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But until now we never had any unpublished insight into what kind of warped thinking goes into the utter lack of accountability that Leo has made his hallmark.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.
Showing posts with label local newspaper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label local newspaper. Show all posts
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
HOT ENOUGH FOR YA?
HOT ENOUGH FOR YA?: It's just become too easy. Turn to the web site of our local "newspaper"- and we used the term advisedly- and prepare for LOL anomalies and goof-ups galore.
This week's winner wasn't even an actual article but rather a rare- and in this case head-scratching- "Correction and Clarification." The Tuesday notice read:
The article “Summer begins Wednesday” published Sunday should state that summer solstice is not the hottest day of the year.
Oookaaay.
Sure enough, checking the previous Sunday, in another of those "no byline" fillers that are simply press releases with a word or two changed to protect the person guilty from charges of plagiarism, a story accompanied by a NASA graphic showing the Sun and the Earth at both equinoxes and both solstices, actually said:
The four seasons are determined by the changing sunlight, which changes while the Earth tilts its axis as it orbits the Sun. This year’s summer officially begins Wednesday. The summer solstice — the longest day of the year — in the Northern Hemisphere is when the sun reaches the northernmost point in the sky. Summer solstice is also the hottest day of the year.(emphasis added)
It seems doubtful that NASA created that bit of science fiction and more likely that some aspiring hack at the local "newspaper" assumed that if it was summer it was hot and if it was the longest day of the summer, it must be the hottest day, too.
Apparently science is haaaard.
In professionally run newspapers these rewrites of press releases are noted as such in the article- a practice which our local Kaua`i paper has apparently dispensed with of late. But with who-the-hell-knows-who doing the job of editor these days, not only doesn't this vital bit of information appear any more but somehow, when changing a few words, information that would be pegged as patently absurd by a fifth-grader appears as gospel.
And speaking of factual matters and actual journalism, when discussing the criminal enterprise that is Wall Street capitalism and the felonious acts that have left us all one step from bankruptcy and homelessness, we admit to having an almost secret source of information that causes many to ask us "where the heck did you hear about that?"
The answer has always been "from Matt Taibbi of- believe it or not- Rolling Stone magazine."
Not only has his coverage been revelatory of the way America was and continues to be scammed by the 1% of the 1% that do investment capitalism's dirty work- along with tales of the revolving door of regulators and agency heads who, the day before, had been the ones who were perpetrating the very frauds they are now investigating- he does it in an understandable and ROTFLMAO manner.
But this week Matt has outdone himself with a story of a verdict in a trial that has escaped the media's perusal but is one of the more exemplary of precautionary tales when it comes to the "wha' hopp'n'd" aspect of the world financial collapse.
An early sentence seems to sum up what was at stake in the recent guilty verdict in the trial of three municipal bond dealers.
"The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia" is the story of how "the world's most powerful banks have, for years, been fixing the prices of almost every adjustable-rate vehicle on earth, from mortgages and credit cards to interest-rate swaps and even currencies."
Taibbi begins his sordid tale of greed and obliviousness on the part of the three financial executives and their cronies saying:
Someday, it will go down in history as the first trial of the modern American mafia. Of course, you won't hear the recent financial corruption case, United States of America v. Carollo, Goldberg and Grimm, called anything like that. If you heard about it at all, you're probably either in the municipal bond business or married to an antitrust lawyer. Even then, all you probably heard was that a threesome of bit players on Wall Street got convicted of obscure antitrust violations in one of the most inscrutable, jargon-packed legal snoozefests since the government's massive case against Microsoft in the Nineties – not exactly the thrilling courtroom drama offered by the famed trials of old-school mobsters like Al Capone or Anthony "Tony Ducks" Carollo.
But this just-completed trial in downtown New York against three faceless financial executives really was historic. Over 10 years in the making, the case allowed federal prosecutors to make public for the first time the astonishing inner workings of the reigning American crime syndicate, which now operates not out of Little Italy and Las Vegas, but out of Wall Street.
Taibbi essentially describes a "point shaving" scam that apparently goes on in every bond traders' office and has done so for at least decades.
Basically the way it works is that when a city, county or state borrows money for "capital improvements" it borrows the whole amount it needs- say $100 million to build a bridge. But it doesn’t pay out the whole $100 million all at once- it can take years to spend it first on consultants, then designers, then on each individual aspect of construction.
The rest gets deposited with "virtually every major bank and finance company on Wall Street – not just GE, but J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Wachovia and more" according to Taibbi.
There are usually three bids required and the highest interest rate is the one accepted by the borrower. But these financial executives have been shaving "points"- hundredths of a percent in interest- so that the winners provide the lowest amount possible with a revolving winner of the bids so that everyone gets a chance to steal.
The difference is kicked back to the executives in various manners. While that hundredth of a percent might only be, for instance, $50,000, imagine that times a gazillion with many deals going down daily in untold numbers of jurisdictions.
It adds up to billions that, instead of going back to the borrowers to use for hospitals, elderly services, aid for the homeless and other government services, goes into the pockets of the financial execs and corporate bottom lines.
Taibbi also tracks the money to "kickbacks" in the form of campaign contributions to elected officials to the tune of what Taibbi says is a return rate of 66 to 1- for every dollar "contributed" to someone's campaign it generates $66 in appropriations and returns to the "donor."
Read Taibbi's piece- it will be one of the best half hours you've ever invested in understanding how cavalierly and causally Wall St. brethren have been ripping us off daily.
Also check out Taibbi's blog post today that contains " a few interesting bits" that had to be left out of the magazine piece for space reasons.
Unless and until stories like this get some corporate media coverage it will go on for many years to come. We may have to skip today's Casey Anthony interview or tales of the Octomom's stripping routine but hey- we've all gotta make some sacrifices these days.
This week's winner wasn't even an actual article but rather a rare- and in this case head-scratching- "Correction and Clarification." The Tuesday notice read:
The article “Summer begins Wednesday” published Sunday should state that summer solstice is not the hottest day of the year.
Oookaaay.
Sure enough, checking the previous Sunday, in another of those "no byline" fillers that are simply press releases with a word or two changed to protect the person guilty from charges of plagiarism, a story accompanied by a NASA graphic showing the Sun and the Earth at both equinoxes and both solstices, actually said:
The four seasons are determined by the changing sunlight, which changes while the Earth tilts its axis as it orbits the Sun. This year’s summer officially begins Wednesday. The summer solstice — the longest day of the year — in the Northern Hemisphere is when the sun reaches the northernmost point in the sky. Summer solstice is also the hottest day of the year.(emphasis added)
It seems doubtful that NASA created that bit of science fiction and more likely that some aspiring hack at the local "newspaper" assumed that if it was summer it was hot and if it was the longest day of the summer, it must be the hottest day, too.
Apparently science is haaaard.
In professionally run newspapers these rewrites of press releases are noted as such in the article- a practice which our local Kaua`i paper has apparently dispensed with of late. But with who-the-hell-knows-who doing the job of editor these days, not only doesn't this vital bit of information appear any more but somehow, when changing a few words, information that would be pegged as patently absurd by a fifth-grader appears as gospel.
And speaking of factual matters and actual journalism, when discussing the criminal enterprise that is Wall Street capitalism and the felonious acts that have left us all one step from bankruptcy and homelessness, we admit to having an almost secret source of information that causes many to ask us "where the heck did you hear about that?"
The answer has always been "from Matt Taibbi of- believe it or not- Rolling Stone magazine."
Not only has his coverage been revelatory of the way America was and continues to be scammed by the 1% of the 1% that do investment capitalism's dirty work- along with tales of the revolving door of regulators and agency heads who, the day before, had been the ones who were perpetrating the very frauds they are now investigating- he does it in an understandable and ROTFLMAO manner.
But this week Matt has outdone himself with a story of a verdict in a trial that has escaped the media's perusal but is one of the more exemplary of precautionary tales when it comes to the "wha' hopp'n'd" aspect of the world financial collapse.
An early sentence seems to sum up what was at stake in the recent guilty verdict in the trial of three municipal bond dealers.
"The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia" is the story of how "the world's most powerful banks have, for years, been fixing the prices of almost every adjustable-rate vehicle on earth, from mortgages and credit cards to interest-rate swaps and even currencies."
Taibbi begins his sordid tale of greed and obliviousness on the part of the three financial executives and their cronies saying:
Someday, it will go down in history as the first trial of the modern American mafia. Of course, you won't hear the recent financial corruption case, United States of America v. Carollo, Goldberg and Grimm, called anything like that. If you heard about it at all, you're probably either in the municipal bond business or married to an antitrust lawyer. Even then, all you probably heard was that a threesome of bit players on Wall Street got convicted of obscure antitrust violations in one of the most inscrutable, jargon-packed legal snoozefests since the government's massive case against Microsoft in the Nineties – not exactly the thrilling courtroom drama offered by the famed trials of old-school mobsters like Al Capone or Anthony "Tony Ducks" Carollo.
But this just-completed trial in downtown New York against three faceless financial executives really was historic. Over 10 years in the making, the case allowed federal prosecutors to make public for the first time the astonishing inner workings of the reigning American crime syndicate, which now operates not out of Little Italy and Las Vegas, but out of Wall Street.
Taibbi essentially describes a "point shaving" scam that apparently goes on in every bond traders' office and has done so for at least decades.
Basically the way it works is that when a city, county or state borrows money for "capital improvements" it borrows the whole amount it needs- say $100 million to build a bridge. But it doesn’t pay out the whole $100 million all at once- it can take years to spend it first on consultants, then designers, then on each individual aspect of construction.
The rest gets deposited with "virtually every major bank and finance company on Wall Street – not just GE, but J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, UBS, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Wachovia and more" according to Taibbi.
There are usually three bids required and the highest interest rate is the one accepted by the borrower. But these financial executives have been shaving "points"- hundredths of a percent in interest- so that the winners provide the lowest amount possible with a revolving winner of the bids so that everyone gets a chance to steal.
The difference is kicked back to the executives in various manners. While that hundredth of a percent might only be, for instance, $50,000, imagine that times a gazillion with many deals going down daily in untold numbers of jurisdictions.
It adds up to billions that, instead of going back to the borrowers to use for hospitals, elderly services, aid for the homeless and other government services, goes into the pockets of the financial execs and corporate bottom lines.
Taibbi also tracks the money to "kickbacks" in the form of campaign contributions to elected officials to the tune of what Taibbi says is a return rate of 66 to 1- for every dollar "contributed" to someone's campaign it generates $66 in appropriations and returns to the "donor."
Read Taibbi's piece- it will be one of the best half hours you've ever invested in understanding how cavalierly and causally Wall St. brethren have been ripping us off daily.
Also check out Taibbi's blog post today that contains " a few interesting bits" that had to be left out of the magazine piece for space reasons.
Unless and until stories like this get some corporate media coverage it will go on for many years to come. We may have to skip today's Casey Anthony interview or tales of the Octomom's stripping routine but hey- we've all gotta make some sacrifices these days.
Monday, June 18, 2012
YOU WIN AGAIN
YOU WIN AGAIN: The news is out all over town that it's news when there's real news in the paper. It’s not news to readers that the local Kaua`i newspaper has, if it's possible, sunk to a new low.
We set out to find out the percentage of actual news articles in the past month or so and how much was fluff and filler. And we ran into a problem- we couldn't find any news because even newsworthy subjects were treated as feature stories.
After throwing out rewritten press releases- which is where most "news" has come from recently- and recounts of court doings covering a full gamut of petty crimes, the percentage of actual news storries came out to be around 4-5% ... and that's being generous.
It may be the fact that there's no editor any more and, according to sources at the paper, Publisher Casey Quel Fitchett (who?) is the prime editorial decision maker. It may be the lack of actual journalists with the bulk of words being written by long time photographer Dennis Fujimoto.
But it just may be intentional. The lack of coverage of the scandalous doings in the Office of Prosecutor Attorney Shaylene-Iseri Carvalho and the distinct dearth of coverage of administration activities that are not straight from the mayor's public relations people can't be by accident. Nor can the publication of any kind of list containing local people's names so as to boost circulation. The lists of honor roll students during the last week seemed more numerous than the actual number of schools.
But an article in today's New York Times makes the decline from previous depths that few thought could be exceeded all the more perplexing.
According to the article:
Three years after telling his shareholders that he would not buy a newspaper at any price, (Warren) Buffett has moved aggressively into the business, buying 63 local papers and revealing a 3 percent stake in Lee Enterprises, a chain of mostly small dailies based in Iowa.
That's right- Lee Enterprises, which owns the local Kaua`i newspaper, is in turn owned in part by Berkshire Hathaway's Buffett, known as one of the most liberal of the super-rich people in the country if not the world. He's someone you'd think would have a commitment to decent journalism if he owned your local newspapers.
But oxymoronically enough the article- which is essentially about the Buffalo News which Buffett has owned since 1977- touts his commitment to informing the communities in which his Lee Enterprises papers operate, even in a time of severe decline in the newspaper industry.
For his new employees, the best indicator of what Buffett may do (at Lee) is what he has done with The Buffalo News. Interviews with more than a dozen current and former editors paint a picture of a profitable paper that is run with little involvement from its owner. Some journalists say that the owners will hold out as long as they can to buy the latest printing presses and that they wish the paper dedicated more resources to the highly ambitious journalism that wins the biggest awards.
(M)any workers agree that the owners do not skimp on sending journalists to town meetings or on enterprising local journalism, which is in line with Buffett’s belief about intensely locally focused papers.
The article makes Buffett's commitment to journalism clear even while cuts to newsroom staffs- such as the News' decline from 200 to 140 newsroom people- take its toll. But while Buffett seems to be hands off editorially he is depicted as one of the few newspaper owners that maintains a commitment to informing the people served by his new Lee newspapers.
How that jibes with our local newspaper's recent apparent commitment to steer clear of coverage of election year issues people need to know about is anyone's guess. But a clue might be gleaned from the sentence after the one quoted above.
“In Grand Island, Nebraska, everyone is interested in how the football team does. They’re interested in who got married. They’re maybe even more interested in who got divorced,” Buffett said, adding that he was not interested in sprawling markets like New York or Los Angeles. “If you live in South Central Los Angeles, you’re not interested in who dies in Beverly Hills.”
Oh, swell. Does that mean that all we're going to get is local gossip? Even that would be an improvement over the warmed over press releases that pass for news these days.
When there are actual articles that aren't simply rewrites of county or non profit PR they are of the sort that violate every tenet of journalism- unabashedly promotional pieces depicting their advertisers' latest wares.
With the news that Buffett owns Lee might we expect more, given what the Times article depicts as his commitment to "sending journalists to town meetings (and to) enterprising local journalism"?
Time will tell, but the local Kaua`i newspaper has nowhere to go but up.
We set out to find out the percentage of actual news articles in the past month or so and how much was fluff and filler. And we ran into a problem- we couldn't find any news because even newsworthy subjects were treated as feature stories.
After throwing out rewritten press releases- which is where most "news" has come from recently- and recounts of court doings covering a full gamut of petty crimes, the percentage of actual news storries came out to be around 4-5% ... and that's being generous.
It may be the fact that there's no editor any more and, according to sources at the paper, Publisher Casey Quel Fitchett (who?) is the prime editorial decision maker. It may be the lack of actual journalists with the bulk of words being written by long time photographer Dennis Fujimoto.
But it just may be intentional. The lack of coverage of the scandalous doings in the Office of Prosecutor Attorney Shaylene-Iseri Carvalho and the distinct dearth of coverage of administration activities that are not straight from the mayor's public relations people can't be by accident. Nor can the publication of any kind of list containing local people's names so as to boost circulation. The lists of honor roll students during the last week seemed more numerous than the actual number of schools.
But an article in today's New York Times makes the decline from previous depths that few thought could be exceeded all the more perplexing.
According to the article:
Three years after telling his shareholders that he would not buy a newspaper at any price, (Warren) Buffett has moved aggressively into the business, buying 63 local papers and revealing a 3 percent stake in Lee Enterprises, a chain of mostly small dailies based in Iowa.
That's right- Lee Enterprises, which owns the local Kaua`i newspaper, is in turn owned in part by Berkshire Hathaway's Buffett, known as one of the most liberal of the super-rich people in the country if not the world. He's someone you'd think would have a commitment to decent journalism if he owned your local newspapers.
But oxymoronically enough the article- which is essentially about the Buffalo News which Buffett has owned since 1977- touts his commitment to informing the communities in which his Lee Enterprises papers operate, even in a time of severe decline in the newspaper industry.
For his new employees, the best indicator of what Buffett may do (at Lee) is what he has done with The Buffalo News. Interviews with more than a dozen current and former editors paint a picture of a profitable paper that is run with little involvement from its owner. Some journalists say that the owners will hold out as long as they can to buy the latest printing presses and that they wish the paper dedicated more resources to the highly ambitious journalism that wins the biggest awards.
(M)any workers agree that the owners do not skimp on sending journalists to town meetings or on enterprising local journalism, which is in line with Buffett’s belief about intensely locally focused papers.
The article makes Buffett's commitment to journalism clear even while cuts to newsroom staffs- such as the News' decline from 200 to 140 newsroom people- take its toll. But while Buffett seems to be hands off editorially he is depicted as one of the few newspaper owners that maintains a commitment to informing the people served by his new Lee newspapers.
How that jibes with our local newspaper's recent apparent commitment to steer clear of coverage of election year issues people need to know about is anyone's guess. But a clue might be gleaned from the sentence after the one quoted above.
“In Grand Island, Nebraska, everyone is interested in how the football team does. They’re interested in who got married. They’re maybe even more interested in who got divorced,” Buffett said, adding that he was not interested in sprawling markets like New York or Los Angeles. “If you live in South Central Los Angeles, you’re not interested in who dies in Beverly Hills.”
Oh, swell. Does that mean that all we're going to get is local gossip? Even that would be an improvement over the warmed over press releases that pass for news these days.
When there are actual articles that aren't simply rewrites of county or non profit PR they are of the sort that violate every tenet of journalism- unabashedly promotional pieces depicting their advertisers' latest wares.
With the news that Buffett owns Lee might we expect more, given what the Times article depicts as his commitment to "sending journalists to town meetings (and to) enterprising local journalism"?
Time will tell, but the local Kaua`i newspaper has nowhere to go but up.
Friday, May 4, 2012
SPIT IT UP
SPIT IT UP: No, Shaylene didn't grab us off the street and throw us in her own personal dungeon. Nor did Beth Tokioka get out the pins and the voodoo doll.
And after an MRI "gut check" we've confirmed that our recent nausea is not, as we suspected, due to the prospect of four years of having to listen to the voice of former Governor Ben Cayetano should he become the mayor of Honolulu.
We regret the lack of a high fiber diet for the past 20 years (damn, dem Safeway baguettes is tasty), but the diverticular gods apparently have other people to sicken today so maybe between bathroom runs we can play a little catch-up today.
Of course the news that Judge Kathleen Watanabe threw out Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's politically motivated charges against her blood-feud enemy Councilmember Tim Bynum in the "Rice-Cooker-Gate" case- and made sure she couldn't file them again- wasn't much of a surprise. The real laughter was that the "special prosecutor" assigned to the case was none other than former one-term Kaua`i Councilmember and current Deputy Prosecutor on Maui, Richard "Sweating Bullets" Minatoya.
Minatoya really had little choice but to go along with Watanabe's charade of taking Iseri's department off the case and then getting someone else to "investigate" Iseri's envisioned manifestations of the criminal mind of Tim Bynum.
Apparently Watanabe couldn't bring herself to just dismiss the charges all by herself, or better still jail Iseri for fraud and other "alleged" misconduct. The Judgy-Wudgy wouldn't want to deprive Iseri of due process just because Iseri has so little regard for due process herself.
(Parenthetically we just have to ask why it is that people who hate lawyers have such reverence for judges. Where do they think judges come from- the Judge Fairy?)
Once Minatoya talked to Iseri's hench-persons in the planning department and examined some of the evidence of Shay's and her "Igor," First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane's crimes and misdemeanors, he fulfilled his role of being "shocked, shocked" to find gambling at Rick's.
As an aside we can't let the fact that Minatoya's name is in the news go by without telling the tale of how he got that middle name.
It was we believe 1998 (we don't need no stinkin' fact checks) when then one-term Councilmember Mary Thronas decided to run for mayor (if we remember the correct chronology), trying to unseat then-Mayor Maryanne Kusaka.
Thronas failed in her mayoral bid after referring to Kusaka's office as "a Filipino taxi cab" and talking about "jewing-down" somebody-or-other... all within earshot of a reporter who apparently didn't know that those kinds of things aren't supposed to be reported on Kaua`i.
We were helping produce a "Video Voters' Guide" and had a couple of freebie rooms at the old Kaua`i Resort to do it. We had prepared questions for council and mayoral candidates and the questions were to be provided to each candidate exactly one hour before their individually scheduled taping times.
When Thronas came in we handed her the questions. She looked the piece of paper and then looked back at us and then looked back to the paper as if to ask "what the heck am I supposed to do with this?"
She never did glance at the content but rather spent the next hour gossiping with her hair and makeup people as they put her face in order. We actually had to read her the questions to her before she answered them... without of course really answering them, in quite the "accomplished politician" style .
Next up was the head-shaven Minatoya who had squeaked onto the council two years previously and had not exactly spent the biennium endearing himself to the electorate, serving as just another "bum" to be thrown out... just like the bum he had replaced.
Minatoya came in ten minutes before his appointed time to receive the questions and when we told him that, to be fair, we had to wait until exactly one hour before his taping time to give him the questions, he proceeded to stare at his watch for the next 10 minutes like he was waiting for the priest to arrive for last rites.
When we finally gave him the paper he began to look it over like it was his death warrant. What had previously been a trickle of perspiration now began flowing from his chrome-dome by the barrel-full. We didn't take a lot of notice and continued to yack about nothing in particular until Minatoya jumped up and, loud enough for them to hear him at the nearby Lydgate Park Pavilion, screamed "SHUT UP- I'VE ONLY GOT AN HOUR."
Needless to say by "showtime" Minatoya looked like he'd stepped out of a dunking booth. He stumbled his way through his answers, lost the election (some say because of the performance which played for months on public access TV) and was never heard from again on Kaua`i- until now.
Anyway, now we wait for the other shoe to drop as Bynum plots his revenge against Iseri, who has been busy lawyering-up over budget-related as well as other questions the council has over her P.O.H.A.K.U. program and other assorted sordid activities.
The council met in secret executive session on Wednesday regarding P.O.H.A.K.U. and next Wednesday will discuss it in public although the effect on Iseri's budget- which goes to public hearing next Wednesday at 5 p.m.- may be negligible in an election year since "dollar-funding" the entire Office of the Prosecutor (OPA) isn't really an option.
By the way, we just can't let this go without noting how hilarious it is that other island media have- due to a well established hatred of Bynum over the transient vacation rental issue- credited Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura with leading the investigative battle to reveal Iseri's "alleged" crimes.
The fact is that Yukimura has actually been serving as a mouthpiece for Bynum's research into Iseri's activities, but because Bynum wouldn't exactly be the best front-man for any public interrogation, Yukimura, to her credit, as taken up the reigns of the fight to publicize Iseri's shenanigans.
But the real news this week is the sudden departure of the local newspaper's "new" editor Renee Haines. We hear she was fired, not because she was censoring huge swaths of copy filed by her less-than-competent staff regarding Shaylene-related scandals and instead running fluff pieces Iseri gave her.
The publisher could care less about that and might have even been ordering it. They don't really care about much as long as the Happy Camper's column isn't printed blurry.
But apparently Haines had so little news savvy after coming over from the advertising side of the newspaper business that, as a fake newsperson, she personally wrote and published a fake story from fake marine biologist named Terry Lilley- who works for fake-everything Hanalei boatyard owner Mike Sheehan- and Lilley's fake "toxic levels of heavy metals in Hanalei Bay" report- all without checking with anyone as to what the truth is.
But if the local paper is a joke, the real joke is of course the Honolulu Star-Advertiser which has yet to say a word about the whole Iseri-Bynum brouhaha. That may be changing after Bynum's attorney Dan Hempey sent out a press release regarding Watanabe's ruling yesterday. But the joke may be about to become a shaggy dog story because the reporter assigned to the neighbor islands, Rosemary "No Dateline" Bernardo, has apparently yet to set foot on a neighbor island for a story, preferring to file her stories from the S-A's city desk.
We just love this place. Even bending over the toilet, it's endlessly entertaining.
We'll be posting whenever we can.
Eat your fiber kiddies.
And after an MRI "gut check" we've confirmed that our recent nausea is not, as we suspected, due to the prospect of four years of having to listen to the voice of former Governor Ben Cayetano should he become the mayor of Honolulu.
We regret the lack of a high fiber diet for the past 20 years (damn, dem Safeway baguettes is tasty), but the diverticular gods apparently have other people to sicken today so maybe between bathroom runs we can play a little catch-up today.
Of course the news that Judge Kathleen Watanabe threw out Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho's politically motivated charges against her blood-feud enemy Councilmember Tim Bynum in the "Rice-Cooker-Gate" case- and made sure she couldn't file them again- wasn't much of a surprise. The real laughter was that the "special prosecutor" assigned to the case was none other than former one-term Kaua`i Councilmember and current Deputy Prosecutor on Maui, Richard "Sweating Bullets" Minatoya.
Minatoya really had little choice but to go along with Watanabe's charade of taking Iseri's department off the case and then getting someone else to "investigate" Iseri's envisioned manifestations of the criminal mind of Tim Bynum.
Apparently Watanabe couldn't bring herself to just dismiss the charges all by herself, or better still jail Iseri for fraud and other "alleged" misconduct. The Judgy-Wudgy wouldn't want to deprive Iseri of due process just because Iseri has so little regard for due process herself.
(Parenthetically we just have to ask why it is that people who hate lawyers have such reverence for judges. Where do they think judges come from- the Judge Fairy?)
Once Minatoya talked to Iseri's hench-persons in the planning department and examined some of the evidence of Shay's and her "Igor," First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane's crimes and misdemeanors, he fulfilled his role of being "shocked, shocked" to find gambling at Rick's.
As an aside we can't let the fact that Minatoya's name is in the news go by without telling the tale of how he got that middle name.
It was we believe 1998 (we don't need no stinkin' fact checks) when then one-term Councilmember Mary Thronas decided to run for mayor (if we remember the correct chronology), trying to unseat then-Mayor Maryanne Kusaka.
Thronas failed in her mayoral bid after referring to Kusaka's office as "a Filipino taxi cab" and talking about "jewing-down" somebody-or-other... all within earshot of a reporter who apparently didn't know that those kinds of things aren't supposed to be reported on Kaua`i.
We were helping produce a "Video Voters' Guide" and had a couple of freebie rooms at the old Kaua`i Resort to do it. We had prepared questions for council and mayoral candidates and the questions were to be provided to each candidate exactly one hour before their individually scheduled taping times.
When Thronas came in we handed her the questions. She looked the piece of paper and then looked back at us and then looked back to the paper as if to ask "what the heck am I supposed to do with this?"
She never did glance at the content but rather spent the next hour gossiping with her hair and makeup people as they put her face in order. We actually had to read her the questions to her before she answered them... without of course really answering them, in quite the "accomplished politician" style .
Next up was the head-shaven Minatoya who had squeaked onto the council two years previously and had not exactly spent the biennium endearing himself to the electorate, serving as just another "bum" to be thrown out... just like the bum he had replaced.
Minatoya came in ten minutes before his appointed time to receive the questions and when we told him that, to be fair, we had to wait until exactly one hour before his taping time to give him the questions, he proceeded to stare at his watch for the next 10 minutes like he was waiting for the priest to arrive for last rites.
When we finally gave him the paper he began to look it over like it was his death warrant. What had previously been a trickle of perspiration now began flowing from his chrome-dome by the barrel-full. We didn't take a lot of notice and continued to yack about nothing in particular until Minatoya jumped up and, loud enough for them to hear him at the nearby Lydgate Park Pavilion, screamed "SHUT UP- I'VE ONLY GOT AN HOUR."
Needless to say by "showtime" Minatoya looked like he'd stepped out of a dunking booth. He stumbled his way through his answers, lost the election (some say because of the performance which played for months on public access TV) and was never heard from again on Kaua`i- until now.
Anyway, now we wait for the other shoe to drop as Bynum plots his revenge against Iseri, who has been busy lawyering-up over budget-related as well as other questions the council has over her P.O.H.A.K.U. program and other assorted sordid activities.
The council met in secret executive session on Wednesday regarding P.O.H.A.K.U. and next Wednesday will discuss it in public although the effect on Iseri's budget- which goes to public hearing next Wednesday at 5 p.m.- may be negligible in an election year since "dollar-funding" the entire Office of the Prosecutor (OPA) isn't really an option.
By the way, we just can't let this go without noting how hilarious it is that other island media have- due to a well established hatred of Bynum over the transient vacation rental issue- credited Councilmember JoAnn Yukimura with leading the investigative battle to reveal Iseri's "alleged" crimes.
The fact is that Yukimura has actually been serving as a mouthpiece for Bynum's research into Iseri's activities, but because Bynum wouldn't exactly be the best front-man for any public interrogation, Yukimura, to her credit, as taken up the reigns of the fight to publicize Iseri's shenanigans.
But the real news this week is the sudden departure of the local newspaper's "new" editor Renee Haines. We hear she was fired, not because she was censoring huge swaths of copy filed by her less-than-competent staff regarding Shaylene-related scandals and instead running fluff pieces Iseri gave her.
The publisher could care less about that and might have even been ordering it. They don't really care about much as long as the Happy Camper's column isn't printed blurry.
But apparently Haines had so little news savvy after coming over from the advertising side of the newspaper business that, as a fake newsperson, she personally wrote and published a fake story from fake marine biologist named Terry Lilley- who works for fake-everything Hanalei boatyard owner Mike Sheehan- and Lilley's fake "toxic levels of heavy metals in Hanalei Bay" report- all without checking with anyone as to what the truth is.
But if the local paper is a joke, the real joke is of course the Honolulu Star-Advertiser which has yet to say a word about the whole Iseri-Bynum brouhaha. That may be changing after Bynum's attorney Dan Hempey sent out a press release regarding Watanabe's ruling yesterday. But the joke may be about to become a shaggy dog story because the reporter assigned to the neighbor islands, Rosemary "No Dateline" Bernardo, has apparently yet to set foot on a neighbor island for a story, preferring to file her stories from the S-A's city desk.
We just love this place. Even bending over the toilet, it's endlessly entertaining.
We'll be posting whenever we can.
Eat your fiber kiddies.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
NOW YOU DON'T SEE IT, NOW YOU STILL DON'T SEE IT
NOW YOU DON'T SEE IT, NOW YOU STILL DON'T SEE IT: We realize that criticizing the council today may be one of those "no good deeds goes unpunished" type of things. After all, it only took a decade and half to get the paperwork for council agenda items posted on-line after the promise had been made to get it done "tout suite."
So today we have an excuse for our usual "but we digress" style.
Legendary local Kaua`i newspaper Editor Jean Holmes tells the story of how, when the paper's founder Charlie Fern hired her from the Howard County Times in Maryland, he assigned her to cover the Kaua`i County Council.
"When I walked in they practically had to put their pants on" she used to say of the colorful, equally legendary (albeit for different reasons) cast of council characters who had never seen a woman in the council chambers, much less a "lady reporter."
When we first attended a meeting in the pre-television days, not much had changed except that a different cast of characters were perturbed, this time at a haole hippie being in their midst.
Proceedings came to a screeching halt but after a bit of "who the heck are you and what are you here for?" then-County Clerk "Bunji" Shimomura (are we even close to the correct name and or spelling of either?) informed them, much to their astonishment, that indeed they had to allow members of the public- even this apparent wild man- to observe them in action.
But TV changed things. Dragged kicking and screaming into the 1990's, public access TV put council proceedings under the public microscope, albeit in fits and starts with officials finding ways to delay and indeed at times suspend cablecasts until almost 2000.
Around the same time, something called the "internet" was burgeoning and it took a mammoth effort to just get the weekly agendas posted at "kauai.com"- the domain purchased by then-Mayor Maryanne Kusaka, despite the fact that governments already had "dot gov" domains reserved exclusively for them.
By then, as a regular, we had gotten used to the cat and mouse game that interested members of the public, like the notorious "nitpickers"- and even reporters- were required to play, especially when it came to obtaining the aforementioned paperwork. The most annoying flaming hoop was the one called "how can you ask for it by name if you don't know it exists?". The OIP wasn't exactly accessible those days- even with a long distance call there was no "attorney of the day"- so we got pretty much got only what they wanted us to get.
But then suddenly, with the ascension of Ron Kouchi to Council Chair and Republican Kusaka in the mayor’s seat, revealing administration scandals- from, gem-gate to red-Chrysler-gate- became Kouchi's favorite game and the paperwork- especially the juicy stuff- began flowing on a more regular basis.
But there was a catch- although by the early 2000's the council's agendas began to be posted on-line the associated paperwork was available only at Council Services desk. Of course the game in those days was that agendas for the then-Thursday meetings came out as or after the doors to Council Services were locked for the weekend- with the required six days notice for meetings conveniently reduced to three beginning Monday at 9 a.m.
Than meant the already small window got smaller still and required a trip to Lihu`e to boot.
So, with the turn of the century began our quixotic century quest to get that paperwork posted on-line. But so too started the paternalistic reign of Chair Kaipo "it's not public information until I say it's public information... and the OIP can 'bite me'" Asing.
You get the idea. For ten years councilmembers promised posting of documents would begin post haste. Eventually though, not only Asing but even those self-same councilmembers- now having seen who was politically buttering their Portuguese Sweet Bread- were suddenly silent on the issue.
Without those documents by the way, the community would probably never know about the slew of sexual harassment cases which we only found out about because the suit was included- perhaps accidentally- in the "packet." Previous to that we had to be handed papers cloak and dagger style by anonymous sources- one time literally under a toilet stall.
Of course the main problem now is that although the paperwork is available- not at the council's page of the county web site but through "Granicus," a huge mainland company that is contracted to produce and "webcast" the meetings- it is not available in a "text" format but as a "scanned" file.
That means that someone trying to use any of the paperwork to testify- or for any reason like informing others- cannot simply "lift" the text from the file but must re-type it.
It is also probably a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) because the "voice recognition" software used by the visually-challenged will not work with a "picture" of the piece of paper- which is what is essentially what is being used by the county, which apparently supplies Granicus with the files.
Of course some of the paperwork either wasn't created in text or doesn't lend itself to text such as maps or graphs or the like. But there is what is called "Optical Recognition" software which is widely used these days to convert a scanned picture of the words into a "text file." Although errors may be contained in the conversion, going back and comparing it with the original is certainly preferable having to "key in" a 5,000 word document or even a 100-word quote.
Of course we complain because we do this all the time- take documents and post them in text. We have a friend (yes- we do have a few despite being a recovering asshole-a-holic) who has been very generous with his/her time in doing conversions for us. But the county could do this once, for everybody... after all they say they've had to create a new full-time position just to post the already available paperwork.
Scanning and posting around 25- 50 pages apparently takes 40 hours a week. Guess they had to look for an available slug because there wasn't a competent tortoise or snail on the civil service list (sorry- nothing personal, just personnel).
We just discovered the availability of the files today so we don't know yet when the documents will be posted each week (why do we suspect they won't be available when the agenda is ready- usually on Thursdays- but rather as late as they can get away with?.. maybe because we've been dealing with these guys for almost 30 years).
We're not sure who is responsible for the postings- given that "new" Council Chair Jay Furfaro has been on the job for 15 months now without change and brand new County Clerk Ricky Watenabe has been on the job for only about a month or so, we suspect that it is Ricky's doing... especially since Rick has been one of the only senior staffers in council services who has not just made himself available but actually never lied through his teeth to us or evaded our questions and/or requests, lo these decades.
Anyway there's still some stuff missing like committee reports, some communications, legal documents (a real biggie as to digging out news) and even a resolution and a bill for second reading (meaning "ready for final passage") as well as of course whatever is available for executive sessions- another document treasure trove which, many times, is where court filings of lawsuits may be available since they are public records.
So yes- it is a "what have you done for me lately" type of thing. Maybe we should make like the local newspaper... sit down, shut up and say "thanks for the crumbs massah"
All we can say is "put your pants on ladies and gentlemen of the council, there are woman and kids- and wildly rabid reporters- watching.
So today we have an excuse for our usual "but we digress" style.
Legendary local Kaua`i newspaper Editor Jean Holmes tells the story of how, when the paper's founder Charlie Fern hired her from the Howard County Times in Maryland, he assigned her to cover the Kaua`i County Council.
"When I walked in they practically had to put their pants on" she used to say of the colorful, equally legendary (albeit for different reasons) cast of council characters who had never seen a woman in the council chambers, much less a "lady reporter."
When we first attended a meeting in the pre-television days, not much had changed except that a different cast of characters were perturbed, this time at a haole hippie being in their midst.
Proceedings came to a screeching halt but after a bit of "who the heck are you and what are you here for?" then-County Clerk "Bunji" Shimomura (are we even close to the correct name and or spelling of either?) informed them, much to their astonishment, that indeed they had to allow members of the public- even this apparent wild man- to observe them in action.
But TV changed things. Dragged kicking and screaming into the 1990's, public access TV put council proceedings under the public microscope, albeit in fits and starts with officials finding ways to delay and indeed at times suspend cablecasts until almost 2000.
Around the same time, something called the "internet" was burgeoning and it took a mammoth effort to just get the weekly agendas posted at "kauai.com"- the domain purchased by then-Mayor Maryanne Kusaka, despite the fact that governments already had "dot gov" domains reserved exclusively for them.
By then, as a regular, we had gotten used to the cat and mouse game that interested members of the public, like the notorious "nitpickers"- and even reporters- were required to play, especially when it came to obtaining the aforementioned paperwork. The most annoying flaming hoop was the one called "how can you ask for it by name if you don't know it exists?". The OIP wasn't exactly accessible those days- even with a long distance call there was no "attorney of the day"- so we got pretty much got only what they wanted us to get.
But then suddenly, with the ascension of Ron Kouchi to Council Chair and Republican Kusaka in the mayor’s seat, revealing administration scandals- from, gem-gate to red-Chrysler-gate- became Kouchi's favorite game and the paperwork- especially the juicy stuff- began flowing on a more regular basis.
But there was a catch- although by the early 2000's the council's agendas began to be posted on-line the associated paperwork was available only at Council Services desk. Of course the game in those days was that agendas for the then-Thursday meetings came out as or after the doors to Council Services were locked for the weekend- with the required six days notice for meetings conveniently reduced to three beginning Monday at 9 a.m.
Than meant the already small window got smaller still and required a trip to Lihu`e to boot.
So, with the turn of the century began our quixotic century quest to get that paperwork posted on-line. But so too started the paternalistic reign of Chair Kaipo "it's not public information until I say it's public information... and the OIP can 'bite me'" Asing.
You get the idea. For ten years councilmembers promised posting of documents would begin post haste. Eventually though, not only Asing but even those self-same councilmembers- now having seen who was politically buttering their Portuguese Sweet Bread- were suddenly silent on the issue.
Without those documents by the way, the community would probably never know about the slew of sexual harassment cases which we only found out about because the suit was included- perhaps accidentally- in the "packet." Previous to that we had to be handed papers cloak and dagger style by anonymous sources- one time literally under a toilet stall.
Of course the main problem now is that although the paperwork is available- not at the council's page of the county web site but through "Granicus," a huge mainland company that is contracted to produce and "webcast" the meetings- it is not available in a "text" format but as a "scanned" file.
That means that someone trying to use any of the paperwork to testify- or for any reason like informing others- cannot simply "lift" the text from the file but must re-type it.
It is also probably a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) because the "voice recognition" software used by the visually-challenged will not work with a "picture" of the piece of paper- which is what is essentially what is being used by the county, which apparently supplies Granicus with the files.
Of course some of the paperwork either wasn't created in text or doesn't lend itself to text such as maps or graphs or the like. But there is what is called "Optical Recognition" software which is widely used these days to convert a scanned picture of the words into a "text file." Although errors may be contained in the conversion, going back and comparing it with the original is certainly preferable having to "key in" a 5,000 word document or even a 100-word quote.
Of course we complain because we do this all the time- take documents and post them in text. We have a friend (yes- we do have a few despite being a recovering asshole-a-holic) who has been very generous with his/her time in doing conversions for us. But the county could do this once, for everybody... after all they say they've had to create a new full-time position just to post the already available paperwork.
Scanning and posting around 25- 50 pages apparently takes 40 hours a week. Guess they had to look for an available slug because there wasn't a competent tortoise or snail on the civil service list (sorry- nothing personal, just personnel).
We just discovered the availability of the files today so we don't know yet when the documents will be posted each week (why do we suspect they won't be available when the agenda is ready- usually on Thursdays- but rather as late as they can get away with?.. maybe because we've been dealing with these guys for almost 30 years).
We're not sure who is responsible for the postings- given that "new" Council Chair Jay Furfaro has been on the job for 15 months now without change and brand new County Clerk Ricky Watenabe has been on the job for only about a month or so, we suspect that it is Ricky's doing... especially since Rick has been one of the only senior staffers in council services who has not just made himself available but actually never lied through his teeth to us or evaded our questions and/or requests, lo these decades.
Anyway there's still some stuff missing like committee reports, some communications, legal documents (a real biggie as to digging out news) and even a resolution and a bill for second reading (meaning "ready for final passage") as well as of course whatever is available for executive sessions- another document treasure trove which, many times, is where court filings of lawsuits may be available since they are public records.
So yes- it is a "what have you done for me lately" type of thing. Maybe we should make like the local newspaper... sit down, shut up and say "thanks for the crumbs massah"
All we can say is "put your pants on ladies and gentlemen of the council, there are woman and kids- and wildly rabid reporters- watching.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
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.
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.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
WELL I WONDER, WONDER, WONDER, WONDER WHO
WELL I WONDER, WONDER, WONDER, WONDER WHO: The "fact" that Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Chief Darryl Perry "is on leave" seems to be the only thing that is clear after chapter two of the latest departmental saga hit the streets.
Chapter one was the leave that was apparently forced on two assistant chiefs by Perry on Tuesday. But as to how Perry wound up on leave there seems to be about as much confusion in the press as there is silence on the part of the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.
The first report of Perry's "situation" came from a county press release last night and simply said:
As of this morning, Police Chief Darryl Perry is on leave and Deputy Police Chief Michael Contrades will serve as Acting Police Chief until further notice.
The local Kaua`i newspaper claims to have reached Perry who told them that indeed it was hizzonah who did the deed saying:
While the county offered no explanation in terse statements that were released Tuesday and Wednesday, Perry said late Wednesday that“the truth will come out,” and that the actions were brought about by the mayor’s office.
The pay-walled Honolulu Star Advertiser, while detailing some of the ways past chiefs have departed on less than friendly terms with the county apparently reached county KPD spokesperson Sarah Blane who told them "she was not told who placed Perry on leave."
Although the county claims it cannot say anything because it is a "personnel matter" the sunshine law says that, if appropriate in the specific case, the public's interest in the information can trump privacy concerns. That, however, would be a matter for the toothless Office of Information Practices (OIP) to determine and, even if they had fangs, they seem to work at glacial speeds.
So who dunnit?
Well if it was the mayor all we can say is "here we go again."
According to Section 11-4 of the Kaua`i County Charter
The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission. He may be removed by the police commission only after being given a written statement of the charges against him and a hearing before the commission.
And while the power to place the chief on leave is not directly addressed, Police Commissions statewide are, according to state law, supposed to be autonomous in their dealings with the police chiefs.
But while it's not within Carvalho's powers to remove- or even place on leave- the chief, it's not for lack of wishing on his part. He has been engaged in a campaign to have the state law changed so that the chiefs of the police departments across the state would be hired and fired by the mayors, making the police commissions little more than advisory boards.
It may be of note that both Perry and the commission have gone on the record opposing Carvalho's would-be new law.
A perusal of the police commission's most recent agenda produces no recent "emergency" meeting where any executive session placing Perry on leave might have taken place and to do so would have violated the state sunshine law anyway which requires six days notice before a meeting can be held.
However this morning at 8:15 an agenda for a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday February 7- the first day one could be legally held- calls for no less than three "executive sessions."
The first, ES 5 reads in part
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4, 92-5(a) (2) and (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho Jr. to provide the Commission with a briefing regarding personnel and/or disciplinary actions related to notarized complaint filed with the Police Commission on 01/31/12, and for the Commission to further consider and discuss said personnel and/or disciplinary actions.
While it's not clear what "disciplinary action" Carvalho has taken it seems pretty clear it refers to placing Perry on leave because the next item, ES 6 reads
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities as they relate to Section 11.04 of the County of Kaua'i Charter
Charter section 11-4 of course is the one cited above about the hiring and firing of the chief being the sole kuleana of the police commission.
The third item on the 2/7 agenda reads:
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities as they relate to Rule 6-1.f of the Rules of the Kaua'i County Police Commission.
But if you thought that would clarify what was going on you'll be sorely disappointed because Rule 6 is entitled "Control, Management And Direction Of The Department" and 6-1 is an incredibly long and list of the "Powers, Duties and Responsibilities of the Police Commission."
Although 6-1-3 does deal with "Investigation of Charge (sic)" it does not directly address what happens if the target of the investigation is the chief.
So what does it matter who put Perry on leave?
Well if past is prologue the county might just be in for another big settlement should Perry decide to sue for denying his rights under the charter.
To make a long story short, back when George Freitas was the chief and Maryanne Kusaka was the mayor- this during the time when Kusaka was allegedly covering up for her buddies with grubbing and grading violations by allegedly telling a Department of Public Works engineer to butt out when it came to Jimmy Pflueger and the Ka Loko Dam area that later burst during a storm killing seven people- Kusaka "removed" Freitas from his office.
She apparently got the long time secretary for Freitas and past chiefs to take his gun and badge from his desk and give it to her. There was a long list of serious charges made but when it was all over the only one the police commission upheld was that Freitas had given a ride to his girlfriend in his police car.
And in the end Freitas settled for a reported half-million dollar golden parachute and "retiring" from the force.
Hard to say what will happen tomorrow- or next Tuesday for that matter because the usual open session for decision making after executive sessions on complaint against KPD personnel is decidedly missing from the 2/7 agenda.
But one thing is clear- in his notorious quest for power Carvalho is certainly putting the county in jeopardy by usurping the commission's oversight.
Chapter one was the leave that was apparently forced on two assistant chiefs by Perry on Tuesday. But as to how Perry wound up on leave there seems to be about as much confusion in the press as there is silence on the part of the administration of Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.
The first report of Perry's "situation" came from a county press release last night and simply said:
As of this morning, Police Chief Darryl Perry is on leave and Deputy Police Chief Michael Contrades will serve as Acting Police Chief until further notice.
The local Kaua`i newspaper claims to have reached Perry who told them that indeed it was hizzonah who did the deed saying:
While the county offered no explanation in terse statements that were released Tuesday and Wednesday, Perry said late Wednesday that“the truth will come out,” and that the actions were brought about by the mayor’s office.
The pay-walled Honolulu Star Advertiser, while detailing some of the ways past chiefs have departed on less than friendly terms with the county apparently reached county KPD spokesperson Sarah Blane who told them "she was not told who placed Perry on leave."
Although the county claims it cannot say anything because it is a "personnel matter" the sunshine law says that, if appropriate in the specific case, the public's interest in the information can trump privacy concerns. That, however, would be a matter for the toothless Office of Information Practices (OIP) to determine and, even if they had fangs, they seem to work at glacial speeds.
So who dunnit?
Well if it was the mayor all we can say is "here we go again."
According to Section 11-4 of the Kaua`i County Charter
The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission. He may be removed by the police commission only after being given a written statement of the charges against him and a hearing before the commission.
And while the power to place the chief on leave is not directly addressed, Police Commissions statewide are, according to state law, supposed to be autonomous in their dealings with the police chiefs.
But while it's not within Carvalho's powers to remove- or even place on leave- the chief, it's not for lack of wishing on his part. He has been engaged in a campaign to have the state law changed so that the chiefs of the police departments across the state would be hired and fired by the mayors, making the police commissions little more than advisory boards.
It may be of note that both Perry and the commission have gone on the record opposing Carvalho's would-be new law.
A perusal of the police commission's most recent agenda produces no recent "emergency" meeting where any executive session placing Perry on leave might have taken place and to do so would have violated the state sunshine law anyway which requires six days notice before a meeting can be held.
However this morning at 8:15 an agenda for a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday February 7- the first day one could be legally held- calls for no less than three "executive sessions."
The first, ES 5 reads in part
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4, 92-5(a) (2) and (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho Jr. to provide the Commission with a briefing regarding personnel and/or disciplinary actions related to notarized complaint filed with the Police Commission on 01/31/12, and for the Commission to further consider and discuss said personnel and/or disciplinary actions.
While it's not clear what "disciplinary action" Carvalho has taken it seems pretty clear it refers to placing Perry on leave because the next item, ES 6 reads
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities as they relate to Section 11.04 of the County of Kaua'i Charter
Charter section 11-4 of course is the one cited above about the hiring and firing of the chief being the sole kuleana of the police commission.
The third item on the 2/7 agenda reads:
Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92-4 and 92-5 (a) (4), the purpose of this Executive Session is for the Commission to consult with its attorney as to its powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities as they relate to Rule 6-1.f of the Rules of the Kaua'i County Police Commission.
But if you thought that would clarify what was going on you'll be sorely disappointed because Rule 6 is entitled "Control, Management And Direction Of The Department" and 6-1 is an incredibly long and list of the "Powers, Duties and Responsibilities of the Police Commission."
Although 6-1-3 does deal with "Investigation of Charge (sic)" it does not directly address what happens if the target of the investigation is the chief.
So what does it matter who put Perry on leave?
Well if past is prologue the county might just be in for another big settlement should Perry decide to sue for denying his rights under the charter.
To make a long story short, back when George Freitas was the chief and Maryanne Kusaka was the mayor- this during the time when Kusaka was allegedly covering up for her buddies with grubbing and grading violations by allegedly telling a Department of Public Works engineer to butt out when it came to Jimmy Pflueger and the Ka Loko Dam area that later burst during a storm killing seven people- Kusaka "removed" Freitas from his office.
She apparently got the long time secretary for Freitas and past chiefs to take his gun and badge from his desk and give it to her. There was a long list of serious charges made but when it was all over the only one the police commission upheld was that Freitas had given a ride to his girlfriend in his police car.
And in the end Freitas settled for a reported half-million dollar golden parachute and "retiring" from the force.
Hard to say what will happen tomorrow- or next Tuesday for that matter because the usual open session for decision making after executive sessions on complaint against KPD personnel is decidedly missing from the 2/7 agenda.
But one thing is clear- in his notorious quest for power Carvalho is certainly putting the county in jeopardy by usurping the commission's oversight.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
BUT WAS IT BASMATI OR LOCAL-KINE STICKY?
BUT WAS IT BASMATI OR LOCAL-KINE STICKY?: Only on Kauai could we have a scandal that revolves around whether having a rice-cooker in the wrong room constitutes a zoning violation.
That's because "Rice-cooker-gate" is a direct result of what happens when a dysfunctional planning department and an ego-maniacal prosecutor collude to "bring down" a councilmember.
The matter- into which we've been delving for the past year or so- has finally spilled over into the local newspaper with an article yesterday that scratched the surface of the prosecution of Councilmember Tim Bynum by Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, after the release of various documents and a back and forth between Iseri and Bynum on the matter.
Despite Iseri's denial of any ill-feeling between the two, the feud between her and Bynum goes back to their days together on the council when she and Councilmember Mel Rapozo were allies and sided with then-Chair Kaipo Asing in the infamous days when Bynum and Asing butted heads with all of them over Asing's paternalistic leadership of the council involving issues of process, staffing, introduction of measures and other issues.
Iseri was then elected prosecuting attorney in 2008.
According to a complaint form we've obtained dated 3/26/10 Bynum was alleged to have an "illegal dwelling multi family" unit at his home which is on agriculturally zoned land.
The problem is that, under "Complainer/Requester" the form notes "*wants to remain anonymous!" (the asterisk and exclamation marks are written on the form)
The complaint has two initializations, one for "inspector" and another for "assigned by" but who they actually are is not readily apparent. However what is known is that, according to Bynum's press release that followed an email from Iseri to current Council Chair Jay Furfaro sent just before last Wednesday's council meeting where Iseri appeared on a budgetary matter related to the Victim Witness program:
Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
That someone is apparently Planning Inspector Sheilah Miyake who was CCed in a series of memos between Iseri and then Planning Director Ian Costa and has been identified by numerous reliable sources close to the investigation as being the "trespasser."
On April 7, 2010, Iseri wrote to Costa:
We received information to corroborate an anonymous complaint dated March 2.6, 2010 that was sent to the Planning Department and our office, that Councilmember Tim Bynum was renting out his house, or a portion thereof. Can you let me know if renting out a portion of his residence is ill~gal given his land status, and what ordinance/statute would he be violating by doing so? Please advise.
Costa wrote back, CCing Miyake, saying
Sorry for delay Shaylene.
The CZO really doesn't prohibit renting portions of structures. Even the issue of "lock-outs" is not addressed.
The CZO does not dictate where locks are permitted and not permitted (thank goodness!). The issue would be whether the area, in question creates a "multi-family" dwelling. What was permitted is a "single-family" dwelling based on "one kitchen". If a second kitchen (area used for the preparation of food) is present, then a violation would exist for an illegal "multi-family" dwelling unit.
I understand Sheila has been assisting and monitoring .......let me know if we can be of further assistance.
Despite Iseri's previous contention that actions on the complaint was initiated by the planning department alone, her memo indicates that now she says the complaint was sent to both planning and the prosecutor's office. She also seems to say that she and Miyake worked together to get the "rice cooker" information that was arguably obtained illegally via Miyake's trespassing.
In a comment on our November 5, 2010 report on Bynum's denial of allgations, Iseri wrote"
Mr. Parx,
Your statements are completely erroneous. I was never involved in the investigation of Tim Bynum's violations. The entire investigation was conducted by the Planning Department.
The memo seems to indicate that it was Iseri who initiated the action in conjunction with Miyake and without Director Costa's prior involvement. It also shows that Costa essentially confirms what people have been told at planning previous to this incident- that a "second kitchen" is what makes it illegal. And, as everyone is told, it is a stove that constituted what a "kitchen" was.
But Iseri wasn't to be stopped by the prior definition of a kitchen by planning. Apparently when Miyake told her she saw a "rice cooker" on the counter when she sneaked onto Bynum's property without his permission- or even asking- Iseri saw her opening and decided that, despite what planning had said ever since the CZO was established in the early 70's, now any device- presumably even a toaster or coffee maker- is a "kitchen."
The most hilarious part of all this is Iseri's continuing contention that there is no feud or even animosity between her and Bynum. Anyone who ever watched those council sessions where she butted heads with Bynum would have no doubt she despises Bynum.
So as to who made the complaint? Well we can't say for sure but for some reason former Chair Kaipo Asing has taken an unusual interest in Bynum's cases, showing up to Bynum's court dates and last week's council meeting where, if Bynum had not recused himself, sparks between Iseri and Bynum would surely have flown.
Was it Asing? Was it Iseri's ally Mel Rapozo whose animosity toward Bynum is thinly, if at all, disguised? Some seem to think the latter is the case but so far Rapozo's name hasn't come up in any documents.
The answer is apparently another question- does it really matter which of them it was? To think that there was no collusion in the matter would strain credulity.
Another question is what will happen when these people are put under oath. We understand that new Planning Director Mike Dahilig is privy to the whole story and even if the others were thinking of perjuring themselves, his testimony would surely be straightforward, the thinking being that Dahilig, a former deputy county attorney, isn't going to lie under oath for anyone.
A final question is why Iseri's office is even prosecuting the case and why she hasn't recused herself and her office by letting the state attorney general's office take it over. It would seem, given the history between Iseri and Bynum, recusal would be a no brainer.
Also, Iseri's email was stamped with a big "Confidential" across the top and the original did not contain any redactions. But under the Sunshine law she has no apparent right to say an email to the council is confidential. All emails to councilmembers are considered public documents.
We'll leave it there for today. Below are the full texts of Iseri's letter asking for Bynum's recusal last Wednesday and Bynum's "press release" that followed this weekend. It should be noted that there may be misprints in Iseri's email. First of all, names of those involved are redacted and second we had to use optical character recognition software to get it in "text" form. There may be redactions that are not noted so the sentences may seem disjointed. But you'll get the gist of it.
----#---
Iseri's letter to Council Chair Jay Furfaro CCed to all councilmembers except Bynum.
January 19, 2011
TO: Council Chair Jay Furfaro
FR: Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho
RE: Conflict Notice Regarding Councilmember Timothy Bynum
This communication serves as a notice to the Council regarding a conflict of interest between Councilmember Timothy Bynum and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This conflict arises from several incidents involving Councilmember Bynum and employees in our office, as well as the pending criminal case filed by our Office against Councilmember Bynum in November 2011.
1. Bynum's Inappropriate Confrontation Of Deputy Prosecuting (redacted)
On September 28, 2011, Councilmember Timothy Bynum attended a court proceeding with his son, David Bynum, at the 5th Judicial Circuit Courthouse in Lihu`e. After the hearing, Mr. Bynum stood outside the courtroom door in the public hallway and confronted Deputy Prosecuting Attorney (redacted) regarding David's case. As (redacted) exited the courtroom, Mr. Bynum stated directly to (redacted) "Do you think justice was done? This was because [expletive] Shaylene doesn't like me and is out to get me." (Redacted) was standing nearby and also witnessed the confrontation.
According to the Kaua`i County Charter section 3.07(D)
The council may, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of its entire membership, suspend without pay for not more than one month any member for disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. The presiding officer or the council by a majority vote may expel any other person who is guilty of disorderly, contemptuous or improper conduct at any meeting.
While this section deals with disorderly and contemptuous conduct that occurs in the presence of the Council, it is also instructive as to the appropriate conduct expected from Councilmembers in their dealings with county employees as well as the general public.
Additionally, Section 3.18 of the Kaua`i County Charter states:
Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor. and neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee or officer either publicly or privately. Any willful violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the council shall be sufficient grounds for an action for his removal from office.
Clearly, Councilmember Bynum did not handle this situation appropriately. If Mr. Bynum had questions or concerns about the case, the appropriate course of action would have been to communicate those to the elected Department Head, which is me, rather than confronting one of our Deputies, who, in fact, was not assigned to handling the case. This confrontation clearly illustrates the undue bias Mr. Bynum harbors toward both me personally, as well as the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. As such, Mr. Bynum must recuse himself from any matter before the Council involving the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney.
2. Bynum's inappropriate confrontation of (redacted)
Before coming to work at the OPA (redacted) was employed by (redacted) as (redacted). She applied to the OPA as a (redacted) and was offered the job in (redacted) . After accepting the position (redacted), who had turned in her 2 week notice (redacted) was confronted by Councilmember Bynum in her office. Bynum stated that he was concerned because it was well known that he and Shaylene did not 'get along' and adamantly believed that the only reason Shaylene hired her was to 'get back at him.' These statements and allegations continued for a prolonged period, leaving (redacted) to feel uncomfortable and offended.
Councilmember Bynum's inappropriate confrontation with (redacted) regarding her employment at the OPA demonstrates Mr. Bynum's continued undue bias toward me and my office. This bias and proclivity to engage in inappropriate conduct with OPA employees further establishes the need to have Mr. Bynum precluded from participating in any matters relating to the operations of the OPA.
3. Bynum's Pending Criminal Case
On November 9, 2011, the OPA filed a criminal complaint in the District Court of the Fifth Circuit against Timothy Bynum, alleging 4 counts of violations of the Kaua`i County Code. Each Count is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,000.000 fine for each. This means that if convicted, Bynum could face up to 4 total years imprisonment and $8,000.00 in fines. There have already been two motion hearings on the case, in which Mr. Bynum has been represented by a private attorney. At each hearing, First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane represented the State and made all arguments on behalf of the State. Councilmember Bynum's criminal case clearly establishes a conflict with the OPA. He has a clear financial interest in the operations of the OPA, as he would directly benefit if the OPA's operations were negatively impacted by any action of the Council. By virtue of being a criminal defendant, he has a vested interest in ensuring that the OPA not operate at peak efficiency. In accordance with Article )0( of the Kaua`i County Charter, this financial interest clearly prohibits Bynum from participating in any matter relating to the OPA that comes before the Council. Further, because Councilmember Bynum is represented by an attorney in his criminal case, our office is prohibited from having direct contact with Bynum without his attorney present; as such contact would violate Bynum's 6th Amendment Right to Counsel and could result in dismissal of his case. Bynum's paranoid belief that the actions taken by our office were calculated personal attacks against him is without any merit and is completely baseless. The criminal case against his son was investigated by the Kaua`i Police Department and referred to our office for prosecution. The case initiated against Councilmember Bynum was investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution. The contact with (redacted) was solely initiated by Councilmember Bynum. Her decision to apply to the OPA and our decision to hire her was purely based on (redacted) exceptional experience and qualifications.
For the above stated reasons, Councilmember Bynum has a clear conflict of interest with the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney and should not be allowed to participate in any Council proceedings involving the OPA. It is our hope that the Council will address this situation in a timely and appropriate manner. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this matter.
SHAYLENE ISERI-CARVALHO
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
---------
Bynum's Press Release
I was elected to legislate for the county and to provide oversight of various government agencies and offices. Among these is the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
However, the OPA has recently filed criminal zoning violations against me and I must now defend those in Court. Since I was charged, the County Prosecutor has now cited those same charges as a basis for having me recused from all legislative oversight over her office. Out of an over abundance of caution I agreed to recuse myself from the January 19th meeting.
Likewise, I believe that it would be appropriate for the Kauai Prosecuting Attorney to be recused from prosecuting my case and allow the Attorney General's office to properly evaluate this case. I believe that this would be the best assurance of a fair proceeding and a fair process that is certain to be governed by the rule of law.
The Prosecuting Attorney states in a Jan 19 letter that her criminal prosecution is not personal, and was a routine matter “investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution.” What I have learned is that as early as April 2010, the Prosecuting Attorney asked the Planning Director in an email for a legal basis on which to prosecute me. I am attaching a copy of emails between the Prosecuting Attorney and then-Planning Department Head Ian Costa. These e-mails establish that the Prosecuting Attorney was involved in the matter before Planning even investigated the “anonymous complaint” and that this was not just a routine Planning Department investigation.
In her email, the Prosecutor refers to an "anonymous" complaint. Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
I hope that through the court-process I will be able to ascertain the identity of this trespasser and learn how this person was able to anonymously commence a criminal investigation - especially when I have previously been assured by the Planning Department that my house was properly permitted. I also hope to find out who, if anyone in government authorized sending someone to peer into the windows of my family home. I believe that the trespasser should be prosecuted, but thus far his or her identity appears to have been protected. The documents provided to my defense attorney so far only state that he or she "wishes to remain anonymous".
Finally, just minutes prior to the January 19, 2012 Special Council Meeting, the Prosecuting Attorney sent a letter marked confidential demanding my recusal. The letter was sent to all Council Members except for me. I was allowed to read the letter in the presence of the County Attorneys but I was not given a copy.
I am now informed that the Prosecuting Attorney intends to release to the public this letter she stamped “confidential.” The letter misrepresents conversations I had with two individuals I have long respected and have had a cordial professional relationship with for years.
The intended subject matter of the January 19 Council Meeting was a valid examination of concerns raised by a number of citizens regarding the Victim Witness program, the reported backlog of cases, finance issues and the high turnover / vacancies of Deputies. Council member Joann Yukimura instigated the request. Anyone who follows the Council knows that this type of oversight agenda item is common and a legitimate Council responsibility.
Additional information regarding the alleged zoning violation:
In 2005, at times there were 4 generations of my family (7 people total) living in my home (my father, myself and my wife, my son, my daughter, our grandson and his mother). We decided to do an addition to our home. We wanted to create a living space that was integrated. We constructed two bedrooms, a bathroom and family room. The addition also included a ramp because my elderly father was increasingly having difficulty negotiating the steps to the front door much less the stairs to the second story where the existing bedrooms were located.
When the drawings were done I took them to the County Planning department and the Building division for informal review. I was told everything was fine as long as no stove was installed. Subsequently we submitted the plans to the County for formal review and approval. The plans were approved after being circulated to and approved by various departments including the Planning department.
We hired a contractor and built according to the plans. The County sent inspectors during construction including a final inspection after which we were issued a certificate of occupancy. The addition is exactly as it was when “final inspection” occurred; nothing has been added or deleted. No installed cooking facilities have ever existed in the addition. Our home has one kitchen; every person that has ever resided in our home has used the one kitchen.
That's because "Rice-cooker-gate" is a direct result of what happens when a dysfunctional planning department and an ego-maniacal prosecutor collude to "bring down" a councilmember.
The matter- into which we've been delving for the past year or so- has finally spilled over into the local newspaper with an article yesterday that scratched the surface of the prosecution of Councilmember Tim Bynum by Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, after the release of various documents and a back and forth between Iseri and Bynum on the matter.
Despite Iseri's denial of any ill-feeling between the two, the feud between her and Bynum goes back to their days together on the council when she and Councilmember Mel Rapozo were allies and sided with then-Chair Kaipo Asing in the infamous days when Bynum and Asing butted heads with all of them over Asing's paternalistic leadership of the council involving issues of process, staffing, introduction of measures and other issues.
Iseri was then elected prosecuting attorney in 2008.
According to a complaint form we've obtained dated 3/26/10 Bynum was alleged to have an "illegal dwelling multi family" unit at his home which is on agriculturally zoned land.
The problem is that, under "Complainer/Requester" the form notes "*wants to remain anonymous!" (the asterisk and exclamation marks are written on the form)
The complaint has two initializations, one for "inspector" and another for "assigned by" but who they actually are is not readily apparent. However what is known is that, according to Bynum's press release that followed an email from Iseri to current Council Chair Jay Furfaro sent just before last Wednesday's council meeting where Iseri appeared on a budgetary matter related to the Victim Witness program:
Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
That someone is apparently Planning Inspector Sheilah Miyake who was CCed in a series of memos between Iseri and then Planning Director Ian Costa and has been identified by numerous reliable sources close to the investigation as being the "trespasser."
On April 7, 2010, Iseri wrote to Costa:
We received information to corroborate an anonymous complaint dated March 2.6, 2010 that was sent to the Planning Department and our office, that Councilmember Tim Bynum was renting out his house, or a portion thereof. Can you let me know if renting out a portion of his residence is ill~gal given his land status, and what ordinance/statute would he be violating by doing so? Please advise.
Costa wrote back, CCing Miyake, saying
Sorry for delay Shaylene.
The CZO really doesn't prohibit renting portions of structures. Even the issue of "lock-outs" is not addressed.
The CZO does not dictate where locks are permitted and not permitted (thank goodness!). The issue would be whether the area, in question creates a "multi-family" dwelling. What was permitted is a "single-family" dwelling based on "one kitchen". If a second kitchen (area used for the preparation of food) is present, then a violation would exist for an illegal "multi-family" dwelling unit.
I understand Sheila has been assisting and monitoring .......let me know if we can be of further assistance.
Despite Iseri's previous contention that actions on the complaint was initiated by the planning department alone, her memo indicates that now she says the complaint was sent to both planning and the prosecutor's office. She also seems to say that she and Miyake worked together to get the "rice cooker" information that was arguably obtained illegally via Miyake's trespassing.
In a comment on our November 5, 2010 report on Bynum's denial of allgations, Iseri wrote"
Mr. Parx,
Your statements are completely erroneous. I was never involved in the investigation of Tim Bynum's violations. The entire investigation was conducted by the Planning Department.
The memo seems to indicate that it was Iseri who initiated the action in conjunction with Miyake and without Director Costa's prior involvement. It also shows that Costa essentially confirms what people have been told at planning previous to this incident- that a "second kitchen" is what makes it illegal. And, as everyone is told, it is a stove that constituted what a "kitchen" was.
But Iseri wasn't to be stopped by the prior definition of a kitchen by planning. Apparently when Miyake told her she saw a "rice cooker" on the counter when she sneaked onto Bynum's property without his permission- or even asking- Iseri saw her opening and decided that, despite what planning had said ever since the CZO was established in the early 70's, now any device- presumably even a toaster or coffee maker- is a "kitchen."
The most hilarious part of all this is Iseri's continuing contention that there is no feud or even animosity between her and Bynum. Anyone who ever watched those council sessions where she butted heads with Bynum would have no doubt she despises Bynum.
So as to who made the complaint? Well we can't say for sure but for some reason former Chair Kaipo Asing has taken an unusual interest in Bynum's cases, showing up to Bynum's court dates and last week's council meeting where, if Bynum had not recused himself, sparks between Iseri and Bynum would surely have flown.
Was it Asing? Was it Iseri's ally Mel Rapozo whose animosity toward Bynum is thinly, if at all, disguised? Some seem to think the latter is the case but so far Rapozo's name hasn't come up in any documents.
The answer is apparently another question- does it really matter which of them it was? To think that there was no collusion in the matter would strain credulity.
Another question is what will happen when these people are put under oath. We understand that new Planning Director Mike Dahilig is privy to the whole story and even if the others were thinking of perjuring themselves, his testimony would surely be straightforward, the thinking being that Dahilig, a former deputy county attorney, isn't going to lie under oath for anyone.
A final question is why Iseri's office is even prosecuting the case and why she hasn't recused herself and her office by letting the state attorney general's office take it over. It would seem, given the history between Iseri and Bynum, recusal would be a no brainer.
Also, Iseri's email was stamped with a big "Confidential" across the top and the original did not contain any redactions. But under the Sunshine law she has no apparent right to say an email to the council is confidential. All emails to councilmembers are considered public documents.
We'll leave it there for today. Below are the full texts of Iseri's letter asking for Bynum's recusal last Wednesday and Bynum's "press release" that followed this weekend. It should be noted that there may be misprints in Iseri's email. First of all, names of those involved are redacted and second we had to use optical character recognition software to get it in "text" form. There may be redactions that are not noted so the sentences may seem disjointed. But you'll get the gist of it.
----#---
Iseri's letter to Council Chair Jay Furfaro CCed to all councilmembers except Bynum.
January 19, 2011
TO: Council Chair Jay Furfaro
FR: Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho
RE: Conflict Notice Regarding Councilmember Timothy Bynum
This communication serves as a notice to the Council regarding a conflict of interest between Councilmember Timothy Bynum and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. This conflict arises from several incidents involving Councilmember Bynum and employees in our office, as well as the pending criminal case filed by our Office against Councilmember Bynum in November 2011.
1. Bynum's Inappropriate Confrontation Of Deputy Prosecuting (redacted)
On September 28, 2011, Councilmember Timothy Bynum attended a court proceeding with his son, David Bynum, at the 5th Judicial Circuit Courthouse in Lihu`e. After the hearing, Mr. Bynum stood outside the courtroom door in the public hallway and confronted Deputy Prosecuting Attorney (redacted) regarding David's case. As (redacted) exited the courtroom, Mr. Bynum stated directly to (redacted) "Do you think justice was done? This was because [expletive] Shaylene doesn't like me and is out to get me." (Redacted) was standing nearby and also witnessed the confrontation.
According to the Kaua`i County Charter section 3.07(D)
The council may, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of its entire membership, suspend without pay for not more than one month any member for disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. The presiding officer or the council by a majority vote may expel any other person who is guilty of disorderly, contemptuous or improper conduct at any meeting.
While this section deals with disorderly and contemptuous conduct that occurs in the presence of the Council, it is also instructive as to the appropriate conduct expected from Councilmembers in their dealings with county employees as well as the general public.
Additionally, Section 3.18 of the Kaua`i County Charter states:
Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor. and neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee or officer either publicly or privately. Any willful violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the council shall be sufficient grounds for an action for his removal from office.
Clearly, Councilmember Bynum did not handle this situation appropriately. If Mr. Bynum had questions or concerns about the case, the appropriate course of action would have been to communicate those to the elected Department Head, which is me, rather than confronting one of our Deputies, who, in fact, was not assigned to handling the case. This confrontation clearly illustrates the undue bias Mr. Bynum harbors toward both me personally, as well as the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. As such, Mr. Bynum must recuse himself from any matter before the Council involving the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney.
2. Bynum's inappropriate confrontation of (redacted)
Before coming to work at the OPA (redacted) was employed by (redacted) as (redacted). She applied to the OPA as a (redacted) and was offered the job in (redacted) . After accepting the position (redacted), who had turned in her 2 week notice (redacted) was confronted by Councilmember Bynum in her office. Bynum stated that he was concerned because it was well known that he and Shaylene did not 'get along' and adamantly believed that the only reason Shaylene hired her was to 'get back at him.' These statements and allegations continued for a prolonged period, leaving (redacted) to feel uncomfortable and offended.
Councilmember Bynum's inappropriate confrontation with (redacted) regarding her employment at the OPA demonstrates Mr. Bynum's continued undue bias toward me and my office. This bias and proclivity to engage in inappropriate conduct with OPA employees further establishes the need to have Mr. Bynum precluded from participating in any matters relating to the operations of the OPA.
3. Bynum's Pending Criminal Case
On November 9, 2011, the OPA filed a criminal complaint in the District Court of the Fifth Circuit against Timothy Bynum, alleging 4 counts of violations of the Kaua`i County Code. Each Count is a misdemeanor offense, punishable by up to one year in jail and a $2,000.000 fine for each. This means that if convicted, Bynum could face up to 4 total years imprisonment and $8,000.00 in fines. There have already been two motion hearings on the case, in which Mr. Bynum has been represented by a private attorney. At each hearing, First Deputy Prosecutor Jake Delaplane represented the State and made all arguments on behalf of the State. Councilmember Bynum's criminal case clearly establishes a conflict with the OPA. He has a clear financial interest in the operations of the OPA, as he would directly benefit if the OPA's operations were negatively impacted by any action of the Council. By virtue of being a criminal defendant, he has a vested interest in ensuring that the OPA not operate at peak efficiency. In accordance with Article )0( of the Kaua`i County Charter, this financial interest clearly prohibits Bynum from participating in any matter relating to the OPA that comes before the Council. Further, because Councilmember Bynum is represented by an attorney in his criminal case, our office is prohibited from having direct contact with Bynum without his attorney present; as such contact would violate Bynum's 6th Amendment Right to Counsel and could result in dismissal of his case. Bynum's paranoid belief that the actions taken by our office were calculated personal attacks against him is without any merit and is completely baseless. The criminal case against his son was investigated by the Kaua`i Police Department and referred to our office for prosecution. The case initiated against Councilmember Bynum was investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution. The contact with (redacted) was solely initiated by Councilmember Bynum. Her decision to apply to the OPA and our decision to hire her was purely based on (redacted) exceptional experience and qualifications.
For the above stated reasons, Councilmember Bynum has a clear conflict of interest with the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney and should not be allowed to participate in any Council proceedings involving the OPA. It is our hope that the Council will address this situation in a timely and appropriate manner. Feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this matter.
SHAYLENE ISERI-CARVALHO
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
---------
Bynum's Press Release
I was elected to legislate for the county and to provide oversight of various government agencies and offices. Among these is the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney (OPA).
However, the OPA has recently filed criminal zoning violations against me and I must now defend those in Court. Since I was charged, the County Prosecutor has now cited those same charges as a basis for having me recused from all legislative oversight over her office. Out of an over abundance of caution I agreed to recuse myself from the January 19th meeting.
Likewise, I believe that it would be appropriate for the Kauai Prosecuting Attorney to be recused from prosecuting my case and allow the Attorney General's office to properly evaluate this case. I believe that this would be the best assurance of a fair proceeding and a fair process that is certain to be governed by the rule of law.
The Prosecuting Attorney states in a Jan 19 letter that her criminal prosecution is not personal, and was a routine matter “investigated by the Planning Department and referred to our office for criminal prosecution.” What I have learned is that as early as April 2010, the Prosecuting Attorney asked the Planning Director in an email for a legal basis on which to prosecute me. I am attaching a copy of emails between the Prosecuting Attorney and then-Planning Department Head Ian Costa. These e-mails establish that the Prosecuting Attorney was involved in the matter before Planning even investigated the “anonymous complaint” and that this was not just a routine Planning Department investigation.
In her email, the Prosecutor refers to an "anonymous" complaint. Apparently, sometime prior to April 2010 a trespasser entered onto my property, looked into my windows and observed a rice cooker and a refrigerator in the family room.
I hope that through the court-process I will be able to ascertain the identity of this trespasser and learn how this person was able to anonymously commence a criminal investigation - especially when I have previously been assured by the Planning Department that my house was properly permitted. I also hope to find out who, if anyone in government authorized sending someone to peer into the windows of my family home. I believe that the trespasser should be prosecuted, but thus far his or her identity appears to have been protected. The documents provided to my defense attorney so far only state that he or she "wishes to remain anonymous".
Finally, just minutes prior to the January 19, 2012 Special Council Meeting, the Prosecuting Attorney sent a letter marked confidential demanding my recusal. The letter was sent to all Council Members except for me. I was allowed to read the letter in the presence of the County Attorneys but I was not given a copy.
I am now informed that the Prosecuting Attorney intends to release to the public this letter she stamped “confidential.” The letter misrepresents conversations I had with two individuals I have long respected and have had a cordial professional relationship with for years.
The intended subject matter of the January 19 Council Meeting was a valid examination of concerns raised by a number of citizens regarding the Victim Witness program, the reported backlog of cases, finance issues and the high turnover / vacancies of Deputies. Council member Joann Yukimura instigated the request. Anyone who follows the Council knows that this type of oversight agenda item is common and a legitimate Council responsibility.
Additional information regarding the alleged zoning violation:
In 2005, at times there were 4 generations of my family (7 people total) living in my home (my father, myself and my wife, my son, my daughter, our grandson and his mother). We decided to do an addition to our home. We wanted to create a living space that was integrated. We constructed two bedrooms, a bathroom and family room. The addition also included a ramp because my elderly father was increasingly having difficulty negotiating the steps to the front door much less the stairs to the second story where the existing bedrooms were located.
When the drawings were done I took them to the County Planning department and the Building division for informal review. I was told everything was fine as long as no stove was installed. Subsequently we submitted the plans to the County for formal review and approval. The plans were approved after being circulated to and approved by various departments including the Planning department.
We hired a contractor and built according to the plans. The County sent inspectors during construction including a final inspection after which we were issued a certificate of occupancy. The addition is exactly as it was when “final inspection” occurred; nothing has been added or deleted. No installed cooking facilities have ever existed in the addition. Our home has one kitchen; every person that has ever resided in our home has used the one kitchen.
Thursday, January 19, 2012
FORE
FORE: Back in the days of rampant resort development on Kaua`i- as if they ever ended- many of us thought that, in an attempt to keep it simple for voters, we should ask only one question of council candidates that year: "Do you play golf?"
In the 80's and early 90's it seemed like every resort- from the Hyatt at Maha`ulepu to Chris Hemmeter's Westin- depended on having a golf course to make them "viable"- or at least that's what they tried to tell the council and planning commission.
But at the time, before there were a gazillion golf courses on the island all "designed" by the top names in golf, there was what is still called "the jewel" of the county's Parks and Recreation system: the Wailua Golf Course.
It was once named one of the top municipal golf courses in the country and was not just meticulously maintained- all by one old guy with a green thumb, infinite energy and love of golf and golfers- but it broke even, paying for itself through round and cart fees and the proceeds from the "19th hole" concession.
So the council, in it's infinite wisdom, decided that since it was self-supporting it should be funded using what's called an "enterprise fund"- a separate account, set up in perpetuity for an operation that's supposed be self-supporting.
The problem is that the old maintenance guy retired and the irrigation system rusted out and the council started throwing money into things like a new drip irrigation system (that never did work right) and outside consultants.
But they never did get the same results and now the "self-supporting" golf course costs around an extra half-a-million dollars each year- subsidized from the general fund- in order to operate.
Over the past few years the council has tried everything from raising fees for each round to lowering the fees to get more people to play more rounds, especially tourists. When they tried "adjusting" the fees for local youth and seniors it caused enough of an outcry that any further thought of actually making local people pay to play golf was permanently back-burnered.
The only place to look for revenue ended up being that "19th hole"- the restaurant, bar and "pro shop."
So last spring the council was thrilled when local attorney and former Prosecutor Mike Soong and his friend, bail bondsman Darrell Horner, opened the incredibly tone-deafly-named Jailhouse Pub & Grill- so monikered because it sits across from the Kaua`i County Correctional Center.
Councilmembers proclaimed this to be just the thing that was going to save the golf course- or at least somehow save the "enterprise fund" aspect of it and maybe put a dent in the half-million dollars of taxpayer money being pumped into the "enterprise fund" every year.
Oh, why?.. didn't you hear? The Jailhouse Pub & Grill is now "officially closed" according to their phone message. The sign is gone and the door is locked. Pau already.
According to an article in the local newspaper just last May:
Late last year, Mike Soong learned the county was seeking bids to fill the space for its former bar “Par for the Course.” By February they were awarded the contract and a 7-year-lease.
Seems they didn't even make it seven months.
This whole fiasco just further shines a light on the absurd conundrum that is the Wailua Golf Course. If the county doesn't charge enough per round they will not be able to get it to break even. And if they raise the price to where it will pay for itself people, especially the tourists who pay the higher fees, will say to themselves "for that kind of money I'd rather go to one of the resort golf courses" which are meticulously maintained by the resorts- and which the resorts subsidize as they would any "essential" amenity.
The "clubhouse" was never designed to- and never will- pay for the difference between what the county can charge for a round of golf and what it costs to keep the place "well maintained," a condition that any golfer will tell you, is anything but the case these days despite millions in capital improvements and outside groundskeeping consultants. That "investment" in this "jewel" has only add to the increasing negative balance of the "enterprise fund" at a rate that makes ever catching-up impossible.
We're not sure whether it was the name or what but the quick opening and closing of the Jailhouse Pub and Grill indicates that the council's last best hope for the golf course "breaking even" was a pipe dream to begin with.
It's certainly time to, if nothing else, give up on the enterprise fund and get real with the taxpayers. Right now a handful of golfers are running the show proving that nothing really ever changes at the county building.
Maybe people don't mind throwing that half-million bucks at a run-down facility that only serves a small fraction of a population that is desperate for more recreational facilites and in severe need of money for maintaince to keep the existing ones clean and operating.
But the council needs to at least start being honest enough to ask.
In the 80's and early 90's it seemed like every resort- from the Hyatt at Maha`ulepu to Chris Hemmeter's Westin- depended on having a golf course to make them "viable"- or at least that's what they tried to tell the council and planning commission.
But at the time, before there were a gazillion golf courses on the island all "designed" by the top names in golf, there was what is still called "the jewel" of the county's Parks and Recreation system: the Wailua Golf Course.
It was once named one of the top municipal golf courses in the country and was not just meticulously maintained- all by one old guy with a green thumb, infinite energy and love of golf and golfers- but it broke even, paying for itself through round and cart fees and the proceeds from the "19th hole" concession.
So the council, in it's infinite wisdom, decided that since it was self-supporting it should be funded using what's called an "enterprise fund"- a separate account, set up in perpetuity for an operation that's supposed be self-supporting.
The problem is that the old maintenance guy retired and the irrigation system rusted out and the council started throwing money into things like a new drip irrigation system (that never did work right) and outside consultants.
But they never did get the same results and now the "self-supporting" golf course costs around an extra half-a-million dollars each year- subsidized from the general fund- in order to operate.
Over the past few years the council has tried everything from raising fees for each round to lowering the fees to get more people to play more rounds, especially tourists. When they tried "adjusting" the fees for local youth and seniors it caused enough of an outcry that any further thought of actually making local people pay to play golf was permanently back-burnered.
The only place to look for revenue ended up being that "19th hole"- the restaurant, bar and "pro shop."
So last spring the council was thrilled when local attorney and former Prosecutor Mike Soong and his friend, bail bondsman Darrell Horner, opened the incredibly tone-deafly-named Jailhouse Pub & Grill- so monikered because it sits across from the Kaua`i County Correctional Center.
Councilmembers proclaimed this to be just the thing that was going to save the golf course- or at least somehow save the "enterprise fund" aspect of it and maybe put a dent in the half-million dollars of taxpayer money being pumped into the "enterprise fund" every year.
Oh, why?.. didn't you hear? The Jailhouse Pub & Grill is now "officially closed" according to their phone message. The sign is gone and the door is locked. Pau already.
According to an article in the local newspaper just last May:
Late last year, Mike Soong learned the county was seeking bids to fill the space for its former bar “Par for the Course.” By February they were awarded the contract and a 7-year-lease.
Seems they didn't even make it seven months.
This whole fiasco just further shines a light on the absurd conundrum that is the Wailua Golf Course. If the county doesn't charge enough per round they will not be able to get it to break even. And if they raise the price to where it will pay for itself people, especially the tourists who pay the higher fees, will say to themselves "for that kind of money I'd rather go to one of the resort golf courses" which are meticulously maintained by the resorts- and which the resorts subsidize as they would any "essential" amenity.
The "clubhouse" was never designed to- and never will- pay for the difference between what the county can charge for a round of golf and what it costs to keep the place "well maintained," a condition that any golfer will tell you, is anything but the case these days despite millions in capital improvements and outside groundskeeping consultants. That "investment" in this "jewel" has only add to the increasing negative balance of the "enterprise fund" at a rate that makes ever catching-up impossible.
We're not sure whether it was the name or what but the quick opening and closing of the Jailhouse Pub and Grill indicates that the council's last best hope for the golf course "breaking even" was a pipe dream to begin with.
It's certainly time to, if nothing else, give up on the enterprise fund and get real with the taxpayers. Right now a handful of golfers are running the show proving that nothing really ever changes at the county building.
Maybe people don't mind throwing that half-million bucks at a run-down facility that only serves a small fraction of a population that is desperate for more recreational facilites and in severe need of money for maintaince to keep the existing ones clean and operating.
But the council needs to at least start being honest enough to ask.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
IT'S NEWS TO ME
IT'S NEWS TO ME: It only took a decade or so, which anywhere else might be seen as a snail's pace. But here on Kaua`i when it "only" takes a dozen to get the government follow the law your first thought is that it's miraculous that they complied at all.
When a long list of nominees for various boards and commissions were scheduled for interviews a week ago Tuesday we had little hope of seeing them on television. After all, it took over five year of complaining on our part to even get the Office of Information Practices (OIP) to tell the council to end the practice of holding the interviews in secret executive sessions and then another few years for the paternalistic then-Council Chair, Kaipo Asing, to actually comply.
But it took still a few more years before the council allowed the interviews to be video-recorded claiming they didn't have the money to do so- even though they paid to caption and televise up to an hour a week of those "grip and grin" certificates and awards that they present to auntie and uncle every time they sneeze and to every sports team that came in anywhere but last in Honolulu... especially around election time.
Now, after some dribs and drabs of individual interviews interspersed with council meetings over the last year or so, the yearly appointments- and more importantly reappointments- of a slew of board and commission members was actually televised last week.
And guess what? It actually produced news of sorts, although you wouldn't know it from perusing the local newspaper, probably because you had to actually be paying attention to both the interviews and the way government works around here to find it.
The biggest news came from outspoken Planning Commissioner Jay Kimura who has ascended to chair this year. Kimura is the one who, when you watch the planning commission meetings, is continually shaking his head in disbelief over the fact that transient vacation rentals (TVRs) can be put on agricultural lands in the first place, denouncing the way the permits for all types of TVRs are approved willy-nilly regardless of compliance with the law and generally kvetching about the lack of enforcement of TVR regulations for both existing permit holders and those for who have been rejected but continue to operate.
The news is that anyone who was wondering at the time exactly what happened in executive session when former Planning Director Ian Costa left his post under investigation by the FBI can wonder no more whether he resigned or was actually fired by the planning commission.
Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. was certainly circumspect about the circumstances, probably because he has since "hired" Costa- or at least told his former campaign manager Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation Lenny Rapozo to hire Costa- as a deputy director under Rapozo.
During Kimura's questioning Councilmember Tim Bynum directly asked Kimura "during your tenure the planning director changed. That was a decision of the board, correct?"
Kimura simply answered "Yes."
Bynum continued the questioning as to whether Kimura was happy with the new Director, former Deputy County Attorney Mike Dahilig, to which Kimura replied that he would "rather keep my opinion to myself," even though his disgust with Dahilig's lack of enforcement and lax attitude toward TVR permitting in general hasn't been very well disguised at planning commission meetings.
But now we do know that Costa was fired- as if there was really any doubt until now in the minds of any but the most rabid of Carvalho sycophants. Oh- that and, according to Rapozo, the "fact" that state attorney general is "going over the approved 'TVRs on ag land' permits"... whatever that means.
Another bit of major news is that Board and Commission Director John Isobe has "retired" and been replaced by former state House Representative from 1992-1993, Paula Ishii Morikami (D-12th District) who is apparently now the latest politically-connected apparatchik to join the Carvalho administration.
Isobe's "retirement" has yet to be formally announced but it came up during the interview with former District Court Judge Calvin Morishige who has been nominated to be on the Kaua`i Board of Ethics.
One bit of news of sorts that Morishige made was to say, in response to questions from Councilmember Mel Rapozo, that his opinion was that county attorneys who advise boards and commissions actually do just that and only that- advise them.
"Their opinion is only their opinion- the decision is up to the board," he told the council.
Now anywhere else in the world this would not be news. But under the Carvalho administration, County Attorney Al Castillo’s opinions are to be followed blindly by all. And if they are not, board and commission members have been threatened with the withholding of county representation should they be sued for their official actions, according to a lengthy discourse on the subject by Rapozo.
This has been especially true with the Ethics Board where commissioners have actually battled deputy county attorneys to get them to change their written opinion rather than make a ruling that would treat their advise as, well, advice as opposed to a dictum.
There was probably more news but it was really hard to stay awake through all the fawning and phoney praise for both the nominees and Carvalho for his wonderful choices... alternating with the occasional grinning through gritted teeth by both councilmembers and appointees, holding back what they really wanted to say.
It kind of makes you wonder what "news" might have come up behind closed doors for all those years where they didn't have to watch what they were saying. But then again current councilmembers are new at this "conducting the public’s' business in public" stuff, especially when it comes to having to interact with those who have seen the corruption of the Carvalho administration up close and personal and then allowing them to discuss it on TV.
---------
(Sorry for any flubs today- our editor's computer is down.)
When a long list of nominees for various boards and commissions were scheduled for interviews a week ago Tuesday we had little hope of seeing them on television. After all, it took over five year of complaining on our part to even get the Office of Information Practices (OIP) to tell the council to end the practice of holding the interviews in secret executive sessions and then another few years for the paternalistic then-Council Chair, Kaipo Asing, to actually comply.
But it took still a few more years before the council allowed the interviews to be video-recorded claiming they didn't have the money to do so- even though they paid to caption and televise up to an hour a week of those "grip and grin" certificates and awards that they present to auntie and uncle every time they sneeze and to every sports team that came in anywhere but last in Honolulu... especially around election time.
Now, after some dribs and drabs of individual interviews interspersed with council meetings over the last year or so, the yearly appointments- and more importantly reappointments- of a slew of board and commission members was actually televised last week.
And guess what? It actually produced news of sorts, although you wouldn't know it from perusing the local newspaper, probably because you had to actually be paying attention to both the interviews and the way government works around here to find it.
The biggest news came from outspoken Planning Commissioner Jay Kimura who has ascended to chair this year. Kimura is the one who, when you watch the planning commission meetings, is continually shaking his head in disbelief over the fact that transient vacation rentals (TVRs) can be put on agricultural lands in the first place, denouncing the way the permits for all types of TVRs are approved willy-nilly regardless of compliance with the law and generally kvetching about the lack of enforcement of TVR regulations for both existing permit holders and those for who have been rejected but continue to operate.
The news is that anyone who was wondering at the time exactly what happened in executive session when former Planning Director Ian Costa left his post under investigation by the FBI can wonder no more whether he resigned or was actually fired by the planning commission.
Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. was certainly circumspect about the circumstances, probably because he has since "hired" Costa- or at least told his former campaign manager Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation Lenny Rapozo to hire Costa- as a deputy director under Rapozo.
During Kimura's questioning Councilmember Tim Bynum directly asked Kimura "during your tenure the planning director changed. That was a decision of the board, correct?"
Kimura simply answered "Yes."
Bynum continued the questioning as to whether Kimura was happy with the new Director, former Deputy County Attorney Mike Dahilig, to which Kimura replied that he would "rather keep my opinion to myself," even though his disgust with Dahilig's lack of enforcement and lax attitude toward TVR permitting in general hasn't been very well disguised at planning commission meetings.
But now we do know that Costa was fired- as if there was really any doubt until now in the minds of any but the most rabid of Carvalho sycophants. Oh- that and, according to Rapozo, the "fact" that state attorney general is "going over the approved 'TVRs on ag land' permits"... whatever that means.
Another bit of major news is that Board and Commission Director John Isobe has "retired" and been replaced by former state House Representative from 1992-1993, Paula Ishii Morikami (D-12th District) who is apparently now the latest politically-connected apparatchik to join the Carvalho administration.
Isobe's "retirement" has yet to be formally announced but it came up during the interview with former District Court Judge Calvin Morishige who has been nominated to be on the Kaua`i Board of Ethics.
One bit of news of sorts that Morishige made was to say, in response to questions from Councilmember Mel Rapozo, that his opinion was that county attorneys who advise boards and commissions actually do just that and only that- advise them.
"Their opinion is only their opinion- the decision is up to the board," he told the council.
Now anywhere else in the world this would not be news. But under the Carvalho administration, County Attorney Al Castillo’s opinions are to be followed blindly by all. And if they are not, board and commission members have been threatened with the withholding of county representation should they be sued for their official actions, according to a lengthy discourse on the subject by Rapozo.
This has been especially true with the Ethics Board where commissioners have actually battled deputy county attorneys to get them to change their written opinion rather than make a ruling that would treat their advise as, well, advice as opposed to a dictum.
There was probably more news but it was really hard to stay awake through all the fawning and phoney praise for both the nominees and Carvalho for his wonderful choices... alternating with the occasional grinning through gritted teeth by both councilmembers and appointees, holding back what they really wanted to say.
It kind of makes you wonder what "news" might have come up behind closed doors for all those years where they didn't have to watch what they were saying. But then again current councilmembers are new at this "conducting the public’s' business in public" stuff, especially when it comes to having to interact with those who have seen the corruption of the Carvalho administration up close and personal and then allowing them to discuss it on TV.
---------
(Sorry for any flubs today- our editor's computer is down.)
Friday, January 13, 2012
GOO-GOO-GA-JOOB
GOO-GOO-GA-JOOB: Apparently all is not well on the SS Minnow.
Seems the Skipper's "little buddy" went temporarily insane and deviated from the script prompting a dressing down for daring to do so on Wednesday's "episode."
It was just before lunch when the Skipper, played by Kaua`i County Council Chair Jay Furfaro, had another of his patented, blowhard, conniption fits of pomposity chiding Gilligan, played by local newspaper government reporter Leo Azambuja, for daring to write something that wasn't pre-approved by Furfaro.
Never known for his knowledge of- or adherence to- the Sunshine Law, Furfaro has continued the tradition of his predecessor, Kaipo Asing, in abusing the law to stifle discussion he doesn't like by arbitrarily and capriciously deciding that such discussions are not "sticking to the agenda item," as the law requires.
The fact that the law is supposed to be liberally construed towards openness never comes into the discussion.
So in typical fashion, Furfaro decided on Wednesday that, despite the fact that it wasn't on the agenda, he was going to discuss the appointment of long-time council "fixer," Rick Watanabe, to the position of County Clerk. And since it wasn't on the agenda he announced he was using what he calls "personal privilege"- a term invented some years ago that loosely translates to "illegal but I'm going to do it anyway" - to talk about it anyway.
Saying "I'd like to congratulate ourselves," he described a supposedly "wide search" that yielded more than 20 candidates in what he and other councilmembers praised as a process that was "historic" for its "openness," despite the fact that none of the names of the 20- nor the 5 finalists- has been or is planned on being released, making the process, for all intents and purposes, the same as always- a backroom deal discussed exclusively in closed-door executive session.
But the real howler was when, saying he had prepared a "press release" regarding the appointment, he actually chided Azambuja for having the nerve to include information that wasn't in his press release in the article in the paper announcing Watanabe's appointment.
Calling it an "editorial" Furfaro lit into "the media" saying "you should print the press release as such," and presumably no other unapproved information along with it.
Azumbuja had the nerve to point out that, before the appointment was announced, Watanabe had said he wasn't interested in the job.
Oh- and he want into a long explanation of the various salaries involved including not just Watanabe's now as County Clerk but the salary cut taken by former County Clerk Peter Nakamura who according to the article is now making $29,420 less in his new job as a "senior planner" in the planning department after he was apparently fired by the council following a series of public allegations of misconduct, a harassment lawsuit and a string of executive sessions to discuss his "job performance."
For the record Nakamura says he chose to take the new job at an almost $30,000 pay cut. Councilmembers have essentially refused to discuss the end of Nakamura's tenure saying it was a "personnel matter" and to do so would violate Nakamura's privacy.
Furfaro insisted that Watanabe had "changed his mind" about the clerk job saying "heck, even (Republican candidate for President Mitt) Romney changes his mind," chiding the media by saying he is always available for press inquires.
Furfaro has consistently refused to answer our email queries for the past three-and-a-half years.
But, being so presumptuous and pompous as to think that the press is there to be his own personal megaphone aside, the Sunshine Law violation is not just blatant but the apparent irony of Furfaro's violation in cutting off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda"- as we described above- and then claiming some kind of personal privilege to do the same, is lost on only one person- Furfaro.
In a followup to yesterdays PNN's news coverage of charges of mismanagement by and maltreatment of employees of Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, we mentioned an Office of Information Practices (OIP) ruling that, a year and a half after the incident, ruled that then Chair Kaipo Asing was wrong to have cut off Councilmember Tim Bynum when he questioned Iseri in May of 2009.
We have since been directed to OIP Memo 11-7 which says that:
To the extent that Requester’s line of questioning wouhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifld have related to whether other sources of funds existed for the VOCA program so that the grant monies did not need to be used for that program, we believe that the line of questioning would have been reasonably related to the agenda item and thus would not have violated the Sunshine Law... (B)ased upon our review of the May 6 meeting minutes we believe that the nexus that Requester subsequently drew between the agenda item and his line of questioning was sufficient under the Sunshine Law to have allowed questioning reasonably related to whether other sources of funds precluded the need to apply the grant monies to the VOCA program.
We point this out because it is archetypical of the type of thing that Furfaro- despite his protestations to the contrary- has continued to allow and even use himself to stifle discussion.
Although the extent of his abuse of the provision in the Sunshine Law that says that discussions must pertain to an agenda item hasn't risen to the heights used by Asing during his notorious 2009-10 feud with Bynum over process and rules, since becoming chair upon the electoral ouster of Asing, Furfaro has, over and over, allowed Councilmember Mel Rapozo- who, along with his political ally Iseri, is a political enemy of Bynum's- to interrupt Bynum and try to stop whatever Bynum is saying that Rapozo doesn't want said in public... especially criticism of Iseri.
It all comes down to something that, on Kaua`i, has been ignored and even apparently intentionally flouted ever since council meetings have been televised when it's convenient in order to prevent certain potentially embarrassing information from reaching the public.
The Declaration of Policy and Intent- the very first paragraph of the Sunshine Law, HRS Chapter 92-1 says, in part,
The formation and conduct of public policy - the discussions, deliberations, decisions, and action of governmental agencies - shall be conducted as openly as possible. To implement this policy the legislature declares that:
(1) It is the intent of this part to protect the people's right to know;
(2) The provisions requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed; and
(3) The provisions providing for exceptions to the open meeting requirements shall be strictly construed against closed meetings.
If we had our druthers that statement would be made into a poster and hung on the wall in the council chambers. Or perhaps tattooed on each councilmembers forehead so that they would see it every time they looked at each other.
But rather, every councilmember has at times bemoaned the existence of the Sunshine Law, especially the part that prevents more than two of them them from discussing public policy behind closed doors.
There's a reason for that provision. It's there so that members of the public are privy to discussions that lead to the laws that govern our lives.
We have yet to hear a good explanation for why we should allow this to be done in "back rooms"- smoke-filled or not- other than that it would be "easier" and that people would be more likely to speak up if they know no one is watching.
Exactly.
Listen up elected and appointed government officials. Maybe you didn't get the memo. This is not your own private little fiefdom. It is government and you are determining public policy and people deserve to hear ALL of the thoughts and reasoning that go into your decision-making so that they can determine whether you are the one they want representing them when passing the legislation that rules their lives.
They want to know that your reasons indicate you are serving for the greater good- not for your uncle's wallet. And we want to know you can articulate how you reached your decision. As your math teach used to say: show your work.
If it is "politically embarrassing" or something you'd rather people didn't hear you say, perhaps you shouldn't say it.
It's the height of hypocrisy to cut off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda" with some obviously convoluted, strict interpretation of what the agenda item is and then claim you have "personal privilege" to talk about anything you damn well please between agenda items.
When it comes to convincing our seven stranded castaways of all this, well, let's just say it's an uphill climb.
Seems the Skipper's "little buddy" went temporarily insane and deviated from the script prompting a dressing down for daring to do so on Wednesday's "episode."
It was just before lunch when the Skipper, played by Kaua`i County Council Chair Jay Furfaro, had another of his patented, blowhard, conniption fits of pomposity chiding Gilligan, played by local newspaper government reporter Leo Azambuja, for daring to write something that wasn't pre-approved by Furfaro.
Never known for his knowledge of- or adherence to- the Sunshine Law, Furfaro has continued the tradition of his predecessor, Kaipo Asing, in abusing the law to stifle discussion he doesn't like by arbitrarily and capriciously deciding that such discussions are not "sticking to the agenda item," as the law requires.
The fact that the law is supposed to be liberally construed towards openness never comes into the discussion.
So in typical fashion, Furfaro decided on Wednesday that, despite the fact that it wasn't on the agenda, he was going to discuss the appointment of long-time council "fixer," Rick Watanabe, to the position of County Clerk. And since it wasn't on the agenda he announced he was using what he calls "personal privilege"- a term invented some years ago that loosely translates to "illegal but I'm going to do it anyway" - to talk about it anyway.
Saying "I'd like to congratulate ourselves," he described a supposedly "wide search" that yielded more than 20 candidates in what he and other councilmembers praised as a process that was "historic" for its "openness," despite the fact that none of the names of the 20- nor the 5 finalists- has been or is planned on being released, making the process, for all intents and purposes, the same as always- a backroom deal discussed exclusively in closed-door executive session.
But the real howler was when, saying he had prepared a "press release" regarding the appointment, he actually chided Azambuja for having the nerve to include information that wasn't in his press release in the article in the paper announcing Watanabe's appointment.
Calling it an "editorial" Furfaro lit into "the media" saying "you should print the press release as such," and presumably no other unapproved information along with it.
Azumbuja had the nerve to point out that, before the appointment was announced, Watanabe had said he wasn't interested in the job.
Oh- and he want into a long explanation of the various salaries involved including not just Watanabe's now as County Clerk but the salary cut taken by former County Clerk Peter Nakamura who according to the article is now making $29,420 less in his new job as a "senior planner" in the planning department after he was apparently fired by the council following a series of public allegations of misconduct, a harassment lawsuit and a string of executive sessions to discuss his "job performance."
For the record Nakamura says he chose to take the new job at an almost $30,000 pay cut. Councilmembers have essentially refused to discuss the end of Nakamura's tenure saying it was a "personnel matter" and to do so would violate Nakamura's privacy.
Furfaro insisted that Watanabe had "changed his mind" about the clerk job saying "heck, even (Republican candidate for President Mitt) Romney changes his mind," chiding the media by saying he is always available for press inquires.
Furfaro has consistently refused to answer our email queries for the past three-and-a-half years.
But, being so presumptuous and pompous as to think that the press is there to be his own personal megaphone aside, the Sunshine Law violation is not just blatant but the apparent irony of Furfaro's violation in cutting off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda"- as we described above- and then claiming some kind of personal privilege to do the same, is lost on only one person- Furfaro.
In a followup to yesterdays PNN's news coverage of charges of mismanagement by and maltreatment of employees of Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, we mentioned an Office of Information Practices (OIP) ruling that, a year and a half after the incident, ruled that then Chair Kaipo Asing was wrong to have cut off Councilmember Tim Bynum when he questioned Iseri in May of 2009.
We have since been directed to OIP Memo 11-7 which says that:
To the extent that Requester’s line of questioning wouhttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifld have related to whether other sources of funds existed for the VOCA program so that the grant monies did not need to be used for that program, we believe that the line of questioning would have been reasonably related to the agenda item and thus would not have violated the Sunshine Law... (B)ased upon our review of the May 6 meeting minutes we believe that the nexus that Requester subsequently drew between the agenda item and his line of questioning was sufficient under the Sunshine Law to have allowed questioning reasonably related to whether other sources of funds precluded the need to apply the grant monies to the VOCA program.
We point this out because it is archetypical of the type of thing that Furfaro- despite his protestations to the contrary- has continued to allow and even use himself to stifle discussion.
Although the extent of his abuse of the provision in the Sunshine Law that says that discussions must pertain to an agenda item hasn't risen to the heights used by Asing during his notorious 2009-10 feud with Bynum over process and rules, since becoming chair upon the electoral ouster of Asing, Furfaro has, over and over, allowed Councilmember Mel Rapozo- who, along with his political ally Iseri, is a political enemy of Bynum's- to interrupt Bynum and try to stop whatever Bynum is saying that Rapozo doesn't want said in public... especially criticism of Iseri.
It all comes down to something that, on Kaua`i, has been ignored and even apparently intentionally flouted ever since council meetings have been televised when it's convenient in order to prevent certain potentially embarrassing information from reaching the public.
The Declaration of Policy and Intent- the very first paragraph of the Sunshine Law, HRS Chapter 92-1 says, in part,
The formation and conduct of public policy - the discussions, deliberations, decisions, and action of governmental agencies - shall be conducted as openly as possible. To implement this policy the legislature declares that:
(1) It is the intent of this part to protect the people's right to know;
(2) The provisions requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed; and
(3) The provisions providing for exceptions to the open meeting requirements shall be strictly construed against closed meetings.
If we had our druthers that statement would be made into a poster and hung on the wall in the council chambers. Or perhaps tattooed on each councilmembers forehead so that they would see it every time they looked at each other.
But rather, every councilmember has at times bemoaned the existence of the Sunshine Law, especially the part that prevents more than two of them them from discussing public policy behind closed doors.
There's a reason for that provision. It's there so that members of the public are privy to discussions that lead to the laws that govern our lives.
We have yet to hear a good explanation for why we should allow this to be done in "back rooms"- smoke-filled or not- other than that it would be "easier" and that people would be more likely to speak up if they know no one is watching.
Exactly.
Listen up elected and appointed government officials. Maybe you didn't get the memo. This is not your own private little fiefdom. It is government and you are determining public policy and people deserve to hear ALL of the thoughts and reasoning that go into your decision-making so that they can determine whether you are the one they want representing them when passing the legislation that rules their lives.
They want to know that your reasons indicate you are serving for the greater good- not for your uncle's wallet. And we want to know you can articulate how you reached your decision. As your math teach used to say: show your work.
If it is "politically embarrassing" or something you'd rather people didn't hear you say, perhaps you shouldn't say it.
It's the height of hypocrisy to cut off councilmembers for speaking "off agenda" with some obviously convoluted, strict interpretation of what the agenda item is and then claim you have "personal privilege" to talk about anything you damn well please between agenda items.
When it comes to convincing our seven stranded castaways of all this, well, let's just say it's an uphill climb.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
