Perry, like "Charlie on the MTA" he may never go "home" and his fate is still unknown. He may walk forever though the halls of the cop shop, he's the chief who never (actually) returned.
Yet, according to sources close to the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Police Chief Darryl Perry is back on the job today although his whereabouts inside police headquarters at any given moment is anybody's guess.
It all started late yesterday when Perry told the TV's Hawai`i News Now (HNN) that he was returning to work today based on unanimous instructions from the police commission Friday, despite a county attorney's opinion that reportedly gives Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. the authority to determine Perry's status after Perry was placed on leave on February 2.
But this morning HNN reported that:
Kauai Police Chief Darryl Perry was turned away from his office when he tried to return to work Wednesday morning in a power struggle with Mayor Bernard Carvalho.
Perry told a Hawaii News Now news crew that he was not allowed to receive his gun and badge and get access to his office Wednesday at police headquarters in Lihue just before 8 a.m.
"I ordered Assistant Chief Mark Begley to open my office and reissue my equipment. He stated to me that under direct orders from the mayor and the county attorney, that he is not to do that," Perry said in an interview at police headquarters.
"The police commissioners have expressed their opinion and also directed the issuance of equipment and my ID card and everything else that comes with it, my weapons. But they have refused," Perry said.
"Right now, I'm actually on duty, but I don't have any equipment with me. I can't get in to my office. I don't have access to my computer," he added.
As of press time we have learned Perry is still "at work" although still locked out of his office
This morning at 9:29:16 a.m. Carvalho's Director Of Communications Beth Tokioka issued a "Statement by Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. Regarding The Kaua`i Police Department," in which Carvalho claims that it was initially Perry's idea to be placed on leave and Carvalho initially disagreed.
In the release Carvalho tells the following story for the first time:
“First of all, I would like to state that it is still my belief, based on advice from legal counsel, that I have the authority to supervise the daily activities of the Chief and that I have acted within my authority for all actions taken regarding this matter. The members of the Police Commission have been advised of this as well.
“As you know, on February 2, I made an announcement that the Chief of Police had been placed on leave pending the outcome of the investigation of the complaint in question. I want to make it absolutely clear that this action was taken upon the request of the Chief. Initially, when the Chief made this request on January 30, I felt that there was no need to place him on leave and that he could continue to lead the department under certain conditions that would preserve the integrity of the compliant investigation. After I advised the Chief that I would not be placing him on leave, he sent an email to the Police Commission on that same day – January 30 - asking them to pressure me into placing him on leave. I am providing you with a copy of that email so that you can see how emphatically he felt about being placed on leave.
“After further discussions on January 31 and February 1, it was determined that the Chief’s concerns had merit, and that an appropriate course of action would be to place him on leave until the complaint was properly addressed. There has been public speculation and statements regarding the type of leave the Chief was placed on. Because this is a personnel matter, I will release no details on that aspect of this matter.
“On Sunday, February 19, I was informed by Police Commission Chair Ernie Kanekoa that the Commission wanted the Chief to return to the job as soon as possible. I listened to his reasons and, although the Chief had previously made a strong case for why he should be placed on leave in the best interests of all involved, I was willing to talk to the Chief and better understand the reasons for his change of heart. I asked that Ernie and the Chief be available to discuss this with me on Tuesday, February 21, at 3:00 pm. My intent was to determine if conditions could be agreed upon that would protect the interests of all involved in the complaint so that Chief Perry could return to work.
“It is important to remember - above all else - that I have been served with a complaint that involves Chief Perry and other high-ranking officials in the department. It is my legal responsibility - which I take very seriously - to ensure that complaint is handled properly.
“Unfortunately, yesterday afternoon Ernie advised us that the Chief, on advice of his attorney, would not meet with us. This meeting was very important before we could even consider bringing the Chief back to work. In earlier discussions I've had with the Chief on this matter, he expressed deep concerns about protecting the integrity of the investigation, the department, County of Kaua`i, and his personal interest with respect to further risk and exposure to himself and his family if he were to continue working while the complaint was being investigated. I had my own concerns for protecting the interests of all involved in the complaint. For those reasons, I feel it is very important to have a shared understanding of the terms under which the Chief could return to work while the complaint is being investigated. Unfortunately for all concerned, the Chief refused to meet and chose instead to communicate through the media.
That is certainly a different story- in fact the opposite of the one told by Perry, who said he asked to be allowed to work from home but it was Carvalho who insisted he be placed on leave.
Carvalho went on to state he was " disappointed in the way this has been handled over the past 24 hours," saying the department "is in capable hands" while reiterating that "the Charter gives me that authority and (I) have been advised as such by the County Attorney," and stating that "(t)he Chief even acknowledges this in his email of January 30."
Perry's January 30 email seems to confirm Carvalho's narrative. It is addressed to individual police commission members, the mayor and some of his senior advisers and community supporters as well as some of the KPD brass.
It reads, in full,
As you know, AC Quibilan and AC Asher were placed on administrative leave with pay at the closing of this business day pending the outcome of the investigations relating to hostile working environment complaints initiated by an officer.
Additionally, at this morning’s meeting I too was placed on notice by the Mayor for my involvement relating to the most recent complaint against AC Quibilan.
In order to protect the integrity of the investigation, the department, County of Kauai, and personal interest with respect to further risk and exposure to myself and family, I too was about to put myself on administrative leave with pay at the close of this business day. However, I was informed by KPD’s legal advisor, Justin Kollar, that I do not have the authority to do that.
Therefore, I am requesting that this body contact the Mayor’s Office as soon as is practical to have my request approved without delay.
In the interim, Deputy Chief Michael Contrades shall be the Acting Chief of Police and Assistant Chief Mark Begley will be the Acting Deputy Chief until further notice and/or modifications are made.
I will send a notification to All KPD at the end of the day and will be turning in my equipment immediately in accordance with policy and procedure.
Because I will not have access to departmental communications systems, you may contact me directly via my cell phone 351-5004, or by email perrys007@hawaii.rr.com.
Mahalo. Chief Perry
Darryl D. Perry
Chief of Police
In not immediately launching an investigation when Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa filed an internal "hostile work environment" complaint against Perry's assistant chiefs, Roy Asher and Ale Quibilan, there's no doubt that Perry's actions were a violation of county policy which has the force of civil law according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) rules.
That, according to sources familiar with the filing, is essentially what Abbatiello's January complaint- this time addressed to the mayor and police commission- said. It also, according to sources, complained that Perry indirectly tried to get the idea across that she might be jeopardizing her beloved work with youth and the Explorer Scouts if she didn't drop the October compliant.
As to Perry, like "Charlie on the MTA" he may never go "home" and his fate is still unknown. He may walk forever though the halls of the cop shop, he's the chief who never (actually) returned.
Monday, February 6, 2012
WHY, WHY, WHY, DELILAH
WHY, WHY, WHY, DELILAH: One of the oddest things about the current Kaua`i Police Department complaints against Assistant Chief Roy Asher and is why the reported October complaint against Asher by Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa seems to have fallen into a black hole while the January complaint against Quibilan spurred a full-fledged inquiry by Mayor Bernard Carvalho, Jr.
The reason may be the way the two complaints were filed.
According to an administration source the October complaint never reached the mayor's office in the first place but rather was filed internally and handled within KPD where an investigation was apparently launched. Whether that investigation is still active is unknown.
All we can say is that in January when the complaint was reportedly filed against Quibilan it was sent to both the Kaua`i Police Commission (KPC) and Carvalho.
The matter is on tomorrow's KPC agenda, scheduled for no less than three executive sessions. So why then did Carvalho feel the need to launch his own investigation and suspend Chief Darryl Perry, especially since there is nothing in the county charter that specifically gives the mayor the power to deal with the internal affairs of the department? In fact, the commission is designated as the entity that hires and fires and so, presumably, disciplines the chief although the "discipline" part is not specifically spelled out in the charter.
Apparently Carvalho found himself in an untenable position, especially given the likelihood that there will be yet another lawsuit involving, if not sexual harassment then certainly, "creating a hostile work environment" as has been reported is the subject of both complaints.
If he were to ignore the fact that the complaint was sent to him and wait for the commission to act, when the complaint was revealed and his name was on it he surely would have been accused of inaction in the face of this type of complaint. That's something of which the county has been accused over and over during the last decade plus, as multiple sexual harassment and hostile work environment cases have shown not only guilt but distinct attempts by the county to stonewall and even cover up the events by failing to launch timely investigations... or launch them at all.
Whether or not Carvalho's actions will be found to have been in violation of the ambiguous provisions in the charter, perhaps worse for him politically would have been to have it be known that the complaint was addressed to him and he failed to act post haste.
That being said all this criticism- such as a scathing editorial in Saturday's Honolulu Star Advertiser condemning Carvalho's attitude toward informing the public of some of the details that would not have violated anyone's privacy- could have been avoided by being a bit more open as to why he took the action he did.
The pay-wall protected editorial said, in part
Kauai residents have been left in the dark after Mayor Bernard Carvalho placed on leave the island's police chief and two assistant chiefs due to what he calls an "employee-generated complaint," which can mean just about anything. The mayor should provide more information about the allegations surrounding the three highest public officials entrusted with safeguarding the island's public safety...
The mayor added in a prepared statement, "It is standard procedure to keep all information relative to the complaint confidential while the investigation is in process. This is essential to safeguard the fairness of the process and the rights and privacy of all involved."
Of course, that depends on what the public already knows or soon will learn. When police chiefs were put on leave recently in other parts of the country, the mayors in each of those cases acknowledged the issues that already had been public knowledge: In Oklahoma, the chief's arrest on drug charges; in Texas, misuse of public funds; in Connecticut, sexual harassment; and at the University of California at Davis, pepper spraying students.
But in a small town in New Hampshire, residents are still left wondering why the police chief resigned Thursday, more than four months after he was put on paid leave that totaled $36,000.
Clearly, there is compelling reason for the public to know the circumstances under which their paid public officials are placed on leave. Kauai's situation is no different...
Mayor Carvalho read the statement to reporters that the "content of the complaint" will be kept secret "while the investigation is ongoing," but he would not say whether it would be made public afterward.
"This is not the first time an employee has been placed on leave pending the outcome of an investigation," he read, "and it should not be construed to be disciplinary in nature."
However, the police chief is more than your garden-variety county employee. Residents deserve to be advised about the nature of the allegations being made against the man who has been in charge of the county's law enforcement and his two top assistants.
But perhaps the most telling part of the editorial described what happened after Carvalho's press conference on Thursday where he read a prepare statement that revealed just about nothing.
Carvalho refused to answer questions by reporters on Thursday, directing them to his communications team. When asked whether that team would answer questions that day, he responded flippantly, "Welcome to Kauai." The county attorney has advised all county employees to remain silent, and Kauai police officers are telling reporters that they are under orders not to talk.
This just underlines not just Carvalho's inability to think and speak coherently on his own without displaying foot-in-mouth disease, but the amateurish nature of Carvalho's "communications team" which is headed by Beth Tokioka- the so-called "brains" behind the last three administrations.
Tokioka has no experience as a journalist and has gotten away with Carvalho's "Welcome to Kaua`i" attitude because the local newspaper has been, with rare periods of coherency, an administration lap dog.
All this does is to confirm the widely held view that Kaua`i is "a separate kingdom" where neither the ABCs of good public relations nor the rule of law apply.
It takes a shakeup of the proportions of the current debacle to get the attention of the outside press. The only problem is that when this story fades, so will the attention to the finger that Kaua`i mayors have been giving to the rest of the world for generations.
The reason may be the way the two complaints were filed.
According to an administration source the October complaint never reached the mayor's office in the first place but rather was filed internally and handled within KPD where an investigation was apparently launched. Whether that investigation is still active is unknown.
All we can say is that in January when the complaint was reportedly filed against Quibilan it was sent to both the Kaua`i Police Commission (KPC) and Carvalho.
The matter is on tomorrow's KPC agenda, scheduled for no less than three executive sessions. So why then did Carvalho feel the need to launch his own investigation and suspend Chief Darryl Perry, especially since there is nothing in the county charter that specifically gives the mayor the power to deal with the internal affairs of the department? In fact, the commission is designated as the entity that hires and fires and so, presumably, disciplines the chief although the "discipline" part is not specifically spelled out in the charter.
Apparently Carvalho found himself in an untenable position, especially given the likelihood that there will be yet another lawsuit involving, if not sexual harassment then certainly, "creating a hostile work environment" as has been reported is the subject of both complaints.
If he were to ignore the fact that the complaint was sent to him and wait for the commission to act, when the complaint was revealed and his name was on it he surely would have been accused of inaction in the face of this type of complaint. That's something of which the county has been accused over and over during the last decade plus, as multiple sexual harassment and hostile work environment cases have shown not only guilt but distinct attempts by the county to stonewall and even cover up the events by failing to launch timely investigations... or launch them at all.
Whether or not Carvalho's actions will be found to have been in violation of the ambiguous provisions in the charter, perhaps worse for him politically would have been to have it be known that the complaint was addressed to him and he failed to act post haste.
That being said all this criticism- such as a scathing editorial in Saturday's Honolulu Star Advertiser condemning Carvalho's attitude toward informing the public of some of the details that would not have violated anyone's privacy- could have been avoided by being a bit more open as to why he took the action he did.
The pay-wall protected editorial said, in part
Kauai residents have been left in the dark after Mayor Bernard Carvalho placed on leave the island's police chief and two assistant chiefs due to what he calls an "employee-generated complaint," which can mean just about anything. The mayor should provide more information about the allegations surrounding the three highest public officials entrusted with safeguarding the island's public safety...
The mayor added in a prepared statement, "It is standard procedure to keep all information relative to the complaint confidential while the investigation is in process. This is essential to safeguard the fairness of the process and the rights and privacy of all involved."
Of course, that depends on what the public already knows or soon will learn. When police chiefs were put on leave recently in other parts of the country, the mayors in each of those cases acknowledged the issues that already had been public knowledge: In Oklahoma, the chief's arrest on drug charges; in Texas, misuse of public funds; in Connecticut, sexual harassment; and at the University of California at Davis, pepper spraying students.
But in a small town in New Hampshire, residents are still left wondering why the police chief resigned Thursday, more than four months after he was put on paid leave that totaled $36,000.
Clearly, there is compelling reason for the public to know the circumstances under which their paid public officials are placed on leave. Kauai's situation is no different...
Mayor Carvalho read the statement to reporters that the "content of the complaint" will be kept secret "while the investigation is ongoing," but he would not say whether it would be made public afterward.
"This is not the first time an employee has been placed on leave pending the outcome of an investigation," he read, "and it should not be construed to be disciplinary in nature."
However, the police chief is more than your garden-variety county employee. Residents deserve to be advised about the nature of the allegations being made against the man who has been in charge of the county's law enforcement and his two top assistants.
But perhaps the most telling part of the editorial described what happened after Carvalho's press conference on Thursday where he read a prepare statement that revealed just about nothing.
Carvalho refused to answer questions by reporters on Thursday, directing them to his communications team. When asked whether that team would answer questions that day, he responded flippantly, "Welcome to Kauai." The county attorney has advised all county employees to remain silent, and Kauai police officers are telling reporters that they are under orders not to talk.
This just underlines not just Carvalho's inability to think and speak coherently on his own without displaying foot-in-mouth disease, but the amateurish nature of Carvalho's "communications team" which is headed by Beth Tokioka- the so-called "brains" behind the last three administrations.
Tokioka has no experience as a journalist and has gotten away with Carvalho's "Welcome to Kaua`i" attitude because the local newspaper has been, with rare periods of coherency, an administration lap dog.
All this does is to confirm the widely held view that Kaua`i is "a separate kingdom" where neither the ABCs of good public relations nor the rule of law apply.
It takes a shakeup of the proportions of the current debacle to get the attention of the outside press. The only problem is that when this story fades, so will the attention to the finger that Kaua`i mayors have been giving to the rest of the world for generations.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
WELL I WONDER, WONDER, WONDER, WONDER WHO
WELL I WONDER, WONDER, WONDER, WONDER WHO: The "fact" that Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief Darryl Perry "is on leave" seems to be the only thing that is clear after chapter two of the latest departmental saga hit the streets.
Chapter one was the leave that was apparently forced on two assistant chiefs by Perry on Tuesday. But as to how Perry wound up on leave there seems to be about as much confusion in the press as there is silence on the part of the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.
The first report of Perry's "situation" came from a county press release last night and simply said:
As of this morning, Police Chief Darryl Perry is on leave and Deputy Police Chief Michael Contrades will serve as Acting Police Chief until further notice.
The local Kaua`i newspaper claims to have reached Perry who told them that indeed it was hizzonah who did the deed saying:
While the county offered no explanation in terse statements that were released Tuesday and Wednesday, Perry said late Wednesday that“the truth will come out,” and that the actions were brought about by the mayor’s office.
The pay-walled Honolulu Star Advertiser, while detailing some of the ways past chiefs have departed on less than friendly terms with the county apparently reached county KPD spokesperson Sarah Blane who told them "she was not told who placed Perry on leave."
Although the county claims it cannot say anything because it is a "personnel matter" the sunshine law says that, if appropriate in the specific case, the public's interest in the information can trump privacy concerns. That, however, would be a matter for the toothless Office of Information Practices (OIP) to determine and, even if they had fangs, they seem to work at glacial speeds.
So who dunnit?
Well if it was the mayor all we can say is "here we go again."
According to Section 11-4 of the Kaua`i County Charter
The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission. He may be removed by the police commission only after being given a written statement of the charges against him and a hearing before the commission.
And while the power to place the chief on leave is not directly addressed, Police Commissions statewide are, according to state law, supposed to be autonomous in their dealings with the police chiefs.
But while it's not within Carvalho's powers to remove- or even place on leave- the chief, it's not for lack of wishing on his part. He has been engaged in a campaign to have the state law changed so that the chiefs of the police departments across the state would be hired and fired by the mayors, making the police commissions little more than advisory boards.
It may be of note that both Perry and the commission have gone on the record opposing Carvalho's would-be new law.
A perusal of the police commission's most recent agenda produces no recent "emergency" meeting where any executive session placing Perry on leave might have taken place and to do so would have violated the state sunshine law anyway which requires six days notice before a meeting can be held.
However this morning at 8:15 an agenda for a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday February 7- the first day one could be legally held- calls for no less than three "executive sessions."
The first, ES 5 reads in part
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4, 92-5(a) (2) and (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho Jr. to provide the Commission with a briefing regarding personnel and/or disciplinary actions related to notarized complaint filed with the Police Commission on 01/31/12, and for the Commission to further consider and discuss said personnel and/or disciplinary actions.
While it's not clear what "disciplinary action" Carvalho has taken it seems pretty clear it refers to placing Perry on leave because the next item, ES 6 reads
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities as they relate to Section 11.04 of the County of Kaua'i Charter
Charter section 11-4 of course is the one cited above about the hiring and firing of the chief being the sole kuleana of the police commission.
The third item on the 2/7 agenda reads:
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities as they relate to Rule 6-1.f of the Rules of the Kaua'i County Police Commission.
But if you thought that would clarify what was going on you'll be sorely disappointed because Rule 6 is entitled "Control, Management And Direction Of The Department" and 6-1 is an incredibly long and list of the "Powers, Duties and Responsibilities of the Police Commission."
Although 6-1-3 does deal with "Investigation of Charge (sic)" it does not directly address what happens if the target of the investigation is the chief.
So what does it matter who put Perry on leave?
Well if past is prologue the county might just be in for another big settlement should Perry decide to sue for denying his rights under the charter.
To make a long story short, back when George Freitas was the chief and Maryanne Kusaka was the mayor- this during the time when Kusaka was allegedly covering up for her buddies with grubbing and grading violations by allegedly telling a Department of Public Works engineer to butt out when it came to Jimmy Pflueger and the Ka Loko Dam area that later burst during a storm killing seven people- Kusaka "removed" Freitas from his office.
She apparently got the long time secretary for Freitas and past chiefs to take his gun and badge from his desk and give it to her. There was a long list of serious charges made but when it was all over the only one the police commission upheld was that Freitas had given a ride to his girlfriend in his police car.
And in the end Freitas settled for a reported half-million dollar golden parachute and "retiring" from the force.
Hard to say what will happen tomorrow- or next Tuesday for that matter because the usual open session for decision making after executive sessions on complaint against KPD personnel is decidedly missing from the 2/7 agenda.
But one thing is clear- in his notorious quest for power Carvalho is certainly putting the county in jeopardy by usurping the commission's oversight.
Chapter one was the leave that was apparently forced on two assistant chiefs by Perry on Tuesday. But as to how Perry wound up on leave there seems to be about as much confusion in the press as there is silence on the part of the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.
The first report of Perry's "situation" came from a county press release last night and simply said:
As of this morning, Police Chief Darryl Perry is on leave and Deputy Police Chief Michael Contrades will serve as Acting Police Chief until further notice.
The local Kaua`i newspaper claims to have reached Perry who told them that indeed it was hizzonah who did the deed saying:
While the county offered no explanation in terse statements that were released Tuesday and Wednesday, Perry said late Wednesday that“the truth will come out,” and that the actions were brought about by the mayor’s office.
The pay-walled Honolulu Star Advertiser, while detailing some of the ways past chiefs have departed on less than friendly terms with the county apparently reached county KPD spokesperson Sarah Blane who told them "she was not told who placed Perry on leave."
Although the county claims it cannot say anything because it is a "personnel matter" the sunshine law says that, if appropriate in the specific case, the public's interest in the information can trump privacy concerns. That, however, would be a matter for the toothless Office of Information Practices (OIP) to determine and, even if they had fangs, they seem to work at glacial speeds.
So who dunnit?
Well if it was the mayor all we can say is "here we go again."
According to Section 11-4 of the Kaua`i County Charter
The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission. He may be removed by the police commission only after being given a written statement of the charges against him and a hearing before the commission.
And while the power to place the chief on leave is not directly addressed, Police Commissions statewide are, according to state law, supposed to be autonomous in their dealings with the police chiefs.
But while it's not within Carvalho's powers to remove- or even place on leave- the chief, it's not for lack of wishing on his part. He has been engaged in a campaign to have the state law changed so that the chiefs of the police departments across the state would be hired and fired by the mayors, making the police commissions little more than advisory boards.
It may be of note that both Perry and the commission have gone on the record opposing Carvalho's would-be new law.
A perusal of the police commission's most recent agenda produces no recent "emergency" meeting where any executive session placing Perry on leave might have taken place and to do so would have violated the state sunshine law anyway which requires six days notice before a meeting can be held.
However this morning at 8:15 an agenda for a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday February 7- the first day one could be legally held- calls for no less than three "executive sessions."
The first, ES 5 reads in part
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4, 92-5(a) (2) and (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho Jr. to provide the Commission with a briefing regarding personnel and/or disciplinary actions related to notarized complaint filed with the Police Commission on 01/31/12, and for the Commission to further consider and discuss said personnel and/or disciplinary actions.
While it's not clear what "disciplinary action" Carvalho has taken it seems pretty clear it refers to placing Perry on leave because the next item, ES 6 reads
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities as they relate to Section 11.04 of the County of Kaua'i Charter
Charter section 11-4 of course is the one cited above about the hiring and firing of the chief being the sole kuleana of the police commission.
The third item on the 2/7 agenda reads:
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities as they relate to Rule 6-1.f of the Rules of the Kaua'i County Police Commission.
But if you thought that would clarify what was going on you'll be sorely disappointed because Rule 6 is entitled "Control, Management And Direction Of The Department" and 6-1 is an incredibly long and list of the "Powers, Duties and Responsibilities of the Police Commission."
Although 6-1-3 does deal with "Investigation of Charge (sic)" it does not directly address what happens if the target of the investigation is the chief.
So what does it matter who put Perry on leave?
Well if past is prologue the county might just be in for another big settlement should Perry decide to sue for denying his rights under the charter.
To make a long story short, back when George Freitas was the chief and Maryanne Kusaka was the mayor- this during the time when Kusaka was allegedly covering up for her buddies with grubbing and grading violations by allegedly telling a Department of Public Works engineer to butt out when it came to Jimmy Pflueger and the Ka Loko Dam area that later burst during a storm killing seven people- Kusaka "removed" Freitas from his office.
She apparently got the long time secretary for Freitas and past chiefs to take his gun and badge from his desk and give it to her. There was a long list of serious charges made but when it was all over the only one the police commission upheld was that Freitas had given a ride to his girlfriend in his police car.
And in the end Freitas settled for a reported half-million dollar golden parachute and "retiring" from the force.
Hard to say what will happen tomorrow- or next Tuesday for that matter because the usual open session for decision making after executive sessions on complaint against KPD personnel is decidedly missing from the 2/7 agenda.
But one thing is clear- in his notorious quest for power Carvalho is certainly putting the county in jeopardy by usurping the commission's oversight.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
OPAQUE- AND PROUD OF IT
OPAQUE- AND PROUD OF IT: We don’t know what we’d do for source material if it wasn’t for the local newspaper’s now ubiquitous Leo Azambuja whose reports today added more confusion to that caused by his recent muddled coverage.
Today was a two-fer with the primary article on the preliminary hearing in the Anahola murder case that he apparently attended, missing facts and even quotes that somehow the Honolulu Advertiser “staff” bylined article- apparently written from their offices- contain regarding future witnesses yet to testify in the continued hearing.
And when the secondary article, based on an interview with the victim’s father, gets to the meat of the article- a description of what allegedly actually occurred- it’s completely unattributed. Though many may assume it was part of the narrative from the father assumptions can always get you in trouble.
But although it’s easy to blame the newspaper and the Azambuja’s amateurism for the community’s “what the heck is going on here?” attitude toward the Anahola murder and other cases, people's ire should really be directed toward Mayor Bernard Carvalho.
We are in possession of an email from hizonnah to a constituent who, like the local newspaper and many others in the community (us included), has been focused on trying to get Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) its own public information officer (PIO) like any normal police department.
Although he has been tight lipped on the subject until now, in the email Carvalho out and out rejects the idea in favor of the current practice of controlling every bit if information that comes out of the administration through his “Communications Team”.
The email, in full, reads:
I appreciate your continued concern and support for the Kaua`i Police Department. I can assure you that the present arrangement provides the Kaua`i Police Department 24/7 access to our Communications Team, including support at the scene of an incident if that is requested by KPD. I would challenge anyone to come up with an instance where a call from KPD to one of our Communications Team members was not immediately picked up or returned within minutes of the call. This happens in the evening, on weekends, holidays and furlough days.
Information received from KPD is turned around by members of our communications team quickly in the form of a draft for review by KPD personnel. There is never a release, quote or other information relating to KPD that is not first scrutinized and approved by KPD senior personnel before being released to the media – including the quote that you reference in your email.
Again, I appreciate your concern and can only assure you that KPD is well-served by three competent, experienced, and well-trained individuals who are fully committed to serving the needs of our police department as well as satisfy the public’s need to know to the greatest extent possible.
Mahalo,
Mayor Carvalho
As most know, Carvalho’s “team” is headed by political operative Beth Tokioka who has tightly controlled the messages from the last three administrations.
It’s not about the timeliness of what is released. It’s about the amount and type and general lack of information the public receives about crimes committed on the island.
Carvalho’s rampant paranoia has not only resulted in the lack of information that normally would be released by a police department to calm the citizenry but it flouts the intent of having a police force that is supposed to be out of the normal political control of the administration- as evidenced by the fact that the Kaua`i Police Commission is solely responsible for oversight of KPD.
It’s all part of his petty-vindictive, politically-motivated, commend-and-control style of management that has become the most insulated and corrupt Kaua`i administration in memory- and that’s saying a lot.
The local newspaper can take their share of the blame for less than coherent reporting. But unless and until KPD has its own professional PIO within its ranks Kaua`i will continue to get the mushroom treatment by being kept in the dark and fed bullsh*t.
-------
Clarification: Although we can’t see how, a few people somehow got the impression yesterday that we are a part of the new “For Kaua`i” newspaper. We have not been asked and so far, are not. Sorry if we some how caused any confusion.
And the link we provided didn’t work- the correct one is here.
Today was a two-fer with the primary article on the preliminary hearing in the Anahola murder case that he apparently attended, missing facts and even quotes that somehow the Honolulu Advertiser “staff” bylined article- apparently written from their offices- contain regarding future witnesses yet to testify in the continued hearing.
And when the secondary article, based on an interview with the victim’s father, gets to the meat of the article- a description of what allegedly actually occurred- it’s completely unattributed. Though many may assume it was part of the narrative from the father assumptions can always get you in trouble.
But although it’s easy to blame the newspaper and the Azambuja’s amateurism for the community’s “what the heck is going on here?” attitude toward the Anahola murder and other cases, people's ire should really be directed toward Mayor Bernard Carvalho.
We are in possession of an email from hizonnah to a constituent who, like the local newspaper and many others in the community (us included), has been focused on trying to get Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) its own public information officer (PIO) like any normal police department.
Although he has been tight lipped on the subject until now, in the email Carvalho out and out rejects the idea in favor of the current practice of controlling every bit if information that comes out of the administration through his “Communications Team”.
The email, in full, reads:
I appreciate your continued concern and support for the Kaua`i Police Department. I can assure you that the present arrangement provides the Kaua`i Police Department 24/7 access to our Communications Team, including support at the scene of an incident if that is requested by KPD. I would challenge anyone to come up with an instance where a call from KPD to one of our Communications Team members was not immediately picked up or returned within minutes of the call. This happens in the evening, on weekends, holidays and furlough days.
Information received from KPD is turned around by members of our communications team quickly in the form of a draft for review by KPD personnel. There is never a release, quote or other information relating to KPD that is not first scrutinized and approved by KPD senior personnel before being released to the media – including the quote that you reference in your email.
Again, I appreciate your concern and can only assure you that KPD is well-served by three competent, experienced, and well-trained individuals who are fully committed to serving the needs of our police department as well as satisfy the public’s need to know to the greatest extent possible.
Mahalo,
Mayor Carvalho
As most know, Carvalho’s “team” is headed by political operative Beth Tokioka who has tightly controlled the messages from the last three administrations.
It’s not about the timeliness of what is released. It’s about the amount and type and general lack of information the public receives about crimes committed on the island.
Carvalho’s rampant paranoia has not only resulted in the lack of information that normally would be released by a police department to calm the citizenry but it flouts the intent of having a police force that is supposed to be out of the normal political control of the administration- as evidenced by the fact that the Kaua`i Police Commission is solely responsible for oversight of KPD.
It’s all part of his petty-vindictive, politically-motivated, commend-and-control style of management that has become the most insulated and corrupt Kaua`i administration in memory- and that’s saying a lot.
The local newspaper can take their share of the blame for less than coherent reporting. But unless and until KPD has its own professional PIO within its ranks Kaua`i will continue to get the mushroom treatment by being kept in the dark and fed bullsh*t.
-------
Clarification: Although we can’t see how, a few people somehow got the impression yesterday that we are a part of the new “For Kaua`i” newspaper. We have not been asked and so far, are not. Sorry if we some how caused any confusion.
And the link we provided didn’t work- the correct one is here.
Monday, November 30, 2009
OPEN FOOT, INSERT MOUTH
OPEN FOOT, INSERT MOUTH: The obvious late-night-comedian-fodder way the two headlines appeared one above the other, at least on-line-
Police chief welcomes ‘constructive criticism’
Doughnuts help sustain leadership program.
-notwithstanding, the soft-peddled content of reporter Paul Curtis’ articles only serves to underscore the tin ear Chief Darryl Perry has for the way his communications with the public sound to the average citizen’s ear.
Apparently Perry was so shocked and apparently angry over receiving a career-first “needs improvement” grade on an evaluation- this time from a member of the police commission- when it comes to whether he “(u)nderstands ramifications of actions to others, the organization and the county,” that he felt the need to share the full evaluation with Curtis who could be counted on to play up the good parts and pooh-pooh the bad.
But what was even more dismaying than Curtis’ apparent need to suck up to the chief and department he covers- as opposed to putting their feet to the fire as “crime-beat” reporters are supposed to do- was what Perry did upon hearing from someone other than the public that perhaps his PR skills are often along the lines of “open mouth-insert foot”.
Curtis writes that upon receiving the evaluation- which other than Curtis’ characterizations has not been shared in full with the public although PNN has requested a copy either be posted on-line or be emailed to us- instead of taking the apparently “blind” or unattributed assessment to heart Perry’s first reaction was to try to track down who would dare to give god’s gift to KPD a less than “exceptional” grade.
Curtis reports that:
“So far nobody has ‘fessed up” to being the one or two commissioners responsible for the “Needs Improvement” scores, (Perry) said. This (needs improvement) ranking scores a two on a scale of one to five, with five being exceptional and one being unsatisfactory.
Fessed up? Seems the chief thinks this is tantamount to a crime. Perhaps a lineup and the third degree are in order.
Was there something unclear about the obvious fear of ostracization and ridicule from his or her peers that the one commissioner with the guts to declare the emperor naked felt in putting it in an anonymous evaluation rather than saying it aloud?
According to some in the criminal justice system the widely touted “vast improvement in morale” on the force has come at the expense of many, including some officers, feeling free enough to questions the polices that result from the politics of the chief and certain commissioners in areas such as medical marijuana, the innocent-until-guilty civil rights of those approached and/or detained and the chief’s acknowledge arming-to-the-teeth” in reaction- many say overreacting- to the non-violent civil disobedience at the Nawiliwili Superferry protests.
Apparently when no one “’fessed up” to the bad grade on his or her own Perry still wasn’t satisfied.
After the evaluation was finished in late October, two years into his current three-year contract, Perry met individually with each of the seven commissioners, not just to identify who was responsible for the low marks in two of the 28 categories, but to seek specifics on why he got the low marks so that he could improve in the areas of “Tracks and adheres to budgetary allocations” and “Understands ramifications of actions to others, the organization and the county,” he said.
And if the message that this kind of mark on his record is unacceptable was still unclear he used a well-trod bureaucratic bromide to make it perfectly clear by, according to Curtis, saying
“Constructive criticism is always welcome,”
implying that this was anything but constructive.
The tag team of Perry and ex-marine, now “pastor” Commissioner Tom Iannucci have been almost comical in the way they manage to bungle public relations whenever given the opportunity despite widespread ridicule in the community for their foible-filled fanaticism.
Many, even among Perry’s strongest supporters, have been almost relieved that his semi-regular column in the local newspaper has become more semi than regular in recent months.
Most people can take a hint. Obviously some cannot.
Police chief welcomes ‘constructive criticism’
Doughnuts help sustain leadership program.
-notwithstanding, the soft-peddled content of reporter Paul Curtis’ articles only serves to underscore the tin ear Chief Darryl Perry has for the way his communications with the public sound to the average citizen’s ear.
Apparently Perry was so shocked and apparently angry over receiving a career-first “needs improvement” grade on an evaluation- this time from a member of the police commission- when it comes to whether he “(u)nderstands ramifications of actions to others, the organization and the county,” that he felt the need to share the full evaluation with Curtis who could be counted on to play up the good parts and pooh-pooh the bad.
But what was even more dismaying than Curtis’ apparent need to suck up to the chief and department he covers- as opposed to putting their feet to the fire as “crime-beat” reporters are supposed to do- was what Perry did upon hearing from someone other than the public that perhaps his PR skills are often along the lines of “open mouth-insert foot”.
Curtis writes that upon receiving the evaluation- which other than Curtis’ characterizations has not been shared in full with the public although PNN has requested a copy either be posted on-line or be emailed to us- instead of taking the apparently “blind” or unattributed assessment to heart Perry’s first reaction was to try to track down who would dare to give god’s gift to KPD a less than “exceptional” grade.
Curtis reports that:
“So far nobody has ‘fessed up” to being the one or two commissioners responsible for the “Needs Improvement” scores, (Perry) said. This (needs improvement) ranking scores a two on a scale of one to five, with five being exceptional and one being unsatisfactory.
Fessed up? Seems the chief thinks this is tantamount to a crime. Perhaps a lineup and the third degree are in order.
Was there something unclear about the obvious fear of ostracization and ridicule from his or her peers that the one commissioner with the guts to declare the emperor naked felt in putting it in an anonymous evaluation rather than saying it aloud?
According to some in the criminal justice system the widely touted “vast improvement in morale” on the force has come at the expense of many, including some officers, feeling free enough to questions the polices that result from the politics of the chief and certain commissioners in areas such as medical marijuana, the innocent-until-guilty civil rights of those approached and/or detained and the chief’s acknowledge arming-to-the-teeth” in reaction- many say overreacting- to the non-violent civil disobedience at the Nawiliwili Superferry protests.
Apparently when no one “’fessed up” to the bad grade on his or her own Perry still wasn’t satisfied.
After the evaluation was finished in late October, two years into his current three-year contract, Perry met individually with each of the seven commissioners, not just to identify who was responsible for the low marks in two of the 28 categories, but to seek specifics on why he got the low marks so that he could improve in the areas of “Tracks and adheres to budgetary allocations” and “Understands ramifications of actions to others, the organization and the county,” he said.
And if the message that this kind of mark on his record is unacceptable was still unclear he used a well-trod bureaucratic bromide to make it perfectly clear by, according to Curtis, saying
“Constructive criticism is always welcome,”
implying that this was anything but constructive.
The tag team of Perry and ex-marine, now “pastor” Commissioner Tom Iannucci have been almost comical in the way they manage to bungle public relations whenever given the opportunity despite widespread ridicule in the community for their foible-filled fanaticism.
Many, even among Perry’s strongest supporters, have been almost relieved that his semi-regular column in the local newspaper has become more semi than regular in recent months.
Most people can take a hint. Obviously some cannot.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
(PNN) NEW KPD BUDGET UP 4% DESPITE ORDERED 10% CUTS
NEW KPD BUDGET UP 4% DESPITE ORDERED 10% CUTS
The Kaua`i Police Department “will not meet the 10% budget cuts” ordered by Mayor Bernard Carvalho and will actually show a 4% increase “due to collective bargaining agreements”, Police Commissioner Tom Iannucci told the commission at it’s meeting last Friday (Feb 27),
As PNN first- and still exclusively- reported in January, Carvalho has ordered all department heads to make 10% “across the board” cuts to their proposed 2009-10 budgets.
The full budget is due in the council’s hands by March 15.
Overtime, due to the chronic shortage of sworn officers that has plagued the department for more than a decade, is the prime reason for the non-compliance of the department according to Chief Darryl Perry.
He explained to commissars the domino effects of the shortage that caused some officers to work almost double normal number of hours, often at time-and-a-half or even double time in some instances.
He said another contributing factor is the shortage of not just sworn officers but also of civilian public safety workers who staff the cell block causing the department to take officers off the beat to guard those who are arrested.
According to Perry the department currently has 17 vacancies but hopes to graduate all 13 recruits in the current class that ends July 31 and start another in August or September.
Perry told the commission that the department is willing to “go the extra mile” to give individual help to any recruit who shows signs of dropping out and anticipates a 100% graduation rate this time around.
But the fact that there are 91 candidate right now who are awaiting processing and background checks caused Commissioner Leon Gonsalves to chide Perry for not moving fast enough to bring the department up to it’s full staffing complement of 148 sworn public safety officers.
Perry told the commission that the three or four officers devoted to doing the background checks- often stated as the main delay in processing- were enough. But Gonsalves told Perry “we’ve got to step it up” saying he’s been dismayed at the more than deliberate manner that new recruits are processed for the six years he’s been on the commission.
Gonsalves expressed displeasure over the year or more it has routinely taken from the time of application to beginning the class and told Perry that “guys are falling away” because it takes so long.
Perry also told the commission that even at 148 sworn officers KPD is short staffed by 26 officers when compared to the other counties’ officer-to-population ratios.
That situation may be addressed in the near future by what Perry said was “a billion dollars out there” in federal money some of which will allow KPD to expand the number of slots for officers by 35.
The federal funding would cover the first three years of salary for each new officer but after that the county would need to fund them causing one commissioner to remark that the council has been slow to authorize raising the number of officers despite their oft stated dedication to providing “whatever the department needs” to insure public safety.
Also on the commission agenda, after a report indicating rising crime figures on Kaua`i, when asked by a commissioner why Perry stated that “we have intelligence that some guys are coming over from O`ahu to commit crime” in addition to citing tough economic times as a traditional time of increased crime.
In addition to not meeting the 10% across the board cuts the department is also trying to get out from under the hiring freeze the county has imposed for “support staff”.
When asked about it by a commissioner Perry grinned and said “you had to ask me that” before carefully choosing his words in saying “we’re working with the Mayor’s office on that".
The commission also voted to go ahead and host the Hawai`i state police commissioner’s meeting this May after much debate about cost and the need for the department budget to be spent on departmental needs. To reduce costs the convention will use local speakers such as U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo who will be the keynote speaker.
The Kaua`i Police Department “will not meet the 10% budget cuts” ordered by Mayor Bernard Carvalho and will actually show a 4% increase “due to collective bargaining agreements”, Police Commissioner Tom Iannucci told the commission at it’s meeting last Friday (Feb 27),
As PNN first- and still exclusively- reported in January, Carvalho has ordered all department heads to make 10% “across the board” cuts to their proposed 2009-10 budgets.
The full budget is due in the council’s hands by March 15.
Overtime, due to the chronic shortage of sworn officers that has plagued the department for more than a decade, is the prime reason for the non-compliance of the department according to Chief Darryl Perry.
He explained to commissars the domino effects of the shortage that caused some officers to work almost double normal number of hours, often at time-and-a-half or even double time in some instances.
He said another contributing factor is the shortage of not just sworn officers but also of civilian public safety workers who staff the cell block causing the department to take officers off the beat to guard those who are arrested.
According to Perry the department currently has 17 vacancies but hopes to graduate all 13 recruits in the current class that ends July 31 and start another in August or September.
Perry told the commission that the department is willing to “go the extra mile” to give individual help to any recruit who shows signs of dropping out and anticipates a 100% graduation rate this time around.
But the fact that there are 91 candidate right now who are awaiting processing and background checks caused Commissioner Leon Gonsalves to chide Perry for not moving fast enough to bring the department up to it’s full staffing complement of 148 sworn public safety officers.
Perry told the commission that the three or four officers devoted to doing the background checks- often stated as the main delay in processing- were enough. But Gonsalves told Perry “we’ve got to step it up” saying he’s been dismayed at the more than deliberate manner that new recruits are processed for the six years he’s been on the commission.
Gonsalves expressed displeasure over the year or more it has routinely taken from the time of application to beginning the class and told Perry that “guys are falling away” because it takes so long.
Perry also told the commission that even at 148 sworn officers KPD is short staffed by 26 officers when compared to the other counties’ officer-to-population ratios.
That situation may be addressed in the near future by what Perry said was “a billion dollars out there” in federal money some of which will allow KPD to expand the number of slots for officers by 35.
The federal funding would cover the first three years of salary for each new officer but after that the county would need to fund them causing one commissioner to remark that the council has been slow to authorize raising the number of officers despite their oft stated dedication to providing “whatever the department needs” to insure public safety.
Also on the commission agenda, after a report indicating rising crime figures on Kaua`i, when asked by a commissioner why Perry stated that “we have intelligence that some guys are coming over from O`ahu to commit crime” in addition to citing tough economic times as a traditional time of increased crime.
In addition to not meeting the 10% across the board cuts the department is also trying to get out from under the hiring freeze the county has imposed for “support staff”.
When asked about it by a commissioner Perry grinned and said “you had to ask me that” before carefully choosing his words in saying “we’re working with the Mayor’s office on that".
The commission also voted to go ahead and host the Hawai`i state police commissioner’s meeting this May after much debate about cost and the need for the department budget to be spent on departmental needs. To reduce costs the convention will use local speakers such as U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo who will be the keynote speaker.
Saturday, June 14, 2008
BARK CLEARLY
BARK CLEARLY: Another day another pile of “huh?” on Kaua`i.
The first one regards the report in today’s paper from new reporter Michael Levine, who’s been doing an unparalleled job so far of covering the police and court beat with vigorous, clear and concise coverage.
In his article today we get news that despite the deliberate lack of funding for it in the County’s new Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) budget, Chief Darryl Perry is going ahead with creating an Internal Affairs Division (IAD) anyway, in possible violation of the budget ordinance..
The article itself is careful to call it a “pseudo” IAD despite the misleading headline, “Police chief to add internal affairs unit, information officer”, apparently written by someone who didn’t bother to read the article.
The headline is factually wrong in two respects- first in saying the Chief is the one adding a Public Information Officer (PIO) when the Council approved and funded the position thereby creating it and second in saying that the Chief is adding an actual IA division instead of a “sort of” one.
The distressing news is that the already understaffed department’s Criminal Investigations Bureau (CIB) will apparently be giving up officers to create the pseudo-IA, despite bitter complaints from the Council during the budget process this year that department heads are misappropriating salary monies and shifting around positions without Council approval for purposes not specifically identified by the Council in the ordinance
But the illegality might be one of those problems that takes care of itself since now the CIB will have even less time to investigate “The Case of the Shifting Salaries”.
Certainly we’ve needed an IA division at KPD for many years and the Council can certainly be criticized for reportedly giving the Chief a bad “choice” in saying he could have either more clerks or an IA division but not both.
The extra clerks will presumably be used to get officers back on the street and away from doing paperwork that can be done by non Public Safety Officers. This has been a long standing problem discussed at length by the Police Commission and this and past chiefs.
But so much for the Council’s past promises to give funding priority to reasonable requests for necessary items requested by KPD to not just make better use of personnel but to put a clamp on rogue officers without pitting the chief against his personnel, which is what the IA is supposed to do.
We’re also a little “huh” about the way the PIO position was described. The article claims
(T)he new position will be opening dialogue with community leaders to coordinate joint efforts, Perry said.
Whether that was meant to say that average community members will be excluded and only “leaders” will be included in these dialogues is an important distinction for many especially given the current perceived lack of public input on policing policies.
If it was an unintended word slip-up one would think the Chief would choose his words a little more carefully what with the ill-considered way many say he has responded to community complaints recently.
But in any case getting the filter of the administration out of the mix- where it shouldn’t be by law- and allowing the Department to speak for itself is certainly a step in the right direction.
Another “huh?” is contained in a report in Walter Lewis’ column today saying that the new administration-proposed property tax reform bill was put together by what the Mayor Bryan Baptiste has called a “Real Property Tax Commission”.
We’re beginning to think the administration doesn’t just “not get it”- the idea of open governance or the concept of following the law- but is blatantly thumbing their nose at it.
In addition to the fact that, as Walter says, according to the Charter only the Council can create boards and commissions, when a commission meets their confabs must be open to the public, take public testimony on every agenda item and announce and “post” their agenda with the lieutenant governor’s office six days in advance according to State law
Somehow this commission formed, met and delivered their work product in complete secrecy.
It would take pages to list all the times Baptiste’s babooze brigade of crony consultants have done this kind of thing- meeting secretly to come up with “done-deals”- so we don’t expect anyone to notice unless the Council decides to enforce the law and send the proposed bill back as dead on arrival. But unless it’s politically advantageous for them to nix it, don’t count on it.
Last but not least is this weird little “huh?” piece from the yesterday’s paper announcing how Councilpersons Mel Rapozo and Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho have really brought home the bacon in the form of prescription-drug discount program for Kaua`i.
With a headline of “Discount prescription program now on Kaua‘i” the article ballyhoos how:
Kaua‘i County yesterday launched a prescription drug discount card program to help relieve the financial strain on residents due to soaring medical costs, officials said.The free program, sponsored by the National Association of Counties, offers an average savings of 20 percent off the retail price of commonly prescribed drugs
“This is the best program ever offered for free to our residents,” said Kaua‘i County Councilwoman Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, who has served on the NACo Board of Directors since 2006.
Wow. Free. And the “best” program to boot.. Tell us more Mel...
Local government may be unable to combat high prices at the pump, but this program should provide some monetary aid for residents, Councilman Mel Rapozo said at the Historic County Building.It costs county taxpayers nothing to make the cards available at neighborhood centers, the Parks and Recreation Department, the Office of Elderly Affairs, the Mayor’s Office and the Historic County Building, officials said.“Why wouldn’t we do this?” said Rapozo, who thanked Mayor Bryan Baptiste’s administration for its help in making the program possible on Kaua‘i.
But credit where credit is do. What did Shaylene do to bring this godsend to our shores?
“I personally took the initiative to start this program on Kaua‘i after seeing the tremendous benefits to other counties and after having the contract reviewed by our county attorney,” (Iseri Carvalho) said. “Since the program began, participating counties have made the program available to millions of Americans of any age, income level or health condition, and has saved consumers more than $83 million through 7.5 million prescriptions in savings averaging 22 percent.”
“It’s so vital ... the networking capabilities ... that put Michigan in the same room as Hawai`i,” he said. “We share so many of the same problems.”Oooo...vital.. Tell us more Shay- you must really care and showed us by taking the initiative. You’re our hero. Maybe we can buy a new car now with all that money we’ll be saving.
But wait there’s more.
NACo President Eric Coleman, who calls the program the association’s most innovative to date, attended the council’s meeting.“The NACo prescription discount card offers significant savings for the uninsured and underinsured residents of our county and even those fortunate to have prescription coverage can use the card to save money on drugs that are not covered by their health plan,” Iseri-Carvalho says in a news release. “Residents do not have to be Medicare beneficiaries to be eligible.”
We’re ready- tell us how dos this program works- how much will we be saving.
Well if you read to the bottom you’ll see.
The program works by simply presenting the card to a participating pharmacy and the consumer will receive the lowest price available from the pharmacy for a prescription, Iseri-Carvalho said.
Wow- you mean this time they’ll charge us their “lowest” price? We sure tied of being charged their highest price. “Let’s see” says the pharmacist, “that difference would be... let me total that up for ya here....
...ZERO, because the highest and lowest prices are both the same- they’re called THE PRICE.”
“We were going to charge you the price we’re charging Mrs. Kanaka but we decided that for you, special today, because you look like an honest lady and we like your face AND you have the ‘Mel and Shaylene Card’ we’ll charge you the price we’re charging everyone“
What, are there pharmacies charging different prices for different people?. Special 10% surcharge for malahinis?. 20% off for one-legged Filipinos? Are there signs at Kaua`i drug stores saying “we cheat kids, old people, sailors and drunks but not ‘Mel and Shaylene Cardholders’?”
Raising the perennial question do three “huh?” make a ?Whaaaaa?”?.
The first one regards the report in today’s paper from new reporter Michael Levine, who’s been doing an unparalleled job so far of covering the police and court beat with vigorous, clear and concise coverage.
In his article today we get news that despite the deliberate lack of funding for it in the County’s new Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) budget, Chief Darryl Perry is going ahead with creating an Internal Affairs Division (IAD) anyway, in possible violation of the budget ordinance..
The article itself is careful to call it a “pseudo” IAD despite the misleading headline, “Police chief to add internal affairs unit, information officer”, apparently written by someone who didn’t bother to read the article.
The headline is factually wrong in two respects- first in saying the Chief is the one adding a Public Information Officer (PIO) when the Council approved and funded the position thereby creating it and second in saying that the Chief is adding an actual IA division instead of a “sort of” one.
The distressing news is that the already understaffed department’s Criminal Investigations Bureau (CIB) will apparently be giving up officers to create the pseudo-IA, despite bitter complaints from the Council during the budget process this year that department heads are misappropriating salary monies and shifting around positions without Council approval for purposes not specifically identified by the Council in the ordinance
But the illegality might be one of those problems that takes care of itself since now the CIB will have even less time to investigate “The Case of the Shifting Salaries”.
Certainly we’ve needed an IA division at KPD for many years and the Council can certainly be criticized for reportedly giving the Chief a bad “choice” in saying he could have either more clerks or an IA division but not both.
The extra clerks will presumably be used to get officers back on the street and away from doing paperwork that can be done by non Public Safety Officers. This has been a long standing problem discussed at length by the Police Commission and this and past chiefs.
But so much for the Council’s past promises to give funding priority to reasonable requests for necessary items requested by KPD to not just make better use of personnel but to put a clamp on rogue officers without pitting the chief against his personnel, which is what the IA is supposed to do.
We’re also a little “huh” about the way the PIO position was described. The article claims
(T)he new position will be opening dialogue with community leaders to coordinate joint efforts, Perry said.
Whether that was meant to say that average community members will be excluded and only “leaders” will be included in these dialogues is an important distinction for many especially given the current perceived lack of public input on policing policies.
If it was an unintended word slip-up one would think the Chief would choose his words a little more carefully what with the ill-considered way many say he has responded to community complaints recently.
But in any case getting the filter of the administration out of the mix- where it shouldn’t be by law- and allowing the Department to speak for itself is certainly a step in the right direction.
Another “huh?” is contained in a report in Walter Lewis’ column today saying that the new administration-proposed property tax reform bill was put together by what the Mayor Bryan Baptiste has called a “Real Property Tax Commission”.
We’re beginning to think the administration doesn’t just “not get it”- the idea of open governance or the concept of following the law- but is blatantly thumbing their nose at it.
In addition to the fact that, as Walter says, according to the Charter only the Council can create boards and commissions, when a commission meets their confabs must be open to the public, take public testimony on every agenda item and announce and “post” their agenda with the lieutenant governor’s office six days in advance according to State law
Somehow this commission formed, met and delivered their work product in complete secrecy.
It would take pages to list all the times Baptiste’s babooze brigade of crony consultants have done this kind of thing- meeting secretly to come up with “done-deals”- so we don’t expect anyone to notice unless the Council decides to enforce the law and send the proposed bill back as dead on arrival. But unless it’s politically advantageous for them to nix it, don’t count on it.
Last but not least is this weird little “huh?” piece from the yesterday’s paper announcing how Councilpersons Mel Rapozo and Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho have really brought home the bacon in the form of prescription-drug discount program for Kaua`i.
With a headline of “Discount prescription program now on Kaua‘i” the article ballyhoos how:
Kaua‘i County yesterday launched a prescription drug discount card program to help relieve the financial strain on residents due to soaring medical costs, officials said.The free program, sponsored by the National Association of Counties, offers an average savings of 20 percent off the retail price of commonly prescribed drugs
“This is the best program ever offered for free to our residents,” said Kaua‘i County Councilwoman Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, who has served on the NACo Board of Directors since 2006.
Wow. Free. And the “best” program to boot.. Tell us more Mel...
Local government may be unable to combat high prices at the pump, but this program should provide some monetary aid for residents, Councilman Mel Rapozo said at the Historic County Building.It costs county taxpayers nothing to make the cards available at neighborhood centers, the Parks and Recreation Department, the Office of Elderly Affairs, the Mayor’s Office and the Historic County Building, officials said.“Why wouldn’t we do this?” said Rapozo, who thanked Mayor Bryan Baptiste’s administration for its help in making the program possible on Kaua‘i.
But credit where credit is do. What did Shaylene do to bring this godsend to our shores?
“I personally took the initiative to start this program on Kaua‘i after seeing the tremendous benefits to other counties and after having the contract reviewed by our county attorney,” (Iseri Carvalho) said. “Since the program began, participating counties have made the program available to millions of Americans of any age, income level or health condition, and has saved consumers more than $83 million through 7.5 million prescriptions in savings averaging 22 percent.”
“It’s so vital ... the networking capabilities ... that put Michigan in the same room as Hawai`i,” he said. “We share so many of the same problems.”Oooo...vital.. Tell us more Shay- you must really care and showed us by taking the initiative. You’re our hero. Maybe we can buy a new car now with all that money we’ll be saving.
But wait there’s more.
NACo President Eric Coleman, who calls the program the association’s most innovative to date, attended the council’s meeting.“The NACo prescription discount card offers significant savings for the uninsured and underinsured residents of our county and even those fortunate to have prescription coverage can use the card to save money on drugs that are not covered by their health plan,” Iseri-Carvalho says in a news release. “Residents do not have to be Medicare beneficiaries to be eligible.”
We’re ready- tell us how dos this program works- how much will we be saving.
Well if you read to the bottom you’ll see.
The program works by simply presenting the card to a participating pharmacy and the consumer will receive the lowest price available from the pharmacy for a prescription, Iseri-Carvalho said.
Wow- you mean this time they’ll charge us their “lowest” price? We sure tied of being charged their highest price. “Let’s see” says the pharmacist, “that difference would be... let me total that up for ya here....
...ZERO, because the highest and lowest prices are both the same- they’re called THE PRICE.”
“We were going to charge you the price we’re charging Mrs. Kanaka but we decided that for you, special today, because you look like an honest lady and we like your face AND you have the ‘Mel and Shaylene Card’ we’ll charge you the price we’re charging everyone“
What, are there pharmacies charging different prices for different people?. Special 10% surcharge for malahinis?. 20% off for one-legged Filipinos? Are there signs at Kaua`i drug stores saying “we cheat kids, old people, sailors and drunks but not ‘Mel and Shaylene Cardholders’?”
Raising the perennial question do three “huh?” make a ?Whaaaaa?”?.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
DAWG, YOU GOTTA CARRY THAT WEIGHT
DAWG, YOU GOTTA CARRY THAT WEIGHT: One has to wonder whether this is now being done on purpose or whether Tom Iannucci is just lacks all judgment and discretion.
Another rant from the head of the Police Commission appears in today’s paper replete with a similar tone to, and the type of ridicule you’d expect from, some crazy rabid reporter but not from the top civilian official in the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD).
Whatever one thinks of Juan Wilson’s research or the points he makes in trying to get KPD to consider community policing policies and possibly get officers out of their cars, Iannucci seemingly doesn’t want to discuss anything. Apparently his new “style” is to just ridicule Wilson personally rather than actually argue the points of community policing and it’s applicability to Kaua`i.
Iannucci seems to have fun trying to make his points by using condescending and patronizing ridicule of Wilson personally with such ditties as:
“I appreciate your attempt to”,
“Nice attempt, but it just doesn’t work.”.
“So which Kansas City were you relating us to?”
“That’s why they have the little blue lights on the tops of their cars, with the little “woo woo” sound”,
“Look, here is the reality”
ending with
“It seems like you just got a problem with KPD and this is the real issue. After all the fuss, Wilson, I hope you are driving in an electric cart, or riding a horse yourself. That would only be right.”
But even when it comes to the subject at hand he argues against getting officers out on foot, bike, horse or even Segway by ridiculing anyone he can who would suggest that this is even possible in what he claims is a totally rural area.
His silly, non-analogous, un-visionary professings include such drivel as
Hey, I’m all for the Mayberry RFD lifestyle, where you, me, Barney Fife and Sheriff Andy are strolling down Rice Street talking about the Friday night football game and we stop by Aunt Bee’s house for some apple pie, or Portuguese bean soup. Where the biggest problem the town is facing is that Opey is cutting class to go fishing and they have a town drunk. I want that, Wilson, but the reality is, it’s not where we are at, nor does anyone believe we’re at that place either.
and
Your “Harvard” sociologist police officer, who wrote a book, is just one of over 800,000 officers across our country. Writing a book and going to Harvard does not make one an “expert” by any means.
Iannucci’s “can’t do” attitude seem to preclude all use of non-vehicular policing. His only true argument that addresses the issue is this:
Kaua‘i is a rural and very spread out island. We simply don’t have the manpower or the finances to support one or two officers per neighborhood, per shift, per week, island-wide with substations and equipment. But you’re more than welcome to petition the mayor or the County Council about your request.
Either Iannucci is the most disingenuous person on the island or he doesn’t get out much. Maybe he’s never been to the strip malls and towns, the shopping complexes and beach areas where bikes or horses might be appropriate since, looking that the police blotter, half of the crime seems to takes place in these areas.
How about putting a little thought into it Tom? Are you telling us it’s impossible to include bikes and electric cart patrols in our core areas? Are you saying it’s impractical to have daytime patrols in the makai areas say between Kawaihau Road and Lydgate Park patrolling the streets and beaches rather than doing the current drive-bys? How about the Lihu`e area from the hospital down to the airport up Rice Street and maybe over to Kukui Grove?
Only an idiot would think that we need to have a walking patrol up and down Papalina and Waha and over to Kua road in Kalaheo or put someone on a Segway up Olohena across Kamalu and down to Wailua.
But guess what- to conflate the idea of doing it where people congregate daily with putting an officer on foot atop Wai`ale`ale is just as idiotic- and besides making up such wild misrepresentational projections is OUR job Tom.
In dismissing the getting-out-of-the-car idea entirely, Iannucci has us laughing at him, not Wilson by putting up any straw man in a storm rather than trying to look at the places where community policing might make sense- yes Tom, like through Hanapepe town and down to Salt Pond up to ‘Ele`ele and down to Port Allen.
The Password today Tom is Disingenuity- when you say you’re
“wondering if the beat cop can make it from Salt Pond to Hanapepe Heights in time to stop a fight or a robbery”
you don’t mention of course that the same officer in a patrol car could be in Waimea when he gets the call and take even longer.
Or that the officer could be actually sitting there witnessing the car break-in or mugging without drawing attention to himself through the presence his police cruiser. Those examinations of the logistics of patrolling are the same whether you’re on foot on bike or in a car in that each has advantages and disadvantages.
But it is obviously easier to make up absurdities based on the worst way to distribute resources such as riding a Segway up the Hanapepe- Ele`ele hill instead of thinking about innovative ways to make better use of our policing resources.
Would it take that much to equip some patrol cars to carry bikes and get officers out of them when they’re not responding to calls from the boonies? Or is that too hard to imagine Tom- does it huwt yaw widdle bwane to try to figure out how to do it?
You apparently strained your neurons to the breaking point to figure out all the misrepresentations and excuses in the world for not even considering where community policing might be appropriate. It might not be appropriate.
But you’d never know due to your rejection of the concept out of hand which is even more dismaying than the dismissive, pejorative and downright disrespectful attitude you display in dealing with the suggestions from someone you are supposed to represent in sitting on the Police Commission..
People expect broad brush spoofing derision, scorn and mirth out of this mangy mutt. But we don’t expect either the attitude nor the disingenuous distractions and misrepresentation from the top civilian official in our the paramilitary operation of our police force.
I hear they’re selling clues down in town Tom - maybe you need to get out of your car, climb in the bathroom window and trade in some of that Viagra for one. Or quit the police department and get yourself a steady job... like blogging.
Another rant from the head of the Police Commission appears in today’s paper replete with a similar tone to, and the type of ridicule you’d expect from, some crazy rabid reporter but not from the top civilian official in the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD).
Whatever one thinks of Juan Wilson’s research or the points he makes in trying to get KPD to consider community policing policies and possibly get officers out of their cars, Iannucci seemingly doesn’t want to discuss anything. Apparently his new “style” is to just ridicule Wilson personally rather than actually argue the points of community policing and it’s applicability to Kaua`i.
Iannucci seems to have fun trying to make his points by using condescending and patronizing ridicule of Wilson personally with such ditties as:
“I appreciate your attempt to”,
“Nice attempt, but it just doesn’t work.”.
“So which Kansas City were you relating us to?”
“That’s why they have the little blue lights on the tops of their cars, with the little “woo woo” sound”,
“Look, here is the reality”
ending with
“It seems like you just got a problem with KPD and this is the real issue. After all the fuss, Wilson, I hope you are driving in an electric cart, or riding a horse yourself. That would only be right.”
But even when it comes to the subject at hand he argues against getting officers out on foot, bike, horse or even Segway by ridiculing anyone he can who would suggest that this is even possible in what he claims is a totally rural area.
His silly, non-analogous, un-visionary professings include such drivel as
Hey, I’m all for the Mayberry RFD lifestyle, where you, me, Barney Fife and Sheriff Andy are strolling down Rice Street talking about the Friday night football game and we stop by Aunt Bee’s house for some apple pie, or Portuguese bean soup. Where the biggest problem the town is facing is that Opey is cutting class to go fishing and they have a town drunk. I want that, Wilson, but the reality is, it’s not where we are at, nor does anyone believe we’re at that place either.
and
Your “Harvard” sociologist police officer, who wrote a book, is just one of over 800,000 officers across our country. Writing a book and going to Harvard does not make one an “expert” by any means.
Iannucci’s “can’t do” attitude seem to preclude all use of non-vehicular policing. His only true argument that addresses the issue is this:
Kaua‘i is a rural and very spread out island. We simply don’t have the manpower or the finances to support one or two officers per neighborhood, per shift, per week, island-wide with substations and equipment. But you’re more than welcome to petition the mayor or the County Council about your request.
Either Iannucci is the most disingenuous person on the island or he doesn’t get out much. Maybe he’s never been to the strip malls and towns, the shopping complexes and beach areas where bikes or horses might be appropriate since, looking that the police blotter, half of the crime seems to takes place in these areas.
How about putting a little thought into it Tom? Are you telling us it’s impossible to include bikes and electric cart patrols in our core areas? Are you saying it’s impractical to have daytime patrols in the makai areas say between Kawaihau Road and Lydgate Park patrolling the streets and beaches rather than doing the current drive-bys? How about the Lihu`e area from the hospital down to the airport up Rice Street and maybe over to Kukui Grove?
Only an idiot would think that we need to have a walking patrol up and down Papalina and Waha and over to Kua road in Kalaheo or put someone on a Segway up Olohena across Kamalu and down to Wailua.
But guess what- to conflate the idea of doing it where people congregate daily with putting an officer on foot atop Wai`ale`ale is just as idiotic- and besides making up such wild misrepresentational projections is OUR job Tom.
In dismissing the getting-out-of-the-car idea entirely, Iannucci has us laughing at him, not Wilson by putting up any straw man in a storm rather than trying to look at the places where community policing might make sense- yes Tom, like through Hanapepe town and down to Salt Pond up to ‘Ele`ele and down to Port Allen.
The Password today Tom is Disingenuity- when you say you’re
“wondering if the beat cop can make it from Salt Pond to Hanapepe Heights in time to stop a fight or a robbery”
you don’t mention of course that the same officer in a patrol car could be in Waimea when he gets the call and take even longer.
Or that the officer could be actually sitting there witnessing the car break-in or mugging without drawing attention to himself through the presence his police cruiser. Those examinations of the logistics of patrolling are the same whether you’re on foot on bike or in a car in that each has advantages and disadvantages.
But it is obviously easier to make up absurdities based on the worst way to distribute resources such as riding a Segway up the Hanapepe- Ele`ele hill instead of thinking about innovative ways to make better use of our policing resources.
Would it take that much to equip some patrol cars to carry bikes and get officers out of them when they’re not responding to calls from the boonies? Or is that too hard to imagine Tom- does it huwt yaw widdle bwane to try to figure out how to do it?
You apparently strained your neurons to the breaking point to figure out all the misrepresentations and excuses in the world for not even considering where community policing might be appropriate. It might not be appropriate.
But you’d never know due to your rejection of the concept out of hand which is even more dismaying than the dismissive, pejorative and downright disrespectful attitude you display in dealing with the suggestions from someone you are supposed to represent in sitting on the Police Commission..
People expect broad brush spoofing derision, scorn and mirth out of this mangy mutt. But we don’t expect either the attitude nor the disingenuous distractions and misrepresentation from the top civilian official in our the paramilitary operation of our police force.
I hear they’re selling clues down in town Tom - maybe you need to get out of your car, climb in the bathroom window and trade in some of that Viagra for one. Or quit the police department and get yourself a steady job... like blogging.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
AS THE FUR FLIES
AS THE FUR FLIES: The dish continues and the dishes continue to fly in the local paper and in the blogosphere today over Juan Wilson’s weekend column and yesterday’s flippant response from Kaua`i Police Chief Darryl Perry.
This morning found a report by Wilson at his Island Breath web site purporting that it was not actually the “Mission Statement” of KPD that the Chief changed without going through proper state procedures as we detailed yesterday but rather the “Chief’s Message” which is right below the mission statement at the KPD web site but is not really worth the bandwidth it’s written on as an official document.
The “message” now includes the words “Aloha Spirit” and “integrity” according to Wilson, who posted Perry’s letter and a link to the new “Chief’s Message” and original “Mission Statement”
So essentially it seems that, if not guilty of illegally changing the Mission Statement of the Department, Chief Perry misrepresented what had changed as a response to Wilson’s critique of what’s wrong with KPD’s Mission Statement especially when compared with those on other islands.
But a quick look at the local paper also found another glib straw-man tirade this time from Police Commission Chair and ex-marine Tom Iannucci saying it indeed was the Mission Statement that was formulated in an insular manner without public input.
Iannucci said
But with words like “verbal buffoonery at its finest”, “what planet Wilson (is) writing from”, “trash talk” and “the right to bash our department” Iannucci accuses Wilson of wanting to disarm the force and take away their patrol cars, all the while fear mongering and raising the specter of the “Oklahoma City bombing or the destruction of the World Trade Center towers”, waving the militarization-of-the-police-force flag with such aplomb as to make any Homeland Security nut and Patriot Act-loving Chaneyac’s crotch swell with a testosterone-fueled pride and fury.
But blogger Larry Geller of Disappeared News http://disappearednews.com/ wonders what article Iannucci and Perry read. He wrote us an email saying:
We’ve hear word that Wilson and Perry are tentatively scheduled to appear on a KKCR radio talk show on Thursday at 4 p.m. but whether their will both be live or whether the Chief will only sit for a pre-taped interview with programmer Jonathan Jay remains to be seen.
And evidently Darryl and Tom weren’t the only ones who read Juan’s column as an ill-considered, wild and fanciful rant.
This morning found Koko’s human, numero-uno Kaua`i news-blogger Joan Conrow assailing not just Wilson’s column but his future viability to speak on the issue saying:
She prefaced this by saying:
We’re not going to defend everything Juan had to say or how he said it but Tom Iannucci’s tome is certainly more indefensible in ostensibly denying there are any governance and oversight problems and giving the impression that everything’s hunky-dory at the “just doing our job” KPD.
Iannucci said
If Iannucci is going to deny the harassment of dissidents then how about getting Perry to talk about the Apioalina and Mawae incidents instead of just stonewalling.
Iannucci says that
If Tom is denying KPD’s complicity in any “cover-up” of what really happened in the west side spraying incidents then where is the police investigation of Sygenta and even the DOH? Perhaps it would clear them, perhaps it would collar them. But if there’s “no comment” and apparently no investigation how can the people think there isn’t something wrong?
Perhaps the lack of any substantive investigation in the light of overwhelming evidence Sygenta lied and tried to mislead and cover up their complicity and place kids in the way of harm is what’s “shameful”.
If KPD doesn’t know what everyone in town knows it may be because they didn’t try to find out.
Or are all the parent, teachers and community leaders and members in Waimea who allege a crime, a cover-up and a lack of police investigation all a bunch of liars and nuts, to be ignored and ridiculed too?
For Tom and Darryl’s information getting officers out of their cars and onto bikes, horses, electric carts and even on foot is a national trend in policing and is a part and parcel of a movement called “Community Policing”. Try googleing it. Thousands of jurisdictions throughout the country practice it. Our last two chiefs were outspoken proponents.
We would turn it around on Tom- is there never a circumstance where an officer getting out of his or her car and going sans six-shooter appropriate? It sounds like your answer is no.- never. That’s just as absurd as saying police should never drive cars or carry guns which we never head Juan say in the first place, only hearing this straw man from you and Darryl.
It isn’t about taking away all the cars and guns but it is about, where appropriate, putting policing on the ground in the community and making the officers part of that community.
But possibly Iannucci and Perry, if they have heard of this national trend in policing, see it as a challenge to the “us and them” mentality that people legitimately fear is the growing local trend under their tutelage.
That is what the problem is and why people like Juan see conspiracy everywhere. Whether they agree with him or not the Chief’s and Chair’s job is to understand, acknowledge and deal with the “reality” that Wilson isn’t alone and not to concoct their own fantasies to counter with an equally fanciful hyped-up, paranoiac “reality”.
Iannucci and Perry owe it to us and themselves to figure out why there are these “conspiracy theories”. Perhaps it is the dots they are unintentionally drawing that people are connecting.
Wilson is apparently judging KPD by it’s words and deeds and lately it has been dismal on both accounts. The fact that Iannucci and Perry don’t understand and in fact ridicule Wilson’s reaction to some of the Department’s recent alleged abusive words and deeds and refusal to discuss them is more telling than Wilson’s apprehension of and at a conspiracy.
This morning found a report by Wilson at his Island Breath web site purporting that it was not actually the “Mission Statement” of KPD that the Chief changed without going through proper state procedures as we detailed yesterday but rather the “Chief’s Message” which is right below the mission statement at the KPD web site but is not really worth the bandwidth it’s written on as an official document.
The “message” now includes the words “Aloha Spirit” and “integrity” according to Wilson, who posted Perry’s letter and a link to the new “Chief’s Message” and original “Mission Statement”
So essentially it seems that, if not guilty of illegally changing the Mission Statement of the Department, Chief Perry misrepresented what had changed as a response to Wilson’s critique of what’s wrong with KPD’s Mission Statement especially when compared with those on other islands.
But a quick look at the local paper also found another glib straw-man tirade this time from Police Commission Chair and ex-marine Tom Iannucci saying it indeed was the Mission Statement that was formulated in an insular manner without public input.
Iannucci said
The mission statement is just one of many works in progress. Before your attack on our department and its mission statement, the updated statement was being handed out. Myself, as a police commissioner, along with all the other commissioners present and the leaders of the department were handed the updated mission statement that has been worked on for months with the input from various members of KPD. Among other things, the revised mission statement included a section on the “aloha spirit” and its inclusion in Hawai‘i state law.
But with words like “verbal buffoonery at its finest”, “what planet Wilson (is) writing from”, “trash talk” and “the right to bash our department” Iannucci accuses Wilson of wanting to disarm the force and take away their patrol cars, all the while fear mongering and raising the specter of the “Oklahoma City bombing or the destruction of the World Trade Center towers”, waving the militarization-of-the-police-force flag with such aplomb as to make any Homeland Security nut and Patriot Act-loving Chaneyac’s crotch swell with a testosterone-fueled pride and fury.
But blogger Larry Geller of Disappeared News http://disappearednews.com/ wonders what article Iannucci and Perry read. He wrote us an email saying:
Judging from the reaction, Juan must have hit some sensitive points.
They are getting better at raising straw men. Now we've got the
fire department on skateboards?? Patrolling in electric carts is quite common, security guards use those and even Segways, as do some police I understand. Unless I missed something, Juan didn't suggest trading in their SUVs for these things, nor turning in their weapons.
The dialog is going. You have a newspaper that seems willing to take these things up. The Honolulu Advertiser here is quite different.
We’ve hear word that Wilson and Perry are tentatively scheduled to appear on a KKCR radio talk show on Thursday at 4 p.m. but whether their will both be live or whether the Chief will only sit for a pre-taped interview with programmer Jonathan Jay remains to be seen.
And evidently Darryl and Tom weren’t the only ones who read Juan’s column as an ill-considered, wild and fanciful rant.
This morning found Koko’s human, numero-uno Kaua`i news-blogger Joan Conrow assailing not just Wilson’s column but his future viability to speak on the issue saying:
Juan has already blown his wad with the cops, and he’s not going to get anywhere with them from here. He has lost all effectiveness, if he ever had any, as a spokesman on this issue.
She prefaced this by saying:
Juan lost credibility, at least with me, and most likely many others, when he started out by saying the cops should give up their guns and cars and use “sporty electric golf carts,” bicycles and horse patrols. That was before he morphed into a conspiracy bit about the cops “providing speculators security for unwanted development” and “protecting the pesticide spraying of GMO corporations on the Westside.” Huh?
When you come from an extreme premise like that, it’s easy to be discredited and dismissed, which both the chief and Iannucci did in their responses. And in the process, the legitimate concerns about the further militarization of police that Juan also raised go unexamined.
We’re not going to defend everything Juan had to say or how he said it but Tom Iannucci’s tome is certainly more indefensible in ostensibly denying there are any governance and oversight problems and giving the impression that everything’s hunky-dory at the “just doing our job” KPD.
Iannucci said
Unlike your conspiracy theory, our police officers have to go out and provide protection for both the Superferry and those who protest against it. They don’t arrest protesters, but those who violate those laws that allow us all free speech
If Iannucci is going to deny the harassment of dissidents then how about getting Perry to talk about the Apioalina and Mawae incidents instead of just stonewalling.
Iannucci says that
“to even insinuate that the chief and our officers are in some way ‘suppressing’ Hawaiian Sovereignty groups or ‘protecting’ the pesticide spraying by our children in schools is just shameful”.
If Tom is denying KPD’s complicity in any “cover-up” of what really happened in the west side spraying incidents then where is the police investigation of Sygenta and even the DOH? Perhaps it would clear them, perhaps it would collar them. But if there’s “no comment” and apparently no investigation how can the people think there isn’t something wrong?
Perhaps the lack of any substantive investigation in the light of overwhelming evidence Sygenta lied and tried to mislead and cover up their complicity and place kids in the way of harm is what’s “shameful”.
If KPD doesn’t know what everyone in town knows it may be because they didn’t try to find out.
Or are all the parent, teachers and community leaders and members in Waimea who allege a crime, a cover-up and a lack of police investigation all a bunch of liars and nuts, to be ignored and ridiculed too?
For Tom and Darryl’s information getting officers out of their cars and onto bikes, horses, electric carts and even on foot is a national trend in policing and is a part and parcel of a movement called “Community Policing”. Try googleing it. Thousands of jurisdictions throughout the country practice it. Our last two chiefs were outspoken proponents.
We would turn it around on Tom- is there never a circumstance where an officer getting out of his or her car and going sans six-shooter appropriate? It sounds like your answer is no.- never. That’s just as absurd as saying police should never drive cars or carry guns which we never head Juan say in the first place, only hearing this straw man from you and Darryl.
It isn’t about taking away all the cars and guns but it is about, where appropriate, putting policing on the ground in the community and making the officers part of that community.
But possibly Iannucci and Perry, if they have heard of this national trend in policing, see it as a challenge to the “us and them” mentality that people legitimately fear is the growing local trend under their tutelage.
That is what the problem is and why people like Juan see conspiracy everywhere. Whether they agree with him or not the Chief’s and Chair’s job is to understand, acknowledge and deal with the “reality” that Wilson isn’t alone and not to concoct their own fantasies to counter with an equally fanciful hyped-up, paranoiac “reality”.
Iannucci and Perry owe it to us and themselves to figure out why there are these “conspiracy theories”. Perhaps it is the dots they are unintentionally drawing that people are connecting.
Wilson is apparently judging KPD by it’s words and deeds and lately it has been dismal on both accounts. The fact that Iannucci and Perry don’t understand and in fact ridicule Wilson’s reaction to some of the Department’s recent alleged abusive words and deeds and refusal to discuss them is more telling than Wilson’s apprehension of and at a conspiracy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
