PAY THE LADY

PAY THE LADY: Kaua`i County Council meetings are generally political exercises with long-winded, often well-deserved finger pointing at a stumble-bum mayor and his ever expanding cadre of appointed dimwitted cronies being the rule rather than the exception.

So it was no surprise that the subject of paying them all resulted in a few of the wilder politically-tinged sessions, with each councilmember unable to agree with any of the others on what the biggest issue was but all agreeing there's something rotten in the state of Lihu`e.

We've yet to view yesterday's finale to the latest chapter in the continuing saga regarding the most recent Salary Commission resolution where it was allowed to become law, if (always a big if) the local newspaper article is to be believed.

But anyone who has paid attention over the years knows that the debacle of political gamesmanship in every nook and cranny of Kaua`i government is the result of an ironic and iconic self-lit exploding cigar.

The subject of any legislative body's salaries is always a touchy subject. Kaua`i was no different and decades back the Salary Commission (SC) was created to take some of the pressure off the council so they could get a raise without really proposing one.

The only problem was that even with a recommendation from the SC, the council still had to ultimately vote to raise their own salaries. They tried some tinkering over the years, once to change the county charter to make any raise take effect only after the next election. But that didn't do any good because everyone knew that the incumbents were reelected over and over.

So throughout the 90's and into the 2000's, the council's, the mayor's and all other appointed officials' salaries remained the same because the council couldn’t stand the political heat associated with raising them. The council's salary for what was turning into a full time job as the island grew, was stuck at $28,000 and $32,000 for the chair. Some of their clerks were getting almost twice that.

It got to the point where civil service workers in many departments were getting paid a lot more than the department heads. In one case the salary for the County Engineer- the head of the Public Works Department- was so low he quit to take a civil service job in the behemoth department, leaving the job open for many years because no one who was qualified would take it.

Finally a solution was proposed. In an "experiment to take the politics out of the process," as it was called, the SC resolution wasn't advisory any more but would automatically take effect unless five or more members of the council voted stop it.

But really it was just an illusory change and although the smoke and mirror machines were fully engaged, people saw- or at least the council assumed the people saw, which is the same thing- that the council was still, in essence, in charge of either accepting or rejecting their own raises.

Though the first few raises went through with minimal grumbling because voters accepted the "salary inversion" excuse cited above, no one foresaw that the exponentially ballooning pay raises contained in the multiple-year resolutions would become outrageous when things like "furlough Fridays" and 5% pay cuts came about after the bottom fell out of the free enterprise system.

All of a sudden the whole process had to be reversed and the council was faced with a "yes means no and no means yes" situation where allowing the current resolution to pass would actually be giving out pay cuts and voting to reject the reso would allow raises to go into effect.

That's where the incompetence of the local newspaper comes in because none of the council members trusted reporter Leo Azambuja to correctly report the story so each councilmember, with visions of "Council Votes For Pay Raise Resolution" headlines, came up with his or her own excuse for why they were voting against the reso.

Some cited the March 15 date in the charter by which the resolution "shall" be forwarded to the council. One cited the apparent ethical violation allowing Boards and Commissions Administrator John Isobe to write the actual resolution lowering everyone's salary but giving himself a raise. Another claimed that the mayor directed the whole thing, charging impropriety through interference with the supposedly independent SC. Still another complained about the fact that the budget didn’t reflect the resolution even though the amounts were actually less than the salaries appropriated in the budget.

It got so wild that, in an unprecedented move, County Attorney Al Castillo took the hot seat and gave off-the-cuff verbal legal advice, trying to placate councilmembers' various phoney finaglings, with often conflicting and confusing opinions... made all the more perplexing when Castillo's deputy Mona Clarke sat in and gave even more advice, much of which was at odds with Castillo's counsel.

It's no wonder that the the council couldn’t even actively decide to "receive" the reso, essentially killing it and had to kill it via a reported tie vote which had the same effect of receiving it but without the full set of fingerprints.

Meanwhile any changes to Article XXIX of the charter regarding the Salary Commission isn't even on the radar screen of the Charter Commission which is contemplating asking voters once again to remove the prohibition on board and commission members from asking for money, favors and otherwise lobbying the council, planning commission and other boards and commissions... even though the same amendment was soundly rejected in 2010.

If campaign money is the mother's milk of politics then the actual salaries of elected officials is the meat and potatoes. But either way there's bound to a nice buffet spread to enable the expected politically-motivated food fight when next year's salary resolution hits the council floor.

NOTHING TO SEE HERE

NOTHING TO SEE HERE: One thing that rampant county cronyism creates is a bunch of well-connected board and commission members whose qualifications are often as dubious as their conscientiousness.

When Charter Commission Chair Sherman Shiraishi showed up at last Wednesday's Council Committee of the Whole meeting to request the council's input on a "proposal to establish a permanent Charter Review Commission," it was the council that seemed befuddled as to why the commission is sitting for 10 years in the first place.

Seems that when the 2007-8 commission was empaneled for the then-usual "once every 10 years" assemblage there were so many proposals for changes to the charter that they had to limit the number that made it to the ballot to 15 from as many as 50 at one point, just so as not to overwhelm voters.

And that was without even touching the whole "county manager" mess or the apparent need for a slew of housekeeping changes.

As the session began a letter from Mayor Bernard Carvalho to the commission and council was produced raising the question as to why, if the commission was good to go until 2018, it was necessary to make it permanent now.

Well that was enough for Shiraishi to take his cue and all of a sudden, after months of charter commission meetings and weeks of council deferrals until Shiraishi could come to address the council, he instantly decided he agreed with the mayor after all.

Nope- no cronyism here... just good old independent thought.

But since Shiraishi and Board and Commissions Director John Isobe were there anyway the councilmembers decided to air some gripes about the charter and past amendments- whether they had any idea what they were talking about or not.

First up was Councilperson JoAnn Yukimura who has a special black place in her heart for the ease with which citizen's can petition for a charter amendment- a 5% of registered voters threshold. That came about after she initiated and led the court fight- where the county sued the county- against the "Proposition 13" style property tax amendment that passed overwhelmingly in the early 2000's, only to be overturned by the Hawai`i Supreme Court in a confused ruling that no one really understood.

She and others maintain that a county's charter is "like the federal or state constitutions" in that it should be hard to change since it is a guiding document. But the difference is that while the federal and state constitutions grant rights to citizens and delineate powers, local charters merely take the powers left over and delineate the structure of the legislative and executive branches and list the various departments, board and commissions and the like, describing their functions- nuts and bolts measures that occasionally need revision due to changes in the needs of the community.

But that's a philosophical matter that can be argued either way. What wasn't was Yukimura's bemoaning of the fact that the people of Kaua`i "still need education" after they rejected changes to the infamous anti-cronyism section 20.02(D) of the charter which prohibits members of boards and commissions from "(a)ppear(ing) in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency."

It's a simple measure that stops perceptions of conflicts of interest before they start so that the "one hand washes the other" style of governance can be nipped in the bud.

It seems the charter commission has recently lost three of its members because they routinely represented clients before the council and planning commission and even though there are only a handful of such good old boys and girls on the island they have populated boards and commissions in droves. The county tried to ignore the provision for years even appointing conflicted individuals to the Ethics Board to rule for allowing the practice.

But when they finally tried to change the charter the voters rejected it and the Ethics Board was left with no other choice to finally issue an opinion enforcing the charter.

Of course there were nods of agreement around the council table as well as from Shiraishi and Isobe that indeed it is the voters who "don't get it."

Despite the need for things like reform of the county attorney section (we're the only island without a "corporation counsel") and a the transformation of the Department of Personnel Services into a modern Department Human Resources (another example of changing times leading to the need for changes to the charter) as well as a slew of needed housekeeping changes (like removing all the references to "he") councilmembers insist on the commission asking voters the same questions over and over (like four year council terms) even when they've been answered again and again... resoundingly.

Once again the trophy for the most dunderheaded performance of the day had to go to- who else- Chair Jay Furfaro.

Recently the council discovered that the Cost Control Commission (CCC) was taking the powers the charter gave them seriously, such as requiring the administration to submit bills to the council to carry out their recommendations within 30 days of their request. But despite the charter requirement, the administration had simply ignored three such requests in 2009.

That apparently got Furfaro looking through CCC documents where he noticed that they were discussing possible changes to the real property tax laws- something that Furfaro rarely fails to tell the public, whether it's on the agenda or not, that he is working on reforming.

Like a lion building up from a growl to a roar, Furfaro essentially asked what the heck the CCC was doing butting into the council's kuleana finally reading Section 3.10 from the charter:

Annual Budget and Capital Program. The council shall enact an annual budget ordinance, which shall include both the operational and capital expenditures for the fiscal year and the method of financing same. The council shall provide sufficient revenues to assure a balanced budget (emphasis his).

The council is in charge of property taxes, he bellowed, not the cost control commission.

Apparently Furfaro failed to read the charter's Section 28, regarding the CCC. Isobe, left with no choice but to defend the CCC- and so himself as the person in charge- then read 28.04 aloud:

The commission shall review personnel costs, real property taxes (emphasis added), travel budgets, contract procedures; review with the aim of eliminating programs and services available or more efficiently supplied by other governments or organizations; eliminate or consolidate overlapping or duplicate programs and services; scrutinize for reduction any county operation.

Furfaro hemmed and hawed and with a Ralph Kramden "hahmana-hamamana" quickly changed the subject but we were laughing too hard to hear what he said next.

What wasn't surprising at all was how quickly Shiraishi changed from the need for a perpetual charter commission to saying that there was barely any work to do as soon as the mayor told him what to think- and how fast the council agreed.

Because after all what's the good of being able to nominate and confirm a select set of yes men and women to board and commissions if they start to tell you no?

STRIKING DEEP

STRIKING DEEP: Kaua`i has been called “The Garden Island”, “The Separate Kingdom” and a lot of other things but with the strict controls brought on by Mayor Bernard Carvalho and his insular “team” after last November’s election the name “The Paranoiac Secrecy Island” has become the more appropriate moniker.

Carvalho’s county employees- the same ones who be abused with politcally motivated unnecessary furloughs- are now under a gag edict that forbids them from speaking to the media or anyone likely to repeat what they say in a public way, according to numerous county employees.

But while Carvalho and his PR mastermind Beth Tokioka have the ability to control employees under threat of losing their jobs- despite their civil service employment- there’s a whole other set of county functionaries that have less to lose by acting on their own and actually doing their job competently rather than whatever way the administration directs them to act.

The scores of board and commission (B&C) members are usually a pretty compliant lot having been selected more often for their cronyism than their expertise. But there’s always a few, eh?...

Since their meetings are open to the public and their minutes are either available on-line now or will be very soon, what they say may not be what the administration wants the public to hear.

So it shouldn’t be any surprise that B&C Administrator John Isobe has come up with a plan to make sure that those “few” will receive the proper indoctrination to ensure that any and all things said or done are subject to the proper PR filter.

That’s why Isobe is seeking to procure- albeit in as secretive manner as possible- a “person to provide Public Relations advice and services to the various Boards and Commissions of the County of Kauai” at an estimated Cost of $15,000.00 - $ 30,000.00 a year with the ability to extend the contract.

First of all we have to ask the question, “isn’t that Isobe’s job?” And where exactly is the money coming from? Isn’t it a line item in the county budget?

Those will have to be asked rhetorically for now. The bigger concern is how the PR person will be selected- and controlled.

As the document we obtained this week says in it’s “Description of proposed procurement”:

The Office of Boards and Commissions anticipates the need to select a person or firm qualified to provide Public Relations advice and services to the various Boards and Commissions of the County of Kauai. The objectives of this effort are to:

• Provide general public relations support and assistance to County Boards and Commissions;

• Assist and facilitate public educational efforts as any be required related to specific issues or topics under consideration by the various Boards and Commissions;

• Directly advise board and staff members with tips and talking points needed to enhance communication and relationship skills to factually, diplomatically and courteously address public concerns and issues that are brought before a Board or Commission;

• Develop and implement a public relations program that will improve awareness. Knowledge and perception about the service and value that Boards and Commissions provide to the County;

Interested person or firms should have at least five (5) years of combined experience in public relations on the island of Kaua`i that demonstrate knowledge about the pros & cons of current government and community issues. Desirable qualifications also include previous work experience directly related to the State of County government.

But even with the restrictive way the qualifications are written there are dozens of PR firms out there and if the contract was indeed subject to normal procurement it would have to be widely advertised and the person selected based on the best qualifications and price quote.

Obviously that won’t do- they need someone who will teach them to shut up, not to actually speak to the public and press.

So Isobe has received a waiver from the procurement process because, as Isobe writes in his “Explanation describing how procurement by competitive means is either not practical or not advantageous to the County”:

Public Relations is more an "art" than a "science". The creativity, resourcefulness, background experience, and work ethic/style of an individual or the firm are important in ensuring a good working foundation and relationship.

A negotiated process provides the venue for Q&A to properly evaluate and select the most appropriate and qualified person/firm to meet the objectives and scope for an effective public relations program effort.

But even without proper procurement processes how can Isobe make sure the person selected is a true crony who will do as he or she is told?

In the “Details of the process or procedures to be followed in determining or developing at a list of eligible persons/entities, and in selecting the vendor to ensure maximum fair and open competition” it says:

A solicitation requesting resumes from qualified persons or firms interested in undertaking this work will be advertised in a local newspaper(s) of general circulation and posted on the website (htto://www.spo.hawaii.gov).

Resumes will then be evaluated and ranked by an evaluation committee consisting of three (3) members. Immediately thereafter, a three (3) member committee will negotiate the terms and conditions for a contract with the top ranked respondent.

And who might the three people be?

Why of course Isobe and two other mayoral appointees who work directly out of the office of the mayor and can be fired on the spot by the mayor: ADA Coordinator, Christina Pilkington and Anti-Drug Coordinator, Theresa Koki.

As the wall between the public and Carvalho’s minions gets higher and higher we can expect that this is just the beginning of an era of darkness and obfuscation that few could have imagined could have gotten much more opaque before last November.

For those seeking information from the county it’s going to be a long four years.

(PNN) MAYOR WITHDRAWS LIQUOR COMMISSION NOMINATION AFTER WATCHDOG CHALLENGE

MAYOR WITHDRAWS LIQUOR COMMISSION NOMINATION AFTER WATCHDOG CHALLENGE

(PNN) -- Mayor Bernard Carvalho’s nomination of Heidy Yamamoto to the Liquor Commission has been withdrawn after the county attorney’s office told the administration that “it would be prudent to withdraw this nomination to avoid any potential conflicts given the fact that part of Costco's merchandising includes alcoholic beverages.” according to a letter to councilmembers from Board and Commission administrator John Isobe.

As PNN reported last month Ms. Yamamoto’s job at Costco would make her ineligible to serve due to the plain language of the county charter which prohibits anyone “who is or becomes engaged, or is directly or indirectly interested in any business for the manufacture or sale of liquor”.

Council watchdog Rob Abrew who discovered the conflict of interest obtained the letter only after the council voted to receive the resolution that would have confirmed Yamamoto.

At first the administration tried to go forward with the nomination claiming that since Yamamoto didn’t deal directly with liquor in her job duties she was exempt from following the law.

Abrew persisted in trying to get answers from the council as to what happened in the interim during his public testimony and finally was told of the letter. Then, during a recess Abrew said was chided by an angry Councilperson Jay Furfaro for exposing the matter to on-camera public scrutiny.

Abrew discovered the conflict of interest after a successful battle earlier this year to obtain the applications of prospective board and commission members when their names are put before the council, a practice that the Office of Information Practices (OIP) required in a previous opinion.

Abrew still has an outstanding case with the OIP after filing a complaint earlier this year due to what he says was stonewalling and intentional delays by the council in following the sunshine law.

For PNN’s prior coverage of Abrew’s attempts to bring sunshine to the board and commission nomination process see:

Friday, January 8, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL IGNORES, FLOUTS OIP IN CONFIRMING BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBERS

Monday, January 11, 2010 (PNN) ABREW FILES WRITTEN RECORDS, CLARIFICATION REQUESTS WITH COUNTY CLERK AT OIP’S URGING

Monday, January 25, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST

Friday, February 19, 2010 (PNN) ABREW SUCCEEDS IN OBTAINING PROSPECTIVE B&C MEMBERS’ APPLICATIONS

Monday, March 22, 2010
(PNN) CARVALHO, ISOBE VIOLATE CHARTER IN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION APPOINTMENT, APPLICATION REVEALS

The following is the full text of the letter from the county attorney

----

(To) Honorable Kaipo Asing, Council Chairperson; Honorable Jay Furfaro, Council Vice Chairperson
(From) Mr. John Isobe, Executive Assistant to the Mayor

April 12, 2010

Withdrawal of Appointment to Liquor Commission

This responds to your request for clarification regarding a possible conflict of interest on the appointment of Ms. Heidy Yamamoto to the Liquor Commission based on her employment at Costco, who is a retailer of liquor.

This matter was referred to the County Attorney's Office for review and opinion along with Ms. Yamamoto's job responsibilities none of which include a reference to the manufacture or sale of liquor. Although the County Attorney's Office did not provide a definitive answer, they have advised that it would be prudent to withdraw this nomination to avoid any potential conflicts given the fact that part of Costco's merchandising includes alcoholic beverages.

For this reason, we are hereby withdrawing the appointment of Ms. Heidy Yamamoto to the Liquor Commission.

Please be informed that we have advised Ms. Yamamoto about this possible conflict and she is in agreement with this course of action.

Please contact me if you have any questions regarding this matter.

STILL ON PATROL

STILL ON PATROL: The recent decision by the Kaua`i Board of Ethics (BOE) to enforce the conflict-of-interest prohibitions as expressed in the county charter’s section 20.02(D) was an important first step in reforming what has evolved into a traditionally ethically-challenged political tool of administrations and councils.

And apparently members of the public aren’t going to rest on their laurels if Horace Stoessel’s communication asking the BOE to “schedule three reviews that I believe will serve the public interest as well as the board’s interest, with a brief rationale for each” is any indication.

Although Stoessel’s requests are matters that the BOE needs to examine until they come under a less political and more independent template and appointment system - similar to that of the State Ethics commission- any reforms may be merely akin to shifting deck chairs on the Titanic until the charter review commission decides (or a group of citizens petitions) to deal with the really problematic charter sections like the one governing the BOE’s structure.

That said, here’s Horace’s request:

----------

TO: Chairperson Sally Motta and members of the Board of Ethics
FROM: Horace Stoessel
SUBJECT: Request for Reviews
DATE: March 30, 2010

The purpose of this communication is to ask the Board of Ethics to schedule three reviews that I believe will serve the public interest as well as the board’s interest, with a brief rationale for each.

1. A review of the board’s Guide to Ethical Issues (2004), with a view to making appropriate revisions. Aside from routine corrections such as recognizing the creation of the Office of Boards and Commissions Administrator, potentially confusing references to the Code of Ethics need correcting. In the last paragraph of page one, for example, the Code is referred to as “these ordinances,” while the examples listed on pages 4-8 routinely cite the County Code ahead of the Charter—a practice that should be reversed.

2. A review of Chapter 3 Article 1 of the County Code in light of Charter Section 20.04D, with a view to recommending changes per 20.05D(5). In 1971 the Council enacted Section 25, entitled “ETHICS,” consisting of slightly more than two double-spaced pages. In 1976 the section was replaced with approximately six single-spaced pages entitled “CODE OF ETHICS.” It is reasonable to assume that the new title and expanded contents made it easy for people to assume that Chapter 3 Article 1, rather than Charter Article XX, contains the code of ethics. The title of 3.1 should be changed to something like “Supplements to the Code of Ethics,” and the contents should be reviewed in light of the requirement that ordinances should be necessary supplements to the code. For example, is mere repetition of sections from Article XX justified by 20.04D?

3. A review of the relationship between the Board of Ethics and the administration in light of the board’s authority and responsibility per Article XX, the job description of the Boards and Commissions Administrator (Charter Section 7.06 adopted in 2006), and the County Attorney’s role (Charter Section 8.04). The board is not a part of the administration, but the fact that the Boards and Commissions Administrator and the County Attorney are appointed by the Mayor and serve the board can lead to the perception that the board is just another part of the administration. One key issue is whether the board has the right to seek outside counsel when it deems such counsel is needed.

I request that this communication be placed on the board’s April 9 agenda.

(PNN) CARVALHO, ISOBE VIOLATE CHARTER IN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION APPOINTMENT, APPLICATION REVEALS

CARVALHO, ISOBE VIOLATE CHARTER IN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION APPOINTMENT, APPLICATION REVEALS

(PNN) -- When Rob Abrew first started his campaign to force the council to provide the public with the actual applications filed by prospective board and commission members and do so in a timely manner he suspected he might be opening a can of worms.

This past Wednesday his suspicions- that the lack of sunshine might be covering up at best incompetence and at worst malfeasance on the part of Mayor Bernard Carvalho and Boards and Commissions Administrator John Isobe- were confirmed when he examined one of the two applications submitted by people seeking council confirmation for their appointments.

Despite the fact that Heidy Huddy-Yamamoto’s application for appointment to the Liquor Control Commission clearly states she works for Costco- an establishment that sells liquor- the fact that her membership on the commission would clearly violate the county charter, Carvalho and Isobe didn’t seem to mind.

In article 16 section 3, Disqualifications of Liquor Control Commissioners, the county charter states:

No person shall be a member or the liquor control commission who is or becomes engaged, or is directly or indirectly interested in any business for the manufacture or sale of liquor... This provision shall be enforced by the mayor by the removal of the disqualified member whenever such disqualifications shall appear.

Abrew has been successful in not only making the applications available to the public but in causing Isobe to make changes to the application forms to make sure that they include all information required by the charter including a question as to political party affiliation so as to confirms that only “a bare majority” of members of any one party sit on any individual board or commission.

But while Abrew confirms that all the latest applications do ask that question the county still has no process for ascertaining the validity of information provided with the various political parties.

When he brought the subject up at the March 3 council meeting- the first for which the applications were made available- Councilmember Tim Bynum, who has supported Abrew in his efforts, told Abrew that he had confidence that the administration would be doing their job as far as confirming the information provided and presumably checking on the legality of each appointment.

However the very next meeting on March 17 the violation of the charter presented on Yamamoto’s application was either missed or ignored by Carvalho, Isobe and apparently the council itself which, after Abrew’s testimony, deferred the resolution confirming Yamamoto’s nomination pending an interview.

Abrew thinks the action may be a violation of the code of ethics since it is a violation of both Carvalho’s and Isobe’s oath of office in which they swear to uphold the county charter.

He also wonders how many other board and commission member’s appointments have violated the charter and/or ordinances since not only are the past applications unavailable but this seems to confirm that the administration may not even be reading them much less verifying the information contained.

Abrew says that some of the applications he has seen so far have been incomplete with many unanswered “blanks” including under “employment” which might also reveal conflicts-of-interest in violation of the provisions of the code of ethics contained in the charter and county code.

For background see previous PNN news stories:

Friday, January 8, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL IGNORES, FLOUTS OIP IN CONFIRMING BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBERS Monday, January 11, 2010 (PNN) ABREW FILES WRITTEN RECORDS, CLARIFICATION REQUESTS WITH COUNTY CLERK AT OIP’S URGING

Monday, January 25, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST
Friday, February 19, 2010 (PNN) ABREW SUCCEEDS IN OBTAINING PROSPECTIVE B&C MEMBERS’ APPLICATIONS

(PNN) ABREW SUCCEEDS IN OBTAINING PROSPECTIVE B&C MEMBERS’ APPLICATIONS

ABREW SUCCEEDS IN OBTAINING PROSPECTIVE B&C MEMBERS’ APPLICATIONS

(PNN) -- The county council finally complied with an Office of Information Practices opinion and the county charter last week in making applications of prospective board and commission (B&C) member available to the public before council confirmation and asking them about their political party affiliation.

Open and good governance activist Rob Abrew- who has battled the council for months to get them to comply- said he was pleased to be able to get the applications in a timely manner although he continued to question why the council had to wait for the administration’s B&C office to do the job of redacting certain confidential information contained in the applications such as addresses and phone numbers.

Although the B&C office did draw up a new application form to comply with the charter provision that B&Cs contain no more than a bare majority of any one political party and nominees did fill out that section of the new forms, the county apparently still does not have a way to confirm that the answers were truthful.

It is unknown whether the county will attempt to verify the party affiliation, if any, of the new board members. According to Abrew, who has reviewed the applications, almost all of them answered that they were not a member of any party.

Party membership in Hawai`i is strictly the domain of the individual parties and is optional on the part of voters. The lists of members is not considered public information under state sunshine and open records law.

Once someone “signs a card” for membership in one of the two major parties they are considered members for life unless or until they act to leave the party or change affiliation.

That has meant that many in Hawai`i may not even be aware of whether or not they are members, including the tens of thousands who joined the democratic party to vote in the Obama-Clinton presidential primary held in 2008.

See the following for PNN’s past coverage of Abrew’s efforts:

Monday, January 25, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST

Monday, January 11, 2010 (PNN) ABREW FILES WRITTEN RECORDS, CLARIFICATION REQUESTS WITH COUNTY CLERK AT OIP’S URGING

Friday, January 8, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL IGNORES, FLOUTS OIP IN CONFIRMING BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBERS

CANIS CANTANKEROUS

CANIS CANTANKEROUS: Having spent two years (and four days) at this daily, frothy-foamy hydrophobic-hysteria we’ve come to appreciate that people are entitled to their own opinions but they’re not entitled to their own facts.

That’s been pounded into our brain over and over as we’ve observed “the Kaua`i way of doing things” inexpertly performed by our various and sundry county entities- ones who are intent on not just reinventing the wheel but doing so to produce a square one derived through the limited self-interest of the individuals involved in the decision-making

The archetype of this warped behavior has been a Board of Ethics (BOE) made up of the ethically-challenged, carving out exemptions to conflict-of-interest laws for their own conflicts-of-interest with logic only the truly mentally-challenged could appreciated.

We’ve written extensively on the Kaua`i County Charter- section 20.02(d)- while a stream of dedicated citizens bang their heads against the wall and still the board continues to try to “carve out exceptions”, the latest for (run-to-the-dictionary) “eleemosynary” (it means charitable) activities.

But while we have felt like we were screaming in outer space someone in higher places was seemingly listening and today, in covering the latest machinations of the BOE, local newspaper reporter Mike Levine presented sections of a State Ethics Commission letter sent to him by State Senator Les Ihara that makes you wonder what these BOE dolts and their amateurish lawyers have been doing for the last year.

It states plainly what we’ve been writing in literally dozens of articles over the past two years- there is a purpose in the law that forbids county officials from appearing on behalf of private interests before county boards, commissions and agencies and it doesn’t matter what kind of cockamamie excuse you have for doing so... even if you are “doing good work”.

Levine writes:

In March 2003, the Hawai`i State Ethics Commission told Sen. Les Ihara (D-Kapahulu, Kaimuki, Palolo) that serving even as an uncompensated director of a non-profit corporation does create a “financial interest” because the Hawai`i Revised Statutes define that term to include directorship in a “business,” and define business to include a corporation, whether operated for profit or not.

“The term ‘financial interest’ pertains, of course, to having an actual monetary interest in a business, and so forth, but also includes situations where one is not receiving actual compensation or monetary gain, but the ‘interest’ in the matter is so strong as to reasonably have a possible effect upon one’s decision-making as a state official,” states the letter, provided unsolicited by Ihara to The Garden Island. It also identifies fiduciary responsibilities and the potential for a lawsuit as financial interests not generally considered by the general public.

“While such service may appear to be merely the providing of volunteer services as a good citizen, in reality, under the law, there are substantial and real financial interests that a member of the board of directors of a non-profit corporation has, whether the individual is compensated or not,” the letter concludes.

Though the state Ethics Commission is not really a controlling authority in that they rule on the activities of state officials, you’d think as a political subdivision of the state the county would take a hint- or at least check with the grownups on how they do it

The fact is that 20.02(d) is a direct challenge to the crony-crammed board and commission system that is populated by a politically connected cadre of corrupt colleagues, carefully chosen by Carvalho’s contemptuous cabal, concentrating on conniving and circumventing conventional codes of conduct.

The fact is that this “interpretive” rule is only needed for those who want to interpret the rule out of existence- it presupposes that they’re entitled to allow their opinions to drive the facts.

And when it comes to county governance that IS the Kaua`i way.

(PNN) COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST

COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST

(PNN)The county council continued to flout county charter provisions and state open meeting and records laws last Wednesday in approving two more board and commission (B&C) members despite a request for deferral by Councilperson Lani Kawahara.

Kawahara said that the Office of Board and Commissions (OBC) is currently working on a process for releasing properly redacted applications of prospective B&C members awaiting confirmation but Chair Kaipo Asing refused to allow her to make a motion to defer approval until they can be made available to the public before confirmation as the Office of Information Practices (OIP) has required.

Despite detailed testimony to the contrary from Rob Abrew who has been championing the issue for the past month County Attorney Al Castillo told the council there was no problem with the process and they could go ahead and vote on the confirmations, saying the OIP “are not necessarily right all the time” citing recent court cases won by the county against the OIP.

The OIP is charged by the state with oversight of the state’s open meeting (HRS 92 Section I) and records (HRS 92F) laws.

Kawahara asked Castillo “do you believe we’ve done due diligence in providing the public the information that’s supposed to be made public within a reasonable amount of time... so the public can comment (on nominees)?”

In response Castillo continually referenced “these fine people” awaiting confirmation saying to Kawahara that no violation of law has occurred and that “nothing should give you pause to question the process”.

Agreeing that all the applicants are all “fine people” Kawahara said that wasn’t the point of questioning the process for confirming the almost two dozen applicants that have been recently processed.

“I don’t have any confidence that the public was able to get information they would have needed to make comments on those nominees” she said.

Kawahara did however leave some hope that when the final two nominees come up for confirmation in two weeks the information might be forthcoming saying “I’ve worked with the offices involved (to assure) that this procedure is much clearer in the future.

“I was requesting that we would honor what will be going on in the future” she noted adding “Give and take between the (council and the) public is how we make decisions, not in a vacuum”

Councilmember Tim Bynum said he appreciated Abrew’s work on the matter and Kawahara’s follow-up saying that “good questions were raised” and noted that B&C administrator John Isobe “has already responded” and that “going forward we will have a clarified process” for redacting phone numbers and addresses and releasing the rest of the applications to the public when the agenda is published- as OIP told the council to do back in January 2005.

That opinion led the council to move interviews with prospective B&C members out of executive session and into the public purview although they still refuse to televise those interviews.

Abrew had requested the information contained in the applications - including employment, experience and potential conflicts of interest- in writing on Jan. 12 but had not received a written response as of this morning, well exceeding the 10 day window for response to a record request under the state law.

The matter was brought to light by Abrew after noting that county charter provisions require that no B&C have more than a “bare majority” of members of any particular political party.

It is still unknown if the new process will include that information and how those memberships- or lack thereof- will be confirmed with the parties.

For more background information see previous PNN reports:

Monday, January 11, 2010(PNN) ABREW FILES WRITTEN RECORDS, CLARIFICATION REQUESTS WITH COUNTY CLERK AT OIP’S URGINGFriday, January 8, 2010(PNN) COUNCIL IGNORES, FLOUTS OIP IN CONFIRMING BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBERS

...GANG AFT AGLEY

...GANG AFT AGLEY: The dysfunctionality of the corrupt crony-riddled board and commission (B&C) system on Kaua`i is not a new issue.

Prior to 2004 members were like babes in the woods, usually flung into their positions with no idea what they were supposed to do, getting on-the-job training confined to whatever dysfunctionality the current members had adopted from their predecessors.

They were selected via a closed secretive process by the mayor and interviewed in secret by the county council before an open confirmation with the public receiving little more than the name of the prospective appointees.

Most didn’t know the sunshine law from a hole in the ground and were surprised to find out they needed agendas- much less ones published and posted six days in advance- to meet and that the public was not just allowed to attend but were to be given the opportunity to testify regarding any and all agenda items.

It was so bad that the charter review commission (CRC) of that year decided that a skilled administrator and staff was needed to bring some cohesion and sunshine to the system.

But under B&C Administrator John Isobe most observers agree that if anything the lack of transparency and independence of members has gone from bad to worse with an administrator unskilled in anything but obfuscation and public relations keeping the selection process hidden, documents unreleased or difficult to obtain- one who sees open meetings and public input as a nuisance and foists that attitude on business and development oriented B&C members all too willing to help him do his dirty work for the administration.

The charter amendment- which, along with any and all amendments from the 2006 and 2008 are unavailable at the county web site, even on the non-updated page where the charter appears- was carefully drafted by the CRC to do a few things.

One was to select someone with skills and experience in doing the job.

The amendment on the ballot read:

There shall be a boards and commissions administrator and any necessary staff. The administrator shall have such training, education or experience as shall qualify the administrator to perform the duties described in this section.

Though the qualifications are pretty general it’s hard to see how Isobe meets them. Rather, a look at his past shows him to be a PR flack and himself a crony of the past three administrations.

A UH graduate and “lifelong” Hawai`i resident Isobe first shows up in 1996 as a spokesperson for Princeville corporation during a time of conflict with the homeowners there over various issues.

Though the dates are unclear his first stint with the county was as Deputy Finance Director under the Kusaka administration and was appointed to a state community-based economic development advisory council in 2006.

He was also a member of the infamous Kaua`i Economic Development Board under disgraced head Gary Baldwin who started the business-friendly pro-development board promoting a staunch chamber of commerce agenda until Baldwin left in disgrace after it was revealed that he was a wanted for running a financial scam on the mainland.

Then having proved himself adept at defending large and powerful corporations he held a positions at Kaua`i Community College (KCC) serving as director of the Kauai Rural Development Project where he developed “F.A.R.M... a strategy to bring the Kauai business community together through education” according to the Pacific Business Journal (PBJ) article in 2001.

That led to a job as training coordinator in the Office of Continuing Education and Training at KCC where, rather than offering traditional academic courses, he was part of a push to serve “business organizations, visitor bureau, chamber of commerce and (the) work-force investment board” telling PBJ in 2003 “’We are in constant contact with people in the industry and our courses revolve around their needs’" .

How that constitutes “training, education or experience as shall qualify” him to be B&C Administrator is anyone’s guess. It certainly qualifies him to know all the pro- development cronies in the Chamber of Commerce-KEDB crowd in order to make sure the B&Cs are stacked to reflect and protect their interests.

One of the most important parts of the amendment was what the administrator was supposed to do and the CRC made sure that open governance principles were to be one of the more important functions.

The charter amendment reads in part:

The administrator shall assist in providing administrative and operational support to the various county boards and commissions. Such support shall include, but not be limited to: assisting in the recruitment, orientation, education, and training of board or commission members regarding their powers, duties, functions, and responsibilities under the charter... (and) helping to educate such members about applicable state and county ethics laws and the State Sunshine Law... (emphasis added).

But the words “sunshine law” never appear at the county web site’s B&C page. Instead here’s Isobe’s blurb at the top of the B&C page:

Kauai County's 16 boards and commissions are comprised of 116 volunteer board members and commissioners who oversee and make critical decisions about key County functions and groups. Volunteers who serve on Kauai County boards and commissions are the best in their fields, local leaders, and valuable, knowledgeable resources. They give an extraordinary amount of time to serve in these roles each year and make both personal and professional sacrifices to do so. Because of this and the weight of their responsibilities to our community, they are among Kauai's treasures.

Instead of trying to recruit everyday citizens who have no preconceived notions- and especially no conflicts of interests in “their fields”- rather he seeks to find the “best in their fields, local leaders, and valuable, knowledgeable resources”- a euphemism for well connected people with a lot to lose if they offend the mayor, who can be counted on to “not rock the boat”... also known as his and the mayors cronies, supporters and campaign contributors, which includes Isobe.

Want more proof? Just look at the notice posted for the first B&C training session this year, scheduled for January 29th, on the “Role Of The Board/Commission Member”.

For some incredibly tone deaf reason it is not itself “agendaed” as a government meeting but rather is printed on Kaua`i Chamber of Commerce stationary and is apparently sponsored by the business promotion organization “Leadership Kaua`i”.

Among the topics covered are:

...your duties and responsibilities as a board or commission member, tips on what resources and materials are available (i.e. charter, county and state laws), general provisions of the law, standards of ethical conduct, guidelines on effective communications (and) basic parliamentary procedure.

The importance of transparency, open meetings and records and public testimony are not to be found.

This is exactly the attitude that former Board of Ethics member Rolf Bieber spoke of, especially the attitude among B&C members that they are the elite and know better than the common rabble whose testimony should be tolerated only because it is required by law- a law they are barely aware of.

John Isobe is the exact opposite of what a B&C administrator should be and is a disgrace to democracy and good governance. His resignation and replacement with a trained manager- one experienced in facilitating communication between citizen volunteers and members of the public- can only be a positive for Kaua`i which at deserves to have the charter amendment they passed honored.

---------

We’ve gotta get outta the house tomorrow and Friday. Unless we feel especially ambitious we’ll be back Monday.

TRANSLUCENCY

TRANSLUCENCY: We mouth off a lot about the complete lack of transparency in county government and maintain it’s not just a matter of the buffoonish bungling of incompetent imbeciles but a concerted, concentrated effort by a cabal of connected, conniving cronies to treat citizens like mushrooms by keeping them in the dark and feeding them bullshit.

It not just the unfathomable need to delay and stonewall the release of documents or the penchant of board and commissions- including of course the county council- to jump into executive session to hide politically sensitive deliberations.

It’s the way even the most basic information is kept under wraps even in the information age.

Ever try to find a complete list and directory of all county employees or, more to the point under current scrutiny, the complete list of board and commission members at the county web site?

Don’t bother looking. There’s not a link to be found and the search box is, as anyone who has tried to use it will tell you, worthless.

But today, while researching one of the more persistent guards at the gates of the Minotaur’s labyrinth, up popped the county directory which, although outdated by many months, elicits at least the heads and deputies of all the various departments and agencies as well as the members of all boards and commissions.

We’re not sure that once we provide the pdf link it won’t magically change so we are posting it in full today so the next time you’re getting the all-American runaround- sending you from department to agency, from civil servant to appointed bureaucrat- you can use the search box at the top of this page to find the person, department, board or commissions you’re looking for.

Here’s the directory as of March 11, 2009 when it was last modified. Spelling of all words and names are as listed by CofK. Boards and Commissions are listed under the department to which they are administratively attached.

----------

COUNTY OF KAUAI
http://www.kauai.gov
4396 Rice Street
Lihue, Hawaii 96766

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
COUNTY COUNCIL (7) (12-01-10)
CHAIR..BILL "KAIPO" ASING (D) ....241-6371
Vice-chair.......Jay Furfaro (D)....... 241-6371
Council Members
Tim Bynum (D)....... 241-6371
Dickie Chang (D).... 241-6371
Daryl Kaneshiro (D).. 241-6371
Lani Kawahara (D) .... 241-6371
Derek Kawakami (D)......... 241-6371
County Clerk
Peter A. Nakamura ......... 241-6371
Deputy County Clerk.....Ernest Pasion.... 241-6371
FAX: 241-6349

EXECUTIVE BRANCH
Mo‘ikeha Building
4444 Rice Street, Suite 235
Lihue, Hawaii 96766
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
MAYOR ...BERNARD P. CARVALHO, JR. (D) ....(12-01-10) .. 241-4900
e-mail: mayor@kauai.gov
Administrative Assistant......Gary Heu.......... 241-4900
Executive Assistant..............Beth Tokioka ....241-4900
Executive Assistant..............Lani Nakazawa..241-4900
Administrative Aide ............Kaui Tanaka...... 241-4900
Public Information Officer ..Mary Daubert ... 241-4900
Staff Services Assistant .......Soncy Tamashiro 241-4900
FAX: 241-6877
Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator....Christina Pilkington... 241-6203
Anti-Drug Coordinator...Theresa Koki...... 241-4925
FAX: 241-5127

OFFICE OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
4444 Rice Street, Suite 150, Lihue 96766
ADMINISTRATOR.....JOHN ISOBE ...... 241-4918
Administrative Aide ...Cyndi Ayonon ....... 241-4922
FAX: 241-5127

BOARD OF ETHICS (7)
Chair ...........Leila Fuller (12-31-10)
Vice-chair....Mark Hubbard (12-31-10)
Secretary .....Christiane Nakea-Tresler (12-31-10)
Members
.Rolf Bieber.......(12-31-09)
Robert Farias.....(12-31-10)
Judith Lenthall...(12-31-09)
Paul Weil.......... (12-31-11)

CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION (7)
Members
Barbara Bennett......... (12-31-09)
Jonathan Chun............(12-31-09)
Sherman Shiraishi......(12-31-11)
Carol Suzawa.............(12-31-11)
Leonard Vierra...........(12-31-10)
Matie Yoshioka......... (12-31-10)
__________________

COST CONTROL COMMISSION (7)

Chair ..........Tore Wistrom (12-31-09)
Vice-chair...Randy Finlay (12-01-10)
Members
Benjamin Bregman (12-31-09)
Nadine Nakamura (12-31-10)
Lorna Nishimitsu (12-31-11)
Sandy Sterker (12-31-11)
Michelle Swartman (12-31-09)

COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN
Chair ............Lisa Ellen Smith (12-31-11)
Vice-chair.....Regina Carvalho (12-31-11)
Secretary .....Uli‘i Castor (12-31-11)
Members......E. Kanani Alapa (12-31-10)
Mylie Alu (12-31-09)
Jade Battad (12-31-10)
JoAnne Georgi (12-31-09)
Cherie Mooy (07-31-09)
Ann Punohu (12-31-09)
Renee Sadang (12-31-11)
Valerie Yadao (12-31-09)
Ex-officio
Darla Abbatiello (Kauai Police Department)
Malcolm Fernandez (Personnel Director)
Peter Nakamura (County Clerk's Office)
Mamo Cummings Graham (State Commissioner)

SALARY COMMISSION (7)
Chair ......Gini Kapali (12-31-09)
1st Vice-chair...Randy Hee (12-31-11)
2nd Vice-chair...Thomas Cooper (12-31-11)
Members
Bob Crowell (12-31-10)
Trinette Kaui (12-31-11)
Dawn Murata (12-31-10)
Allan Smith (12-31-09)

AGENCY ON ELDERLY AFFAIRS
COUNTY EXECUTIVE ON AGING...KEALOHA TAKAHASHI....241-4470
FAX: 241-4499

CIVIL DEFENSE AGENCY
3990 Kaana Street, Suite 100, Lihue 96766
CIVIL DEFENSE ADMINISTRATOR..MARK MARSHALL ... 241-1800
Plans & Operations Officer ..Clifford Ikeda.....241-1800
FAX: 241-1860145

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY
4444 Rice Street, Suite 220, Lihue 96766
ACTING COUNTY ATTORNEY ..DARREN SUZUKI... 241-6315
FAX: 241-6319

OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
4444 Rice Street, Suite 200, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR....GEORGE COSTA..... 241-4946
Film Commissioner...Art Umezu ..... 241-4946
Energy Extension Coordinator ...Glenn Sato ..241-4946
Agriculture Specialist ..Charles W. Spitz ...... 241-4946
Tourism Specialist ..Nalani Brun ................... 241-4946
FAX: 241-6399

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
4444 Rice Street, Suite 280, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR....WALLACE REZENTES, JR. ..... 241-4200
DEPUTY DIRECTOR .....BELMA BARIS ........ 241-6565
FAX: 241-6533

COUNTY BOARD OF REVIEW (5)
Chair ............Benjamin Lizama, Jr. (12-31-10)
Vice-chair.....Richard Koenig, Jr. (12-31-11)
Members
Craig DeCosta (12-31-11)
Cayetano "Sonny" Gerardo (12-31-11)
Eric Nordmeier (12-31-09)

FIRE DEPARTMENT
4444 Rice Street, Suite 295, Lihue 96766
FIRE CHIEF.....ROBERT WESTERMAN ....241-4980
DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF ....JOHN BLALOCK.... 241-4980
FAX: 241-6508
FIRE COMMISSION (7)
Chair ..........George Simpson (12-31-11)
Vice-chair...Darnney Proudfoot (12-31-10)
Members
Guy Croydon (12-31-10)
Basilio Fuertes (12-31-09)
Linda Kaauwai-Iwamoto (12-31-09)
Wayne Mukai (12-31-11)
Jan Rudinoff (12-31-09)

COUNTY OF KAUAI HOUSING AGENCY
DIRECTOR...EUGENE JIMENEZ.... 241-4444
Executive on Housing ....Kenneth Rainforth .... 241-4444
FAX: 241-4495

DEPARTMENT OF LIQUOR CONTROL
4444 Rice Street, Suite 120, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR.....ERIC HONMA ....241-4966
FAX: 241-6585
LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION (7)
Chair ..........Clifford Nakea (12-31-11)
Vice-chair...Gerald Matsunaga (12-31-09)
Members
Shirley Akita (12-31-10)
William Gibson (12-31-10)
Gary Pacheco (12-31-11)
Myles Shibata (12-31-10)
Pauline Ventura (12-31-09)

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION
4444 Rice Street, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR....LEONARD RAPOZO, JR. ... 241-4456
DEPUTY DIRECTOR .....KYLAN DELA CRUZ... 241-4456
FAX: 241-5126

DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL SERVICES
4444 Rice Street, Suite 140, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR.......MALCOLM FERNANDEZ .... 241-4956
FAX: 241-6593

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (7)
Chair .........Rick Haviland, Jr. (06-30-09)
Vice-chair...Lani Aranio (12-31-10)
Members
Suzanne Aquiar (12-31-10)
Gilbert F. Maerina (12-31-10)
Ann Sokei (12-31-10)
Cathy Adams (12-31-11)
Ryan Dela Pena (12-31-09)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
4444 Rice Street, Suite 473, Lihue 96766
DIRECTOR....IAN COSTA... 241-6677
DEPUTY DIRECTOR ..IMAI KALANI AIU...... 241-6677
FAX: 241-6699

HISTORIC PRESERVATION (9)
Chair/Architecture.....Patricia Sheehan (12-31-09)
Vice-chair/Hawaiian Culture .....Kaimi Molly Summers (12-31-11)
Members:
Archeology
Alan E. Faye, Jr. (12-31-10)
L. Kehaulani Kekua (12-31-09)
Architecture
Dennis Alkire (12-31-11)
__________________
Hawaiian Culture
Danita Aiu (12-31-11)
History
__________________
Planning
Randolph Wichman (12-31-09)

PLANNING COMMISSION (7)
Chair/Environmentalist ...James Nishida (12-31-10)
Vice-chair/Business .....Caven Raco (12-31-09)
Members:
At-Large
Camilla Matsumoto (12-31-09)
Business
Kurt Akamine (12-31-10)
Herman Texeira (12-31-10)
Environmentalist
Hartwell Blake (12-31-11)
Labor
Jan Kimura (12-31-11)

PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE & NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION FUND COMMISSION (9)
Chair/At-Large ........Roger Caires (12-31-11)
Vice-chair/At-Large...Caren F. Diamond (05-01-11)
Members:
Anahola-Haena .....Beryl Blaich (05-01-10)
At-Large....Johanna Gomez (12-31-10)
Hanapepe-Eleele..Jean Nishida Souza (05-01-09)
Kapaa-Wailua......Eugene Punzal (12-31-10)
Koloa-Kalaheo....Theresita Kinnaman (05-01-09)
Lihue-Hanamaulu...Puna Dawson (12-31-09)
Waimea-Kekaha ...Randall Uyehara (12-31-09)147

POLICE DEPARTMENT
3990 Kaana Street, Suite 200, Lihue 96766
CHIEF OF POLICE....DARRYL PERRY ... 241-1600
DEPUTY CHIEF .......MARK BEGLEY ..... 241-1602
FAX: 241-1604
POLICE COMMISSION (7)
Chair ..........Russell Grady (12-31-10)
Vice-chair...Charles Fulks, Jr. (12-31-09)
Members
Leon Gonsalves (12-31-09)
Thomas Iannucci (12-31-11)
Alfred Nebre (12-31-11)
Rowena Tachibana (12-31-09)
__________________

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
4444 Rice Street, Suite 275, Lihue 96766
COUNTY ENGINEER....DONALD FUJIMOTO..... 241-4922
DEPUTY COUNTY ENGINEER .....ED RANAUD...241-4922
Solid Waste Coordinator..........Troy Tanigawa ......... 241-4839
FAX: 241-6604

BUILDING DIVISION
4444 Rice Street, Suite 175, Lihue 96766

CHIEF OF BUILDING.....DOUGLAS HAIGH....... 241-4854
FAX: 241-6806

DIVISION OF ENGINEERING
4444 Rice Street, Suite 175, Lihue 96766

CHIEF OF ENGINEERING.....WALLACE KUDO ..... 241-4883
FAX: 241-6609

DIVISION OF ROAD CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE
4444 Rice Street, Suite 255, Lihue 96766

CHIEF OF FIELD OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE...RYAN NISHIKAWA.... 241-4847
FAX: 241-6204

DIVISION OF WASTEWATER
4444 Rice Street, Suite 500, Lihue 96766

CHIEF OF WASTEWATER ....EDWARD TSCHUPP.... 241-6610
FAX: 241-6859

BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS (7)
Chair/Engineering.....Larry Dill (12-31-09)
Vice-chair/Fire ...Michael S. Kano (12-31-10)
Members:
At-Large.....Jose Diogo (12-31-09)
Building.....Rodney Pascua (12-31-09)
Electrical....Norbert Watanabe (12-31-09)
Fire .....__________________
Plumber...Gaylord Fukumoto (12-31-10)

KAUAI WAR MEMORIAL CONVENTION HALL
4191 Hardy Street, Lihue 96766
HALL MANAGER...EDWARD SARITA... 241-6623

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY
4396 Rice Street, Suite 103, Lihue 96766
EXECUTIVE ON
TRANSPORTATION ...JANINE RAPOZO..... 241-6410
FAX: 241-6417148

DEPARTMENT OF WATER
4398 Pualoke Street, Lihue 96766
ACTING MANAGER &
CHIEF ENGINEER...WYNNE USHIGOME...245-5408
FAX: 246-8628
BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY (7)
Chair ........Leland Kahawai (12-31-10)
Vice-chair...Randall Nishimura (12-31-10)
Secretary .....Dee Crowell (12-31-09)
Member
Roy Oyama (12-31-09)
Ex-officio (voting)
Ian Costa (Planning Director)
Donald Fujimoto (County Engineer)
Raymond McCormick (Acting Engineer Program Manager, State Dept. of Transportation)

OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
3990 Kaana Street, Suite 210
Lihue, Hawaii 96766
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY...SHAYLENE ISERI CARVALHO....241-1888
FIRST DEPUTY ......LORI WADA..... 241-1888
VICTIM WITNESS PROGRAM/ DIVISION DIRECTOR ..DIANA GAUESPOHL-WHITE..241-1898
FAX: 241-1758

WHEN THE CAT’S AWAY...:

WHEN THE CAT’S AWAY... : Anyone reading today’s local newspaper coverage of the council interviews of prospective board and commission (B&C) members would think that the session was rather mundane and that, like a popular t-shirt says “Experts agree- everything is A-Okay” down at the county buildings.

But of course when you look at the byline you find out why.

Reporter Mike Levine- the paper’s government beat reporter who, with Editor Nathan Eagle has spent the last year building back the credibility of the paper after a thirty-plus year lull- is apparently on vacation or taking a long weekend and the vapid Paul Curtis was there to report how smoothly everything went, with no mention of Rob Abrew’s testimony and the promises of some councilmembers to look into the matters that he raised before today’s scheduled confirmation votes.

We’ve pretty much outlined the problems with the lack of adherence to some county charter provisions over the past two days but Abrew’s testimony details OIP opinions regarding state open records laws that the council is set to violate if they proceed without providing the public with the non-confidential disclosures contained in the applications prospective B&C members have filled out- one the council has indeed received but have not released to the public.

We’ll try to follow up tomorrow on today’s activities based on reports from Abrew but for today we’ll present his testimony verbatim as it details the issues and the law that, despite Abrew’s testimony, Curtis ignored in favor highlighting kissy-face testimony of former Judge “What Me Worry, Alfred E, Let ‘em go” Laureta and the supposedly laudable qualities of all the nominees.

Here’s Abrew’s testimony:

------

Aloha and Good morning Council Members

I would like to offer my gratitude to all our community members here today that have become the Mayor's successful applicant for a position to one of Kauai's many Boards or Commissions We are here today to complete the process that the citizens of Kauai have approved in Charter section 23.02 (B) on how the Mayor appoints and our Council approves the successful applicant's to a Board or Commission.

On behalf of The Public I must ask today that the Council defer the interview process until the public has a chance to review and publicly testify on information contained on the successful applicant's application as required by HRS 92F, THE UNIFORM INFORMATION PRACTICES ACT (MODIFIED)

In an Letter dated January 1, 2005 addressed to Former Council Member JoAnn Yukimura concerning Executive Session Interviews, the issue of public disclosure of a successful applicant's information was discussed at great length. This letter was responsible for the interviews of the successful applicant's moving from Executive Session to a Public Meeting.

This Letter was also copied and sent to Chair Asing, Former County Attorney Nakazawa and County Clerk Peter Nakamura

It stated:

The Charter provides that all members of boards and commissions shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor, with the approval of the council.” Charter, Art. XXIII, § 23.02. It is our understanding that, in accordance with the Charter, the Mayor transmits to the Council the names of the appointees for the Council’s approval. A copy of each appointee’s application for appointment to the board or commission is also transmitted to the Council. The application includes, among other things, the appointee’s name and employer, a summary of the appointee’s major work experience, and a statement of the applicant’s understanding of the primary duties of the appointment.

Although the UIPA recognizes that individuals have a significant privacy interest in “applications” and “nominations” for “appointment to a governmental position,” the OIP has previously opined that this significant privacy interest is outweighed by the public interest in the application information concerning successful applicants, or nominees, because it “sheds light upon the composition, conduct, and potential conflicts of interest of government board and commission members.” OIP Op. Ltr. No. 91-8 (June 24, 1991). Therefore, the UIPA would require the disclosure of the appointees’ application information.

This is straight forward. We cant say these are only “guidelines”, this is the Law, the intent of the Legislature.

This Letter also made reference to an OIP decision made back in June 1991 (OIP Op Ltr No. 91-8)

This OIP decision was in reference to the Governor's applications for appointments to Boards and Commissions to be reviewed by the State Senate.

Below you will find some information included in that opinion. Since the OIP directly referenced this decision I took the liberty to add Mayor where it had Governor and Council in place of Senate.

*Government Record*

HRS 92F-3 Defines "Government record" means information maintained by an agency in written, auditory, visual, electronic, or other physical form.

*Successful Applicants*

*OIP 91-8*

We find that certain information about a Mayor's nomination would shed light upon the operations of government boards and commissions, and also upon the Mayor's and the Council's role in selecting board and commission members on the public's behalf.

In our opinion, the public has an interest in the application and nomination records concerning a nominee that would reveal the composition, conduct, and potential conflicts of interest of board and commission members whom the Mayor appoints with the Council's approval

We believe that this public interest would be furthered by the disclosure of a nominee's identity and the other nominee information discussed below.

The nominee's work experience required for appointment to the particular board and commission must also be disclosed to the public upon request. Under the UIPA, an individual has a significant privacy interest in the individual's "nongovernmental” employment history, except as necessary to demonstrate compliance with requirements for a particular government position," in this case, as a board or commission member.

We find that more than a "scintilla of public interest" in a nominee's qualifying work experience exists "to preclude a finding of a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy."

We find that the UIPA requires public disclosure of a nominee's current occupation, business address, business telephone number, education and political membership due to a charter provision to keep our government to a bare political majority as possible.

The nominee's home address, home telephone number, birth date, financial information, and other information contained in the application must be kept confidential under the UIPA exception for a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.

*Public Access*

Under section 92F-19(a)(6), Hawaii Revised Statutes, the Mayor may disclose information, including confidential information, about a nominee to the Council that will review the nomination. When the Council receives confidential information about a nominee from the Mayor, the Council must observe the applicable restrictions on disclosure. *However, the Council will be required to publicly disclose certain nominee information under its review when the public interest in disclosure of the information outweighs the nominee's privacy interest. *

Both opinions guide us on what is public information and what is confidential in a successful applicant's application. In my opinion the last line tells us that before the Council can review the information and act to approve or not approve *the Council must disclose the non confidential successful applicant information to the public. This information should be available to the public when the agenda is posted, it was not. *

The communications from the Mayor received in the County Clerks office on 12-4-09 and 12-23-09 stated that the applications of today’s successful applicants were attached. This allowed more then enough time for the Clerks office to remove the confidential information on the application and make available to the public the information needed for the Council to review and move forward. If the applications were not attached and the Mayor did not include them, please have the Mayor send over the applications so we can move forward.

Due to time I have offered only a small portion of the information contained in the two OIP letters I mentioned. I feel to get a complete understanding of all the information supplied, the case notes, case law and Legislative intent of the UIPA you must read the opinions in their entirety. Please feel free to ask you Council Attorney their advice on if it is appropriate to move forward today with this new information supplied today.

My testimony here today is to not interfere with a process that brings members of our fine community together for public serve. But to ask questions about the process and are we doing what we can to make our government the most open and free flowing of information as possible while respecting the private lives of all in our community.

Mahalo for your time

Rob Abrew

UNFAIR TO MIDDLING

UNFAIR TO MIDDLING: We’d been wondering when we’d hear from Rolf Bieber himself telling the long sad story of his public service on the Board of Ethics (BOE) and his abominable treatment by just about everyone in the county administration for trying to do the job he was sworn to do- an unforgivable act on Kaua`i.

Bieber’s letter to the editor in today’s local newspaper cites his saga, chapter and verse, naming names of everyone involved from Mayor Bernard Carvalho to County Attorney Al Castillo, the rest of the BOE members, the members of the county council and assorted king’s-uniform-bedecked bureaucrats and sycophants, all carrying the kings sword.

Bieber writes that his taking of the

oath to preserve the Charter soon aligned me against BOE colleagues, mayoral appointees, the Office of Boards and Commissions (OBC), the County Attorney (CA) and apparently Mayor Carvalho himself, who inexplicably refused to reappoint me to the board for a second term.

But, although the unrivaled plodding cronyism of a politically-tone-deaf Carvalho has set the tone for this administration’s corruption as never before, it could not have been accomplished without Office Boards and Commissions (OBC) administrator John Isobe.

Bieber writes that

Mr. Isobe would on several other occasions try inappropriately to influence me — once, when I requested public documents that could expose members of the administration and commissions he asked that I not share the documents with anyone, and later calling me to meet in his office “to see how things were going” but to actually express his desire for the BOE to reach a “super-majority or unanimous-vote only for release of County Attorney opinions to the public.”

The irony in all this is that it was in fact the same good governance activists that Bieber thanks for their support at the end of the letter who were among those who helped create Isobe’s job.

When the “original” Charter Commission- the one appointed in 2004 under the “every 10 years” provision in the charter- proposed a slew of amendments for the ’06 election, one that all agreed would go a long way toward repairing the apparently broken board and commission system on Kaua`i was the creation of the OBC.

The problems the commission found were due to the lack of guidance from the administration as most newly appointed B&C members were just thrown into their position with no idea what they were doing there.

The thought was that an office of B&Cs would provide the necessary support with training and a one-stop central place for commissioners and board members to go with questions as to how to do their jobs correctly and ethically.

But, as we all find out sooner or later, you can write good legislation and charter provisions until you’re blue in the face but if corrupt-minded individuals dedicated to obedience and cronyism are elected and those elected appoint more of the same to administrative posts there’s little that will work the way it’s supposed to.

Rather than facilitating the B&C members in their quest to uphold their oath Isobe has intervened to make sure they serve the political goals of the mayor.

We can tinker with- or even fully rewrite- the Kaua`i County Charter. But if we continue to elect self-aggrandizing boobs like Carvalho with a “give the new guy a chance” and “how bad could he be” attitude we will, as Bieber says, keep finding out what we knew already... “together we can’t”

One more note- Bieber writes:

In April of 2009, Castillo told me he had meetings with Kauai Circuit Court Judge Randal Valenciano on several occasions concerning 20.02 (D)

Huh? But April of 2009 the controversy over 20.02(D) had been well underway for years with dueling “interpretations” making the matter ripe for an eventual 5th Circuit Court lawsuit.

We certainly deserve an explanation from both Castillo and Valenciano on this apparent breach of ethics.

LOOK OUT KID, THEY KEEP IT ALL HID

LOOK OUT KID, THEY KEEP IT ALL HID: Tomorrow is restocking day for Kaua`i Boards and Commissions (B&Cs), as the county council will quasi-secretly- in an open meeting that won’t be televised- prepare to rubber stamp twenty new B&C members, selected not as much for their expertise as for their ability to bend over when the administration demands it.

As we wrote a couple of weeks ago, rather than televise these interviews the council prefers to spend the money to televise themselves patting each other on the back for presenting “certificates” honoring everyone and anyone that accomplished some minor feat, especially those with big families who vote.

We also told readers about a charter provision prohibiting a majority of any particular board from being members of any one political party and how it may take on new meaning with the slew of new members of the Democratic Party- a number that, according to one democrat in the know, went from 38 to around 4,000 on Kaua`i- that joined to vote in the Obama-Clinton “primary” held by the party last year.

In light of Mayor Bernard Carvalho’s big show of joining the Democratic Party last year and his well document penchant for selecting political cronies and sycophants to B&Cs you’d think the council would look carefully for that when confirming his nominations so as not to run afoul of the law.

But while the “application” to be a B&C member asks about party affiliation apparently the council isn’t privy to the official list of members of political parties on Kaua`i even though they are sworn to uphold the county charter.

As a mater of fact, we’ve learned that as of the date of the agenda posting, the council apparently did not have the applications in their possession- and we have no reason to believe that will change by the official confirmation time.

But even worse is that when these people file before the council tomorrow the council will definitely not have the basic information these people will swear to in their public disclosure forms that list potential conflicts of interest as well as financial information

That’s because, by tradition, those disclosure forms aren’t given to the council at all much less before the interviews but rather go to the Board of Ethics (BOE), which until recently had never publicly released any of the public disclosure statements.

The councilmembers will try to tell us they are doing their job thoroughly when they interview the 20 prospective B&C members tomorrow – as they have in the past- saying “trust us” rather than showing us.

But the question remains- how can they possibly say they do a thorough job of vetting these nominees when they don’t have any of the basic documents needed to do so.

Though the interviews are tomorrow, the actual appointments will happen during the regular council meeting Wednesday, when council watchdog Rob Abrew has told us he will challenge the council on both the issue of party membership and the lack of disclosure forms.

We fully expect the council to follow their usual M.O. and fully ignore Abrew with, at best, a “thank you- next?” and at worst a double-talking, intimidation, “how dare you impugn our integrity” attack after Abrew is sent back to his seat.

The council loves to blame the administration when any boondoggle or other B&C related corrupt scheme is revealed- usually by member of the public at televised meetings- and make up some cockamamie story about why they are blameless.

We’d estimate that at least 50% of the corruption on Kaua`i involves the active or passive complicity of people like those who will be interviewed tomorrow and confirmed Wednesday. Remember that and the council’s “ainokea” actions next time they whine that they have no control and “it’s the administration” that is responsible for B&C activity .

For the record, here are the twenty interviewees:

BOARD OF REVIEW:
•Lisa Wilson -Term ending 12/3112012
•Russell Kyono -Term ending 12/3112011 (replacing Richard Koenig Jr.)

BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY:
•Roy Asao Oyama -Term ending 12/3112012

BUILDING BOARD OF APPEALS:
Dennis Aquino, Fire designation -Term ending 12/3112011
Gerald T. Nakasone, At-Large -Term ending 12/3112012
Lawrence J. Dill, Engineer designation -Term ending 12/3112012

BOARD OF ETHICS:
Warren Perry -Term ending 12/3112012
Brad Nagano -Term ending 12/3112012

CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION:
Roy Morita -Term ending 12/3112012

COST CONTROL COMMISSION:
•Lawrence Chaffin, Jr. -Term ending 12/3112010 (replacing Nadine Nakamura)
•Dirk Apao -Term ending 12/3112012
•Linda Faye Collins -Term ending 12/3112011 (replacing Lorna A. Nishimitsu)

FIRE COMMISSION: ·Jan Rudinoff -Term ending 12/3112012
•Basilio Fuertes, Jr. -Term ending 12/3112012

LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION:
•Gerald Shigemi Matsunaga -Term ending 12/3112012

PLANNING COMMISSION:
•Camilla Chieko Matsumoto, At-large designation -Term ending 12/3112012

POLICE COMMISSION:
Rowena Tachibana -Term ending 12/3112012
George Tiffany -Term ending 12/3112012

SALARY COMMISSION:
•Charles King -Term ending 12/3112011 (replacing Tom Cooper)
•Sheri S. Kunioka-Volz -Term ending 12/3112010 (replacing Dawn Murata)
•William Dahle -Term ending 12/3112012

SNIFFIN’ IT OUT

SNIFFIN’ IT OUT: For the neophyte, reading the county charter is a MEGO (my eyes glaze over) experience. But once the committed nitpicker reads it and then attends or even just watches council and/or board and commission meetings for a while it can be cause for a lightbulb-going-on flashback.

So it was that our friend Rob Abrew- who has exposed quite a few irregularities recently- came across a passage that may be applicable, especially of late.

Here’s his testimony to the council regarding the slew of board and commission nominees they have been asked to confirm lately.

Aloha Council Members

Today we are here to review the Mayors selected applicants to become members of various Boards and Commissions of the County of Kauai. Many of the applicants before you, you all ready know as friends, business associates and fine citizens of the County of Kauai. This process is not about judging these fine citizens as members of the community, but do these recommend appointments follow the process as stated in The County of Kauai Charter as approved by the citizens.

Section 23.02 Boards and Commissions

This section of the Charter lets us know how the Mayor appoints the applicants and how the Council approves this appointment.

In my opinion only two items would be need to reviewed by the Council in order for the applicant to be approved.

These two requirements would be :

23.02 D Each commissioner shall be, at the time of his appointment, a duly qualified resident elector of the county.

It is my understanding that the applicant tells us this on the form submitted to you for review

23.02 E No more than a bare majority of the members of any board or commission shall belong to the same political party.

It is also my understanding that the application asks the applicant if they are a member of a political party.

In C2009-393 received in the County Clerk's office on 12/04/2009 from the Mayor via John Isobe,

Executive Assistant, asks for the Council's favorable consideration and conformation of the following appointments to various Boards and Commissions. At the end of the communication Mr. Isobe states that the application forms are attached.

I believe the application would give the Council some of the information needed to assure that the applicant meets the requirements that the Charter asks for but, the communication does not give the Council the information as need in 23.02 E ….the political make up of the various Board or Commission.

If the applicant in their application tells the Council they are a member of a political party, how would the Council know, if they approve the applicant they would not violate section 23.02 E of the charter.?

I have looked for a public document that shows the public the political make up of the various Boards and Commissions. I have not found any document here today that would give the Council and the public the information needed to approve an applicant that tells us they are a member of a political party. Please request all the information needed to move the applicants forward in a timely matter.

Many discussions in the public lately has been about the way our county government functions and how separation of powers are necessary. The issue before you today is a perfect example of how a check and balance form of government works.

Mahalo for you time

Rob Abrew

Abrew was instrumental in instigating the recent compliance with the law by Isobe and the Board of Ethics in releasing the public disclosure statements filed by prospective B&C members. The release of them was actuated through a filing by reporter Mike Levine who has posted them as they are received at the web site of the local newspaper.

As some may know, membership in a political party in Hawai`i is strictly the province of the party itself and very few people actually join parties by “signing a card”. So not only was the information hard or impossible to obtain in the past but the chances that “a bare majority” of a board or commission would come from one party was probably slim or none.

But last year when Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were battling it out for the Democratic nomination for president the Democratic Party signed up tens of thousands of new members statewide, with membership being a prerequisite for voting in their “primary”- which was actually just a poorly conducted internal party function not affiliated with the state elections.

We don’t have the information yet but it should be interesting to see whether any of the boards and commissions have more than a bare majority that are members of the newly expanded Democratic party.

One of the problems might be verifying with the party whether they are or are not actually members. There’s no law that we know of that they must disclose their list. But since supplying false information on the application is a criminal offense we would expect- even if we wouldn’t assume- the applicants to be truthful.

We’ll keep you up on Abrew’s latest quest. But knowing the administration’s response to these kinds of things- we can only imagine what kind of naked dodge the county attorney might come up with in defining “bare majority”- we expect it to be anything but a walk in the park.

STRAW MAN STRONG MAN

STRAW MAN STRONG MAN: The great talking-past-each-other debate on the “proposed” county manager (CM) system between retired former Judge Al “let ‘em go” Laureta and county watchdog Glenn “hope springs eternal” Mickens continued in the letters to the editor column of the local newspaper today with “Yogi” Mickens “it’s better because it’s better” response to Alfred E. Laureta’s “what, me worry?” demand to know “what’s broken” in Kaua`i county government.

As we’ve said before while we aren’t exactly on the CM conga line we certainly can articulate what the some of the problems are and have done so especially in the past month or so albeit in a cursory manner.

We hope to try to get into some more detail as to what doesn’t work and what kind of specific changes to the charter would be appropriate to address those impediments to good governance over the next few weeks.

But another letter today, this one from Democratic party leader Linda Estes, brings up an issue that has been bandied about although, from Estes letter, it apparently is largely misunderstood.

Everyone we’ve heard speak on the matter contends that Kaua`i has a “strong mayor” system. But Estes makes an argument that in fact:

Kaua`i has a weak mayor form of government because the mayor cannot appoint several of the department heads. Civil Service, Police, Fire, Water, Planning and Liquor are critical departments in county government and the mayor, at this time, cannot appoint the people to head those departments. If he cannot appoint them, how can he hold them responsible for the operation of their departments?

The proposal to put those departments under the direct authority of the mayor should be on the 2010 ballot. Then, if it passes, the people of Kaua`i can decide at a later date if they prefer a county manager or a strong mayor form of government.

First of all the term “strong mayor” derives from what the mayor’s powers are as opposed to those of the county council’s- the traditional balance of power between legislative and administrative branches of government.

The strongest parts of the mayor’s powers on Kaua`i stem from the total ban on any interference by the council in administrative matters enshrined in our charter.

The only way the council can compel the mayor or his/her appointees to appear and answer questions is under one provision that requires the council to launch an official investigation to do so. Otherwise, as we detailed recently, the administration can refuse to even explain how it plans to spend- or in fact did spend- the money the council appropriated or acted upon a piece of legislation passed by the council.

That’s why you see the words “requests the presence of the administration to discuss...” on council agendas.

Another strength of our administrative branch is the power to appoint almost every single member of the administration- except for the county attorney and those that, as Estes points out, are appointed by a board or commission - without confirmation by the council.

Here too the mayor, as most all administrators do, naturally has more power than the council since he selected the members of those boards and commissions (B&Cs) for the most part and the council can only disapprove them. As a matter of fact the council cannot even remove them without the mayor asking that they be removed.

There are some B&Cs where the mayor and council each appoint three members each and those members select one more. But, illustratively, it should be remembered that the original charter did not have this provision and it only arose because of the strength of the mayor... it’s an example of how the original charter was designed to provide for an extremely strong mayor.

There are other provisions that strengthen the mayor’s power as opposed to those of the council but essentially the mayor has a thumb on the balance of power everywhere except for appropriating money or passing ordinances.

Even there there is diminished accountability and, as we’ve seen, administrative rules promulgated by the administration sometimes carve out loopholes in ordinances that are less than specific- some that actually conflict with the law- leaving the council the option of liking it or lumping it... or suing the administration in court, as happened in the “constitutional” budget crisis during the Yukimura administration

The six departments that Estes cites are the exceptions and were set up that way because those specific departments it was thought would be the most subject to political interference and members of the public should be entrusted to make the hiring and firing decisions- with the “check” on their power being that they are appointed and confirmed by elected officials.

But few can argue that that system has worked well. What has happened in practice is that because the department heads have no set terms after which they must face re-approval or renewal of their contracts it becomes almost impossible for a board to remove them.

As a matter of fact there is no procedure for removal of the appointee in the administrative rules any of board with appointment power.

With the staggered three year terms and a two term limits for B&C members after a while few of any of those who appointed the department heads are on the current board and the employee becomes the boss and in fact mentors the members and advises them when they meet.

As a matter of fact, some members have no idea that they are empowered to remove the department head if they want to. And most wouldn’t know how to do it if they did.

Estes suggests that putting them under the mayoral appointment system would solve that problem. But then we’re right back where we started with politics playing a large part in the hire, no council approval and of course a lack of continuity when administrations change- which, when these appointing B&Cs were originally set up, could have been every two years.

But rather than throw out the baby with the bathwater a few fixes might be in order.

The first is a set term for board-appointed department heads. A charter provision calling for a standard contract length- say three years although it could be otherwise- along with a template for a required re-evaluation and re-hire protocol would go a long way to re-imbue the members with a sense that they are indeed in charge.

A charter provision could be somewhat detailed or leave the fleshing out to an ordnance and administrative rules. But right now there is no standard and these department heads become entrenched serving for decades without so much as an opportunity for their appointing authority to really look at their job performance without appearing to be “making waves” or “rocking the boat”- something that, on Kaua`i almost insures they will not be serving on B&C’s very long as the recent Rolf Bieber episode so clearly demonstrates.

Other than the police department we can’t think of a B&C that ever removed a sitting department head... or even attempted to do so. And technically the police commission didn’t do that either, causing the political free for all surrounding Chief KC Lum’s “removal” (he actually retired).

But the contention that Kaua`i has a weak mayor system and that strengthening it is the answer is to cherry pick one “exception that proves the rule” and use it to define the whole system rather than taking a broad perspective when examining the charter and how it plays out in reality.

A charter amendment calling for all mayoral appointments to be confirmed by the council would go a long way toward equalizing the balance of power along with a modification of the strict no-interference clause. Many jurisdictions allow for subpoena power for the legislative branch without launching a formal investigation- and in fact legislative approval of all department heads is the norm across the country.

As we’ve said before, with a requirement for a certain educational and experiential standard and council approval the current charter provision for the Administrative Assistant (AA) could become the very “county manager” that proponents seek. Perhaps the addition of an independent panel that would submit of list of possible hires would be a wise addition to the process of selection of the AA.

We’ll try to get into more specific problems with the charter and possible fixes over the next month or so but suffice to say that the same ends that the CM proponents seek could be accomplished through narrower targeted amendments to the structure expressed in the charter without scaring the b’jeezus out of a citizenry that may be adverse to a “rewrite” of the charter” and/or “eliminating the mayor”- both things that amount to “experiments” and rightly make voters apprehensive.

-------

We’ll be playing with our new chew toys and a bit intermittent over the next two week. If we’re not here, we’re there- so there, hear?