DIGGING UP THE DIRT: The grand jury looking into criminal charges against Jimmy Pflueger in the Ka Loko dam break tragedy seems as leaky as the dam itself was, as press reports of immunity for former Kaua`i Mayor Marianne Kusaka and details of evidence presented pepper press reports.
One report in particular today from Malia Zimmerman of Hawaii Reporter lays out a lot of history and background of the case revealing more details from an interview with Pflueger about his allegation of a $9,000 bribe paid to Kusaka to protect him- an interview that Zimmerman revealed for the first time was “recorded”.
But though the press reports and apparent focus of the investigation has been on Pflueger’s contention that the state bears some responsibility for not stopping him from causing the circumstances that led to the dam break, there is more news on the culpability of Kaua`i County.
She writes
Where Was County Enforcement?
(T)he county of Kauai was notified by at least two concerned citizens of Pflueger’s unpermitted grading around the dam. A County’s Department of Public Works inspector was dispatched to investigate the Ka Loko property on Nov. 7, 1997.
The inspector documented illegal grading with heavy equipment on the hilltop adjacent to Ka Loko Reservoir, and 11 days later, sent a “Notice of Grading Violation” by a certified letter to Pflueger saying inspectors “observed and verified the grading on the subject property to be in violation” of the County’s ordinances. Pflueger was ordered to “stop work immediately with the exception of work to correct any hazards to public safety and health.”
But Pflueger did not stop work. Instead, John Buist, Jr., a civil engineer for the county, says on Nov. 26, 1997, he was “summoned by Mayor (Maryanne) Kusaka” to her office for a meeting to discuss the grading violation for Mr. Pflueger. Buist’s memo says: “Buist informed the Mayor that the investigation was prompted by an anonymous phone call, but that the inspector saw and took a picture of the equipment being used for the work and the cut mountain top.”
Buist continues: “I was questioned (by the mayor) as to why we responded to an anonymous phone call and responded that it was our procedure to respond with an investigation. She questioned as to the other wasted manhours to follow up on anonymous tips and that no other County Agency responded to anonymous tips. Mayor Kusaka asked whether Mr. Pflueger had applied for a grading permit, and was told that a permit application had been filed, but without any grubbing plans. The Mayor and the Assistant Administrator, Wallace Rezentes, Sr., questioned why Mr. Pflueger should be required to obtain a permit for work in such a remote area. Mr. Buist explained that the ordinance applied no matter how remote the site may be, and noted that this was not the first violation for which Mr. Pflueger had been cited. ... In closing, Mr. Portugal instructed me that I was to stop all actions involving Mr. Pflueger and all further communications from or to Mr. Pflueger are to go directly to Mr. Portugal.”
Buist notes Caesar Portugal was in charge of handling Pflueger’s case for the county, and also that Yolanda Portugal-Cabral was under contract with Pflueger in November 1997 to help him submit the grubbing plans to the county. What is not disclosed in this correspondence - because the county officials already knew - Yolanda Portugal-Cabral ran the family engineering business for her father Caesar Portugal and ultimately it would be up to him to approve Pflueger’s plans that his daughter submitted.
Many pieces of evidence that so far have seemingly escaped scrutiny sit in the minutes of a series of Kaua`i County Council meetings from 2000-2002 during which Portugal and former acting head of the Department of Public Works (DPW) and now Planning Director Ian Costa answered questions from the council.
During many months of testimony- almost every week for more than a year- the two were grilled over another Pflueger-caused disaster in Pila`a, which PNN detailed at the time.
But included at some hearings was the issue of the illegal grubbing and grading Pflueger had done just above the Ka Loko dam and the seeming inability of the DPW engineers and inspectors to enter the Ka Loko property to search for violations.
During those sessions various DPW personnel including Portugal, Costa and engineer Wally Kudo were asked about Kusaka’s involvement and did indeed reveal extensively the pressure they received from her regarding Pflueger and developer Tom McCloskey who was also accused of illegal grubbing and grading in Moloa`a and Kealia.
Any examination of the verbatim minutes or video of council meetings and the notes of council committee meetings would provide a gold mine for the questioning of Kusaka and would indicate exactly who else needs to be questioned under oath by the grand jury to get to the truth. But it is doubtful that the minutes have been reviewed.
The council was on the verge of launching an investigation in late 2002 before many of them- including now Senator Gary Hooser, who initiated and pushed the investigation forward- left the council after the 2002 election.. The investigation would have allowed them to compel witnesses and get sworn testimony.
Council records show just what the criminal case is as PNN reported at the time. but no such investigation took place.
Another passage in Zimmerman’s piece gives a picture of Pflueger’s attitude toward his properties.
She writes
In a July 2006 exclusive interview with Hawaii Reporter on his property at Ka Loko and Pilaa on Kauai, Pflueger talked about his love for grubbing and grading the land so he could make it more “beautiful.”
He says he had a special tractor made, 44 feet wide and 17 feet tall, which can literally bury trees and shrubs and create a smooth and manicured look to the grass. “You know, you see all these weeds, we buried them. Anything you see here you can knock down and bury them,” he said, motioning across his beach side property at Pilaa.
Pflueger also said he didn’t remember ever seeing a spillway at Ka Loko, but admitted he could have covered it himself.
"And that reservoir around it is beautiful because I mowed it right down there to the edge. I did, mowed everything. I mowed everything. And if I filled something up or if somebody filled it up – tell me. Tell me. I mean, tell me," Pflueger said.
(The day after talking with Hawaii Reporter, Pflueger arranged another meeting and asked that this conversation not be disclosed, however, the interview was recorded and on the record.)
One of the lines of questioning of the DPW by the council was as to why they couldn’t just take a helicopter and inspect at the lands from above if they couldn’t get land access as they claimed at the time.
So, during the height of those “Developer Gone Wild” council meetings as they were dubbed, we were invited to tail along with activist extraordinaire Ray Chuan on a helicopter trip over Pflueger’s and McCloskey’s lands.
And what struck us was expressed in a question we asked during the flight- “What are all those ponds?” having never seen anything like it in island watersheds.
After the Ka Loko catastrophe we all to painfully figured it out- they’re reservoirs
It is quite obvious Pflueger didn’t do all the land moving by himself and in fact, as PNN has reported in the past, various “friends of Jimmy” were privy to what was at the heart of all of the damage- Jimmy Pflueger’s love for “water-skiing” on his “lakes”
We chanced upon to one of those friends who has requested anonymity who said that he and another friend of Jimmy were invited to go water skiing with Pflueger.
There, Pflueger regaled them with tales of how much effort he was putting into building up the water levels of the lakes by moving earth around the edges so that the water skiing would be better.
If there was one witness there were surely two and more but that, as yet, doesn’t seem to be a focus of the jury.
The other person there with our source was one of the closest “friends of Jimmy”- none other than the notorious Gary Baldwin the economic development guru of the Kusaka administration that left Kaua`i in disgrace after it was learned that he was a scam artist wanted by the law in connection with some deals in Colorado.
Baldwin was also a close associate of Kusaka’s- one whose Kaua`i Economic Development Board was lavished with money from the county’s largess, as PNN detailed in the 90’s on “The Parxist Conspiracy” TV news magazine.
Whether Baldwin- who we hear is out of jail and living in the northwest- has been subpoenaed in unknown but improbable.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
A TALE OF TWO TAILS
A TALE OF TWO TAILS: A new book by local Kaua`i filmmaker Koohan “Camera” Paik and author Jerry Mander has some protesters who were arrested a little ticked at their absence from “The Superferry Chronicles: Hawaii's Uprising Against Militarism, Commercialism, and the Desecration of the Earth”.
As Joan Conrow reported this week, one arrestee wrote an email that was shared with Conrow about a man and his son who spent a night sleeping on the concrete in the pokey.
But what Conrow didn’t report is that the letter also contained criticism of Paik since “no one ever talked to anyone involved” adding “good luck with your book (I) hope ya make a million bucks off what some of us did.”
He said also said that he
“was kinda wondering if you guys were even there or is this book about all the legal crap and not really about people central in the whole protest. just curious since your advertisement is making all like intimate stuff.”
The rest of the email Steven Valiere forwarded to Camera and others says:
I was there and very much a part yet neither of you has asked me any thing. It’s kinda maybe like all the newspaper crap, story after story and no one ever talked to anyone involved, just an opinion of an outsider looking in? Not that it might not be valid just from a distance sorta.
By the by that was me on the front page of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin sitting in front with my arms out. Good luck with your book I hope ya make a million bucks off what some of us did.
And I am not meaning in any stretch to make less of all the extraordinary people that put in time and effort out of the water, the legals, (is that you guys?) and the phone calls and e-mails flying chanting rioting etc And lest we forget that wonderful night we all spent with our governor telling us how it was gonna be?OK- guys see ya at the opening! (edited for spelling, punctuation and capitalization)
Unlike many in the press we aren’t privy to the book which apparently isn’t released yet but is available at amazon.com for a lot less than the $20 retail price.
Paik’s response was a bit defensive but revealed some of the misperceptions people have about the lucrative field of writing and activism.
Aloha Friends,
Richard Diamond, who puts out the Kaua`i Museletter, received this hateful email after putting out an announcement for the book signing launch.
This is the third such vituperous message I've gotten. The first was when I was on the radio announcing auditions for a play based on the Lingle visit to Kauai. Someone called early in the morning and just started venting, just like this letter. I wonder if it's thesame person.
The second instance was from Elaine Dunbar, when I approached her for her mana'o to include in the book. She slammed the door of the KCC auditorium in my face, hissing that she wouldn't help out someone cashing in on the superferry incident. But, of course, we all expect this sort of behavior from Elaine Dunbar.
The reason I am forwarding this to you all, is a humble request to do what you can, if the moment arises, to correct any such misconceptions that people might have around this book. It shocks me to think that this book, which was nurtured purely out of a desire to celebrate our island communities and unite us, might become a source of division because of people like the writer of the following email spreading negative energy.
As for profits from this book, I have worked 24-7 on it, without pay, for over a year, and will receive one dollar for every book sold. To earn pay equal to that of an entry-level school teacher, I would need to sell 30,000 books, which is unlikely. Not to mention the publisher, who has invested tens of thousands of dollars. Our goal is not to "make a million," but to break even.If you can help in the small and simple way of just being aware of this kind of attitude and its dangers, I would be very appreciative.
mahalo,
camera
But upon reflection and a letter from one of those Paik shared the email with, Paik wrote
ADDENDUM
Upon rereading that email from Steve Valiere, I see that I was jumping the gun by calling it "hateful."
I suppose I made the assumption because it sounded so much like the phone call I got, here the guy refused to tell me his name, and just continued to yell in my ear about how he sacrificed so much and suffered under the brutality of the cops, while I was trying to get a word in edgewise that I, too, was there on the pier (though not in the water), and my only desire was to sing the praises through what I do (write) of the courage of those who did go in the water.
The sarcasm that I read in the email was so similar to that phone call, (which *was* hateful), that it triggered a certain response. But I'm all calmed down now. Sorry about that, folks.
camera
We also understand that Paik has approached Valiere to talk it out and will also have him on the panel during an upcoming event related to the book release,
What this does- and the reason we are giving it light is to ask what is being done for those like Valiere and the others who are still suffering at least psychologically at the hands of hateful wackos like Pete Antonson and Kimo Rosen- the latter of which is planning on a pro-Superferry demonstration at Paik’s book release event.
All in the activist community need to remind everyone who showed up to turn back the ferry, how we owe them a lot more than we could ever hope to pay. An occasional reminder that we still honor their actions now and then couldn’t hurt.
As Joan Conrow reported this week, one arrestee wrote an email that was shared with Conrow about a man and his son who spent a night sleeping on the concrete in the pokey.
But what Conrow didn’t report is that the letter also contained criticism of Paik since “no one ever talked to anyone involved” adding “good luck with your book (I) hope ya make a million bucks off what some of us did.”
He said also said that he
“was kinda wondering if you guys were even there or is this book about all the legal crap and not really about people central in the whole protest. just curious since your advertisement is making all like intimate stuff.”
The rest of the email Steven Valiere forwarded to Camera and others says:
I was there and very much a part yet neither of you has asked me any thing. It’s kinda maybe like all the newspaper crap, story after story and no one ever talked to anyone involved, just an opinion of an outsider looking in? Not that it might not be valid just from a distance sorta.
By the by that was me on the front page of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin sitting in front with my arms out. Good luck with your book I hope ya make a million bucks off what some of us did.
And I am not meaning in any stretch to make less of all the extraordinary people that put in time and effort out of the water, the legals, (is that you guys?) and the phone calls and e-mails flying chanting rioting etc And lest we forget that wonderful night we all spent with our governor telling us how it was gonna be?OK- guys see ya at the opening! (edited for spelling, punctuation and capitalization)
Unlike many in the press we aren’t privy to the book which apparently isn’t released yet but is available at amazon.com for a lot less than the $20 retail price.
Paik’s response was a bit defensive but revealed some of the misperceptions people have about the lucrative field of writing and activism.
Aloha Friends,
Richard Diamond, who puts out the Kaua`i Museletter, received this hateful email after putting out an announcement for the book signing launch.
This is the third such vituperous message I've gotten. The first was when I was on the radio announcing auditions for a play based on the Lingle visit to Kauai. Someone called early in the morning and just started venting, just like this letter. I wonder if it's thesame person.
The second instance was from Elaine Dunbar, when I approached her for her mana'o to include in the book. She slammed the door of the KCC auditorium in my face, hissing that she wouldn't help out someone cashing in on the superferry incident. But, of course, we all expect this sort of behavior from Elaine Dunbar.
The reason I am forwarding this to you all, is a humble request to do what you can, if the moment arises, to correct any such misconceptions that people might have around this book. It shocks me to think that this book, which was nurtured purely out of a desire to celebrate our island communities and unite us, might become a source of division because of people like the writer of the following email spreading negative energy.
As for profits from this book, I have worked 24-7 on it, without pay, for over a year, and will receive one dollar for every book sold. To earn pay equal to that of an entry-level school teacher, I would need to sell 30,000 books, which is unlikely. Not to mention the publisher, who has invested tens of thousands of dollars. Our goal is not to "make a million," but to break even.If you can help in the small and simple way of just being aware of this kind of attitude and its dangers, I would be very appreciative.
mahalo,
camera
But upon reflection and a letter from one of those Paik shared the email with, Paik wrote
ADDENDUM
Upon rereading that email from Steve Valiere, I see that I was jumping the gun by calling it "hateful."
I suppose I made the assumption because it sounded so much like the phone call I got, here the guy refused to tell me his name, and just continued to yell in my ear about how he sacrificed so much and suffered under the brutality of the cops, while I was trying to get a word in edgewise that I, too, was there on the pier (though not in the water), and my only desire was to sing the praises through what I do (write) of the courage of those who did go in the water.
The sarcasm that I read in the email was so similar to that phone call, (which *was* hateful), that it triggered a certain response. But I'm all calmed down now. Sorry about that, folks.
camera
We also understand that Paik has approached Valiere to talk it out and will also have him on the panel during an upcoming event related to the book release,
What this does- and the reason we are giving it light is to ask what is being done for those like Valiere and the others who are still suffering at least psychologically at the hands of hateful wackos like Pete Antonson and Kimo Rosen- the latter of which is planning on a pro-Superferry demonstration at Paik’s book release event.
All in the activist community need to remind everyone who showed up to turn back the ferry, how we owe them a lot more than we could ever hope to pay. An occasional reminder that we still honor their actions now and then couldn’t hurt.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
NEW LEADER, NEW PACK?:
NEW LEADER, NEW PACK?: One of the most contentious issues among the electorate if not the candidates during the election to replace the late Mayor Bryan Baptiste was the fate of the many department heads.
Charges of everything from total incompetence to crony-based malfeasance have been leveled against almost every one of the appointees some of whom have served two Republican administrations for up to 14 years
But in an article in today’s Honolulu Advertiser Democratic Mayor-elect Bernard Carvalho indicates he well may keep many of those under fire.
According to Diana Leone’s report
Carvalho won't announce any of his Cabinet members until he has the whole roster worked out, he said. He would only say that his appointees will include current county officials and newcomers.
"We don't want to burn bridges," Carvalho said of his decision to talk with each person who wants to stay on, instead of using the traditional group resignation to make way for a new mayor.
That indicates that those hoping for checks and balances to effectuate change when department head “confirmations” come up before the council may be in for a disappointment.
The article states that
Among the appointments will be an administrative assistant, who on Kaua`i functions as the deputy mayor; directors of the departments of finance, parks, and public works; the county attorney; and leaders of the economic development, housing, elderly affairs, transportation and public information offices.
The police and fire chiefs, and planning and emergency management directors are appointed by citizen commissions. As mayor, Carvalho eventually will get a chance to make appointments to those commissions, but only as vacancies comes up.
But here’s what the Charter says about whether the terms of department heads end with the swearing in of a new mayor
Section 6.04. Appointment and Removal of Officers and Employees.
A) The administrative assistant to the mayor and all department heads shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor, except as otherwise provided by this charter.
Though it might appear ambiguous it does say they are appointed by THE mayor, not a past one. But the reality is that the council has absolutely no say over these department heads... with one exception.
According to Section 8.02.
The county attorney shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor, with the approval of the council.
With that exception all department heads- whether created by Charter or by a vote of five members of the council- are appointed by the mayor or an overseeing board or commission with no say by the council.
Just for future reference this is the list of Charter created departments and the way their heads are selected.
Section 10.02. Appointment and Removal of Director or Finance. The director of finance shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor.
Section 11.04. Chief of Police. The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission.
Section 12.02. Fire Chief. The fire chief shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor. (note- though this appears in the on-line version of the charter at the county web-site it has been replaced by a Fire commission which appoints the chief in a charter change made in the 2006 election)
Section 13.02. County Engineer. The county engineer shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor.
Section 14.04 (Planning) Director. The planning director shall be appointed and may be removed by the (planning) commission.
Section 15.04. Director of Personnel Services. The director of personnel services... shall be appointed and may be removed by the (civil service) commission.
Section 16.05 (Liquor Control Commission).Director. The director shall be appointed and may be removed by the liquor control commission.
Section 17.04. (Water Board) Staff. The board shall appoint an engineer duly registered under Hawaii State laws pertaining to registration of engineers. He shall be known as the manager and chief engineer and shall be the head of the department.
Section 18.01. Civil Defense Agency. There shall be a civil defense agency whose powers, duties, functions and organization shall be as provided by law.
(note: The head of the Department of Parks and Recreation is also a charter created post but is also has not been added at the county web-site since it’s 2006 approval by voters but we believe, from memory, it is not an appointment subject to council approval)
Unfortunately, unlike almost every other jurisdiction in the county- and every one in the state- the laws of Kaua`i expressed in the County Code are not available on-line so it is difficult to establish which of the non charter-created agency heads might be subject to council approval, if any.- if memory serves there are none.
Assuming the answer is zero with the exception of the county attorney it seems that for all practical (if not political) purposes it doesn’t really matter whether Carvalho “keeps” department heads or reappoints those over whom he has to power of appointment.
Many wonder why the Kaua`i system of governance is referred to as a “strong mayor” system by many and this is one reason- the council has little or no power over the people who run the county,
The other is this short little ditty from the end of the county council charter section
Section 3.18. Restrictions on County Council and Council members. The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor.
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.
The upshot is that the council is expected to appropriate money and enact the laws to run the county but has zero access to accurate information on the essential “how’s that going” questions.
And they have little or no recourse should they not get it.
The council essentially doles out cash and passes laws defining what administration personnel are supposed to do in a complete vacuum. They have to “request” the very appearance of a department head cannot even require that they tell the truth in their testimony.
This leads to citizen cries for fiscal responsibility on the part of the council without them having any tools to hold the administration personnel accountable for what they do with the money except on a voluntary basis
The council can of course launch a full fledged “investigation” where they can quasi-judicially swear in witnesses and compel accurate testimony
But an investigation is a high cost, time-consuming and unwieldy process that has never been used despite calls for a public works department investigation from citizens and even some councilmembers.
This has all led many to call for a new structure whereby a “county manager” would be hired by the council and the job of mayor would become strictly ceremonial.
But if the problems of a “strong mayor” system is in the lack of a balance- as in the term “checks and balances”- it seems the same might be said of an even “strong(er) council” system.
A more sensible approach might be to revise these two areas of the charter making all appointments of department and agency heads subject to council approval and allowing the council to initiate removal processes rather than waiting for the mayor to do so..
The second step would be to allow the council to compel the appearance of department heads to appear before them and designate their testimony to be subject to perjury-like charges of lying to the council.
The current set up isn’t working and the reason can be put squarely on the “strong mayor, weak council” system set up in our charter.
Some worry about a similar lack of balance in the new “strong council, weak mayor” system specifically detailed in the county manager proposal put before the charter commission by commissioner Walter Bryant this year.
It might be about time we actually take the time and energy to deconstruct the nuts and bolts of what is hanging up the machinery of county government and change the cogs enough to get this contraption running smoothly.
Charges of everything from total incompetence to crony-based malfeasance have been leveled against almost every one of the appointees some of whom have served two Republican administrations for up to 14 years
But in an article in today’s Honolulu Advertiser Democratic Mayor-elect Bernard Carvalho indicates he well may keep many of those under fire.
According to Diana Leone’s report
Carvalho won't announce any of his Cabinet members until he has the whole roster worked out, he said. He would only say that his appointees will include current county officials and newcomers.
"We don't want to burn bridges," Carvalho said of his decision to talk with each person who wants to stay on, instead of using the traditional group resignation to make way for a new mayor.
That indicates that those hoping for checks and balances to effectuate change when department head “confirmations” come up before the council may be in for a disappointment.
The article states that
Among the appointments will be an administrative assistant, who on Kaua`i functions as the deputy mayor; directors of the departments of finance, parks, and public works; the county attorney; and leaders of the economic development, housing, elderly affairs, transportation and public information offices.
The police and fire chiefs, and planning and emergency management directors are appointed by citizen commissions. As mayor, Carvalho eventually will get a chance to make appointments to those commissions, but only as vacancies comes up.
But here’s what the Charter says about whether the terms of department heads end with the swearing in of a new mayor
Section 6.04. Appointment and Removal of Officers and Employees.
A) The administrative assistant to the mayor and all department heads shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor, except as otherwise provided by this charter.
Though it might appear ambiguous it does say they are appointed by THE mayor, not a past one. But the reality is that the council has absolutely no say over these department heads... with one exception.
According to Section 8.02.
The county attorney shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor, with the approval of the council.
With that exception all department heads- whether created by Charter or by a vote of five members of the council- are appointed by the mayor or an overseeing board or commission with no say by the council.
Just for future reference this is the list of Charter created departments and the way their heads are selected.
Section 10.02. Appointment and Removal of Director or Finance. The director of finance shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor.
Section 11.04. Chief of Police. The chief of police shall be appointed by the police commission.
Section 12.02. Fire Chief. The fire chief shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor. (note- though this appears in the on-line version of the charter at the county web-site it has been replaced by a Fire commission which appoints the chief in a charter change made in the 2006 election)
Section 13.02. County Engineer. The county engineer shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor.
Section 14.04 (Planning) Director. The planning director shall be appointed and may be removed by the (planning) commission.
Section 15.04. Director of Personnel Services. The director of personnel services... shall be appointed and may be removed by the (civil service) commission.
Section 16.05 (Liquor Control Commission).Director. The director shall be appointed and may be removed by the liquor control commission.
Section 17.04. (Water Board) Staff. The board shall appoint an engineer duly registered under Hawaii State laws pertaining to registration of engineers. He shall be known as the manager and chief engineer and shall be the head of the department.
Section 18.01. Civil Defense Agency. There shall be a civil defense agency whose powers, duties, functions and organization shall be as provided by law.
(note: The head of the Department of Parks and Recreation is also a charter created post but is also has not been added at the county web-site since it’s 2006 approval by voters but we believe, from memory, it is not an appointment subject to council approval)
Unfortunately, unlike almost every other jurisdiction in the county- and every one in the state- the laws of Kaua`i expressed in the County Code are not available on-line so it is difficult to establish which of the non charter-created agency heads might be subject to council approval, if any.- if memory serves there are none.
Assuming the answer is zero with the exception of the county attorney it seems that for all practical (if not political) purposes it doesn’t really matter whether Carvalho “keeps” department heads or reappoints those over whom he has to power of appointment.
Many wonder why the Kaua`i system of governance is referred to as a “strong mayor” system by many and this is one reason- the council has little or no power over the people who run the county,
The other is this short little ditty from the end of the county council charter section
Section 3.18. Restrictions on County Council and Council members. The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor.
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.
The upshot is that the council is expected to appropriate money and enact the laws to run the county but has zero access to accurate information on the essential “how’s that going” questions.
And they have little or no recourse should they not get it.
The council essentially doles out cash and passes laws defining what administration personnel are supposed to do in a complete vacuum. They have to “request” the very appearance of a department head cannot even require that they tell the truth in their testimony.
This leads to citizen cries for fiscal responsibility on the part of the council without them having any tools to hold the administration personnel accountable for what they do with the money except on a voluntary basis
The council can of course launch a full fledged “investigation” where they can quasi-judicially swear in witnesses and compel accurate testimony
But an investigation is a high cost, time-consuming and unwieldy process that has never been used despite calls for a public works department investigation from citizens and even some councilmembers.
This has all led many to call for a new structure whereby a “county manager” would be hired by the council and the job of mayor would become strictly ceremonial.
But if the problems of a “strong mayor” system is in the lack of a balance- as in the term “checks and balances”- it seems the same might be said of an even “strong(er) council” system.
A more sensible approach might be to revise these two areas of the charter making all appointments of department and agency heads subject to council approval and allowing the council to initiate removal processes rather than waiting for the mayor to do so..
The second step would be to allow the council to compel the appearance of department heads to appear before them and designate their testimony to be subject to perjury-like charges of lying to the council.
The current set up isn’t working and the reason can be put squarely on the “strong mayor, weak council” system set up in our charter.
Some worry about a similar lack of balance in the new “strong council, weak mayor” system specifically detailed in the county manager proposal put before the charter commission by commissioner Walter Bryant this year.
It might be about time we actually take the time and energy to deconstruct the nuts and bolts of what is hanging up the machinery of county government and change the cogs enough to get this contraption running smoothly.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID
BE AFRAID, BE VERY AFRAID: Today’s another calendar day set aside for jingoistic saber-rattling, a pre-holiday-season chance for old soldiers to justify their participation in wars-past and promote wars-future.
Our views on the subject haven’t done anything but become more objectionable to many since we stated them on Memorial Day when we wrote:
People are honoring those who took the lives of others for no reason other than that they were young and stupid and were told to do so by demented old men who sought to plunder, rape and pillage...
In our lifetime every war in which our country has engaged has been an invasive, imperialistic debacle waged at the behest of profiteers and in the name of raw power.
And the one thing they have in common is that when we all “wake up” afterward we are left with a generation of cripples- both physical and mental- and a bunch of tombstones.
Every dead soldier died in vain. There never was a noble cause or even a valid one. The soldiers died protecting nothing but greed and avarice.
Few remember that Veteran’s Day was originally Armistice Day- a celebration of peace as a concept after the “war to end all wars”. Instead it has morphed into another celebration of needless violence born of paranoid, nonsensical ranting by ex-soldiers who want everyone to be as fearfully xenophobic as they are.
And one particular Kaua`i ex-marine’s rant recently made us wonder how a person like this could call themselves not only a christain “pastor” but head our police commission.
In a piece entitled “Protecting Paradise” published in “Homeland Security Today” in October, Tom Iannucci exhibits the kind of racist fear mongering we see often on the mainland but rarely on Kaua`i.
After describing the “paradise” of Kauai, Iannucci- whose ridicule of those opposing his call a for militaristic buildup of our local constabulary drew fire earlier this year – wastes little time in asking
“What would you do if a small, well-armed group of, let’s say, Filipino Islamic fundamentalists launched an attack on your island?”
calling the scenario
quite possible given the spread of Islamists throughout the Pacific region. Extremists could easily plant themselves in Hawaii’s local communities..
What would it be like for Kauai if a small group of moderately armed Islamists or extremists conducted a coordinated attack against something like a cruise ship, major resort, National Guard facility or tourist location? It would be like any other place and our officers would simply respond the way they were trained to. It made more sense to prepare them to face the possible challenges effectively, utilizing proven tactics and maneuvers that our military has perfected over the last few years.
He goes on to say the “attraction (of) this type of training was the need in today’s military to deal with Islamist insurgents while also being mindful of the civilian population.” before expounding on why we need to spend all sorts of resources we don’t have training our police officers to fight his holy war for him and presumably the islamophobic crusaders in his congregation.
But why ask why? A “christian nation” is what many of those who wage war these days are fighting for. The very fact that the president-elect had to deny so vehemently any wisp of a schooling in the muslim set of fairy tales instead of the judeo-christian fables tells us more than we really want to know about the reasons 21st century Americans feel the need to bomb the latest sets of brown people into oblivion.
Iannucci merely reflects much of what is objectionable about western American culture.
There’s a reason why there was an uproar about the Obama’s statement regarding “clinging to their guns and bibles”. It struck a chord because for a brief moment many on the mainland saw themselves as they appear to be.
With the detailing of the importation and injection of that kind mindset of bigotry and hate into our local culture and institutions, we can’t help but understand a little better why many here fear and sometimes even loath those who spread the American message of irrational alarm that perpetuates a militarism that diminishes us all.
Our views on the subject haven’t done anything but become more objectionable to many since we stated them on Memorial Day when we wrote:
People are honoring those who took the lives of others for no reason other than that they were young and stupid and were told to do so by demented old men who sought to plunder, rape and pillage...
In our lifetime every war in which our country has engaged has been an invasive, imperialistic debacle waged at the behest of profiteers and in the name of raw power.
And the one thing they have in common is that when we all “wake up” afterward we are left with a generation of cripples- both physical and mental- and a bunch of tombstones.
Every dead soldier died in vain. There never was a noble cause or even a valid one. The soldiers died protecting nothing but greed and avarice.
Few remember that Veteran’s Day was originally Armistice Day- a celebration of peace as a concept after the “war to end all wars”. Instead it has morphed into another celebration of needless violence born of paranoid, nonsensical ranting by ex-soldiers who want everyone to be as fearfully xenophobic as they are.
And one particular Kaua`i ex-marine’s rant recently made us wonder how a person like this could call themselves not only a christain “pastor” but head our police commission.
In a piece entitled “Protecting Paradise” published in “Homeland Security Today” in October, Tom Iannucci exhibits the kind of racist fear mongering we see often on the mainland but rarely on Kaua`i.
After describing the “paradise” of Kauai, Iannucci- whose ridicule of those opposing his call a for militaristic buildup of our local constabulary drew fire earlier this year – wastes little time in asking
“What would you do if a small, well-armed group of, let’s say, Filipino Islamic fundamentalists launched an attack on your island?”
calling the scenario
quite possible given the spread of Islamists throughout the Pacific region. Extremists could easily plant themselves in Hawaii’s local communities..
What would it be like for Kauai if a small group of moderately armed Islamists or extremists conducted a coordinated attack against something like a cruise ship, major resort, National Guard facility or tourist location? It would be like any other place and our officers would simply respond the way they were trained to. It made more sense to prepare them to face the possible challenges effectively, utilizing proven tactics and maneuvers that our military has perfected over the last few years.
He goes on to say the “attraction (of) this type of training was the need in today’s military to deal with Islamist insurgents while also being mindful of the civilian population.” before expounding on why we need to spend all sorts of resources we don’t have training our police officers to fight his holy war for him and presumably the islamophobic crusaders in his congregation.
But why ask why? A “christian nation” is what many of those who wage war these days are fighting for. The very fact that the president-elect had to deny so vehemently any wisp of a schooling in the muslim set of fairy tales instead of the judeo-christian fables tells us more than we really want to know about the reasons 21st century Americans feel the need to bomb the latest sets of brown people into oblivion.
Iannucci merely reflects much of what is objectionable about western American culture.
There’s a reason why there was an uproar about the Obama’s statement regarding “clinging to their guns and bibles”. It struck a chord because for a brief moment many on the mainland saw themselves as they appear to be.
With the detailing of the importation and injection of that kind mindset of bigotry and hate into our local culture and institutions, we can’t help but understand a little better why many here fear and sometimes even loath those who spread the American message of irrational alarm that perpetuates a militarism that diminishes us all.
Monday, November 10, 2008
BUT NO WE WON’T
BUT NO WE WON’T: Our hostess Saturday night had had enough with the post- election conversation at her birthday party and asked exasperatedly “please- can we stop talking about politics” to which the guests looked up, looked at each other and answered in unison “Yes We Can”.
And she isn’t the only one, although we worry about those depicted in this account from The Onion.
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
While the alternative of four more years of stomach-churning fascism-creep might have quadrupled the sales of Prozac overnight, the coming depression born of unrequited devotion will yield to a rude awakening for many as the between-the-lines meaning of “yes we can” is reveled to be “well, yes, we could ... but, well, no, we won’t.”
Because the future no doubt holds out to be a mocking shadow of the policies most Democrats think their savior is going to actualize.
Yes we could get out of Iraq... but no, we’re going to not just going to stay for the foreseeable future, we’re actually going to ramp up the imperialistic colonialism in Afghanistan and maybe invade Iran and Pakistan to boot.
Yes we could initiate single, government-payer healthcare and eliminate the insurance, pharmaceutical and for-profit medical corporations from the equation... but no, we’re going to fully empower these overlords by further fracturing care, denying medications and services and mandating that people boost corporate health care profits.
Yes we could repeal NAFTA, GATT and all the other international corporate welfare programs or at least clamp down with strong environmental and worker protections... but no, we’re going to expand unbridled free trade until, instead of elevating all boats with a world-wide rising tide of living-wages and implementation of sustainable practices, we’ll let robber barons steal all the water, grounding the dinghies of workers of the world on the reef of abject poverty.
Yes we could invest in a renewable non-fossil, carbon-free, energy and infrastructure... but no, we will continue to drill off-shore, and support absurdly oxymoronic concepts like clean coal and safe nuclear energy
Yes we could fully regulate our financial system and institute worker-based fiscal policies... but no, we’ll continue to bail out the Wall Street casino denizens and rescue insurance companies, auto manufacturers and the rest of the den of thieves that just gave the candidates the billion they spent convincing you of whatever you wanted to believe.
Don’t forget- it was “change you can believe in”- the kind that takes a blind faith to swallow.
Amidst the verbal diarrhea from the TV talking heads in the post-election euphoria was the idea that we’ve somehow “moved beyond the 60’s” by electing the first “post-boomer”.
But that simply means giving up on fighting against things like hawkish war-mongering behavior, corporate control of the apparatus of government and the stripping of worker’s- and yes even civil- rights.
During the campaign a fellow unrepentant radical reprobate we know would, whenever the topic came up, start screaming "William Ayers for President"..
Boomer and 60’s radical Professor Ayers, unlike members of the progressively more self-absorbed and apathetic generations since, still holds onto the concept that we don’t have to compromise with those that seek our acquiescence in our own oppression.
So we’ll leave you with some words about the 60’s and their meaning today in an excerpt from Ayer’s first writings on the election. from In these Times
...That ’60s show
On Aug. 28, Stephen Colbert, the faux right-wing commentator from Comedy Central who channels Bill O’Reilly on steroids, observed:
“To this day, when our country holds a presidential election, we judge the candidates through the lens of the 1960s. … We all know Obama is cozy with William Ayers a ’60s radical who planted a bomb in the capital building and then later went on to even more heinous crimes by becoming a college professor. … Let us keep fighting the culture wars of our grandparents. The ’60s are a political gift that keeps on giving.”
It was inevitable. McCain would bet the house on a dishonest and largely discredited vision of the ’60s, which was the defining decade for him. He built his political career on being a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
The ’60s—as myth and symbol—is much abused: the downfall of civilization in one account, a time of defeat and humiliation in a second, and a perfect moment of righteous opposition, peace and love in a third.
The idea that the 2008 election may be the last time in American political life that the ’60s plays any role whatsoever is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, let’s get over the nostalgia and move on. On the other, the lessons we might have learned from the black freedom movement and from the resistance against the Vietnam War have never been learned. To achieve this would require that we face history fully and honestly, something this nation has never done.
The war in Vietnam was an illegal invasion and occupation, much of it conducted as a war of terror against the civilian population. The U.S. military killed millions of Vietnamese in air raids—like the one conducted by McCain—and entire areas of the country were designated free-fire zones, where American pilots indiscriminately dropped surplus ordinance—an immoral enterprise by any measure.
What is really important
McCain and Palin—or as our late friend Studs Terkel put it, “Joe McCarthy in drag”—would like to bury the ’60s. The ’60s, after all, was a time of rejecting obedience and conformity in favor of initiative and courage. The ’60s pushed us to a deeper appreciation of the humanity of every human being. And that is the threat it poses to the right wing, hence the attacks and all the guilt by association...
In a robust and sophisticated democracy, political leaders—and all of us—ought to seek ways to talk with many people who hold dissenting, or even radical, ideas. Lacking that simple and yet essential capacity to question authority, we might still be burning witches and enslaving our fellow human beings today.
Maybe we could welcome our current situation—torn by another illegal war, as it was in the ’60s—as an opportunity to search for the new.
Perhaps we might think of ourselves not as passive consumers of politics but as fully mobilized political actors. Perhaps we might think of our various efforts now, as we did then, as more than a single campaign, but rather as our movement-in-the-making.
We might find hope in the growth of opposition to war and occupation worldwide. Or we might be inspired by the growing movements for reparations and prison abolition, or the rising immigrant rights movement and the stirrings of working people everywhere, or by gay and lesbian and transgender people courageously pressing for full recognition.
Yet hope—my hope, our hope—resides in a simple self-evident truth: the future is unknown, and it is also entirely unknowable.
History is always in the making. It’s up to us. It is up to me and to you. Nothing is predetermined. That makes our moment on this earth both hopeful and all the more urgent—we must find ways to become real actors, to become authentic subjects in our own history.
We may not be able to will a movement into being, but neither can we sit idly for a movement to spring full-grown, as from the head of Zeus.
We have to agitate for democracy and egalitarianism, press harder for human rights, learn to build a new society through our self-transformations and our limited everyday struggles.
At the turn of the last century, Eugene Debs, the great Socialist Party leader from Terre Haute, Ind., told a group of workers in Chicago, “If I could lead you into the Promised Land, I would not do it, because someone else would come along and lead you out.”
In this time of new beginnings and rising expectations, it is even more urgent that we figure out how to become the people we have been waiting to be.
And she isn’t the only one, although we worry about those depicted in this account from The Onion.
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
While the alternative of four more years of stomach-churning fascism-creep might have quadrupled the sales of Prozac overnight, the coming depression born of unrequited devotion will yield to a rude awakening for many as the between-the-lines meaning of “yes we can” is reveled to be “well, yes, we could ... but, well, no, we won’t.”
Because the future no doubt holds out to be a mocking shadow of the policies most Democrats think their savior is going to actualize.
Yes we could get out of Iraq... but no, we’re going to not just going to stay for the foreseeable future, we’re actually going to ramp up the imperialistic colonialism in Afghanistan and maybe invade Iran and Pakistan to boot.
Yes we could initiate single, government-payer healthcare and eliminate the insurance, pharmaceutical and for-profit medical corporations from the equation... but no, we’re going to fully empower these overlords by further fracturing care, denying medications and services and mandating that people boost corporate health care profits.
Yes we could repeal NAFTA, GATT and all the other international corporate welfare programs or at least clamp down with strong environmental and worker protections... but no, we’re going to expand unbridled free trade until, instead of elevating all boats with a world-wide rising tide of living-wages and implementation of sustainable practices, we’ll let robber barons steal all the water, grounding the dinghies of workers of the world on the reef of abject poverty.
Yes we could invest in a renewable non-fossil, carbon-free, energy and infrastructure... but no, we will continue to drill off-shore, and support absurdly oxymoronic concepts like clean coal and safe nuclear energy
Yes we could fully regulate our financial system and institute worker-based fiscal policies... but no, we’ll continue to bail out the Wall Street casino denizens and rescue insurance companies, auto manufacturers and the rest of the den of thieves that just gave the candidates the billion they spent convincing you of whatever you wanted to believe.
Don’t forget- it was “change you can believe in”- the kind that takes a blind faith to swallow.
Amidst the verbal diarrhea from the TV talking heads in the post-election euphoria was the idea that we’ve somehow “moved beyond the 60’s” by electing the first “post-boomer”.
But that simply means giving up on fighting against things like hawkish war-mongering behavior, corporate control of the apparatus of government and the stripping of worker’s- and yes even civil- rights.
During the campaign a fellow unrepentant radical reprobate we know would, whenever the topic came up, start screaming "William Ayers for President"..
Boomer and 60’s radical Professor Ayers, unlike members of the progressively more self-absorbed and apathetic generations since, still holds onto the concept that we don’t have to compromise with those that seek our acquiescence in our own oppression.
So we’ll leave you with some words about the 60’s and their meaning today in an excerpt from Ayer’s first writings on the election. from In these Times
...That ’60s show
On Aug. 28, Stephen Colbert, the faux right-wing commentator from Comedy Central who channels Bill O’Reilly on steroids, observed:
“To this day, when our country holds a presidential election, we judge the candidates through the lens of the 1960s. … We all know Obama is cozy with William Ayers a ’60s radical who planted a bomb in the capital building and then later went on to even more heinous crimes by becoming a college professor. … Let us keep fighting the culture wars of our grandparents. The ’60s are a political gift that keeps on giving.”
It was inevitable. McCain would bet the house on a dishonest and largely discredited vision of the ’60s, which was the defining decade for him. He built his political career on being a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
The ’60s—as myth and symbol—is much abused: the downfall of civilization in one account, a time of defeat and humiliation in a second, and a perfect moment of righteous opposition, peace and love in a third.
The idea that the 2008 election may be the last time in American political life that the ’60s plays any role whatsoever is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, let’s get over the nostalgia and move on. On the other, the lessons we might have learned from the black freedom movement and from the resistance against the Vietnam War have never been learned. To achieve this would require that we face history fully and honestly, something this nation has never done.
The war in Vietnam was an illegal invasion and occupation, much of it conducted as a war of terror against the civilian population. The U.S. military killed millions of Vietnamese in air raids—like the one conducted by McCain—and entire areas of the country were designated free-fire zones, where American pilots indiscriminately dropped surplus ordinance—an immoral enterprise by any measure.
What is really important
McCain and Palin—or as our late friend Studs Terkel put it, “Joe McCarthy in drag”—would like to bury the ’60s. The ’60s, after all, was a time of rejecting obedience and conformity in favor of initiative and courage. The ’60s pushed us to a deeper appreciation of the humanity of every human being. And that is the threat it poses to the right wing, hence the attacks and all the guilt by association...
In a robust and sophisticated democracy, political leaders—and all of us—ought to seek ways to talk with many people who hold dissenting, or even radical, ideas. Lacking that simple and yet essential capacity to question authority, we might still be burning witches and enslaving our fellow human beings today.
Maybe we could welcome our current situation—torn by another illegal war, as it was in the ’60s—as an opportunity to search for the new.
Perhaps we might think of ourselves not as passive consumers of politics but as fully mobilized political actors. Perhaps we might think of our various efforts now, as we did then, as more than a single campaign, but rather as our movement-in-the-making.
We might find hope in the growth of opposition to war and occupation worldwide. Or we might be inspired by the growing movements for reparations and prison abolition, or the rising immigrant rights movement and the stirrings of working people everywhere, or by gay and lesbian and transgender people courageously pressing for full recognition.
Yet hope—my hope, our hope—resides in a simple self-evident truth: the future is unknown, and it is also entirely unknowable.
History is always in the making. It’s up to us. It is up to me and to you. Nothing is predetermined. That makes our moment on this earth both hopeful and all the more urgent—we must find ways to become real actors, to become authentic subjects in our own history.
We may not be able to will a movement into being, but neither can we sit idly for a movement to spring full-grown, as from the head of Zeus.
We have to agitate for democracy and egalitarianism, press harder for human rights, learn to build a new society through our self-transformations and our limited everyday struggles.
At the turn of the last century, Eugene Debs, the great Socialist Party leader from Terre Haute, Ind., told a group of workers in Chicago, “If I could lead you into the Promised Land, I would not do it, because someone else would come along and lead you out.”
In this time of new beginnings and rising expectations, it is even more urgent that we figure out how to become the people we have been waiting to be.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
KPD Blue- Chapter 14: A Stampede to the Courthouse; Part I: Jackie Tokashiki versus KPD
KPD Blue
By Anthony Sommer
Chapter 14: A Stampede to the Courthouse; Part I: Jackie Tokashiki versus KPD
On May 14, 2002, Jackie Tokashiki filed lawsuits in both state and federal court against Freitas and Kauai County.
Beyond the dispute in the lawsuit, Tokashiki’s case demonstrates (again) the absurdity of many parts of the hopelessly muddled Kauai County Charter.
Since 1980, Tokashiki had been the private secretary to the police chief (actually a parade of police chiefs) including Freitas. Tokashiki was an “at will” employee, meaning she had no civil service protection and could be fired at the chief’s whim.
Under the County Charter, the secretary to the police chief also is the secretary to the Police Ccommission. The concepts of “conflict of interest” and “separation of powers” apparently never entered the head of the long-ago and long-departed county attorney who first drafted the Kauai County Charter.
Working for both the police chief and the commission that sets policy for the police department was not a conflict Jackie Tokashiki spent any time fretting about for her first 21 years on the job.
But one day in July 2001, Lt. Alvin Seto and Inspector Mel Morris showed up on her doorstep with their laundry list of complaints about Chief Freitas.
According to court records, Tokashiki took off her chief’s secretary hat, put on her Police Commission’s secretary hat and processed the complaint, sending copies to the members of the commission (including Mayor Kusaka, an ex officio member) and the county attorney.
And she scheduled a special (and obviously closed-door) Commission meeting for Aug. 10, 2001.
She did not send a courtesy copy to the chief.
The reason for the executive session was not posted, a violation, again, of the state Open Meeting Law.
At the same time, still typing away in the chief’s office, she prepared a memo for the commissioners outlining the procedure for handling complaints, sent an invitation to Kusaka to attend the meeting (as if she would skip it…) and researched the issue of leave (really suspension) both with and without pay.
She also drafted a letter requesting, apparently by name, John Ko, one of the three investigators for the Honolulu Police Commission, be loaned to Kauai County.
On Aug. 10, the Commission suspended Freitas, although he didn’t learn of it until Aug. 13. The written directive Kusaka gave him, drafted by Tokashiki, required Freitas to turn in his gun, badge, identification, pager, cell phone, vehicle and office keys.
When Freitas went to his office a week later, his gun, which he had left in his desk when he was suspended, was gone.
Tokashiki had locked it in a safe, but she lied to Freitas and said she didn’t know where it was.
In fact, She had searched Freitas’s desk looking for evidence against the chief without any warrant or any authority at all.
Freitas requested the Commission bar Tokashiki from future Commission meetings regarding the investigation of him, and the county attorney told her to stay away.
Ko showed up to conduct the investigation, was given the keys to the chief’s car for his use and unpacked at the Kauai Marriott Beach Resort where he would spend the next two months with the county paying all of his expenses.
Ko asked for members of the department to step forward and talk to him about Freitas. Unlike Honolulu, where Ko usually worked, “stepping forward” is not something any local does on Kauai.
Tokashiki was then enlisted to “encourage” members of the department to be interviewed by Ko. She also gave a statement to Ko and was a key witness in the case.
As already noted, the ultimate result of all this sound and fury was two letters of reprimand in the chief’s personnel folder: One for giving his fiancé a ride in his police car and the other for yelling at Inspector Mel Morris in a private meeting.
On Jan. 7, 2002, Freitas returned to work as police chief and immediately reassigned Tokashiki to a position as secretary in the Administrative and Technical Services Bureau. Her pay and benefits were unaffected.
On April 26, 2002, Freitas told Tokashiki she was terminated effective May 31.
Two weeks later Tokashiki filed lawsuits in state and federal courts claiming that, even though she was an “at will” employee and could be fired by Freitas at any time, the chief’s retaliatory firing of her had violated her job protections under the Hawaii Whistleblower’s Protection Act.
In February 2004, Tokashiki’s attorney Clayton Ikei (a Honolulu lawyer who for decades has sued Kauai County on behalf of many employees in many departments and come away with many large settlements from the county) took the depositions of the key figures in the case.
Although the facts discovered in the deposition would not become public for another two years, Ikei obtained the first up close look at what was going on at all those closed door Police Commission sessions.
What the “secret” Police Commission transcripts revealed was that after Nelson Gabriel was acquitted of molesting his stepdaughter, it had become quite clear that Freitas had been on solid legal ground when he refused to allow Lt. Alvin Seto to attempt to coerce Gabriel’s wife into lying on the stand.
Here’s what happened next that the public never was told:
Commission Chairwoman Dede Wilhelm testified in her deposition that the Commission appeared ready to consider the charge against Freitas of “hindering the prosecution” of Gabriel.
But County Attorney Hartwell Blake slammed on the brakes.
Masuoka issued his ruling in the case against Nelson Gabriel. He found Gabriel innocent.
As a direct result of Masuoka’s decision, Blake told the Commission to “lay low on this and cool it” because he had become convinced the charge by Seto and Morris was unfounded.
If the Commission voted to dismiss Freitas for “hindering prosecution,” and Freitas sued the Commission, Blake told them his office would not represent them and the county would not pay any damages awarded Freitas.
That little gem had been hidden in the Police Commission’s secret executive session minutes for five years until it was revealed by the Hawaii Supreme Court in 2006.
Circuit Judge Masuoka, to no one’s amazement, ruled in favor of the county and dismissed Tokashiki’s lawsuit. Masuoka ruled her actions were not protected by the Whistleblower’s Protection Act.
But her lawyer appealed Masuoka’s decision, and on April 11, 2006, the Hawaii Supreme Court overturned Masuoka and ordered the case be set for trial.
As usual, the trial never took place. Kauai County was willing to pay a lot of taxpayer dollars to keep its dirty laundry from public view.
More than a year later, in May 2007, Kauai County settled the lawsuit and paid Tokashiki $325,000.
Once again, the settlement was approved by the County Council in an executive session that should have been conducted in public. The topic was not noted on the Council agenda for the meeting.
And the county made no announcement of the settlement. It was leaked to the local newspaper on Kauai.
By Anthony Sommer
Chapter 14: A Stampede to the Courthouse; Part I: Jackie Tokashiki versus KPD
On May 14, 2002, Jackie Tokashiki filed lawsuits in both state and federal court against Freitas and Kauai County.
Beyond the dispute in the lawsuit, Tokashiki’s case demonstrates (again) the absurdity of many parts of the hopelessly muddled Kauai County Charter.
Since 1980, Tokashiki had been the private secretary to the police chief (actually a parade of police chiefs) including Freitas. Tokashiki was an “at will” employee, meaning she had no civil service protection and could be fired at the chief’s whim.
Under the County Charter, the secretary to the police chief also is the secretary to the Police Ccommission. The concepts of “conflict of interest” and “separation of powers” apparently never entered the head of the long-ago and long-departed county attorney who first drafted the Kauai County Charter.
Working for both the police chief and the commission that sets policy for the police department was not a conflict Jackie Tokashiki spent any time fretting about for her first 21 years on the job.
But one day in July 2001, Lt. Alvin Seto and Inspector Mel Morris showed up on her doorstep with their laundry list of complaints about Chief Freitas.
According to court records, Tokashiki took off her chief’s secretary hat, put on her Police Commission’s secretary hat and processed the complaint, sending copies to the members of the commission (including Mayor Kusaka, an ex officio member) and the county attorney.
And she scheduled a special (and obviously closed-door) Commission meeting for Aug. 10, 2001.
She did not send a courtesy copy to the chief.
The reason for the executive session was not posted, a violation, again, of the state Open Meeting Law.
At the same time, still typing away in the chief’s office, she prepared a memo for the commissioners outlining the procedure for handling complaints, sent an invitation to Kusaka to attend the meeting (as if she would skip it…) and researched the issue of leave (really suspension) both with and without pay.
She also drafted a letter requesting, apparently by name, John Ko, one of the three investigators for the Honolulu Police Commission, be loaned to Kauai County.
On Aug. 10, the Commission suspended Freitas, although he didn’t learn of it until Aug. 13. The written directive Kusaka gave him, drafted by Tokashiki, required Freitas to turn in his gun, badge, identification, pager, cell phone, vehicle and office keys.
When Freitas went to his office a week later, his gun, which he had left in his desk when he was suspended, was gone.
Tokashiki had locked it in a safe, but she lied to Freitas and said she didn’t know where it was.
In fact, She had searched Freitas’s desk looking for evidence against the chief without any warrant or any authority at all.
Freitas requested the Commission bar Tokashiki from future Commission meetings regarding the investigation of him, and the county attorney told her to stay away.
Ko showed up to conduct the investigation, was given the keys to the chief’s car for his use and unpacked at the Kauai Marriott Beach Resort where he would spend the next two months with the county paying all of his expenses.
Ko asked for members of the department to step forward and talk to him about Freitas. Unlike Honolulu, where Ko usually worked, “stepping forward” is not something any local does on Kauai.
Tokashiki was then enlisted to “encourage” members of the department to be interviewed by Ko. She also gave a statement to Ko and was a key witness in the case.
As already noted, the ultimate result of all this sound and fury was two letters of reprimand in the chief’s personnel folder: One for giving his fiancé a ride in his police car and the other for yelling at Inspector Mel Morris in a private meeting.
On Jan. 7, 2002, Freitas returned to work as police chief and immediately reassigned Tokashiki to a position as secretary in the Administrative and Technical Services Bureau. Her pay and benefits were unaffected.
On April 26, 2002, Freitas told Tokashiki she was terminated effective May 31.
Two weeks later Tokashiki filed lawsuits in state and federal courts claiming that, even though she was an “at will” employee and could be fired by Freitas at any time, the chief’s retaliatory firing of her had violated her job protections under the Hawaii Whistleblower’s Protection Act.
In February 2004, Tokashiki’s attorney Clayton Ikei (a Honolulu lawyer who for decades has sued Kauai County on behalf of many employees in many departments and come away with many large settlements from the county) took the depositions of the key figures in the case.
Although the facts discovered in the deposition would not become public for another two years, Ikei obtained the first up close look at what was going on at all those closed door Police Commission sessions.
What the “secret” Police Commission transcripts revealed was that after Nelson Gabriel was acquitted of molesting his stepdaughter, it had become quite clear that Freitas had been on solid legal ground when he refused to allow Lt. Alvin Seto to attempt to coerce Gabriel’s wife into lying on the stand.
Here’s what happened next that the public never was told:
Commission Chairwoman Dede Wilhelm testified in her deposition that the Commission appeared ready to consider the charge against Freitas of “hindering the prosecution” of Gabriel.
But County Attorney Hartwell Blake slammed on the brakes.
Masuoka issued his ruling in the case against Nelson Gabriel. He found Gabriel innocent.
As a direct result of Masuoka’s decision, Blake told the Commission to “lay low on this and cool it” because he had become convinced the charge by Seto and Morris was unfounded.
If the Commission voted to dismiss Freitas for “hindering prosecution,” and Freitas sued the Commission, Blake told them his office would not represent them and the county would not pay any damages awarded Freitas.
That little gem had been hidden in the Police Commission’s secret executive session minutes for five years until it was revealed by the Hawaii Supreme Court in 2006.
Circuit Judge Masuoka, to no one’s amazement, ruled in favor of the county and dismissed Tokashiki’s lawsuit. Masuoka ruled her actions were not protected by the Whistleblower’s Protection Act.
But her lawyer appealed Masuoka’s decision, and on April 11, 2006, the Hawaii Supreme Court overturned Masuoka and ordered the case be set for trial.
As usual, the trial never took place. Kauai County was willing to pay a lot of taxpayer dollars to keep its dirty laundry from public view.
More than a year later, in May 2007, Kauai County settled the lawsuit and paid Tokashiki $325,000.
Once again, the settlement was approved by the County Council in an executive session that should have been conducted in public. The topic was not noted on the Council agenda for the meeting.
And the county made no announcement of the settlement. It was leaked to the local newspaper on Kauai.
Friday, November 7, 2008
DOWN IN THE DARK MY BONE MILL ROLLS
DOWN IN THE DARK MY BONE MILL ROLLS: From yesterday’s Kaua`i Burial Council meeting comes news via the local newspaper that ding-dong the wicked witch has resigned the chair because “life’s too short to put up with some of the things we put up with at the burial council.”
An odd choice of words indeed from Mark “Ainokea” Hubbard, the post around which the current revolving door of cronyism in Kaua`i government revolves, as we’ve detailed.
He has given up his post saying
“I was willing to run the meetings, but it’s not good to have a haole as the chair. You need to have a Hawaiian, a kupuna, to command some respect,” Hubbard said. “People were looking at council with disrespect just because I was the chair.”
Gee, ya think?
The fact is disrespect for Hubbard goes a lot deeper than his ethnicity- a contempt he has earned though his disrespectful actions toward the Kanaka community as well as the community at large.
The veep at Grove Farm- the old land-robbing plantation outfit that has been a prime actor in the genocide of the Hawaiian people for a century- still sits at the head of the Kaua`i (Lack of any Discernable) Ethics Board where he has refused to enforce the ethics law.
He actually tried to change the charter to allow him and his cronies to openly abuse their positions on the various board commissions and the county council this year.
But the defeat of the measure guarantees... well probably nothing.
Hubbard and his gang of disingenuous dullards are so bored of ethics that they have feigned ignorance- and of course have refused to release a county attorney’s opinion- as to what the law means when it says members of boards and commissions can’t represent private interests before other boards, commissions and administrative agencies
Despite Hubbard’s contention that the law is “too broad” and would cause those who serve to not be able to get a drivers’ license he schizophrenically admitted that the clause actually did do something by proposing an amendment to remove the clause from the charter that forbids conflicts.
The board actually cleared another good old boy, attorney Jonathan Chun- the chair of the Charter Commission that approved the proposed charter change- of ethics charges for extensively representing the Board of Realtors before the county council on the vacation rental bill earlier this year.
But despite the re-iteration of the law by the populace don’t expect Hubbard to change his ways should any complaint be filed when Chun appears before the Planning Commission at next week’s meeting representing another client
The Burial Council meeting itself was apparently an affair to remember in Hubbard’s absence, according to reporter Joan Conrow who described some real shenanigans in the infamous “capping” of the Naue kupuna iwi.
Apparently Mike Dega, the head of the contracted “archeological field crew”- i.e. construction workers- took it upon themselves to put a concrete slab over the ancestral bones, saying neither he nor state Archeologist Nancy McMahon approved the measure.
The real news- perhaps the only good thing in all of this- is that the cap, which from previous descriptions of the process we concluded actually encased the bones, was rather what was described as something similar to a “sewer cover” three feet above the bones which could be removed without disturbing the actual iwi.
But the unbelievable insensitivity in the description of the “caps” aside it remains to be seen if the Planning Commission will withdraw the permits because apparently Burial Council “approval” is one of the conditions for the “house” that developer Joe Brescia is trying to build on top of the cemetery.
One thing that seems to stick out like a skeletal hand reaching out from the ground is that the Planning Commission condition gives actual power to the Burial Council while the state- which created the body- treats them as advisory.
There doesn’t seem to be any law or rule against a county agency giving a state advisory council actual power for county purposes. But, according to the newspaper article Planning Commission Chair Steve Weinstein “(e)ven a violation would not guarantee revocation, as other mitigation measures can be considered.”
Translation? “We’ll probably do what we do whenever someone does something illegal- we’ll allow them to do it anyway if it’s in our power to do so- and sometimes even if it’s not.”
Another question is, based on our analysis yesterday of the new General Plan enforcement charter provision, one the planning department hasn’t dealt with at all- is Brescia’s “house” a “tourist accommodation” that would fall under the new law taking the power of approval away from the Planning Department?
If so, the processing of anything having to do with it should cease immediately if it is to comply with the law.
Although Brescia claims it is merely a huge single family residence Brescia’s other “houses” in the area have been serving as vacation rentals for years.
of course that presumes that anyone in Kaua`i county government even cares whether their activities meet legal requirements and standards..
As our friend Ace commented yesterday
Andy, Andy, Andy. You are ignoring the zeal with which the Planning Commission and the County Council tend to overlook such pesky things as laws, ordinances and charter amendments. One should not be surprised to see these folks do whatever they want and wait to be called on it. To which they will predictably respond, "So sue me".
Just more porridge to fill the Minotaur’s bowl.
An odd choice of words indeed from Mark “Ainokea” Hubbard, the post around which the current revolving door of cronyism in Kaua`i government revolves, as we’ve detailed.
He has given up his post saying
“I was willing to run the meetings, but it’s not good to have a haole as the chair. You need to have a Hawaiian, a kupuna, to command some respect,” Hubbard said. “People were looking at council with disrespect just because I was the chair.”
Gee, ya think?
The fact is disrespect for Hubbard goes a lot deeper than his ethnicity- a contempt he has earned though his disrespectful actions toward the Kanaka community as well as the community at large.
The veep at Grove Farm- the old land-robbing plantation outfit that has been a prime actor in the genocide of the Hawaiian people for a century- still sits at the head of the Kaua`i (Lack of any Discernable) Ethics Board where he has refused to enforce the ethics law.
He actually tried to change the charter to allow him and his cronies to openly abuse their positions on the various board commissions and the county council this year.
But the defeat of the measure guarantees... well probably nothing.
Hubbard and his gang of disingenuous dullards are so bored of ethics that they have feigned ignorance- and of course have refused to release a county attorney’s opinion- as to what the law means when it says members of boards and commissions can’t represent private interests before other boards, commissions and administrative agencies
Despite Hubbard’s contention that the law is “too broad” and would cause those who serve to not be able to get a drivers’ license he schizophrenically admitted that the clause actually did do something by proposing an amendment to remove the clause from the charter that forbids conflicts.
The board actually cleared another good old boy, attorney Jonathan Chun- the chair of the Charter Commission that approved the proposed charter change- of ethics charges for extensively representing the Board of Realtors before the county council on the vacation rental bill earlier this year.
But despite the re-iteration of the law by the populace don’t expect Hubbard to change his ways should any complaint be filed when Chun appears before the Planning Commission at next week’s meeting representing another client
The Burial Council meeting itself was apparently an affair to remember in Hubbard’s absence, according to reporter Joan Conrow who described some real shenanigans in the infamous “capping” of the Naue kupuna iwi.
Apparently Mike Dega, the head of the contracted “archeological field crew”- i.e. construction workers- took it upon themselves to put a concrete slab over the ancestral bones, saying neither he nor state Archeologist Nancy McMahon approved the measure.
The real news- perhaps the only good thing in all of this- is that the cap, which from previous descriptions of the process we concluded actually encased the bones, was rather what was described as something similar to a “sewer cover” three feet above the bones which could be removed without disturbing the actual iwi.
But the unbelievable insensitivity in the description of the “caps” aside it remains to be seen if the Planning Commission will withdraw the permits because apparently Burial Council “approval” is one of the conditions for the “house” that developer Joe Brescia is trying to build on top of the cemetery.
One thing that seems to stick out like a skeletal hand reaching out from the ground is that the Planning Commission condition gives actual power to the Burial Council while the state- which created the body- treats them as advisory.
There doesn’t seem to be any law or rule against a county agency giving a state advisory council actual power for county purposes. But, according to the newspaper article Planning Commission Chair Steve Weinstein “(e)ven a violation would not guarantee revocation, as other mitigation measures can be considered.”
Translation? “We’ll probably do what we do whenever someone does something illegal- we’ll allow them to do it anyway if it’s in our power to do so- and sometimes even if it’s not.”
Another question is, based on our analysis yesterday of the new General Plan enforcement charter provision, one the planning department hasn’t dealt with at all- is Brescia’s “house” a “tourist accommodation” that would fall under the new law taking the power of approval away from the Planning Department?
If so, the processing of anything having to do with it should cease immediately if it is to comply with the law.
Although Brescia claims it is merely a huge single family residence Brescia’s other “houses” in the area have been serving as vacation rentals for years.
of course that presumes that anyone in Kaua`i county government even cares whether their activities meet legal requirements and standards..
As our friend Ace commented yesterday
Andy, Andy, Andy. You are ignoring the zeal with which the Planning Commission and the County Council tend to overlook such pesky things as laws, ordinances and charter amendments. One should not be surprised to see these folks do whatever they want and wait to be called on it. To which they will predictably respond, "So sue me".
Just more porridge to fill the Minotaur’s bowl.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
