DEEP LACK OF BACKGROUND

DEEP LACK OF BACKGROUND: We've learned through painful experience that rock bottom is a place that doesn't exist- there's always a longer and sharper drill bit in the pit.

So it's really no surprise that after more than a dozen regimes at the local newspaper over the past three decades- each, with brief respites of competency, worse than the last- the level of professionalism has plumbed new depths.

The general slipshod nature of the news-less wonder has irritated and generally disgusted residents island-wide. But many- notably us- have saved their ultimate wrath for the alleged skills of alleged reporter Leo Azambuja, whose biggest point of confusion is apparently whether he should bend over or get down on his knees in his dealings with elected officials.

But until now we never had any unpublished insight into what kind of warped thinking goes into the utter lack of accountability that Leo has made his hallmark.

Now, in a series of emails between Azambuja and Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho obtained by reporter Joan Conrow, Azambuja demonstrates his main concern- not informing the public but kissing up to those he covers.

Through a process she describes as tantamount to "pulling impacted wisdom teeth", Conrow requested and finally recently received some heavily redacted emails she had requested from Iseri's office regarding the testimony before the county council of former Victim-Witness counselor Erin Wilson who, according to Conrow, has won an EEOC case after being fired by Iseri.

But the Azambuja emails were not among those released and rather were obtained by Conrow through a "leak" after Iseri refused to include them in a packet.

Conrow's work on the various and sundry scandals in Iseri's office during our recent health challenges has been nothing short of essential to a community in which Azambuja's reporting has been all but non-existent.

We aren't going to go into the whole sordid tale of "Victim-Witness-Gate" here today. You can read some of our earlier coverage here
and here.

Our tale today goes back to January 10, 2012, when Wilson brought a series of charges against Iseri to the attention of the Kaua`i County Council in a letter that is part of the packet released by Iseri's office (last document in pdf).

Azambuja, and therefore the local paper, had been silent on most of Iseri's alleged misdeeds in the matter until January 14, 2012, when an article finally appeared under the headline of "Former Victim counselor fires at OPA."

Azambuja's article essentially briefly quotes Wilson's charges one by one and then quotes Iseri's extensive and detailed answers. But instead of informing readers that Iseri's response was in an email, Azambuja referred to Iseri's responses using the term "she said" over and over, never even mentioning the fact that the responses had been in writing.

That type of thing is considered a major ethical violation these days by the top news outlets like Associated Press and the NY Times. Readers should be informed and certainly should not be lied to as to the form of a response from a news subject.

But content of the leaked email shows even bigger lapses of ethical judgment on Azambuja's part.

It was apparent that Iseri's responses had been in writing and so, apparently, Wilson asked Azambuja for Iseri's full letter.

What Azambuja did next perhaps explains why no one would mistake Azambuja for a trained professional journalist.

Here's the bizarre exchange between Azambuja and Iseri. Astoundingly Azambuja tells Iseri that rather than being considered the subject of his article he was treating her as a "source" and that as such, Iseri's letter is "protected" material... and then he actually asks her if it is okay to give the letter to Wilson.

1) From Azambuja to Iseri:

Re: response to erin wilson (sic) letter Hi Shay

I got a call from Erin Wilson today and she wanted a copy of your response. I explained to her that I'm not sure if it's a public document. Her testimony was a public document but your response is just a answer sent to me through an email. I told her I would act the same if the situation was reversed out of ethics and respect. She insisted she wanted a copy so I said I told her I would ask you for permission.

No one else has seen it and no one will without your authorization. That's how reporters should treat their sources no matter who they are.

But since I told her I would ask you here goes her request.

Do you authorize me to send Eric Wilson a copy of your email

Aloha, Leo

2) From Iseri to Azambuja:

No.

Shay

3) From Azambuja to Iseri:

Ha, not a problem Shay,

See you tomorrow at council.

Aloha,

Leo

4) From Iseri to Azambuja

Thanks for the sense of humor :-)

Shay

Iseri's response certainly was a pubic document. There are no exceptions for communications with reporters in HRS 92F 13-14. Emails to constituents are virtually always public.

But the real head-shaker here is that Azambuja treats her like a "source" when what she was was the "subject" of the story. This demonstrates an amazing lack of journalistic integrity showing a basic lack of understanding of the source-reporter and subject-reporter relationships.

Azambuja's contention to Iseri that "(Wilson's) testimony was a public document but your response is just a answer sent to me through an email" shows how little understanding he has, not just of journalistic ethics but of the state's open records laws.

Anything written by a government official that pertains to their work is a public document, with some exemptions for things like privacy, working drafts and personnel matters. The fact that a reporter who covers "government beat" lack that basic understanding of a law that is an integral part of his work may go a long way toward explaining the utter lack of substance of much of Azambuja's reporting.

As a matter of fact parenthetically we can't remember ever seeing Azambuja write about making an official record request whereas his predecessor in the job created a whole section at the paper's web site regarding "freedom of information" type requests. The last entry there is by that reporter, Michael Levine, who now works at CivilBeat.com

Next Azambuja wrote "I told (Wilson) I would act the same if the situation was reversed out of ethics and respect... No one else has seen it and no one will without your authorization. That's how reporters should treat their sources no matter who they are."

Ethics? Respect? Azambuja is so devoid of ethics it's hard to know where to begin. If Leo can't tell the difference between a public document and an off-the-record remark by a source he ought not be in the profession.

In asking Iseri whether it was okay to release her response- instead of just publishing it like any journalist would normally do- he has given up control of his reporting to someone who obviously has something to hide since she refused to release the rest.

Of course, many times a reporter will have a source-reporter relationship with people he or she covers. But according to well established ethical standards it must always be with the clear understanding that when asked for an on-the-record response that person is not to be treated as a source who can go back later and say "no- you can't use what I gave you 'on the record.'"

But regardless of whether Iseri occasionally acts as a source for Azambuja he is giving up his control over the news coverage he presents. A reporter should never take a written on-the-record response and then give the subject a chance to change or refuse to release it.

Given the email exchange, the "lie" to the readers as to the written nature of Iseri's response takes on an even bigger importance. It makes one wonder whether and how this chummy relationship has influenced Azambuja's coverage in the past.

Since there is no editor at the paper there is no one to take an objective look at Azambuja's relationships with those government officials he covers. That's one of the big functions of an editor- making sure that news isn't being manipulated by the source and that any source-reporter relationship primarily benefits the reporter, the paper and the reader, not the source.

Of course unpublished materials are the possession of the reporter, and under the Hawai`i "Reporters' Shield Law," for purposes of court proceeding, many reporters will withhold their unpublished notes. Reporters should not be seen as an arm of the constabulary.

But that isn't the situation here because there isn't any "source" to protect. Azambuja has lied to his readers and then, continuing the lie, withholds materials that any reporter would be more than glad to share under just about any circumstances. While in "ink and paper" news outlets space may be a factor in publishing a document such as Iseri's reply to Wilson's allegations, on-line publications routinely post full resource documents along with an article from which quotes are extracted.

It's apparent that Azambuja lied so that he wouldn't have to release Iseri's letter due to his self-delusional, mistaken impression that she was a source, not the subject of the story.

No reporter worth a damn would even consider withholding the Iseri letter. But in the schmoozy, "please like me" world of Azambuja, relationships with elected officials (especially, as we've reported in the past, with Council Chair Jay Furfaro who has all but led Leo around by a ring though his nose) is what seems to count. As a matter of fact it appears to be the determining factor in what news the island receives regarding government and politics.

This would be a fireable offense in any legitimate news organization. With the key words here being "legitimate news organization," don't expect anything to change any time soon at the local Kaua`i newspaper.

BLOWING CHUNKS

BLOWING CHUNKS: It seems appropriate that sewage is once again spilling into the ocean at Nawiliwili. After all, all that crap being generated up the hill in Lihu`e this week had to go somewhere.

People all over town were asking "do you smell that?" on Tuesday and it didn't take an olfactorally-advanced detective to discover the source as being the Kaua`i County Council Chambers.

That was when our seven stilted servants once again turned to the budget for what, from all indications, appears to be the biggest criminal enterprise on Kaua`i these days- the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA). Those who have been under a pohaku might want to read up on OPA Godmother Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho and her P.O.H.A.K.U. program.


And another great must-read, blow-by-blow account of Tuesday's session is available via Joan Conrow for anyone who doesn't have the time to watch the debacle... although the latter is well worth the investment of an hour (start about an hour in) if just for the comedic value.

No one expected much in the way of discussion regarding evil mastermind Iseri's all-purpose now-you-see-it-now-you-don't combination misdemeanor diversion program/reelection campaign tool. She's been busy lawyering up and taking the fifth so to no one's surprise, with the aid of her Council(hench)man Mel Rapozo and his refuse-to-recuse sidekick Kipukai Kuali`i, her council nemesis Tim Bynum and his second JoAnn Yukimura once again failed to get any "answers" to the same kinds of questions all the other department heads had to answer in order to receive their yearly budget appropriation.

Lesser Iseri sycophants Council Chair Jay Furfaro, and Councilmembers Dickie Chang and Nadine Nakamura managed to help shut things down out and keep the relevant allegations of crimes and misdemeanors from the public's ears and eyes, running out the clock without any repercussion to the budget... and of course the local newspaper has been too busy promoting flower shows, defunct food banks and poisonous GMO corn to notice the P.O.H.A.K.U. mess.

But while the council busied itself exploring new corners and crevices on the other side of the looking glass, it might well have been County Attorney Al Castillo who stole the show.

This week's prize for "Most Convoluted Abuse of the Law" goes once again to the program "Legal Opinions From Al's Ass," the show that asks the statutory question "did he really just say that?"

This time Castillo actually told Yukimura that the council can't appropriate "line items" in the budget- specific amounts designated for specific uses like a salary for a certain position or a piece of equipment or furniture.

Despite the fact that that's what a line-item budget does by definition, Castillo told the assembled that to restrict department heads as to what the money can be used for would be violate "the separation of powers" and be "interfering with the administration."

After a few "let me get this straight" questions, Yukimura simply gave up, flabbergasted by the notion that a department head like Iseri can now take all money appropriated for her department and spend it on anything her black little heart desires.

Finally things got as curiouser as they could get when Nakamura revealed that, according to the finance director, the P.O.H.A.K.U. was either "pau" or "suspended". But attempted verification of that information apparently depended on how many times one asked the question, so the council spent the next half hour asking over and over until Iseri herself got up and told them it wasn't really pau or suspended but rather being run internally in her office.

By that point everyone was thoroughly confused and befuddled, but it didn't really matter because that was when Furfaro ruled the clock had officially run out, apparently because the only part of the day that matters to Furfaro was beckoning: lunch.

The next move in this monkey chess game will be played at this coming Wednesday's council meeting when, the council will consider the following agenda item:

C 2012-170 Communication (05/17/2012) from Councilmember Yukimura, requesting Council approval of her request that the Board of Ethics conduct an investigation of whether violations of the Code of Ethics have occurred in connection with the creation and operation of the POHAKU Program and related matters.

In addition, the matter is listed for an executive session.

And speaking of wasting time, get ready to once again to vote on a charter amendment that would give these clods four-year terms.

The claim by councilmembers is that "we can't get anything done in two years." But the message from the voters has been "we're not sure we want you to 'get anything done.' If there was a way to give you two month terms, we'd probably go for that."

It's not like Kaua`i voters haven’t said "no freakin' way" way too many times to keep track of over the past few decades. Yet the council is once again apparently going to ask the electorate to approve doubling the time between elections. The last time we said "no" was in 2006 when we also passed "term limits" of eight years.

If you get a chance watch the "debate," do so with an eye toward the unmitigated arrogance and sense of entitlement.

The assumption that these office are theirs once they are elected is palpable. Talk of "slots opening up" when the "eight-years are up" is bandied about with no sense of the fact that they have to run for re-election every two years.

The voters will no doubt reject four-year terms once again and the council will no doubt try again in a few years. If anything, we'd probably pass a charter amendment to prohibit the council from asking us more than once every 20 years.

But if you're looking for the obvious source of the sewage spill it might be the latest "big flush" of $120,000 into the Kaua`i Marathon. Every year it's been the same thing- for no apparent reason the taxpayers have been forced to shovel wads of cash into the event with promises that "this will be the last year." Only it hasn't been and apparently never will be since this year's appropriation seems to be circling the drain with little opposition from council members.

That money could go a long way if it were to be spread wisely among the charitable non-profits that serve the island's neediest. But instead it's shunted directly into the coffers of hotel owners, airlines and other off-island entities, soon to be converted into campaign contributions. Supposedly a few dollars will trickle-down to local businesses and service industry employees, but no one is really quite sure how that works, and council members didn't seem interested in asking any questions so they weren't told too many lies.

It is an election year after all. It can only get worse.

P.O.H.A.K.U.: ROCKIN' IN THE SHAY WORLD; A PNN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

P.O.H.A.K.U.: ROCKIN' IN THE SHAY WORLD;
WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS THE COUNCIL WANTS ANSWERED ON PROSECUTOR'S SIGNATURE DIVERSION PROGRAM?
A PNN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

(PNN) -- Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's much ballyhooed P.O.H.A.K.U. program to "divert" minor offenders from jail has blown-up recently as two councilmembers have tried to ask questions about the program while the rest have blocked those queries, even refusing to hold closed door discussions of the program.

A PNN investigation has uncovered what some of those questions may be and found both process and monetary improprieties associated with the program as well as false claims on the part of Iseri and conflicts of interest within the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).

For those who have not followed the council machinations lately, for weeks now Iseri, her First Deputy Jake Delaplane and her chief ally on the council Mel Rapozo have thwarted Councilmembers JoAnn Yukimura and Tim Bynum from even discussing the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, with the latest dust-up occurring at Friday's budget session for the OPA.

The council has twice defeated requests for an executive session with County Attorney Al Castillo, and when Council Chair Jay Furfaro was at a doctor's appointment Friday morning, Rapozo acted as chair and banned all discussion of P.O.H.A.K.U.

That enraged Bynum and Yukimura with Yukimura forced to withhold a power point presentation she had prepared to expose some of the alleged wrongdoing in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.

But Rapozo banned discussion despite its direct relevance to the the agenda item: the OPA's budget, because, he claimed, County Attorney Al Castillo had banned the discussion- something Castillo later denied.

For those who want a blow-by-blow of the multi-level, multi-player chess game of the past month or so, including Friday's budget session, we recommend reading Joan Conrow's Kaua`i Eclectic coverage here, here and here

The overriding question no one has answered is why? What is Iseri so apparently trying to hide? No one can honestly watch the meetings without asking themselves that question. Why are she and Delaplane "running out the clock" with repetitive power point presentations and long winded answers to questions no one asked every time they are subjected to council questioning?

So what are Yukimura and Bynum trying to question her about?

The key to answering that is apparently a company that, despite Iseri's claim that the program is fully of her design and implementation, is apparently the entity that is responsible for the nuts and bolts of the P.O.H.A.K.U. program... a company called Strategic Justice Partners (SJP) LLC of Nevada.

Politically, P.O.H.A.K.U., which has been implemented for a few years now, has been a key to Iseri's campaign for re-election and she has promoted it recently in two articles in the local newspaper touting community meetings and the program's alleged successes. Iseri's official P.O.H.A.K.U. website calls it "a new innovative diversion program that was designed by the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA) as an alternative to the traditional court process."

But although SJP has never publicly been mentioned by Iseri or her department's personnel, a look at the bottom of the P.O.H.A.K.U. web site says "Content copyright 2011-2012. Strategic Justice Partners. All rights reserved."

And a visit to the SJP web site reveals where the program really came from. The very first thing you see there on the right side is the statement that:

Strategic Justice Partners is a leader in Alternative Sentencing, Diversion and Early Release Programs.

"Our Diversion programs have a 94% completion rate with over 96% of participants rating their experience as "good" or "outstanding".

And under the "What We Do" button it describes a service that sound exactly like the P.O.H.A.K.U. program, saying they provide:

Diversion Programs
Diversion Programs result in lower recidivism than “Stand in line-Pay a fine” justice while dramatically reducing the burden and costs on Prosecutors and Courts. http://www.strategicjusticepartners.com/What_We_Do.html

And the main program exemplary of their work? At the top of the left had side of the home page of the site is a color photo of a smiling, lei-bedecked Iseri alongside a photo of a Kaua`i-style poi pounder (the symbol of P.O.H.A.K.U.) under the title "Kaua'i County Hawai`i; P.O.H.A.K.U. Program." and a blurb that says "We are pleased to introduce P.O.H.A.K.U., an innovative alternative to the traditional court Process."

It doesn't really say who "we" is but the context demands one interpret it as being SJP especially because it's their web site.

Iseri has recently been holding a series of meetings- meetings dutifully reported upon by the local newspaper- apparently as a part of, or at least in conjunction with, her campaign for re-election in the fall. One example of how she has used P.O.H.A.K.U. for political haymaking at every turn is the wording of a communication to the county council for a special council meeting on April 11.

At the time Iseri was asking the "Council approval to apply for and receive Technical Assistance from the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the Vera Institute of Justice's national Cost-Benefit Knowledge Bank for Criminal Justice," although it has since been withdrawn at Iseri's request, apparently because that would have opened the door to questioning about P.O.H.A.K.U.

What would make us say that might be the reason? Well, Iseri had already applied for the "technical assistance" before the item was to have been approved by the council. Not only that but she withdrew the request after all the other delay requests on her part had failed... and she did so in a late night email to the chair, sent the night before the meeting where P.O.H.A.K.U. was to have been discussed.

But it's the rest of the communication that had many laughing at the unique wording that was anything but the usual kind of straightforward "communications for approval." It went on to say that the assistance "will allow the OPA to find innovative programs and develop procedures to ensure that the community is served in the most cost efficient manner and in the best way possible."

Some may say "so what?- it's politics... nothing wrong with that... they all do it." But we bring this up not just to point to the use of the program as a political tool for Iseri but to point out what exactly amounts to wrongdoing here.

It's not clear what precisely SJP's full role is. But what is true is that the association between the OPA and SJP has never come before the council nor has there even been any type of official "procurement process" for SJP's services, as provided by law.

Any "grant" to any department or for that matter any donation of anything, including information or assistance must, by law, come before the county council for approval. It's usually in an official communication for approval to "apply for, accept and indemnify" as the agenda item would normally read. But the words "Strategic Justice Partners" have never been mentioned in even verbal form to the council much less written.

That would be for a grant or donation type of thing. What if the OPA is involved financially with SJP? The fact is that there has never been any official procurement of services from SJP. Nor of course has there ever been a type of contract or "memorandum of agreement" (MOA) which would also have to have been approved by the council.

Finally there have never been any HRS Chapter 91 Administrative Rules promulgated, which according to state law are required to establish procedures for how, say, the OPA would engage with SJP in the P.O.H.A.K.U. program.

But all that is just procedural. Here's what happens if you, as they say, "follow the money."

Because SJP is a Nevada corporation if it wants to do business in Hawai`i it must file with the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (DCCA) and have an "agent" in Hawai`i.

The DCCA filing shows SJP to be a for-profit corporation and the agent in Hawai`i is none other than Iseri's second-in-command, Delaplane.

The filing is simply the initial corporate document and apparently no 2012 report has been submitted. There is nothing to indicate whether Delaplane is being paid for being the sole representative of SJP in Hawai`i. But the fact that he is both their agent and part of the team that is contracting with SJP- the OPA- makes for a blatant conflict of interest.

So who gets what money and where does it come from?

The upcoming OPA's budget for 2013 shows a request for around $20,000 for four different diversion programs although there is no breakdown of how much of that would go to P.O.H.A.K.U. That is one reason why Yukimura and Bynum were asking questions- or want to ask them- in the first place; to find out how much is for each program and in fact what the county funding mechanism(s) for P.O.H.A.K.U. actually are/is. It also "opens the door" so to speak, to discuss the program.

But PNN did learn of one funding source that isn't listed anywhere and certainly has not been communicated to the council.

At Iseri's P.O.H.A.K.U. website those in the program can go to the "Register for Class" page. Under "P.O.H.A.K.U. Class Registration" it says:

You may schedule your P.O.H.A.K.U. class date below.
You must pay your program fees prior to registering.
You may REGISTER with a credit or debit card below or visit any Bank of Hawaii Branch with the deposit slip you were given (emphasis added).

And, PNN has learned, that the "deposit slip" is filled out to deposit $200 to an account bearing the name of, not the County of Kaua`i as one would expect for a program designed and run by Iseri but rather, Strategic Justice Partners.

According to testimony by Delaplane on Friday before the council 49 people have completed the program and so what is clear is that at least that many have paid SJP $200 each for a total of almost $10,000.

What is not clear however is whether the money is refunded if the person doesn't complete the diversion program. The question of how many people failed has, of course, not been discussed because nothing about POHAKU has been able to be discussed, even though both Delaplane and Iseri were permitted to tout it Friday during their "power point" presentation to the council on the budget.

Even- or maybe especially- if the OPA never sees or touches a nickel, improprieties abound with this setup. As we said, P.O.H.A.K.U. itself has never even been approved by the council. Plus, there has never been a procurement of services for SJP nor has there been any MOA, both of which would have to come before the council for approval.

Oh- and one more thing.

The only person listed as a "member" of SJP is one Kirk Barrus. That means he is the sole owner of SJP. Yet a search of SJP's web site does not readily yield Barrus' name- or any other associated with the company.

So who is Barrus? What is his background?

According to David Lazarus' "Consumer Confidential" in the February 20, 2008, Los Angeles Times, Kirk Barrus was the Senior Vice President and spokesperson for a company called American Corrective Counseling Services (ACCS).

In an article in which Lazarus discusses Bush-era court rulings providing full immunity to companies doing business with the government he cites the example of "AT&T and Verizon immunity for their roles in any past and future eavesdropping on the American people."

But ACCS was not granted immunity in the case at hand and Lazarus writes that:

when it comes to public-private canoodling, the most egregious case I've seen recently involved a San Clemente company, American Corrective Counseling Services, that worked with public prosecutors to go after people who bounced checks.

He describes the scam this way:

In contacting consumers, ACCS represented itself as actually being the district attorney's office, even though the cases involved may not have been vetted in advance by an actual prosecutor.

In return for its efforts, ACCS typically would be entitled to a $100 fee and as much as 60% of any fines paid...

Lois Artz, a 72-year-old resident of the Northern California city of Petaluma, received what looked like a very serious letter from the Sonoma County district attorney's office in November 2005.

"The Sonoma County District Attorney's Office has received a CRIME REPORT alleging you have violated Penal Code 476(a) of the California State Statute: Issuing a Worthless Check," the letter warned.

"A conviction under this statute is punishable by up to one (1) year in county jail, or in a state prison, and up to $1,000 in fines," it said.

The letter advised Artz, a former Bank of America branch manager, to enroll in a "bad check restitution program" and to pay $196.62 in fines.

"When I saw that letter, I almost fainted," she told me. "I was beside myself."
Her crime, Artz said, was writing a check for a $26.62 carton of smokes and not having sufficient funds in her bank account to cover it. Artz said she'd been distracted caring for her daughter, who has breast cancer, but she knows that's no excuse.

What troubled her was that her case seemingly was elevated with alarming speed to the level of criminal prosecution without anyone trying to work things out with her.

"I was humiliated and terrified," Artz said. "I felt like any time I turned around, there would be somebody there telling me to come with them."

According to court documents, ACCS went after more than 100,000 Californians in 2001, the latest year for which data are available. And most if not all those people believed they'd been contacted by a government agency, not a private company.

In speaking for ACCS, Barrus

denied that the company acts independently when it chases down suspected check scofflaws.

"We operate under the total control of the district attorney," he said. "We're basically a secretarial service, and therefore should carry the district attorney's immunity.

"They're not letters from a private company," Barrus insisted. "They're letters from a district attorney."

There is another article in The Press Democrat describing the situation in more detail

The fact that the council has questions for Iseri about P.O.H.A.K.U. shouldn't surprise anybody.

We'd certainly like to know a few things.

Did SJP receive other funds such as ACCS did in collecting "as much as 60% of any fines paid" in the California case? Did the OPA either receive or expend any funding directly or indirectly to or from SJP? What exactly is Delaplane's role? What does he do as "agent?" Is he a paid agent? If so, how much? If so, what if anything is Iseri's cut? Doesn't Delaplane or Iseri see an inherent conflict in a operation where someone- so far apparently SJP- is receiving at least $10,000? Why is Iseri so transparently covering up her and the OPA's association with SJP? Is it simply to take credit for a program she didn't really design and implement or is there more?.. perhaps a financial association?

We haven't been able to uncover all the facts or follow all the money. But we sure hope that Rapozo- along with Councilmembers Kipukai Kuali`i, Dickie Chang, and Chair Jay Furfaro- stop blocking at least an executive session but preferably have a full public airing of the issues involved.

Oh by the way- Kuali`i refused to recuse himself from discussions of the OPA's budget despite the fact that the Erin Wilson Victim Witness position cut by Iseri- which is the subject of a complaint by Wilson as we discussed in January - was contracted out to the YWCA where Kuali`i works.

The next thing scheduled for the matter is an executive session set to take place April 30.

GIMME THAT OLD TIME CORRUPTION

GIMME THAT OLD TIME CORRUPTION: Over the years many of the political old-timers have bemoaned the lack of "colorful" characters in Kaua`i officialdom these days.

"Where's the next Tony Baptiste or "Smokey" Louie Gonzalves? What about another Billy Fernandez?" they ask.

In all rhetorical honesty we've gotta suggest that there will never be another Tony, Louie or Billy.

In the day, self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement went hand-in-hand, and people expected it from those they elected. Corruption and abuse of power aside, what they say is missing these days is the pure bombast--the chest-thumping, booming oratory along with the routine mangling of language that went way beyond simply the use of pidgin in its curious misuse, mispronunciation and, well, general misappropriation of what used to be called "10 dollah words."

And though many have demonstrated elements of the old-time grandiloquent clap-trap and kleptomaniacal cronyism, none have embraced the whole package. Until recently.

Former Council member and current Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho has at least approached the old standard, and her escapades have been well chronicled in this space. Undisputed queen of the Malaprop, she also has the inability to speak more than a couple of hundred words without throwing in a "looooodicrous" or two, which accompanies a personal-vendetta style of governance right out of a "B" gangster movie.

But this week's chapter of her blood feud with Council member Tim Bynum may have reached the hallowed heights of yesteryear when her "Rice-Cooker-Gate" case against Bynum was ripped from her office-abusing hands as Fifth Circuit Court Judge Kathleen Watanabe got fed up with Shaylene and her First Deputy Jake Deleplane and threw the case to the state attorney general for disposition.

Readers might have gotten a small sense of Iseri's misbehavior if they read the oft-confusing and momentously-lacking-in-detail account in the local newspaper.

Apparently reporter Tom LaVenture was in a parallel courtroom to the one where journalist-reporter Joan Conrow observed the action, as Conrow actually quoted Watanabe, Deleplane and Bynum's attorney Dan Hempey in quickly and clearly getting to the point:

Lucas Burns testified he was working as a deputy prosecutor when Jake asked him to contact Liberty Yokotake, who had been assaulted by another woman while living at Tim's house. He said Jake coached him to use the assault case as a guise for asking questions about the layout of Tim's house and the location of various appliances, which could be evidence of a zoning violation. And all the while, Lucas would be surreptitiously tape recording the conversation.

The plot was foiled when Lucas refused to play along. "I thought it was inappropriate to secretly tape record and try to come up with reasons why these questions were being asked when it was really to investigate Mr. Bynum," he told the court. "I thought doing this with a hidden tape recorder and without the full knowledge of the victim was inappropriate and not something the first deputy should be doing."

What followed was a description of Deleplane's bafflingly incriminating courtroom antics and defense of Iseri and her office followed by Watanabe's excoriation of the two.

We won't try to summarize it all because it has to be read to grasp the full sleaziness of Iseri and Deleplane's apparently lawless activity, the gist of which has also seemingly been forwarded to the attorney general's office.

Those who have followed the case already know how Iseri apparently lied in trying to say that the whole case was initiated by the planning department. In fact, documents show that she was the one behind the apparently illegal searches and trumped-up charges against Bynum as revenge for Bynum's challenges to the paternalistic authority of her ally, former Council Chair Kaipo Asing (who not so oddly was in court for the hearing) during the time when she, Bynum and Asing were on the council together.

Those who have followed the story as told here (look for background by clicking the links above), in Conrow's KauaiEclectic blog, and, to a lesser and more confusing degree, in the local newspaper, have been appalled to this point by the inelegant abuse of power Iseri has exhibited during her reign as Prosecuting Attorney.

Some will be satisfied in knowing that current Deputy County Attorney Justin Kollar is running against her this November.

But if she is allowed to simply do as Smokey Louis and Uncle Billy (Tony Baptiste actually went to jail while he was mayor where he ran the county from his cell) and freely walk away, we'll only be inviting future Iseri's into office.

We urge the state attorney general not just to drop the non-case against Bynum, but to start an investigation of Iseri, if necessary kicking it up to the FBI, which has reportedly been looking into corruption and abuse of office on Kaua`i going back to the Bryan Baptiste administration.

We enjoy the entertainment factor as much the the next guy. But as much as we've enjoyed the laughs, when it comes to Iseri, our sense of humor is wearing thin.

SchMUSINGS

SchMUSINGS: It was actually a dark and stormy night. The rain was harder than the two feet in three days last weekend and hail was pelting the window so hard it woke us up. But we don't have dogs to walk, the electricity was off and the last time we saw the dawn- or even got up, got out of bed and went outside in the dark- was probably 30 years ago when seeing the sunrise was a result of an all-nighter. So we grabbed another blanket and some ear plugs, rolled over and went back to sleep.

Our apologies to Joan Conrow but since we're going to flit around and do it between games today it seems an appropriate way to commence.

First comes the news that former local Kaua`i newspaper editor Nathan Eagle, the other half of the dynamic duo, has landed a gig with his former cohort, joining ace reporter Mike Levine at Civil Beat.

No surprise on this end since whenever, against all odds, our local paper ends up mysteriously hiring someone even halfway competent, they eventually leave for a real publication. But congrats to CB and Nathan. We can only hope that maybe with two (count 'em two) ex-Kaua`i residents CB will treat Kaua`i like we exist.

Better news on the medical marijuana front. SB 2262 which "clarifies that the medical use of marijuana is considered to be consistent with the Pain Patients' Bill of Rights" has passed the senate and first reading in the house. Passage of the bill will mean that chronic pain patients will now have the right to receive medical marijuana in addition to all other appropriate medications.

That is coupled with the death of House Bill 1963 which was the horrendous effort courtesy of Assistant Director of the Department of Public Safety Keith Kamita- an effort also backed by Kaua`i Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri Carvalho- that would have actually removed chronic pain as a condition for which medical marijuana could be recommended. HB 1963 miraculously didn't get a hearing scheduled by the house Judiciary Committee.

Of course in the "now you see it now you don't" Hawai`i State Legislature, nothing is ever approved until it actually gets signed into law and nothing is ever-ever-ever really dead.

Then, from the "shocked-shocked" file, according to Civil Beat, Kaua`i State Senator Ron Kouchi has jumped on the ethically-bankrupt, legalized-bribery bandwagon by holding a Honolulu fundraiser during the legislative session. Last Night's soiree was a hundred-bucks-a-head affair held at the Mandalay restaurant.

Some states ban the practice of holding fund-raisers during a legislative session. But of course in catch-me-if-you-can-Hawai`i, legislators routinely cash in by holding these events in the hopes of scooping up some cash from those who have an interest in seeing the recipient's vote go a certain way on certain soon-to-be-considered bills. Since quid pro quo's are hard if not impossible to prove it's a practice that is looked upon with disgust by good governance and campaign reform mavens everywhere.

The fundraiser by-the-by is being organized by former Kaua`i Deputy County Attorney Harrison Kawate who worked under perennially county-government-employed former County Attorney Lani Nakazawa. We could go on with many more revolving door connections but the next game is starting soon.

Last but certainly not least is the latest dust up involving our always bafflingly buffoonish Prosecutor, the aforementioned reefer-madness adherent, Shaylene Iseri Carvalho.

Those who missed the real story behind the vague coverage in the local newspaper of the horse-abuse case will want to check in with the aforementioned Joan Conrow and read her coverage beginning last Friday.

Seems dear Shay actually threatened to use her prosecutorial discretion to drop the infamous animal cruelty case because one of the animal control officers at Kaua`i Human Society (KHS) got into a dust up with one of Shay's cousin over a complaint about the cousin's barking dogs and then his lack of dog licenses. Shay claimed the officer was trespassing and is a habitual liar whose testimony in the horse case would be unreliable, so Iseri wanted KHS to fire her.

It's a lot more juicy than that so read Joan's coverage.

But Iseri is back this week with more questionable behavior in a series of emails received by most of the attorneys on Kaua`i regarding the formation of a "Kaua'i Bar Bench Committee"- a "working group of attorneys [formed to] discuss and present issues to our judges [regarding] matters pertaining to judicial administration" according to one local attorney.

The group is being put together through the efforts of local attorney Rosa Flores who, after apparently putting in hours of volunteer time on behalf of the "Kaua`i Bar," innocently sent the following email confirming the "members" of the group, apparently "BCCing" almost all of the attorneys on Kaua`i

Subject: Re: KBA Bench Bar Committee Members

Hi Everyone,

I am very happy to announce the Bench Bar Committee Members. We are very fortunate to have had such an amazing amount of interest and support in the creation of this Committee.

Civil (Circuit Court): Dan Hempey
Collections (District Court): Tim Tobin
Landlord/Tenant, Self-Help Center, Legal Aid, Indigent Services: Emiko Meyers
Criminal Defense: June Ikemoto
Family Law: Caren Dennemeyer
Public Defenders: revolving
Prosecutors Office: revolving/unknown
County Attorneys: Justin Kollar
KBA President/Chair: Rosa Flores
KBA Vice-President/Vice-Chair: Shauna Cahill

The private attorneys on the Committee all wear many hats with various specialties, so we'll have a great overlap in coverage at all times. Please feel free to direct concerns, inquiries, comments, etc. that you would like to bring to the attention of our judges to the Committee member representing your particular area of interest. Everyone is also welcome to direct any inquiries to myself or Shauna Cahill anytime.

Committee Members, I will be in touch soon with all of you.

Thank you,
Rosa

This seemingly pleasant note, apparently following a lot of hard work on Flores' part, elicited a disturbing response from Iseri addressed Flores and CCed to around 75 local attorneys (with the original email in the thread) as well as the Kaua`i judges.

Subject: Re: KBA Bench Bar Committee Members

Aloha Rosa,

It would have been considerate of you to have contacted our office to inquire who would be the representative for the OPA because I would have told you clearly, that it would be me. Please put my name down as the representative of our office.

Shay

Okey-dokey. Apparently because the email was sent to the entire Kaua`i bar, Flores felt compelled to reply to the content and the tone of Iseri's response. She wrote:

Talk about a slap in the face for the best of intentions. Thank you for everyone else for their support in this endeavor, and to the volunteer representatives who took the initiative to contact me.

But Iseri wasn't done with Flores and, CCing the other, wrote back:

We did contact you. Your response is very unprofessional.

Unprofessional? Flores had had just about enough and felt she had to set the record straight. She wrote back saying:

As you very well know, I responded to you directly last week following your assertion that your agency should be represented, and in my response I agreed that your agency should be represented. No mention was made from you as to who would be the representative, and I do not have the time to hunt down attorneys from every possible section to see who is willing to attend the meetings. Yours was not the only agency which did not have name for their rep, but they were nonetheless indicated as being part of the committee.

If anyone else is offended that I did not put their names, please know that it was not intentional; my psychic mind-reading skills are not developed to the point at which I would like them to be. And I apologize for yet another unprofessional response from me.

Not having appeared rude and offensive enough Iseri first wrote:

It definitely is another unprofessional response.

finally adding

I also do not want to be a party to anymore unprofessional emails

Finally Flores realized who she was dealing with and ended the futile conversation by stating

Duly noted. Thank you and God Bless!

Isn't this an election year? Seems everyone knows that but Shaylene.

LEGALLY SCHMEGALLY

LEGALLY SCHMEGALLY: You'd think we'd have learned by now.

But because the lackluster MidWeek advertising rag- the one that's shoved in everyone's mailbox and overflows the trash cans at the Post Office on Tuesdays and Wednesdays- generally has so little relevant content past the puff pieces, we've been tossing them ourselves occasionally without skimming for the rare relevant content.

And in doing so, we'd have missed former Police Commissioner Tom Iannucci's impossibly befuddled and schizophrenic piece on the latest Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) sexual harassment debacle if it weren't for Kaua`i Eclectic's Joan Conrow, who herself only noticed it as she was throwing it out.

Calling Iannucci's tome"an obtuse piece," as she did, is an act of kindness.

Iannucci rambles on with vague analogies about hotel management and all you get out of it is that he- surprise surprise- is yet another troglodytic troll who thinks sexual harassment is best swept under the rug, calling Perry and the two suspended Assistant Chiefs, Ale Quibilan and Roy Asher "wrongly accused," having the unbelievable nerve to state:

Two wrongs don’t make a right. And a wrong may have truly occurred, but to what degree the whip should extend and whom it should consume comes into question, and the motives behind it....

These three officers are men who do care and, in my opinion, their actions and motives are being wrongly accused, and the quicker this is resolved, the better for our island and our department. I stand behind them and their integrity. But they are just the top tiers of a problem whose inception, whose roots are deeper in many different ways.

When all is stripped away and peeled back, we will have to ask: Did it really need to go this far, or was it just opportunity and ability to extend the whip and cause hurt for the sake of doing so? Maybe it will all be buried in legal findings and judgments, and we may never know.

As Perry's biggest supporter- and an ex-Marine with the well-known requisite attitude toward women that goes with it- Iannucci can be expected to take a "boys will be boys" attitude.

But Conrow? We're sure that that isn't the case, at least consciously. But could her admiration and staunch support for Perry be clouding her reasoning? Read on.

Conrow tells the story that we've heard, albeit second hand because the story is apparently being told by, guess who, Perry himself who, we understand, is the source of most of the anonymous quotes in the press since the day he was put on leave by Mayor Bernard Carvalho, Jr.

She re-tells Perry's cockamamie story about asking to work from home and instead being publicly disgraced by Carvalho who "illegally," according to many, put him on leave... all because Carvalho sees Perry as his biggest potential rival not just for power, as Iannucci would have us believe, but in his 2014 re-election bid.

She also adds a new wrinkle that was brought to our attention over the weekend and that is that current Acting Chief Michael Contrades is the son of Tommy Contrades, "whom the mayor already generously rewarded by creating especially for him the new, highly-paid position of managing the county's capital improvement projects," Conrow reports.

Although we have no direct knowledge of Conrow's source, she, unlike us, has a "hot-line" relationship with the chief as she has written many times. Perry would no sooner take a call from us than respond by-the-book to a sexual harassment complaint.

But she does tell two seemingly incongruous stories.

She first tells the story as to how, as we said a couple of weeks back,

It all started when Officer Darla Abbatiello-Higa reportedly rebuffed Quibilan's sexual advances, and he allegedly retaliated by making mean, sexually-oriented cracks to and about her in front of others, including the kids she works with in the Kauai Police Explorers program. She complained to Asher, who reportedly did nothing to separate the two — as is required under a rule in the county handbook — or chastise Quibilan, whose alleged harassment then reportedly worsened.

And she follows that by acknowledging that:

She next took her concerns to the chief, who allegedly twice tried to dissuade her from pursuing a formal EEOC complaint and allegedly expressed resistance at placing Asher and Quibilan on leave. Instead, he reportedly urged her to try to work things out internally.

That, right there, according to the county's own handbook on sexual harassment- as well as the EEOC's- is reason enough for suspending Perry and placing him on administrative leave. Instead, by law and policy, he should not have tried to get her to withdraw her complaint, as apparently he had been doing since she filed the complaint last October.

But then Conrow says that:

Dissatisfied with his response, Officer Darla then took the matter to the mayor, who reportedly directed Perry to put Asher and Quibilan on leave while the complaint was investigated, which Perry did. Now here's where politics rears its ugly head.

The chief then reportedly said that since the complaint involved him, he also should stay away from the cop shop, and would instead work at home.

Uh, well, actually no. Perry's misconduct in trying to dissuade Abbatiello made it mandatory that whomever was in charge formally suspend Perry for misconduct. It's called an attempted cover-up. Don’t forget either, the second complaint was also sent to the police commission which had failed to act before Carvalho took action. It was only after Perry was placed on leave that the commission scheduled a meeting, one for a Sunshine Law mandated six days later despite the fact that they could have acted under emergency provisions of the Law to meet immediately and confirm any action taken when the properly noticed meeting took place with the required six days notice.

The story that Conrow tells- which could only have come from Perry or Carvalho- and it's doubtful it was the latter- is that:

the mayor disagreed (with allowing him to work from home) and told Perry to come into the office. The two, who have long been at odds, reportedly argued, and Perry stood firm by his decision and stayed home. The mayor then suspended Perry without pay for seven days for insubordination, after which he was placed on paid leave with Asher and Quibilan, pending an investigation of Officer Darla's complaint.

Conrow first cites Carvalho's desire to put Contrades in as acting chief and then explains the politics behind Carvalho's move. As she sees it:

it was appropriate for Carvalho to take some immediate action when Officer Darla came directly to him. Not only was it appropriate, it was mandatory, from a staunch-the-bleeding legal standpoint.

But it was Carvalho's responsibility only to ensure that Officer Darla's complaint was appropriately handled once it came to his attention. It's really a stretch to say that his kuleana also included getting into a power struggle with his political enemy, the police chief, and ultimately suspending him.

Surely, once the chief placed Asher and Quibilan on leave, as he is authorized to do, he could have been allowed to take vacation, comp or personal leave until the police commission could be convened to sort out the issues that specifically involved him.

Instead, Carvalho took the opportunity to thuggishly grab power and mete out some political pay back against Perry. Unfortunately, by taking that particular approach he threw the police department and community into a tizzy, caused Officer Darla to be dragged into the spotlight by those seeking to make sense of the turmoil, possibly exposed the county to litigation by Perry, created a lot of ill will and made our island once again the subject of statewide derision.

As we said two weeks ago, it certainly fits the narrative across the island of the politically motivated Carvalho screwing the beloved Chief Perry for political gain.

It seems like Conrow is of two minds- one in which she says that Carvalho's action was "mandatory" and one in which he should have allowed Perry to "work from home,"

Has her belief in Perry has clouded her judgment?

Maybe. Because the real story as we've heard floating around is that Perry, Quibilan and Asher all threatened Abbatiello that if she didn't drop the October complaint she might just lose her beloved position in administrative services working with youth and heading up the police recruitment program with the Explorer Scouts (sorry to bury the lede). Maybe not in those stark terms but the general idea was broadcast loud and clear.

Either story cold be true. A vindictive, politically ruthless mayor seizing the opportunity to repay a supporter or a chief who is known to try to "smooth over" conflicts in order to "boost morale" going too far and violating the law- one that has cost the county millions already.

But the latter is the story that makes sense here, not the one that Iannucci is pushing on Perry's behalf and that Conrow wants desperately to believe- that Bernard's well known penchant for rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies has gone over the line and is threatening to destroy the reputation of the chief.

We could be wrong- but we doubt it.

ROUND AND ROUND SHE GOES

ROUND AND ROUND SHE GOES: When we wrote our "how-to" instruction manual for how one breaks into the county's old boy network a week ago- using the case of former KIUC Board Member, now County Energy Coordinator, Ben Sullivan as an example- we might have made it seem like the system was an invention of current Mayor Bernard Carvalho, Jr.

Hardly.

The "flack catcher" model has been the prime modus operandi of up-and-comers for decades, with administrations going back to statehood and before, picking the best and the brightest of those willing to stick their neck out, draw a dotted line and place it on the chopping block, somehow surviving to populate many if not most of the county's appointed positions.

The only difference is that Carvalho has established the ability to "take one for the team" as the only pre-requisite for a job in his administration.

But when Joan Conrow broke the story on Tuesday about the absurd plans of Grove Farm to tear down the most affordable of all housing, the old sugar-cane-era "Koloa Camp", to build "affordable housing,"- here defined as almost half-a-million-dollar homes that people need to make around $75,000 to get a mortgage for- we realized that we touched only on those entering the county's revolving door system.

We were reminded that the spokesperson for Grove Farm is VP Mike Tresler whose rise to the plantation-era company- now owned by AOL founder Steve Case, cousin of senate candidate Ed Case- is a prime example of what one can accomplish on the back end if one is inclined to fall on swords on a regular basis.

You can read Conrow's coverage at her Kaua`i Eclectic blog and her account of last night's meeting with Koloa residents at the web site of "For Kaua`i" for all the gory details- except for this "what the 'f' was he thinking?" quote from Tresler, obtained by Vanessa Van Voorhis of the local newspaper:

“(The eviction is) a tenant-landlord issue. That’s a private issue … They’re trying to make it a public issue and we’ll push back and just say it’s nobody’s business. We’re required to give that notice, so we’re going to give them that notice. … have we applied for any permits or anything yet? No. Are we in the whole planning stages of it? Yes, we are.”

Tresler- who, perhaps because of the publication of the ill-advised quote, was not at the meeting because, Conrow says, he allegedly had a flight to Honolulu last night- didn't just stumble upon his high paying job as a Grove Farm's chief henchman.

Tresler earned it as Director of Finance for the county and his role in putting the final nail in the coffin of the police career of former Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief KC Lum by, when all else had failed, canceling his contract with the county on orders from... well, let's just say from above because, although Mayor Brian Baptiste was in charge at the time, anyone paying attention knew that forces behind the effort to slander and fire Lum was former Council Chair Kaipo Asing and current Councilmember Mel Rapozo.

We've detailed the stories of both Lum and Tresler in these pages before, describing details of secret investigations and pseudo trials as well as the covering up of secret documents, including the one written by the administrative judge in Lum's hearing containing exculpatory language actually clearing Lum. When the document was leaked and a member of the public tried to submit it to the council as part of his testimony, Asing actually refused to allow council services to take possession of the report.

But none of that was legally enough to fire Lum. The only way to do that, according to the county charter, was apparently by getting the Director of Finance to cancel Lum's contract.

Tresler, a sycophant of Baptiste, whose loud rants in the county building halls attempting to intimidate those who had publicly charged Baptiste with a variety of unethical and politically unsound actions was legendary among the "nitpickers,"- the council regulars who "got" what was going on as Lum, along with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Police Commission, got the shaft.

Well, as if you couldn't guess, canceling Lum's contract was one of Tresler's last actions as Finance Director and it wasn't more than a twinkling of an eye before he landed his cushy VP job with Grove Farm.

Has Tresler gone too far getting caught in a callous sounding quote? If you think so, you haven't been paying attention. A raise and a promotion seem more like it. Or did you forget that this is Kaua`i?

----

Look for light posting next week- we need a break.

DO YOU SMELL THAT?

DO YOU SMELL THAT?: They say that justice delayed is justice denied but what about news? Well, they also ask, who needs yesterday's papers?

While it's widely acknowledged that our local newspaper is, um, shall we say, "content challenged," perhaps their worst feature is the lack of timely reporting of government doings unless it's a spoon-fed and regurgitated press release from the county's public information officer.

This "when we get around to it" style of journalism is not just an affront to those who have a need to be informed but makes it particularly difficult to get involved in government when, say, there's an article on Tuesday about a bill that passed out of a council committee at the previous Wednesday's meeting and is due for final approval the following day- leaving less than 24 hours to arrange to be there to give testimony.

But while today's Kaua`i newspaper is devoid of coverage of yesterday's meeting, real journalism is happening- not just the next day but item by item in real time- not far away.

And wouldn’t you know it? It's none other than our old friend Micheal Levine, late of the Kaua`i press corps who has taken up residence at Honolulu Hale and is using 21st century technology to do his reporting for "Civil Beat".

A look at his daily "Inside Honolulu" column shows no less than 9 blurbs in covering and posting the actions of the Honolulu City Council at various times throughout the day, with the headings:

10:36 a.m. The 'Million-Dollar Baby Toe'
10:51 a.m. Godbey Confirmed As Corp Counsel
11:19 Council Sends Ag Property Tax Bill To Mayor
12:26 p.m. Council To Defer Laie Hotel Vote
12:49 p.m. 'You Got Shafted, I Got Shafted'
3:06 p.m. Laie Hotel Deferred One Month
3:54 p.m. Mililani Senior Development Gets OK
4:22 p.m. $1 Million Settlement Approved
5:38 Council Advances Campaign Sign Rules

Why even the lowly Hawai`i (Island) Tribune Herald has an article today about a controversial bill taken up at their council's Wednesday meeting.

But it’s a rare occurrence when we get coverage of Wednesday's meeting by Friday with the usual routine being a Saturday or Sunday entry... usually a muddled attempt by a certain story-telling-challenged individual- whose name rhymes with Slazumbuja- apparently trying to make sense of what he saw.

It gets worse by the day. For today's news of a $215,000 settlement of a sexual harassment suit filed by PMRF firefighters against ITT one had to turn to the pay-walled Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

And for news of the scandalous allegations of misconduct on the part of the "old" Kaua`i Independent Foodbank- made by the "new" Hawai`i Foodbank- you had to turn to Bob Jones' last two columns in "Midweek." Or you could check out Joan Conrow's "heads up" on the story where the news that the reason for the non-coverage may just be that the publisher of the local paper sits on the "old" foodbank's board of directors.

All we got today was a confusing account of some plea agreement- from who knows how long ago- in what appeared to be a dispute between Kilauea neighbors that resulted in threats.

At least the local paper does serve one constituency- the fishing community is happy to have something in which to wrap their catch. Either way, if you leave your catch lying around for a few days the fact that it stinks is bound to be evident.

--------

Note: While the local newspaper remains silent on their naming of victims of crime as we discussed on Monday, we did receive the following comment purported to be from Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri Carvalho:

I have no idea how the paper's new police beat reporter Tom LaVenture got the list, although I suspect it was from the indictment, which by law, is public record.

As you correctly noted, the victims' names did not appear on any official county press release page or the prosecuting attorney's page at the county web site. It is for those very reasons that you state below:

"It's bad enough to list the victim of a burglary, letting potential crooks know who might might be making themselves a good target for another burglary. But to list the name of an abuse victim and potentially subject the person to the unwarranted taunts, ridicule and shame that many times unfortunately accompany such situations, is just plain professional misconduct"

that the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney(OPA) has NEVER released victims' names to be published.

Thank you for addressing this issue, as the OPA strongly seeks to protect against the revictimization of victims.

Mahalo,

Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho

Kauai Prosecuting Attorney

DIVIDING BY ZERO

DIVIDING BY ZERO: Is it possible that the pablum that passes for the product of the press on Kaua`i is actually getting less informative? It's kind of like asking whether the sound of zero hands clapping is quieter than the sound of one.

We expected to get shafted with KIUC-spun articles in the FERC vote debacle, given that the electric co-op remains one of the local newspaper's biggest advertisers... that and the fact that it was made abundantly clear to the current business editor- who covered the story- that the last business editor was fired for not toeing the Chamber of Commerce line.

Coverage of the planning commission's wholesale permitting of the new transient vacation rentals on ag land shouldn't have to fall to Joan Conrow whose KauaiEclectic blog told the sad tale Monday of how "county planner Mike Laureta prepared Bruce Fehring’s TVR application" as well as other eyebrow raising horror stories from last Tuesday's meeting.

But in reading her exclusive report we could not help but ask how the planning commission is able to get away with violating the now-not-so-new, citizen-petitioned charter amendment that was supposed to give "teeth" to the growth numbers contained in the general plan.

The amendment essentially put a hold on the processing of any new tourist accommodations by the planning commission and gave that job to the county council unless and until the council enacts an ordinance delineating the nuts and bolts of how the limitations are to work and then and only then return the power to the planning commission.

At the last full council meeting just such a proposed ordinance finally returned from the scrutiny of the planning department and commission- albeit in the form of a totally new bill- which passed first reading and is headed for a public hearing on August 3 at 1:30 p.m.

Bill 2140- which, along with all the other documents accompanying council agendas, is still not on-line even though a year has gone by since they were supposed to be made available there- is apparently still a long way from being a legitimate reflection of the intent of the amendment, with some of the "creative interpretations" of the starting point that were contained in the previous version of the bill, still being a point of contention.

The point is that the pointed disregard of the charter shown in the planning commission's approval of these TVRs is just another example of the predictable results of the lack of effective media scrutiny of county government on Kaua`i.

Rote regurgitation of press releases and unquestioned repetition of officials' political talking points does not a watchdog make.

Our local newspaper is bought and paid for, there is no local TV and there are enough shenanigans in Honolulu to keep both the Honolulu newspaper and the on-line "Civil Beat" busy over there, eight days a week, thank you very much.

That has left Kaua`i citizen's with no recourse but to file expensive lawsuits in order to put a stop to these violations of the law, especially those dealing with land use where the big money interests have sewed up just about every attorney in town.

That makes the lack of funding secondary to the availability of a lawyer to take the case- and don't think they don't know and count on that.

Because when it comes enumerating potentially effective opposition to rampant lawlessness, it doesn't take very long to count to zero.

ASK ALICE

ASK ALICE: It didn't take long for our phone to start ringing yesterday and, as is usual when we describe someone- in this case people with Kaua`i Island Utilities Co-op (KIUC) - grasping at straws, trying to overcome past stupid foibles by spewing additional half-truths and outright lies, as things get clearer and clearer they also get curiouser and curiouser.

KIUC's latest "claim,"- as we called it yesterday even though we know how charged that word is as opposed to simply "said" that essentially KIUC has only thus far received "preliminary permits" through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) process and that the state doesn't oppose that, has a few people confused.

Because for it to mean anything at all it would mean that those urging a "no" vote on the ballot question co-op members are currently being asked to decide, have won and KIUC is stopping the FERC "process" with these "preliminary permits."

The question that we came away from those calls with is "so what." Because unless KIUC has decided to reverse course and end their involvement with Free Flow Partners (FFP) and abandon the actual development of the hydroelectric projects, it's an absolutely meaningless red herring.

Because, although we can't be sure what in the heck KIUC has agreed to in their super-secret Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with FFP because they won't let anyone see it. It's quite obvious that the "FERC process" they speak of includes the actual development of the projects and the granting of full FREC "licenses" to do so.

That bit of obfuscation and some other things were made a bit clearer with the on-line availability of Joan Conrow's Honolulu Weekly article on the subject.

But one thing, if we're reading it right, just adds another layer to the original sins of KIUC in secretly signing up with FFP.

Joan writes that:

The utility actually followed the lead of Free Flow Power (FFP), a Massachusetts-based consortium of consultants and investors that filed the permit applications that created a community uproar. The utility became embroiled when it bought Free Flow’s permits and hired the firm (emphasis added) to guide it through a hydro development process administered by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in Washington, DC...

To stake its own claim, KIUC purchased the shell companies that FFP formed to file six applications on waterways (emphasis added) from Hanalei to Kekaha. FERC has already approved three, giving KIUC preliminary permits that carry the exclusive right to study hydroelectric development for three years.

Now those following the the issue down the rabbit hole will remember the original claim by KIUC CEO David Bissell and their attorney David Proudfoot was that the reason they went to FFP and engaged in the FREC process was so that they could make sure that someone else didn't apply for a permit, which grants the exclusive rights to a three-year period to consider development.

But if we're reading Conrow's contention right it sounds like that "someone else" might just have been... drum roll... FFP.

That would certainly explain why, as opponents have said, KIUC chose a company with no hydroelectric track record that sounds more like a venture capital firm- with shady connections- than an energy developer.

While as KIUC has indicated there may have been others who they were afraid of it makes you wonder who is extorting whom.

As we said in our "editorial" Monday- and as Conrow makes abundantly clear- "nothing but a pack of cards" KIUC has created a situation where anyone who didn't, as they say, think that "a sign that they're lying is that their lips are moving" before this episode, is certainly convinced of it now.

Yet unbelievably, Bissell is quoted as bizarrely having said:

“I encourage everyone to have trust in KIUC, have trust in your elected board, have trust in me and, most importantly, have trust in yourself. The only way these projects will go forward is through overwhelming community support.”

All we can say to that is "eat me."

GIMME LAND LOTSA LAND

GIMME LAND LOTSA LAND: As we age time compresses so although it was nearly a decade ago- 2002 to be exact- it seems like only a few years since the biggest issue in the election that year was the disappearing access to mauka and makai.

It was finally dawning on local people that we have gone to one too many places only to find one too many "no trespassing" signs and worse, fences where once we roamed.

And another thing that happens as we age- those accesses that are left seem to get steeper and more dangerous every time we go. Photographer and teacher David Boynton found that out only too late when he slipped and fell to his death on a trail he had hiked for decades.

That's why it so distressing to read our friend Joan Conrow not just excusing but actually celebrating the news she reported Sunday that hate-monger Bruce Laymon has finally erected his fence at Lepeuli (Larsen's) Beach closing off the prescriptive rights to that section the Ala Loa- an ancient trail that leads gently down to the beach- in favor of a steep, rocky trail that has been designated by the county as the "new" access.

Although she says "I don’t like fences, especially near the beach" she goes on to say:

Still, I totally understand why he did it. Keeping cattle in is only part of it. Quite frankly, it’s the only thing that would keep me, and everyone else who has ever used that path, out.

Besides, let’s not forget that there is, after all, another perfectly good access right there, and it had been freshly weed-whacked to make its presence quite clear.


Then bafflingly she includes a picture that shows a zig-zagging, steep, rocky, narrow trail- one that looks more like it was sprayed with roundup than cut- that disappears into the woods.

She goes on to recount the reaction from a "friend" whose age and agility isn't noted.

“That’s it?” said my friend. “From what I’d heard, I thought you had to scale rocks, risk life and limb. It doesn’t look bad at all.”

“It's not,” I replied. “That’s been totally overblown. Most anyone could go down it.”


Most anyone? One other thing about aging is that the ground seems to get farther and farther away each year and ankles seem to twist a lot more when navigating rocky, steep, uneven accesses.

We can't imagine that what came next wasn't a joke but she wrote that when she got home she received an email from Lepeuli activists describing how a woman whose husband had drowned at the beach was now unable to go there due to a subsequent brain injury.

I wonder, did those who heard her story suggest she call Bruce? Because I’m pretty sure he would have been happy to drive her. And did her husband drown because the lateral trail made it oh so very easy to access the dangerous waters of that beautiful beach?

Is that what we need to do to get access these days? Call a total turd like Laymon to arrange a ride around his fence- which may or may not have been legally constructed after he withdrew his request for a state permit to construct the fence after it became apparent it was about to be pulled.

And, knowing Laymon's predilections I'm sure if it was a group of naked, gay "hippies" he would have dropped everything to welcome them to "his" beach.

Aside from the fact that Laymon has a history of racist, homophobic rants and threats against beach users that would make anyone think a lot more than twice about calling him- assuming they had his number- what kind of precedent does that set when an access that has been used for centuries is suddenly cut off and you have to call the owner and ask for ask to go there as a "favor?"

At the risk of over-simplifying someone else's mana`o, Joan is among those who think that it's okay to restrict access- or make places harder to get to- to preserve "special" places. And there is something to be said about that.

But this is not one of those cases.

When she says that she's "very interested in the question of whether the trail it blocks is a traditional ala loa — an issue that will be decided by the courts, and not Bruce Laymon’s fence," she points to the problem here and in other places because what tends to happen is that it becomes the community's responsibility to hire an attorney at great expense to fight a rich landowner in a state where land equals power and money speaks in the courts.

In this case, even though the state is currently essentially on "our" side it appears that they are way too cash strapped to initiate any legal action against Laymon after he withdrew his permit so as to take an immediate and potentially binding decision out of their hands and make it harder still to enforce conservation district laws and regulations.

And as for the county, despite pleas from the public to withhold action the council recently pushed through a "deal" with property owner Waioli Corporation right before Laymon pulled his fast one by abandoning any claim to the Ala Loa, in favor of the the "new" access. That further complicated the state's case because they had a stipulation in place that required that the county "work out" access issues with Waioli giving them leverage on the Ala Loa.

One thing is clear. Anything that some court might do, some day, would be at the end of years and years of litigation during which time the public- or at least na kupuna- is shut out from the access they've enjoyed since time immemorial. And if that goes on long enough- like say 20 years as it has in other instances- any prescriptive rights go out the window too.

It's hard enough to deal with our disappearing recreational opportunities with greedy landowners scooping up accesses and closing them off. But when those that enjoy them the most start sleeping with the enemy it only make it that much harder to protect them.

That's getting old too.

POISON `IWI

POISON `IWI: We're still cussin' like a sailor every time we try to use the county's newfangled webcast site but since Ho`ike is, as usual, woefully inept at getting the meetings on the "air"- much less the schedule of council meetings posted on-line- we tuned to the MP3 audio today to get an aural gander at the section on Nancy McMahon's application to serve on the county's Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission.

And never- we repeat never- in over 35 years, have we seen a steadier stream of people come to the hot seat to talk stink about a nominee.

McMahon, as Joan Conrow wrote last month,

was the former Kauai district archaeologist and SHPD deputy director who approved the burial treatment plan that allowed Joe Brescia to build on top of iwi kupuna. Pua Aiu signed off on the plan after it was rejected by the Kauai Niihau Island Burial Council, thus setting the precedent that capping iwi in concrete and building over them is compatible with a determination to “preserve in place.”

As a matter of fact it was McMahon's actions that were singled out for the wrath of Judge Kathleen Watenabe in the matter as Conrow reported earlier saying

But that irritation was tempered by the good news that Nancy McMahon, the state archaeologist whose misdeeds created the Bresica boondoggle – to quote Judge Watanabe: “The heart of this case is the failure of the state to follow procedures put in place to protect cultural practitioners, the general public and the rights of landowners.” — has been placed on indefinite administrative leave without pay. Her suspension followed a National Park Services inquiry into and state legislative hearings on the screwed up mess that is the State Historic Preservation Division.

It seems like every time there was some kind of pilikila regarding burials McMahon was in the forefront.

Our headline and lede last May said it all:

THREE BURIALS UNEARTHED BY COWS AT LEPEULI UNCEREMONIOUSLY REBURIED BY SHPD’S MCMAHON WITHOUT BURIAL COUNCIL NOTIFICATION.

PNN) -- Three burials that were disinterred by Bruce Laymon's cattle operation on Waioli Corporation property at Lepeuli (Larsen’s Beach) and were unceremoniously moved and reinterred by State Historical Preservation Division (SHPD) Archeologist Nancy McMahon, according to a letter from McMahon to Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a.

McMahon's nomination despite the outrageous conflict of interest in serving on a commission that essentially would review her work, was one of those "council only" appointments where the mayor picks three, the council picks three and the body picks the last one. But the problem has been getting people to serve so the commission hasn't met in ages because they don't have a quorum.

So when McMahon put her name forward she was somewhat of an automatic nominee, according to councilmembers.

The only question really for council members was whether to reject McMahon outright yesterday as the oodles of outraged onlookers had demanded or take 60 days, as Chair Jay Furfaro requested, to "investigate" some of the charges.

After much wrangling, somewhat surprisingly since it had appeared there were only going to be three votes to kill the resolution during discussion, the council voted to kill it right then and there.

As a side note, the main thing the council apparently wanted to look into was one charges that many made, as we heard in an email earlier this week.

Apparently McMahon's educational background had been thrown into question because when her opponents checked with University of Hawai`i-Manoa they discovered her degree was "in anthropology, not archeology."

Seemingly they weren't the only ones who didn't know that archeology is more properly called "physical anthropology," as opposed to cultural anthropology. No one gets an undergraduate degree in "archeology" but rather studies both branches of anthropology and is awarded the appropriate degree.

We don't know what's wrong with this woman- she's apparently a glutton for rejection. First she ran and finished last in the 2008 election for council. Then a steady stream of charges- including one by a Kaua`i massage therapist that she was "filthy dirty" (ouch) - were telecast with such vile tossed in her direction that would bring a normal person to tears.

It's hard to say anyone deserves that but in McMahon’s case she's practically begged for it.

And, with twisted aloha, the community has once again granted her request.

PAUL HARVEY’S REVENGE

PAUL HARVEY’S REVENGE: It feels like “Let’s All Blow Smoke Up Bruce Laymon’s Ass Week” what with Laymon getting the kid-glove treatment from our friend Joan Conrow yesterday and again much more so from out no-so-much-friend Leo Azambuja in today’s local newspaper, all over Laymon’s hatemongering and intimidation campaign at Lepeuli (Larsen’s).

From multiple reports we’ve heard, the level of fear and loathing out there has increased exponentially with reports of confrontational incidents spurred by Laymon against beach goers since he withdrew his request for a state permit recently... as those who can read between the lines of Conrow’s and the paper’s reports can tell.

But one “comment” on Conrow’s post struck us as needing further exposure, that of Lepeuli activist Richard Spacer.

While many on both sides of the issue have criticized Spacer for both his tactics and his position on some of the issues- and although we don’t necessarily agree with him on all points- we thought his rebuttal needed exposure especially regarding some of the history of prescriptive rights and the case law concerning nudity. We also think his “report” regarding the FBI’s visit to Laymon investigating possible hate crimes- which we have independently confirmed- needs more exposure.

The rest, we need to point out, we can neither confirm or refute but are lending today’s column to his side of a story that was presented so one-sidedly, especially in today’s newspaper.

The third part was originally “edited” by Conrow but we requested and received that portion from Spacer today and have included it below.

Here are his comments, all “sic.”

Seems like Bruce Laymon has got to you as well, Ms. Conrow.

The reason the public has the right to access the ala loa trail THROUGH Waioli Corporation land because under the Highways Act of 1892, passed during the reign of Queen Lililoukalani, all roads, trails, etc, at that time were guaranteed to be public forever. The trail through Lepeuli existed in 1892. There are official maps from 1878 clearly showing the trail. There is Native Hawaiian testimony. Waioli Corporation is crying foul becasue they do not like that 1892 law that Lililoukalani had the wisdom to install as she saw the changes coming, and how arrogant haole landowners would keep Hawaiians off the land. A court case on the Big Island concerning an ala loa there was resolved with maps and Native Hawaiian testimony. It is not a private property issue. That is PR spin from Waioli and Laymon becasue they do not want the public to know about the Highways Act of 1892. Google it, see for yourselves.

The same is true in next door Kaakaaniu, owned by Patricia Hanwright. DLNR's Curt Cottrell in 2007 sent her a letter essentially saying to get ready and let them in, as the state claims a coastal trail through there. Patricia Hanwright won't budge. The same stubborness as Waioli. Waioli and Patricia Hanwright are united in denying this trail exists. I have discussed this on KKCR.

The FBI investigated because the KPD has a long history of racism against Caucasians and activists feel little to no vaule will come from filing complaints against Bruce Laymon's hate speech with KPD. How coincidental was the Caucasian guys were at Laymon's home at the time of the FBI visit. Was the FBI visit scheduled in advance or did they make a surprise visit? Do you honestly think the macho he-man local boy police officer would do anything about a gay, lesbian or naturist being attacked? Whether his father is or is not Caucasian or anything else is irrelevant. Bruce Laymon's behavior stands on its own. Bruce Laymon on March 6 told Colorado beachgoer Dennis Bosio at 9:30 am that next week he was going to have 50 Hawaiians down at Larsen's and RUN the f****** haoles out. At 11:30 am the same day he told me he would have 100 Hawaiians there and said he was "taking back the beach." Whatever that is supposed to mean. Exactly HOW are the whites going to be "RUN" out of a PUBLIC beach? With guns, knives, machetes, spearguns, pit bulls?? Mr. Bosio made a notarized statement of the incident and this document is in the posession of the activists, DLNR, KPD, and attorney Colin Yost. It is publically accesible. It clearly documents Bruce Laymon's desire to drive white people out of Larsen's Beach. That means he is a bigot.

The Conservation District Use Permit (now void) granted to Bruce Laymon stated there would be no driving accross Waioli property to access the beach, unless it is NOAA or emergency vehicles. This is violated almost weekly by Filipino and Hawaiian associates of Bruce Laymon including Sherwood Iida who use Schoolhouse Road to set up camps, leave unattended fishing poles, and generally harass beachgoers. Funny how Bruce Laymon leaves that bit out.

Part 2.

The steep, un-maintained easement trail to the beach the Hawaiians mention is just that, an EASEMENT. We do not own it, Waioli does. If you read the easement document, and I assume you did because you were at county council July 7, 2010 when it was introduced, you would know Waioli reserves the right to erect walls or fencing on it. Waioli Attorney Don Wilson's theatrical on-camera denials notwithstanding, the legal document language reserves the right of Waioli to close it off.

Multiple times I have asked county spokesperson Mary Daubert to ask public works when they are going to maintain the county right-of-way trail we obtained in 1979 and the easment trail. I never get an answer as to when, and no improvement has been made to either trail in over a year. My latest request was referred to the county attorney. Why does Kauai County need to ask their lawyer before weed-whacking trails?

This "cattle ranching" project has little to do with cattle; it is all about keeping people away from Larsen's Beach that Bruce Laymon objects to. Who are those people? Bruce Laymon, Robert Schleck and Patricia Hanwright confidante and neighbor Steve Frailey have told us many times in public conversations, including October 16, 2009 at Larsen's. They use the euphemistic term "illegal behavior" to describe them. On January 19, 2011 a young lady who lives near the beach was attempting to use the gradual, lateral trail and was stopped by Bruce Laymon, busy installing 2 fence posts. She asked him who he was to stop her. He said he was the landowner. That is a fallacy. He is a lessee. She asked him WHY he was fencing. Bruce Laymon told her the fence is to keep campers, nudes, and gays from getting to the beach. In 2011 can you believe such bigoted speech is being uttered!? Campers on Waioli land is one thing. Gays and naturists on a public beach have legal protections and this hate speech against both groups is criminal and leaves Bruce Laymon and Waioli Corporation vulnerable to civil litigation. Being gay or lesbian in Hawaii is not illegal. Neither is topfree or nude sunbathing if you are not intending to affront of alarm (offend) someone on a NON-state park beach. A unanimous state supreme court ruling in 2000 settled this issue once and for all. A group called Kauai Naturists has been formed in response to recent events to document harassment of naturists, disseminate correct information, and to make certain this hate speech stops.
February 14, 2011 8:28 PM

Part 3 (note: only the final paragraph was permitted to be posted by Conrow. As noted above we received the first two paragraphs from Spacer):

Bruce Laymon is a Jehovah's Witness according to a member of that church I spoke with in Kapaa. This sect, many say cult, is well known for its intolerance of gays and lesbians. They consider it sinful and illegal. They also hate naturists. Bruce Laymon sees Larsen's as a sinful place and he is the appointed moral messenger to bring pure, "christian" values to that location, whether anyone agrees with him or not. Under Bruce Laymon's vision of Larsen's Beach, judge Sabrina Shizue McKenna, nominated by Governor Neil Abercrombie to sit on the state supreme court, would be excluded from this PUBLIC beach because she is gay. The passing of civil unions and the imminent signing into law of that legislation must be causing Bruce Laymon to lose his mind. Meanwhile, how is it that Robert Schleck, who is gay, is Bruce Laymon's boss, a man who hates gays?! What is that?

Of course, the joke is on Bruce Laymon because Waioli Corporation is using him as a pawn to "clean up" the land so it can be sold to the highest bidder for housing development. Waioli Vice President Charles Spitz told us that recently, as well as that Waioli spent over $40,000. in legal fees over this issue. So much for Waioli valuing preservation.

This issue has severely damaged Waioli's reputation. Ms. Conrow, you ask how to stop the "insanity". How to stop it is for the pro-access board members (there ARE pro-access members) to dump Robert Schleck, Bruce Laymon, and the anti-access trustees on the board NOW. Deed to the public in perpetuity and irrevocably the gradual trail from the Kaakaaniu line to the Waipake line. It is time for Waioli Corporation to say "aloha" instead of "kapu".