AND THE WALLS CAME TUMBLIN’ DOWN

AND THE WALLS CAME TUMBLIN’ DOWN: It was a good news/really bad news moment when the Honolulu-based, on-line news venture Civil Beat launched a while back.

Many were excited over the prospect of whatever each envisioned was needed until we learned that it was going to be, in the words of Disappeared News’ Larry Geller, a “gated community” and would cost $240 a year to enter.

Worse yet, for Kaua`i at least, it meant losing ace reporter Big Mike Levine who moved on to become one of their “reporter-hosts”.

But we heard from Mike yesterday that there are going to be “some changes to civilbeat.com” and that “(e)verything we've been working on is now free for occasional readers.”

No telling what “occasional readers” means but we were able to read stories yesterday and again today.

We wonder what those who paid for a year are thinking... probably much the same thing we did when we got to Woodstock after having paid 18, 1969 dollars for tickets and found the fences on the ground.

Many have wondered how they were doing, especially since they’ve been tight-lipped about how many subscribers they have. And things might have gone from bad to worse recently with the blow back against CEO, Publisher and Co-founder Pierre Omidyar’s other venture, “Pay Pals,” after they banned Wikileaks from using the service- causing at least one notable cancelled subscription.

But really the prime subject of Mike’s letter was to point us to an article by one of his fellow “host-reporters” Adrienne LaFrance headlined “Obama's Winter White House an Illegal Rental”

According to her story:

Obama did not break the law by staying at the house, but the property owner who rented his house to the Obamas does not have the permit that would allow a stay of fewer than 30 days.

Although the owner claims he got around the law by leaving a 30-day window between rentals, the

explanation is one that's commonly offered, but that still represents an illegal renting practice...

"Maybe it's that the people are circumventing the law or thinking, 'Oh, I'll only rent it to one person in a (30-day) period," said Andrew Malahoff, a spokesman for Honolulu City Council member Ikaika Anderson, who chairs the city's Zoning Committee. "They say, 'Even though they're only going to stay there for seven days, I'll charge them for (30) days, and prorate that.' But as far as we know, that is also not legal. You will not rent for a period of less than 30 days. That's what's in the land-use ordinance. It's not just about multiple rental parties, it's the period of days."

It’s hard to see how, if the owner just rented it out for 30 days and the vacationer decided to stay there for only two weeks it could be illegal. But then again we’re not really familiar with all of the planning and zoning laws in Honolulu.

But one thing we are familiar with that LaFrance is apparently unaware of- something that occurred to us years ago when we first heard of the President’s beach house rental- is the fact that the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ (DLNR) Division of Conservation and Resource Enforcement (DOCARE) has cracked down on vacation rentals in the state conservation district (CD) sending “cease and desist” letters to those operation in Wainiha on the North Shore of Kaua`i and in Kane`ohe on O`ahu- not far from the president’s rental.

According to an April 2007 article in the local Kaua`i newspaper

The state Department of Land and Natural Resources has issued notices to 16 property owners in Ha‘ena to halt alleged unauthorized use of multi-million-dollar homes as vacation rentals.

Most of the 16 homes are on makai, or on the ocean side, of Kuhio Highway, from the YMCA’s Camp Naue to Limahuli Stream. Most are clustered around Makua Beach, also known as Tunnels.

A condition in the state Conservation District Use Application, which a property owner secures before building in the state’s conservation area, stipulates a single-family home cannot be used for rental or any other commercial purposes, Peter Young, chairman of the Board of Land and Natural Resources, said in a March 23 letter to alleged violators.

In one case, the cease-and-desist order could force the owner to sell a property worth millions, and may be the scenario facing other supposed violators as well, said Gary Stice, a Kaneohe, O`ahu resident who received one of the letters.

At the time of the letters many of the operators shut down their rentals but according to at least one anti-vacation rental activist many have reopened and DOCARE has apparently dropped the ball.

It also brings up the question of whether the house has a Shoreline Management Area (SMA) permit- which generally include use descriptions- for a vacation rental. But that would also be a City and County of Honolulu issue.

So far the report hasn’t gotten any press either statewide or nationally. But whenever the president is involved, stories including the word “illegal” tend to grow virally.

And the vacation rental issue could certainly use a little viral publicity considering the disease they cause in otherwise quiet residential neighborhoods.

OUT OF THE FRYING PAN...

OUT OF THE FRYING PAN...: State Auditor extraordinaire Marion Higa gets her head into the machinery of government and spits out the details of what’s broken in excruciating detail.

But woe is us when state legislators start coming up with ways to fix it.

A good example of this just might play out next January after yesterday’s joint hearing of the Senate and House public safety committees’ reaction to Higa’s audit of the Sheriffs’ Division of the Department of Public Safety.

At the end of the newspaper report on the hearings was this quote:

In response to a question from Senate Public Safety Chairman Will Espero, (Department of Public Safety Director Clayton) Frank and Deputy Director Jim Propotnick said they would support splitting the sheriffs' law enforcement function from corrections responsibilities.

Espero (D, Ewa-Kapolei-Ewa Beach) said after the meeting that he will introduce legislation to create what in effect would be a stand-alone law enforcement agency combining sheriffs with those with police powers now currently in the Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Land and Natural Resources and Department of Transportation.

For years, not just the Sheriffs' Division but the DLNR’s Division of Conservation and Recourse Enforcement along with the DOTs harbor police have been anything but ethical and competent models of law enforcement with each force answerable only to their respective department heads. That has created private police forces without any of the civilian oversight that is required of accredited law enforcement agencies across the nation.

That’s led to abuses that spur an inordinate number of complaints about specific actions of specific officers without any accountability beyond an arbitrary and often capricious decision by the politically appointed department head

Just combining these law enforcement agencies and presumably putting them under the governor’s office- as one television news report suggested was part of Espero’s plan- will only create an even bigger monster with even less accountability than the current setup.

All too often legislators- not just at the state but county level too- take the easy way out by giving their respective administrations more power than is wise and then wind up complaining about the abuses of that power.

Certainly something is broken with all these paramilitary groups. But unless accreditation and a civilian board or commission is part of any reform plan it’s bound to be ripped a new one by a future Higa audit.

BADGERING THE BADGES

BADGERING THE BADGES: State Auditor Marion Higa’s audit of the much maligned Sheriff’s Division the State Department of Public Safety confirms the dysfunctionality that has been apparent for years.

She rightly criticizes the lack of focus and ever expanding role set for state sheriffs with her prime critique centering around what was summed up in the title of Chapter 2- “Lack of Guidance and Leadership Has Resulted in Defective Law Enforcement”.

That’s the understatement of the year according to our many sources in the judiciary who regularly call us with complaints of abuse of power.

As Higa points out:

(T)he Sheriff Division, saddled with an ill-defined role and a lack of mission clarity, has struggled to uphold its expanded law enforcement duties and responsibilities. As the State’s law enforcement needs have expanded, confusion over the extent of the State’s law enforcement responsibilities has grown. This confusion and uncertainty is the result of vague constitutional language, a broad interpretation of statutory authority, and the consolidation of functions previously deemed incompatible.

As a result, the law enforcement responsibilities of the Sheriff Division have expanded beyond the service of process and the security of state buildings to now include drug enforcement, illegal immigration, homeland security, fugitive arrests, criminal investigations, eviction proceedings, and traffic enforcement.

But what has really evolved since it’s 1989 inception is a secret police department that operates purely at the beck and call of leaders of the judiciary without any oversight.

Judges may order them to do anything they please even if they have questionable motives and with no one to answer to but themselves the division has been all too eager to please. Some higher-ups in the sheriff’s division have even evolved so much power that often it is they, rather than the judges, that have ultimate sway over the division according to judiciary employees past and present.

According to the summery of recommendations:

We recommend that the Department of Public Safety perform a risk assessment of each section of the Sheriff Division in the course of developing a comprehensive strategic plan for the division that, at a minimum, meets the requirements of Act 100, SLH 1999. The department should also consider proposing statutory amendments to align with the division’s duties and functions as indicated by the risk assessment. We also suggest that the department pursue accreditation for the Sheriff Division from the Commission on Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc. (CALEA), to ensure that proper law enforcement policies and procedures are enacted and followed.

It’s not really shocking that there are apparently no administrative rules for their activities- that’s a common denominator of many out of control state departments and apparently without the filing of a lawsuit- in this case to be heard by the very judges that take advantage of the system- it remains up to those in charge to pass Chapter 91 procedures.

But even more important is what is hidden in the last sentence- again to no one’s surprise the Sheriff’s Division is not an accredited law enforcement agency.

One of the main tenets of accreditation is the idea of civilian control of our paramilitary forces- i.e. police- whether local, state or federal.

The Sheriff’s Division joins another out of control secret state police department. the Department of Land and Natural Recourses’ (DLNR) Division of Conservation and Recourse Enforcement (DOCARE) which answers solely to the director of the DLNR with no civilian oversight board or commission.

Unless people demand civilian control of those that carry weapons and have the power to detain and arrest citizens, conditions like those described in this audit will continue to plague law enforcement.