HOOK, LINE AND STINKER

HOOK, LINE AND STINKER: During the last month we've used the bill (#2149) to allow camping at Lydgate Park as a kind of case study of the long-practiced and well-honed dance of the headless chickens used by the last three Kaua`i administrations- especially in the Department of Public Works (DPW) and the now spun-off Department of Parks and Recreation (DP&R)- to run out the clock on county council oversight of various and sundry mismanagement schhemes.

But the manner in which DP&R Director Lenny Rapozo's final "rope-a-dope" performance yielded a split decision in favor of the bill's passage last Wednesday, gave a whole meaning to "don't ask me- I'm only in charge here."

Of course Rapozo's use of "the fog" and the "I not here" method of administrative oversight could not have been accomplished without council allies willing to look the other way at the misrepresentations and outright lies as well as the lack of any semblance of competency of Rapozo and his underlings.

After months of non-answers to "the eight questions" that had been repeatedly asked, in writing, of Rapozo, the bill was moved out of committee to the full council where last Wednesday despite the fact that there were amendments pending and it was no where near ready for a vote... something that has inflamed Chair Jay Furfaro's hair on many an occasion in the past.

Rapozo appeared after handing in the alleged answers just that morning, claiming he never had the questions- many of which had been sent in writing months ago- until the previous Friday. And, much to Furfaro's chagrin, they hadn’t even been distributed to councilmembers yet.

The old bait and switch made an appearance too. Seems the originator of "the fog" himself, perennial county appointee Ian Costa who now serves as Rapozo's deputy, had unexpectedly shown up instead of Rapozo the week before with Rapozo conveniently on the mainland, allowing Rapozo to claim he had no idea what had happened the previous week.

As we've previously described, it's a classic move Costa developed during the year-long "Developers Gone Wild," grubbing and grading hearings before the council in the 90's which exposed the early misdeeds of Jimmy Pflueger preceding the deadly Ka Loko Dam break for which Pflueger is scheduled to stand trial for murder later this or next year.

The session began with Council Chair Jay Furfaro waving around what a real plan would look like, taken from a Virginia Beach Virginia campground saying "can you kokua me... this is what I'm looking for Lenny."

The questions dealt with almost everything imaginable from lack of a sufficient number of toilets to insufficient staffing for maintenance and security and were seemingly at least partially a result of there being no written plan to make sure the professed "work-class facility" would even be run in an organized and coherent manager.

But try as he might, Furfaro could not get a commitment from Rapozo to put together such a plan by the time camping was scheduled to begin, 60 days after the passage of the bill.

Finally after twenty minutes of trying to get such a commitment from Rapozo, Furfaro demonstrated the council's archetypical part in the avoidance scheme by declaring Rapozo's "no" to be a "yes."

Of course the run-around can't properly function without an administration shill. The role was made for Councilmember Tim Bynum whose "don't confuse me with the facts" rhetoric, previously honed on the issue of the bike path, consisted of declaring the questions to have been answered already- whether they were or not- and calling all criticism of the not-ready-for-prime-time "plan" to be too "meticulous."

This left an opening for Councilmember Mel Rapozo to perform one of his classic ape-like chest beating routines consisting of lines like "That's our job, to be meticulous... guilty as charged."

But perhaps the most Kafkaesque scene in the melodrama played out over the issue of the "fishermen" who have traditionally frequented the area since, well, forever.

As championed by Councilperson Kipukai Kuali`i the council went back and forth, working to make sure fishers could go to the campground and essentially camp out while fishing without really being official campers.

Of course the task was impossible on its face. How do you allow people to stay overnight in the campground, in their tents, as long as they leave their fishing poles stuck in the sand with the line in the water- as described by Kuali`i- and then distinguish who is actually camping without a permit and who is simply fishing.

The council has been asking Lenny Rapozo- and Costa- for the actual metes and bounds of the camping area rather than providing the cruddy little map with dotted lines that had been made part of the bill. Mel Rapozo- an ex-cop- described the absurdity of the prosecution going to court with such a map and how any good attorney could raise enough questions to make it unenforceable.

The answer apparently was simply, as stated by many, that the standard was "we know who is camping and who is fishing."

Oh great. The island isn't sufficiently wracked with charges of "reverse racism" by the increasing number of uptight, malahini mainlanders who can't distinguish between the word "haole" as used descriptively and the more provocative "stupid f-ing haole." Now we have an area where the line between campers and fishermen is going to be- at least in their eyes- as much a factor of the shade of their skin as anything else.

County Attorney Al Castillo didn't really help by hemming and hawing and finally maintaining that it didn't matter what the law said as long as there was "sufficient notice" in the form of signage to tell the users what made a fisherman a fisherman and what made a camper a camper.

As if.

Finally, the answer was to be as ambiguous as possible and the council inserted language that allows "fishermen" to "fish" any place in the campgrounds where there isn't an actual designated camp site.

However all this probably doesn't matter one whit because, it was revealed, the county's park rangers are never there between 10:30 p.m. and 4 a.m. leaving enforcement of the unenforceable provision an academic matter anyway.

The bill passed with Kuali`i and Mel Rapozo voting against it and now it's up to the DP&R to promulgate administrative rules- which promise to be as vague as the bill- in the next two months and decide which parts of the campground to "open for camping" with no real idea of what is going to happen, in a classic Kaua`i County "ready, fire, aim" manner.

But whatever happens you can bet dollars to donuts that we haven't heard the end of the seven-year saga, especially when the first "you're not fishing, you're camping- I can tell by the color of your skin" ticket is issued.

-------

Note- We're working with a new editor whose schedule is malleable so, although we intend to keep to the 1 p.m. press time, there may be days when it is decidedly later.

DERAILING THE GRAVY TRAIN

DERAILING THE GRAVY TRAIN: The jibber-jabber over corporate campaign money continued this week with more jabberwockish blather that attempts to keep the argument focused on the price of the whore rather than the whoring itself.

But really the corporate cash issue is only a part of the corruption of democracy that passes for governance in Hawaii and the US. It’s just as easy to donate individual or even “bundled” cash to buy access and influence.

That’s why most people who aren’t too busy pulling bodies out of the river downstream and follow the money to it’s source have discovered that the only hope we have of fixing the system is full public financing of all campaigns.

Part of the Incumbency Protection package being peddled by the pimps of the legislative brothel this year is a bill to kill the hard fought for Big Island pilot project that is actually pretty watered down from the concept of full public financing, much to the delight of the penny-wise pound-foolish anti-taxation crowd.

The knee jerking “me, me, me” crowd- the ones who want all the government services at current levels and are the first to complain when their permit isn’t issued in minutes or there’s never a cop when you need one- keep up a constant drone about their taxes being too high and are the same ones who scream bloody murder at the thought they their tax money will pay for political campaigns under a pubic finance system.

But there’s no better example of the true cost of the private finance system than what is happening right under our noses at this very moment at the state legislature.

Now that the absurd council of revenues system has played out its predestined, mid-session role in the biennial budget dance of the headless chickens, it’s looking like a tax increase of some kind is a foregone conclusion if they can decide who will get the blame.

But will this tax increase be progressive?- which for the uninformed is an ancient pre-Reagan 20th century concept where those who have the ability to pay, pay progressively proportionally more taxes than the oppressed working poor.

Forget it. That doesn’t even appear to be on the table according to almost every media report.

The one tax increase that seems to be the most popular - shockingly-shockingly with the same reps and sens who voted to increase corporate cash- is the most regressive of all, the general excise tax.

Increase corporate taxes? Cut all business tax credits and subsidies? Raise the income tax on those making more than a quarter-million a year?

No way, not under a system where the people who vote on the tax will be bending over and whipping out their begging bowl as soon as the session ends (and even during sometimes).

And guess whose wallets they have their eyes on to pay the people’s tab- the ones they will be asking for money tomorrow?

Do you really think that the legislators are going to tax those who can afford it instead of taking a penny per dollar out of the pockets of the poor- especially when they are about to ask those fat cats for a lot more than some spare change?

The perfect storm has pulled back the veil for a brief crystallizing moment and sheds light as clear as day on exactly how we pay far more on the back end than we ever would by taking the money out of political campaigns and paying for them ourselves.

The only question is if “we, the marks” in this combo three-card-monte/pocket-picking scam will realize that while we’re winning pennies from the quick-hands con-man, the pickpocket standing behind us has just once again emptied our wallet without us even knowing it.

DIGGIN’ UP THE YARD

DIGGIN’ UP THE YARD: Our statement yesterday- based on various press reports- that Chief Elections Officer Kevin Cronin had no election experience in Wisconsin turns out to be wrong.

And one of the experiences he had was being sued for violating the voting rights of 80 black people in the town of Blackwell, Wisconsin in 1987 while he was legal counsel for the Wisconsin state elections board from 1983 to 1988.

The town sued Cronin apparently for giving them the advice not to allow them to vote, allegedly in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1983, and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the 14th and 15th amendments and Wisconsin state law..

According to filing in the US Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit argued Feb. 25, 1987.and decided May 29, 1987 these were some of the facts.

The plaintiffs filed this action purporting to represent themselves and a class consisting of Blackwell Job Corps Center members who were denied their right to vote either because they were Black or because they were job corps members. The plaintiffs contended in their complaint that at a Blackwell polling place on November 6, 1984, they were asked by the defendant Henkel whether they intended to reside in Blackwell in the future. Those who did not answer in the affirmative were considered non-residents and ineligible to vote. Some apparently were not permitted to vote at all, while others were permitted to vote only in the presidential election. The plaintiffs assert that this action of Henkel and other Blackwell election officials violated the laws of Wisconsin, the 14th and 15th Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act.

The Town and Henkel filed a third-party complaint against Cronin, an attorney for the State Election Board, wherein they alleged that Cronin advised a member of the Town Election Board that any person who indicated to election officials that he did not consider himself a resident of Wisconsin was ineligible to vote and should not receive a ballot. The third-party complaint further alleged that Blackwell election officials, acting upon this advice, refused to permit certain members of plaintiffs' class to vote. While the third-party complaint also named Nicolet National Forest as a defendant by reason of the fact that it administers the Job Corps Center at Blackwell, Nicolet was subsequently dismissed and there is no issue raised in the present appeals regarding that dismissal.

Though two lower courts would not dismiss the case against Cronin the US Court of Appeals, in a very complicated rationale and convoluted ruling found that Cronin had immunity in the case and so he could not be sued.

In overturning the lower courts rulings the Appeals Court 7th said:

(T)he Town and Henkel contend that Cronin forfeited his qualified immunity by violating clearly established Wisconsin election law, Wis.Stats. Sec. 6.92 et seq. In Wisconsin, when a voter is challenged as to residence, he is to be placed under oath and asked whether he intends to make his home in the ward in which he is seeking to vote. If notwithstanding the answer given, the vote is still challenged, the voter may take an oath that, among other things, he is a resident of the ward. He may then submit a ballot under challenge which is retained separately from unchallenged ballots. The fact that Cronin's advice did not include all of the implementing details under the Wisconsin statutes is plainly insufficient to permit a finding that Cronin violated clearly established Wisconsin election laws.

We do not mean to imply in so stating that had Cronin violated a Wisconsin election law, under the facts of this case, it would have constituted a violation of clearly established federal law. Cronin would forfeit his qualified immunity for liability under federal law by violating state law only if the violation of state law provided the basis for the federal cause of action. Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 104 S.Ct. 3012, 3020 n. 12, 82 L.Ed.2d 139 (1984). We need not and do not address that issue in this case.

For the reasons stated, pursuant to the order issued in this case by this court on February 26, 1987, the cross-appeal of defendants and third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel is dismissed for lack of appellate jurisdiction and the district court's denial of third-party defendant Kevin B. Cronin's motion to dismiss is REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions to dismiss him. Costs are taxed to defendants, third-party plaintiffs Town of Blackwell and Jennie Henkel.

In other developments and updates to yesterday’s column, the first reported- by Larry Geller at Disappeared News today- is an interesting California analysis of the Hart InerCivic voting machines that Cronin chose spurring an administrative ruling that he royally screwed up

It’s really scary to read how hackable the Hart system is and it’s clear that anyone reading what they found in California would not and could not have approved the Hart system unless they were either dumb or corrupt or both.

And Hawai`i is using those machines this November as it stands now.

Second is an interesting paragraph in an article at Wing-Nut-Central, the Hawai`i Reporter, by Republican Robert R. Kessler who says he filed two challenges to House candidate Isaac Choy’s eligibility as the Democratic replacement for Kirk Caldwell. He notes that although Cronin ruled that only Caldwell’s written withdrawal was official Cronin’s determinations may depend on what he ate for breakfast- or, for the cynical, who buttered his toast.

According to Kessler, Cronin wrote the following regarding the reporting of the replacement within the three day window the law requires.

“I authorized the Democratic Party of Hawaii to inform me of the name of the individual the Party appointed to fill the vacancy by email, fax or telephone no later than 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, July 26, 2008. The Democratic Party so informed me timely.”

All deadlines are apparently not created equal.

Maybe that can be explained by another interesting paragraph from a July 30 article in Honolulu Weekly.

In a piece by Travis Quezon on the “dance of the headless chickens” that occurred in Honolulu on and after candidate filing deadline called “You call this democracy?; Insiders' edge helps Democrats pull a fast one on Hawai`i voters” Travis tells us that:

“In a 2002 court decision involving then-governor Ben Cayetano petitioning for a writ that directs then-Chief Election Officer Dwayne Yoshina to wave time limits mandated under HRS §11-118, the court acknowledges that the election officer has discretion to waive any or all of the law’s requirements in “special circumstances.”

We haven’t been able to track down the case to which Quezon is referring yet but if that’s the law of the land it could go a long way toward explaining the arbitrary and capaciousness of Cronin’s rulings.

IT'S A BIRD, IT'S A PLANE. IT'S AN EYESORE

IT'S A BIRD, IT'S A PLANE. IT'S AN EYESORE: Although it's probably been more than a decade, we remember a certain drive though San Francisco quite clearly.

Having lived there in the early 70's, we just assumed that we could find the old freeway entrance. But while cruising from "the Haight" to "downtown" we found ourselves suddenly coming around the block for the third time looking for the ramp that led to one of the elevated freeways that made much of the city center a dark, gloomy, drug and crime-filled morass.

"They did what? They tore it down? They whole thing?" "Yes," we were told, "there are no more raised thoroughfares north of Market Street."

As the years went by we noted the trend continuing across the country with cities not only refusing to build new raised monstrosities but actually tearing the old ones down.

So it was no surprise that when Honolulu's traditional lack of planning combined with its time-honored corrupt procurement process and long-standing adherence to urban design concepts 40 years out of date combined to yield yet another plan for the long-delayed, on-again-off-again mass transit project, they decided it was going to be constructed a hundred feet in the air.

Admittedly we haven't been to Honolulu in a decade or more and plan on avoiding it like the proverbial plague for the foreseeable future. Once one sets foot outside of the tourist mecca of Waikiki- and not very far- the sidewalks crack and crumble and the streets are not just filthy but filled with potholes large enough to rent for $1700 a month.

Why would we go? Just the price of a last minute plane ticket approaches that of a direct flight from Kaua`i to SF- a city of similar population where the areas known as "slums" are aesthetically more pleasing than most of "town" on O`ahu.

In their infinite wisdom, the city fathers decided on a "plan," not to spruce it up and start carefully planning- complete with pubic input (gasp!)- the city's future development but rather, to plunge most of it into darkness so no one can see how truly decrepit it actually is.

And that's just the physical limitations. The political ones are worse.

Not only was the first fully-funded, ready-to-go attempt at simply building a system to move people to and from work every day aborted a couple of decades back after a particularly entertaining dance-of-the-headless-chickens but, according to a poll reported today, support for the current similarly ready-to-commence project is dropping faster than the price of stock in the companies that lost the contract to construct it.

According to the poll in the pay-wall protected Honolulu Star Advertiser, support for the project has dropped from 49% last May to 43% now.

And as if that wasn’t enough of a sign that the denizens of Honolulu are fed up with the way the project has evolved- the way its back-room planning and pay-to-play system put into place the most expensive, ugliest system possible, not to mention one that bucks a 20 year trend in urban design- former Governor and anti-rail candidate Ben Cayetano is leading the race for mayor over the two pro-rail candidates by a wide margin.

For those that forgot or weren't around, by the time he left office, Cayetano had burned so many bridges and offended so many supporters, he's been left for politically dead ever since.

Yet current Mayor Peter Carlisle, like the rest of the tone-deaf, steel-on-steel, elevated rail supporters, still clings to the notion that the only problem is that "we haven't done as good a job as we should have in showing people exactly what all the accurate information is (on rail)."

Ah, the last refuge of a delusional pol- the notion that "if people were just 'educated' they would see it from my warped, power-hungry vantage point."

We probably have no right to even write this column today- we don't live on O`ahu and would rather be homeless on any neighbor island than live in a Waikiki luxury high rise.
Honolulu citizens seem to be saying "we want mass transit, perhaps even rail- we just don't want THIS mass transit and THIS rail." Kaua`i people have similarly spoken this way about a certain bike path, a certain electricity co-op and a dozen other projects that have been forced down our throats by smug, paternalistic officials.

The "City and County" seems to have a penchant for hiring those who graduated at the bottom of their class from the Rube Goldberg School of Urban Design. Then, when the worst of them are forced to leave in disgrace, they seem to find their way into the equally befuddled, clueless and crony-filled Kaua`i County government.

All we can say is thanks but no thanks. We've got our hands full now.

CHASIN’ THE CHICKENS AGAIN

CHASIN’ THE CHICKENS AGAIN: Well thanks to Ian Lind’s posting of the actual filings in the latest Dance of the Headless Chicken court case, at the risk of turning into a 24/7 “All Kevin Cronin All the Time” blog, we do have more news to clarify and supplement yesterday’s review of the latest Cronin machinations.

Yesterday we reported on the old switcheroo someone pulled in getting an Aug 7 court ruling that Chrystn Eads was “disqualified” from the House race for Kirk Caldwell’s old state house seat and that he was citing her case now as the reason for allowing replacement candidate Isaac Choy to run- this after Choy had been chosen to replace Caldwell causing the Republican Party to sue saying the replacement was outside the three day window for replacement candidates.

We wondered who filed the suit heard on Aug 7- how did it get into court? We hypothesized it might have been the Republicans or the Honolulu County Clerk.

But we should have know because the filer was none other than Cronin himself.

We have no inside info as to why Cronin did so but the only reason would be that he was ready to be reversed on the Caldwell decision pegging his date of withdrawal to when the elections office received his withdrawal in writing the day after the filing deadline, not his verbal withdrawal before the deadline.

To review the actual law again HRS 11-117 says nothing about written withdrawals except in cases of “ill health”

It says:

§11-117 Withdrawal of candidates; disqualification; death; notice. (a) Any candidate may withdraw not later than 4:30 p.m. on the day immediately following the close of filing for any reason and may withdraw after the close of filing up to 4:30 p.m. on the twentieth day prior to an election for reasons of ill health. When a candidate withdraws for ill health, the candidate shall give notice in writing to the chief election officer if the candidate was seeking a congressional or state office, or the candidate shall give notice in writing to the county clerk if the candidate was seeking a county office. The notice shall be accompanied by a statement from a licensed physician indicating that such ill health may endanger the candidate's life.

Despite this as we reported exclusively earlier an official state produced Candidate Fact Sheet says that, the law be damned, ALL withdrawals must be in writing.

The fact sheet says

Candidates may withdraw for any reason not later than the day immediately following the deadline to file nomination papers. To withdraw, the candidate must submit a written notice to the Chief Election Officer (for state and federal office candidacy) or to the appropriate City/County Clerk (for county office candidacy). (HRS Section 11-117).

Yesterday we weren’t quite sure how the news reports regarding the fact sheet fit into it all. But an examination of Cronin’s filings to have Eads’ “withdrawal” re-trigger Choy’s placement on the ballot puts the false fact sheet at the heart of his case for dating Caldwell’s withdrawal.

Cronin goes to great lengths to use the fact sheet to justify his decision, even getting the Ballot Operations Section Head of the Office of Elections, Lori Tomczyk, to file an affidavit saying that all candidates got the fact sheet, even Caldwell

Cronin uses the fact sheet that misrepresents the law as the sole legal justification for his decision in the Caldwell-withdrawal-date decision he made last month and, even though this was a filing for summery judgment in court the actual citation of the relevant law- HRS 11-117- is nowhere in the brief, only many mentions of the “fact sheet”.

Oh and by the way the fact sheet says on it’s cover

This Fact Sheet is intended for informational purposes only and should not be used as an authority on the Hawaii election law and candidate deadlines... Consult the Hawaii Revised Statutes and other sources for more detailed and accurate requirements.

Cronin, under fire for the Caldwell ruling and knowing that the actual law says nothing about withdrawals being in writing in all circumstances, knew he was vulnerable if a ruling on it ever got before a judge.

Just the fact that Caldwell wasn’t challenging his ruling wasn’t enough because there was an outstanding Republican Party-filed suit contesting the “in writing” decision. And if a judge read the actual law he was pretty sure to overrule Cronin- overrule him in a case that was high profile, one for which Cronin has been under continual fire in the press and the blogs and only one of the myriad of Cronin’s actions that have put the elections chief’s job in jeopardy.

What to do, what to do?. How could he make his Caldwell decision go away?

Easy- by essentially suing himself to put the situation with Eads before a judge and getting an official ruling on her case without anyone to challenge it (because no one knew) and fait accompli allowing the Democrats to re-select Choy based on Eads case, not Caldwell’s... all before anyone knew about the done deal.

We had suspected that maybe in the early confusing days after the filing deadline- when the chickens were all first decapitated- someone filed a case thinking it was Eads who was being replaced by Choy rather than Caldwell due to erroneous press reports.

Eads, for those who don’t remember, did not get her papers filed with enough signatures until after the 4:30 p.m., July 22 deadline but was allowed by Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta to collect signatures and file at 4:50 p.m.- an action that Decosta said constituted a non-filing in a decision she made that week.

But Cronin, seeing a little wiggle room revived the filing, saying essentially that the clerk’s mistaken action in accepting the papers late constituted a filing.

And so he went to court to challenge the filing, got a ruing on Aug 7, wrote to the Democratic Party Chair Brian Schatz- who had earlier used his influence to get Decosta to accept Eads filing- who then re-selected Choy to be the replacement candidate, this time for Eads.

And that, Cronin claims, makes his Caldwell decision irrelevant, so moot.

This is sure to cause Republican’s heads to explode when they realize that Schatz’s phone call to Decosta at the 4:30 July 22nd filing deadline asking her to “err on the side of inclusion” and allow Eads to go outside, gather signatures and then file her papers, ended up assuring the Democrats would have a candidate in the race for a House seat in a Democratic stronghold district which otherwise would go to the only person left in the race, a Republican.

Cronin is claiming that even though Eads filing was not legal and should by all reason be adjudged to have never happened, because of Decosta’s error in accepting it- at Schatz’s request- Eads had to be “disqualified” for the office she never qualified for.

The file contains no briefs from anyone but Cronin and his brief goes into convoluted detail as to supposed legal reasons why no one needed to be notified or allowed to challenge it.

Even though Decosta had ruled the filing wasn’t complete, Cronin now says it wasn’t “officially” not filed until he got a ruling from the court – a ruling that re-opened the door for Schatz’s Democratic Party to re-insert Choy’s name on the ballot without having to deal with the actual law in the Caldwell decision.

We’re not sure what’s contained in it but, as reported today in an article about an appeal of a recent administrative hearings officer’s ruling blasting Cronin for selecting an overpriced, second-rate-security election system from Hart InterCivic :

The Republican Party filed another suit Aug. 8 alleging that Cronin and the Office of Elections improperly allowed Democrat Isaac Choy to stand as a state House candidate for the 24th District (Manoa).

We haven’t seen that suit but fear it will spur another chapter in the Hawai`i Shyster Chronicles... making the three main mayoral-wannabe dunces and 15 or so clueless council would-be-clowns on Kaua`i very happy we suspect..

Don’t worry- we’ll get to you

OUTFOXED AGAIN

OUTFOXED AGAIN: Just when it couldn’t get any more devoid of rationality it turns out that there’s now another wrinkle in the Dance of the Headless Chickens in the Honolulu filing deadline debacle today after Honolulu Advertiser reporter Derrick DePledge dug up an Aug 7 court ruling certifying a “replacement” for a candidate that was never an official candidate.

The replacement candidate, Isaac Choy, is the same one that was named in the Kirk Caldwell mess on July 26. But in a “that was our story and we were sticking to it but this one is much better” spiel from self declared “De Facto” Elections Chief Kevin Cronin, it is now Chrystn Eads- who never filed completed papers- that was “disqualified” to put Choy on the ballot.

And that didn’t happen until a formerly secret Aug. 7 court ruling.

Cronin claims that Eads’ whatever-it-was was not official until Aug 7 when a judge ruled on a case apparently filed by Republicans in the confusion as to who was being replaced when they filed the challenge.

Conflicting newspaper reports in the days after the filing deadline resulted in the Republicans originally challenging the “replacement” based on erroneous-at-the-time reports by Richard Borreca in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin that Eads was the one that “needed” replacing

But DePledge’s report at the time that it was indeed Caldwell that was being replaced turned out to be the correct one.

Caldwell was eliminated for filing for a second office-Honolulu County Council- at the same time he was still running for his House seat. Cronin ruled Caldwell’s verbal withdrawal wasn’t sufficient and when Caldwell filed “in writing” the next day Cronin’s subsequent ruling left him not running for anything.

The Republicans challenged the date of the Caldwell withdrawal saying it happened the day of the filing deadline, July 22, and in a ruling that flies in the face of the actual law Cronin ruled that the withdrawal came the day after the filing deadline and a “three day replacement” rule let the Democrats put Choy on the ballot- and do it via telephone on a Saturday after Cronin had ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal via telephone was not sufficient.

But, it appears the Republican case or perhaps one from Honolulu County Clerk Denise Decosta, either on her own or as a reaction to the Republican challenge in the Eads matter (the article doesn’t make it clear who filed for the court ruling), went to court and in an August 7 ruling Eads was “officially” not on the ballot, which Cronin appears to be interpreting as a “disqualification”.

There was no explanation of how a candidate who never officially filed could be disqualified.

Therefore the state is claiming that Decosta’s ruling a few days after the filing deadline that Eads filing was incomplete wasn’t official” until the Aug. 7 ruling and therefore- get this- the Democrats had three days from Aug 7 to pick Choy (again).

And therefore, supposedly, the date of Caldwell’s withdrawal is moot because now Choy is replacing Eads.

Borreca is obviously psychic.

Actually though, the law requires that county clerks go to circuit court for these rulings and though we have some reason to believe it was Decosta who filed for the Aug 7 ruling, she refused to get a court ruling for the one she made that disqualified Caldwell.

This all means that, Cronin and the state is contending, it doesn’t matter when Caldwell withdrew for purposes of the actual Republican challenge saying that the withdrawal took place Tuesday July 22 and therefore the clock ran out on Friday- and therefore the Democrats missed the three day deadline.

And since Caldwell is not challenging when his withdrawal actually took place- even though he would be eligible to run for council if it had been “official” on July 22 instead of the 23rd- Cronin’s ruling in that case that is wasn’t official until the 23rd is for all intent and purpose now irrelevant.... and so it’s legality is no longer a question

In another odd yet relevant tidbit, today it was reported that, in trying to justify his contrary to law ruling in the Caldwell withdrawal, Cronin cited a state “Candidate Information Sheet” we exclusively reported on a week or so ago.

The sheet contains erroneous “written withdrawal required” information but contains a disclaimer that says the pamphlet may not be in compliance with the law and to check the actual law if need be

Cronin’s list of dirty deeds grows. So far he has:

-Failed to register to vote, a requirement for his job, until this month after being hired in February. He said he was too busy and always intended to take the required 30 seconds to complete, stamp and put the form in the mail. He declared himself the “De Facto” Elections Chief when the lack of voter registration came light.

-Ruled that Caldwell’s withdrawal had to be in writing despite past practices of the clerk’s and elections’ offices, and the clerk’s assurance to Caldwell that his withdrawal was official. Caldwell’s oral withdrawal was followed by a call by Decosta’s office to Cronin’s office saying he’d withdrawn. Cronin’s ruling came despite the fact that the law itself does not call for a written withdrawal except under for “health reasons”.

-Sent the ballots to the printer without the legally required review by non-partisan and party observers. Cronin said it was all ok because they turned out to be accurate- and has parsed rulings and manipulated the courts to keep them correct.

-Was severely chastised and reversed by a hearings officer for picking a known-to-be-remarkably-hackable Hart InterCivic election system- a firm he reportedly has had ties to- at a cost almost three times that of a competing bid. Cronin blamed the procurement laws rather than take responsibility

-Was reported here, in an exclusive report, to have been a defendant in a suit regarding keeping blacks off the ballot in 1988 when he was a lawyer for the Wisconsin elections office. After two lower court rulings apparently said he had acted so negligently or purposefully that he had to stand civil trial, a US appeals court ruled he had immunity from the suit- the type of immunity that all officials have for decisions in their official capacity.

We probably left out something. Perhaps the most egregious thing in all this is that the Elections Commission has given him a clean bill of health and is not even considering firing him.

--------------------#-------------

A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER

A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER IS A SCHNAUZER: We were going to leave it alone- after all we don’t live in Honolulu and don’t even know who the heck Chrystn Eads is other than “an aide to Honolulu Mayor Mufi Hannemann” much less where exactly the 24th House district is.

We were happy just to have the legislature rid of an obstructionist party hack and go-fer like House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, whose resignation was a well placed cog in Tuesday’s vaudevillian amateur hour.

Yes, we enjoyed laughing about the dance of the headless chickens that apparently was staged at 4:30 filing deadline when Eads was allowed to submit her paperwork at ten-to-five, even though the deadline is apparently pretty strict, according to state law.

But now for another kick in the face we find out in this morning’s Honolulu Advertiser’s “breaking news” that another wrinkle- heck, let’s call it a bend, fold, spindle and mutilation- has been added and apparently Eads “was told yesterday that her paperwork was voided because it was incomplete.” according to the article.

And- get this- even though there was no actual official “filing” since it was “voided”, the County Clerk is apparently going to allow “the party's House District 24 council (to) name (a) replacement, although others believe it will come from top party officials and insiders.”

In case anyone was wondering the law, according to the article says "in cases of withdrawal, death or disqualification of a party candidate after filing, the vacancy may be filled by the party. The party must notify the chief elections officer 72 hours after the vacancy occurs.”

So let’s get this straight. They are saying that she didn’t get in her papers in time so there was no official filing. Yet the Democratic Party is going to be allowed to name a “replacement” because she was disqualified after filing. But if indeed she legally “filed” – a prerequisite for a “replacement” how is she being disqualified?

Talk about having your cake and eating it too. It’s like being kicked out of a club you’re not a member of.

Actually we’d been considering the case for a couple of days and it seems that if the procedures do not allow for a looser deadline based on the fact that she was there 40 minutes before the deadline but could not get her papers until a few minutes before the cut-off time, there’s something wrong- something inherently exploitable by anyone bent on taking advantage of it..

If indeed this strict policy is in effect then it leaves it wide open for allowing the Clerk and/or the Clerk’s office’s employees a wide latitude for- ahem, shall we say- “directed incompetence”.

Seems like they’re actually allowed- heck, maybe encouraged- to screw someone they don’t want to see on the ballot if they’re coming in at the last minute.

How? Well like by having no one at the counter. “Sorry we’re all out to lunch- be back at 4:31” Or like by taking their sweet little time serving someone else filing papers. Or by notifying another candidate for the office who has already filed and letting dozens of his or her supporters jam the office with requests for some of the other multiple services the Clerk’s office provides.

When one goes to vote on election day and gets there just at the closing deadline, if there is a line the doors close behind them, not in their face. It prevents any potential mischief or shenanigans

But apparently, according to their policy it’s ok for the Clerk to play these little games.

While no one in the press has suggested this was the case with Eads, who knows? Those in attendance- and seemingly it was practically a media luncheon according to multitudinous accounts- haven’t been especially forthcoming with their observations as to exactly why it too almost 40 minutes to “serve” Eads.

With all the press and observers you’d think someone would have brought this up, especially if indeed there was any intentional delays preventing her from filing on time.

Whatever happens from here, the way the situation played out makes the label of Keystone Kops that’s been thrown about in the Honolulu press quite charitable.

-------------

Correction: It appears we interpreted the vagaries of the “breaking news” without reading the published article. Apparently what was reported was that the given reason for the “party replacement was not Eads’ non-filing, but Caldwell’s supposed withdrawal- although there are similar problems there too. We regret the error.