AN UNSAVORY MORSEL

AN UNSAVORY MORSEL: We couldn’t have been more than two or three years old when we somehow became aware- we suspect it was via our fount of all knowledge in those days, Bug Bunny- that we had been missing out on a culinary treat called mock turtle soup.

Of course we immediately made the obvious inference- they were made from mock turtles.

We’d heard of and seen lots of kinds of turtles. Over the years we assumed that, as the case is many times, it was like places called “Bear Creek” that had no bears- it was “just the name of the turtle.”

Over the years Lewis Carroll did nothing to dissuade us from our presumptuous assumption and so a decade later a trip to a fancy restaurant and a bowl of weak broth with some soggy crackers made a, well, mockery of our postulation.

We had gotten what we had long craved only to find out it wasn’t at all what we really expected and wanted.

So it was a bit of deja vu for us today after tracking down the answer to a question that people have been asking us for a couple of months now- who the heck if Sarah Blane?

The answer- Blane is our very own mock turtle.

At first we feared the worst- that references to Blane as “Kaua`i county spokesperson” meant that our old friend Public Information Officer (PIO) Mary Daubert might be on the outs. But Daubert’s name continued to be preceded by the same title.

Observation yielded another of those assumptions- Blane’s name seemed to be attached to county press release emanating from the Kaua`i Police and Fire Departments.

Could it really be true? After years of complaints from the public and KPD chiefs that they needed their own embedded PIO in order to speak directly to the public- rather than having to filter everything through the mayor’s office and his or her PIO- KPD had their very own spokesperson?

After all, KPD is set up by charter to be an independent department with a police commission, not the mayor, doing the oversight. They don’t need to have the contents of each and every communication with the public filtered through the political whims of the mayor.

So, after a month or so of seeing Blane’s name attached to police and fire statements today we asked Mary “whassup?”

And, as if we couldn’t have predicted it, she wrote:

Sarah Blane is the newest member of Kaua`i County’s communications team. The other members of the team are Beth Tokioka, director of communications, and myself, public information officer. Sarah joined the Mayor’s office staff on Dec. 1 at the start of Mayor Carvalho’s first full term. Her title is public information assistant. She is responsible primarily for media communications for KPD and KFD, the county’s Facebook page, and assisting with community outreach efforts.

In an administration where even the smallest bit of PR minutia is carefully controlled we’d have to be as naive as a two year old searching for a delectable misnomer to think that any KPD spokesperson would be situated in KPD and answer to the chief.

We can only imagine how Chief Darryl Perry really feels about this after having had his, er, legs cut off while he was off island during the anti-marijuana rally fiasco with a deceptive press release going out on KPD letterhead under his name- a release that only hours later proved to be a lie in order to cover-up the fact that the rally was cancelled due to an ACLU compliant, not the weather.

So pity poor Sarah the county’s mock turtle. She aspires to be real meat but ends up nothing more than a mouthful of watery mush.

-----

We're taking a long weekend. Be back next week.

EVERYBODY’S LAUGHING, EVERYBODY’S HAPPY

EVERYBODY’S LAUGHING, EVERYBODY’S HAPPY: County Attorney (CA) Al “The Nebbish” Castillo surprised a select few with his apparent agreement with the ACLU- Hawai`i opinion about illegality of the Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho/KPD/anti-drug office-sponsored, anti-marijuana rally last week.

Others suspect though that perhaps his opinion had less to do with the issue at hand than it did with the long standing feud between Castillo and Iseri ever since both took office over two years ago. The infamous game of musical chairs at the time has left the county with a bunch of ex-prosecutors in the CA’s office and vice versa which may be why Castillo took the opportunity to stick it to Iseri.

But at the same council meeting where Iseri and Councilmember Mel Rapozo held their “Reefer Madness” cotillion, Castillo was busy doing his best Louis Quarorze impression, once again interrupting the council to remind them who, in reality, L'Etat c'est.

The issue at hand was a complicated one that has been doggedly pursued by activist Horace Stoessel even since January’s inaugural meeting fiasco over the evaluations of appointed officials, including the county clerk.

Stoessel has become a resource extraordinaire on the subject for the council, having sat on the Salary Commission and after spending years to emerge as an expert on the subject- as well as others- as it relates to the county charter.

So after Stoessel’s “three minutes times two” were up the council had many questions and was trying to ascertain his opinion on who should be responsible for writing into law the process for evaluations.

It’s all very esoteric but suffice it to say that it had gone on for quite a while when, like a petulant child piping up during a “grown-up conversation” Castillo couldn’t take it any more.

His first interruption was, as if they needed it, to “direct” the council to “stop”, saying Stoessel was well past his three minutes and was- gasp - actually engaging with them during deliberations- something former Chair Kaipo Asing invented and then promptly banned in order to take the public out of the public participatory process.

He was pretty much ignored and the council was finally getting to the nitty gritty of whether the council actually had the authority to dictate a system for evaluating administration appointees when Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura asked if she had properly understood Stoessel’s “legal conclusion” on a fine point.

That was just too much for Castillo who loudly protested that a “legal conclusion by anyone but the county attorney is irrelevant” and that it was “really improper” for Stoessel to reflect back on his time with the salary commission.

As Castillo spoke, the camera showed a clearly agitated Yukimura, rolling her eyes and shaking her head in disbelief. Then Council Chair Jay Furfaro tried to calm things reminding Castillo that he, Furfaro, was the chair and was “acting like any good manager,” likening it to seeking input from a valued employee whose knowledge and experience was essential to the conversation.

That brought back some decorum and discussion continued with a clearly agitated Castillo keeping his peace. But when it became apparent that the council was going to take Stoessel’s testimony to heart, the Sun King couldn’t control himself any more screeching out “I am the County Attorney” and then blathering on about how he should be consulted and boo-hoo-hoo and blah-blah-blah.

So tune in again next week folks for the comedic stylings of Iseri and Castillo and their ensemble of rotating attorneys. You can’t go wrong and well, the price is right... if you ignore the fact that your taxes paying for it.

GET SMART

GET SMART: Though there’s been a deafening cone of silence over County Attorney Al Castillo’s response to the Hawai`i Chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union’s (ACLU) letter that led to the cancellation of the county’s anti marijuana rally last Thursday, PNN has learned that Castillo has apparently opined that the ACLU was correct in telling the county that using county resources for the activities is illegal.

And to no one’s surprise Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho is none too pleased and has written two nasty letters to Castillo saying so.

Although we weren’t able to obtain Castillo’s “confidential” letter- which was addressed to Iseri, each individual council member, the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief Darryl Perry as well as three administration honchos- it is obvious from Iseri's responses, which were also “cced” to Mayor Bernard Carvalho, that Castillo supported the ACLU’s position.

In response to Castillo’s original email Iseri wrote

Subject: RE: Anti-Drug Rally Scheduled for February 17, 2011

Aloha Al,

It is quite unfortunate that you chose to send out an email with that tone. You are violating all of the county employees’ rights who chose to attend the rally on their own time. You are suppressing their First Amendment rights and your actions should not be condoned. I will be submitting a letter to the oversight body to review your actions. I have already received calls about you and other County officials that are prohibiting people from attending, even after work hours. Please stop doing this, as I believe, this exposes the county to significant liability.

Further, please be aware that your Deputy County Attorney, on county time, testified on a televised Council meeting with you present, to strongly oppose these same bills, that “other county officials” you make reference to in the press release, exposed the county to significant liability. Yet, I don’t see any reference to your office taking responsibility for its use of county resources to oppose legislation. You were present at the Council meeting and said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. There is absolutely no authority for the County Attorney’s Office to testify in criminal matters. Let’s call a spade a spade. It is inappropriate to place blame when your office is guilty of the same actions. We are one County and to try to place blame when you were present when all this was happening is totally inappropriate, unprofessional and not in the County’s best interests.

Mahalo,

Shay

But the ACLU did not say that there was anything wrong with employees using their own time and resources to lobby on legislation. In fact they said the opposite in their original letter writing:

At the outset, we note that the American Civil Liberties Union ("ACLU") has long advocated for individual free speech rights, regardless of the content of that speech. Additionally, the ACLU supports and defends the right of government officials and employees to comment on issues in their personal capacities. The issue with the upcoming Rally is not about the individual police officers, prosecuting attorneys and other county employees expressing their viewpoints, it is about the potential use of public resources (including time and labor of County employees) to do so.

The ACLU letter came the same day as the council meeting- which we described yesterday and presumably did not address the presentation made there.

After a response, also confidential, from Castillo, Iseri not only admitted that her office wrote the press release that the ACLU used to point out the illegality of Iseri’s actions, but gives a detailed description of who else acted in the same vein, writing:

Al,

If you haven’t done your total investigation, let it be clear that our office prepared the “draft” release. The “draft” release was provided to KPD to review. It was Beth Tokioka that reviewed it, edited it, and sent it onward. Beth even took the liberty of making amendments to include a quote from Theresa Koki that was never in our initial draft release. Theresa Koki was never presented the release, and never made any quotes because I specifically had asked her about it when the release was amended . It was very clear to me that once we mentioned that Jake had prepared the release, you then took the position to blame KPD and OPA, because of quotes in the release. I find it very sad that because of the unprofessional manner in which this matter was handled at your doing, what started out as a great act of collaboration between KPD, the Administration and the Prosecutor’s Office, has turned into a chaotic event.

Shay

So what did the ACLU say?

Before the passage on employees actions on their own as private citizens they wrote:

Re: February 17 Anti-Drug Rally

Dear Chief Perry and Mr. Castillo:

We write to raise serious legal concerns about the Anti-Drug Rally scheduled for tomorrow, February 17, 2011 ("Rally"). In short, we believe that Kauai County employees are acting outside the scope of their limited, delegated authority, thus exposing the County to litigation. See Rees v. Carlisle, 113 Hawai`i 446, 153 P.2d 1131 (2007). Consequently, we recommend that you cancel or postpone the Rally to allow for further discussion.

1- Factual Background

As we understand it, the Kauai Police Department, the Prosecuting Attorney and others are sponsoring the Rally to "raise awareness and inform the community about the dangers associated with pending marijuana legislation." Kauai Police Department News Release, February 12, 2011. The News Release quotes Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, speaking in opposition to specific pieces of legislation currently pending before the Hawaii State Legislature, as stating that `"[i]f passed, these measures will result in increased violent crime, economic crisis and a rise in marijuana usage among our children.'" Id. Finally, the News Release unequivocally states that "Nine police chiefs and prosecuting attorneys from each of the four counties stand united against this dangerous legislation." Id. (emphasis added). Thus, it cannot be disputed that the overriding purpose of the Rally is to persuade constituents to lobby legislators to vote against the pending bills, HB 1169 and SB 58.

The main case that the ACLU cites in its “Legal Background” is Rees v. Carlisle, saying that:

In 2002, the ACLU of Hawaii Foundation ("ACLU of Hawaii") filed suit on behalf of journalist Robert Rees against County Prosecutor Peter Carlisle. The gravamen of the case concerned Carlisle's improper use of public funds to actively advocate in favor of and campaign for the passage of a state constitutional amendment, Senate Bill No. 996 of 2002 ("amendment" or "Question 3"). It was undisputed that Carlisle used public resources for this purpose. The ACLU of Hawaii argued, inter alia, that: (a) neither the City Charter nor Hawaii Revised Statutes ("HRS") § 2840.6 authorized Carlisle's expenditure of public funds to engage in partisan political campaigning; and (b) any law that purported to grant such authority would run afoul of a myriad of constitutional rights, including free association, free speech and the fundamental right to vote.

In 2007, the Hawaii Supreme Court held that "neither the Revised Charter of Honolulu nor HRS § 28-10.6 authorize the prosecuting attorney to advocate for a proposed constitutional election[.]" Rees v. Carlisle, 113 Hawai`i 446, 456, 153 P.2d 1131, 1141 (2007). Based on this holding, the Court declined to reach the constitutional issues. A copy of this decision is attached for your ready reference.

The case seems to go way beyond the incident at hand, going to the very heart of a government employee using office time and/or resources to lobby for or against any legislation- a common practice of police and prosecutors statewide.

In a section called “Neither the Police Department Nor the Prosecutor Is Empowered to Use Public Funds to Advocate for a Particular Legislative Result” the letter says that:

The powers of the Police Department and the Prosecutor are set forth by the County of Kauai Charter, Article XI and IXA, respectively. Notably absent from these articles is any language that authorizes either the Police Department or the Prosecutor to spend public resources to educate the public about issues relating to crime research, prevention and education. Cf. H.R.S. §28-10.6 (authorizing the state Attorney General to spend public resources in this regard); R.C.H. 8-104(e-i) (passed post-Rees to authorize the Honolulu Prosecutor to do the same).

First, the plain language of the County of Kauai Charter limits the authority of the Prosecutor to prosecuting crimes. County of Kauai Charter, Article IXA, Sec. 9A.03. It is well-settled that the Prosecutor's powers and functions are limited to those expressly accorded to his office by the statute creating it. 63A Arri.Jur.2d, Prosecuting Attorneys § 20 (1984). 1 The County of Kauai Charter similarly limits the authority of the Police. County of Kauai Charter, Article XI, Section 11.05. 2 There is no statutory or other Given the similarity in language in Kauai's County Charter and the pre-2007 Honolulu County Charter, court decisions affecting the Honolulu Prosecutor are analogous to the situation now presented by the Kauai County Prosecutor. Honolulu's Department of the Prosecuting Attorney was established in Article VIII of the Revised Charter of Honolulu ("R.C.H.") of 1973 (1983). "Unless otherwise specifically provided by statute, his powers and functions are limited by § 8-105 [now § 8-104] of the Charter to the prosecution of criminal offenses against the laws of the State and the ordinances and rules and regulations of the city." Marsland v. Pang, 5 Haw. App. 463, 472, 701 P.2d 175, 184 (1985) (noting that the county prosecutor only "has been delegated the primary authority and responsibility for initiating and conducting criminal prosecutions within his county jurisdiction").

Furthermore, this limitation on the Prosecutor's powers also eviscerates any argument that engaging in the Rally is germane to the Prosecutor's function. Thus, as fully set forth infra wider Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, 431 U.S. 209 (1977), and its progeny, the conduct of the Police Department and Prosecutor's Office constitutes forced speech in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, §4, of the Hawaii Constitution.

2 Notably, the Charter empowers the Police to engage in "traffic safety education." "It is a general principle of statutory construction that when 'Congress includes particular language in one section of a statute but omits it in another section of the same Act, it is generally presumed that Congress acts intentionally and purposely in the disparate inclusion or exclusion." Barnhart v. Sigtnon Coal Co., Inc., 534 U.S. 438, 452, 122 S.Ct. 941, 951, 151 L.Ed.2d 908, 922 (2002) (citing Russello v. United States, 464 U.S. 16, 23, 104 S.Ct. 296, 300, 78 L.Ed.2d 17, 24 (1983)). Where the County wanted to provide the authority that grants the Police Department of the Prosecutor the power to expend public resources to educate the public on criminal justice issues.

Consequently, Rees V. Carlisle, 113 Hawaii 446, 153 P.2d 1131 (2007) is directly on point: neither Kauai's Prosecutor nor Police Department may engage in the type of activity proposed by tomorrow's Rally.

The ACLU letter goes onto say that not only are the actions of the county illegal but it exposes the county to liability. In a section marked “Using Public Resources to Fund the Rally and Associated Events Could Expose the County to Liability Under the First Amendment” they say that:

Such openly biased speech by public officials raises serious First Amendment questions. In the words of Justice Black: Probably no one would suggest that Congress could, without violating [the First] Amendment, pass a law taxing workers, or any persons for that matter (even lawyers), to create a fund to be used in helping certain political parties or groups favored by the Government to elect their candidates or promote their controversial causes.

Compelling a man by law to pay his money to elect candidates or advocate laws or doctrines he is against differs only in degree, if at all, from compelling him by law to speak for a candidate, a party, or a cause he is against. The very reason for the First Amendment is to make the people of this country free to think, speak, write and worship as they wish, not as the Government commands.

After a long passage describing various federal and Supreme Court of the US cases that support that, the ACLU letter concludes by saying:

Given the serious legal concerns about tomorrow's Rally, we would recommend that such Rally be canceled or postponed to allow for further discussion. A moderate delay will not hamper the legislative process on the contested bills given that HB 1169 appears to be dead and SB 58 has not yet been scheduled for hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Thank you in advance for your time and attention to this matter. If you have any questions or comments in the interim, please feel free to contact me at 383-8287 or Iperrin(at)acluhawaii)dot)org or Daniel Gluck, Senior Staff Attorney, at 522-5908 or dgluck(at)acluhawaii(dot)org.

Sincerely,
Lois K. Perrin
Legal Director

The fact that Castillo has apparently supported the ACLU’s position now makes it a controlling opinion that the county must follow in the future. We hope that county employees will remember this when they use their position and time and resources to testify and seek to influence legislation in the future.

DOCTOR DOCTOR TELL ME THE NEWS

DOCTOR DOCTOR TELL ME THE NEWS: To simply call last week’s anti-pot council meeting a dog and pony show would be an insult to horses and hounds everywhere . And it would be to ignore the fall-on-the-floor side-splitting presentations of Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri Carvalho and Keith Kamita, head of the state’s drug enforcement division of the Department of Public Safety (DPS) in Councilmember Mel Rapozo’s Pubic Safety Committee.

Iseri- as always mangling the English language with her best "Miss Malaprop" impression- began her “power point” with the word “Marijuana” flashed on the screen in a font reminiscent of the movie “Reefer Madness.” Then, in a spittle-laced rant, she did her fear-mongering, fact-free best to eviscerate any credibility she might have had.

Starting with the much discredited “gateway” theory she soon moved on to medical marijuana with an attack on sick people claiming that, despite clear language in the law, the program was “supposed to be” only for certain terminal patients, and stating that there was a “loophole” for use by those in pain- which, studies show is one of the most beneficial uses of cannabis.

“Doctor” Iseri then turned her rant to trying to convince no one in particular that pot causes violence- failing to understand that it the fact that it’s illegality that leads to any associated violence- and making the claim that the decriminalization of less than an ounce would “allow juveniles to possess” cannabis- a claim later repeated over and over whenever she felt trapped by the actual facts.

There’s also been some public discussion of her contention that an ounce of pot equals 50-60 “joints”. Considering that there’s 28 grams in an ounce and joints of ½ gram are common- although small- the stat might make sense.

But, in fact, in trying to make the claim Iseri held up giant gallon Zip-loc bag containing those 50 or so joints that the vice division of the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) had prepared, each of which were big enough to be called spliffs.

Among her other claims were that pot nowadays is 10 times stronger than in the 90’s and that plants now contain 37% THC.

We’re pretty sure there are lots of people out there that would like some of that 10-times-stronger, 37% THC pot.

“This is undisputed” she shrieked, adding that this apparently proves somehow that it’s “clearly an addictive drug,” even though no one has ever been physically addicted as commonly are with crystal methamphetamine or heroin abuse.

She then suggested that instead of medical marijuana people use the ineffective government substitute “Marinol” which contains only one of the elements of marijuana by filtering out all of the other beneficial parts used when smoking or ingesting the whole plant.

She prattled on for a while with the usual unsupported blather about how medical use was just a front for legalization, how it’s marketed to children, how “huge amounts of crime” are associated with compassion centers on the mainland- even trying to ridicule the term- and the “myth” that petty possession cases are clogging the courts.

But when she was done Councilperson JoAnn Yukimura, doing her best “Colombo” impression, first cited an actual study- one cited in the legislative decriminalization bills- showing the gateway claim is bogus.

Over and over she asked Iseri for her “studies” to support her facts to no avail. Finally Iseri admitted that everything she said was “our opinion” and that many of her “facts” were indeed the opinions of mainland police departments.

Yukimura, along with Councilperson Tim Bynum also put the lie to Iseri’s claim that the bill to decriminalize less than an ounce would “legalize” marijuana- a term she used repeatedly to try to claim that it would legalize pot use “by kids.”

In fact possession of less than an ounce would still be illegal but it would no longer be a criminal act, only a “violation” subject to a fine as in a parking ticket- a fact that Iseri admitted only after having been asked six- and yes we counted- times.

Iseri also couldn’t cite any study for her claim that pot uses four dollars in social services for every one dollar spent on buying it.

When it got to be Councilmember Dickie Chang’s turn he had apparently never heard of Marinol and, well frankly, he seemed to have much more interest in it than an academic inquiry might have generated.

One trick Iseri tried to use over and over was that, when trapped in her lack of documentation for anything she said she would immediately use misdirection to talk about either use by children or by those at work or operating heavy machinery.

Her sidekick Kamita- the one from the drug enforcement division- is actually the one who administers the medical marijuana program and in trying to show why he wanted to keep oversight in the DPS he made a great case for why the medical program should be taken away from someone like him who actually opposes the program and is more interested in arresting medical users who have a gram more than permitted than in their health.

That’s why one of the bills which Kamita, Iseri and Rapozo all oppose would transfer oversight to the Department of Health (DOH) where it is in every other state with a medical marijuana program and where regulation of any medicine belongs.

Yukimura finally described how the real issue has been access to marijuana for those for whom it is recommended by a doctor under the program and how dispensaries are actually a method that has worked in other states with few problems and actually with decreases in crimes associated with the illegality of pot.

Though Kamita first objected, defending his claim of crime increasing around dispensaries on the mainland, he finally admitted the he didn’t really know and was relying on the propaganda put out by some PDs and prosecutors in California- who of course also stand to lose federal and state grants and funding should the crime associated with illegality disappear.

Kamita and Iseri mumbled and stumbled through it all but finally, after having their excuses derided as nonsense, turned of course to the last refuge of these stragglers in the mid-20th century... saying it “sends the wrong message.”

What message is that? That both your jobs and much of you funding depends on marijuana interdiction?- something they and Rapozo scoffed at but of course couldn’t deny. The message that you’re the last bastion of those in denial at the real facts behind marijuana?

The fact that marijuana is really a “wonder drug” that treats many maladies?

But Rapozo, who was thus running the meeting, wasn’t about to let them look too out of touch and idiotic so he stopped the questioning and turned to public testimony.

That brought up the head of the KPD vice squad who, thankfully, brought some sanity to the discussion more or less deriding the “gateway” idiocy saying that “if you drink a glass of wine you’re not going to turn into a raging alcoholic” and, in answer to a question by Yukimura admitted that “not everyone” who uses pot turns to hard drugs.

He was followed by a handful of people, in favor of the state decriminalization, dispensary and transfer from DPS to Department of Health bills. Each was unceremoniously cut off by Rapozo after their three minutes and, although given an extra minute to “sum up,” were again cut off after another 45 seconds.

We mention that because they were followed by three county employees- two with the mayor’s anti-drug office and another the county attorney who serves KPD- each of whom was given around five minutes without interruption.

Finally Rapozo ended the session by saying “I will close with a very brief” statement and warbling on for almost 15 minutes waffling between statements like “I don’t oppose medical marijuana” and deriding use for things like migraine headaches and intractable, chronic pain.

Of course this was all before Rapozo’s and Iseri’s “anti-pot rally” fiasco last Thursday which that was shot down by the ACLU with a letter to the county regarding the use of county employees and resources to lobby or promote action on legislation- something that the Hawai`i and California courts have said is illegal.


We’ll comment on the letter later this week because it’s an issue that goes well beyond the medical or decimalization of marijuana issue. But if you want a uproarious evening of laugh-until-you-cry entertainment make sure to catch the Mel and Shay Show now playing on Channel 53.

COME HELL OR HIGH BONG WATER

COME HELL OR HIGH BONG WATER: No one seems to know for sure what will happen this afternoon when the appointed time for Councilmember Mel Rapozo’s and County Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho’s anti-marijuana rally comes around.

But only two things seem certain at press time- a bunch of counter demonstrators will likely show up and so will Mel Rapozo.

The rest is a subject for the Babooze Comedy Hour starring the Keystone Cops.

The curtain opened with Act 1 this morning at 10:36 when the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) issued the following fishy sounding press release.

Anti-drug rally cancelled

LĪHU'E – An anti-drug rally that was scheduled at 4 pm this afternoon in front of the Historic County Building has been cancelled due to the threat of flash flooding for Kaua`i County.

A flash watch is in effect for Kaua`i and Ni`ihau through tomorrow morning.

The rally was planned to raise awareness and inform the community of the pending marijuana legislation now being considered by the state Legislature.

It’s not clear if anyone bought that excuse after our article yesterday exposed the use of county resources to plan the rally and an order from Iseri that attendance was “mandatory” for her staff attorneys and, ahem, strongly encouraged for the rest of the staff... with a suggestion that they “rearrange” their “schedule” to attend.

But in Act 2, at 12:23 p.m.- less than couple of hours after the first release- it disappeared from the county’s press release page, replaced with the following release, this one from the office of County Attorney Al Castillo:

Update on anti-drug rally

LĪHU'E – County officials said this morning that they received a complaint from the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) regarding the anti-drug rally that was scheduled at 4 pm this afternoon in front of the Historic County Building.

“We are in receipt of the ACLU complaint and my office is reviewing it,” said County Attorney Alfred Castillo.

The rally was cancelled due to the complaint and for safety concerns due to the threat of flash flooding for Kaua`i County.

A flash watch is in effect for Kaua`i and Ni`ihau through tomorrow morning.

The rally was planned to raise awareness and inform the community of the pending marijuana legislation now being considered by the state Legislature.

Oh to be a fly on the wall to witness all that went into that release.

But Act 3 was on it’s way and at 1 p.m. a “Breaking News” update appeared at the local newspaper’s web site from new cops and court reporter Jessica Musicar with a headline of “Rapozo: Anti-drug rally still a go”

Musicar wrote:

Is it canceled or isn't it?

Whether an anti-drug rally will be held at 4 p.m. remains unclear, as the county and a member of its council have indicated conflicting answers.

Kaua`i County Council member Mel Rapozo, who said he originally scheduled the rally, plans to show up at the historic County Building with other participants, regardless of the county's notice of cancellation. The rally was intended to raise awareness and inform the community about pending marijuana legislation under consideration by the state Legislature.

This morning, however, the county canceled the rally, citing a weather warning. It later noted this afternoon in a press release that the cancellation is also tied to a complaint from the American Civil Liberties Union.

Rapozo said he is upset that the county was hiding behind the weather.

"To use the weather as an excuse is unacceptable," Rapozo said. "The reason for the cancellation wasn't the weather. It was the ACLU's concerns."

Although the county has not specified the nature of the complaint, stating only that County Attorney Alfred Castillo is reviewing it, Rapozo said the organization took issue with the county using public resources to host the rally.

Acting as a citizen of the county, rather than a councilman, Rapozo added he will be at the rally with church and youth groups...

We can see it now. Since county employees and any solicited attendees- like the island’s pastors and their minions who Rapozo urged to attend- most likely had heard about the “official” cancellation and the counter demonstrators- especially those who read the local newspaper on-line where, in the comments column, the protest was originally organized- probably either haven’t heard or heard Rapozo will be there, we expect to see Mel facing down a group of pissed off citizens.
.
But in all seriousness canceling the anti-pot-party after a complaint from the ACLU cannot be allowed to be where this ends. We urge a full investigation by at least the attorney general’s office if not the FBI- since of course KPD and the prosecutor are the alleged “perps”- as well as ethics complaints against Chief Darryl Perry whose underlings organized the KPD’s involvement, Councilmember Rapozo and, especially, Prosecuting Attorney Iseri... all of whom are or should be well aware of the laws.

It’s high time to take a page from the prosecutor’s playbook and make an example of those involved so that this type of thing never happens again.