HOLY MOLE

HOLY MOLE: Another week, another mystifyingly shallow look at issues from the local newspaper’s editorial board which, we found out this week is comprised of editors Nathan Eagle, Michael Levine and publisher Mark Lewis.

But the content this time has raised not just our hackles but those of Joan Conrow and even Katy Rose who, despite a move back to the mainland to complete her education, has started up a new blog on local issues called, as the now-ubiquitous bumper sticker says, “No Forget Fo’ Go Home”.

Which were the precisely the words shouted during a recent local vs. tourist incident according to the editorial.

As Katy succinctly describes it, the editorial expresses the distinctly mainland- and implicitly extortionate- view of things, telling us all to:

Play nice, children. Be nice to haole tourists, because your survival depends on it.

The article tells the tale of a hapless tourist who refused to pick up a hitch-hiker, and was then called "haole," which sent him crying all the way back to vanilla suburbs, USA, where he joined the swelling ranks of injured white people who have had their vacations ruined by being called names.

The editorial bemoans what “bad publicity” this is for our tourism industry, with all the distinct tin ear for the roots of the incident that a malahini or their local sycophantic supplicants can muster.

The editorial expresses perhaps the attitude that typifies the source of the rage many local people feel, with one of those “if rape is inevitable sit back and enjoy it” type of rants we hear from rich haoles with a western sense of American privilege and entitlement, borne of a wealth-worshipping, individualist culture.

Like it or not, Kaua`i remains exceedingly dependent on a struggling tourism industry to drive its economy and keep its people off of the unemployment rolls and in their homes.

Ah, it’s “like it or lump it” time, eh?

We all know the type. He doesn’t just come over and snap up a bunch of ag land for his McMansion, he isn’t just smug about his “right” to be here because his country “stole, fair and square” the sovereignty of the islands, but he takes every opportunity to let everyone know how much of a bastard he is.

Usually most have enough sense to spew their hate anonymously. Just take a look at all the no-name comments at Conrow’s blog where, though moderation is now in force, a few of these ass-wipes are for some reason still allowed to glom onto Joan’s readership and spew their smug sense of entitlement via anti-kanaka, anti-local-culture rants.

Here’s one from today:

The editorial is right. So what if someone has money for a vacation here - or if you don't enough much money to make yourself happy - be nice anyway! Life is too short.

Here’s a few more just from the past week that are typical whenever Joan writes passionately about the hewa haumia of stolen kanaka maoli rights and the illegal overthrow, annexation and statehood.

--Whine, whine, whine... More "native Hawaiians" feel comfortable and thankful that they are part of the USA than those who don't. There will never be a groundswell of majority opinion otherwise. Dream on, though. It's a free country you live in, after all, and a pretty good welfare system to most of those "disaffected masses".

--Do you really think that if the American masses knew the truth, that it would make any difference?...If so, that's a delusion even greater than a hope for an independent Hawaii.

--Hawaii is a state and will never, ever be allowed to be anything else. Most everybody's OK with that, too.

--So, rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic if it makes you happy, deludes you that such changes are "meaningful" and "progressive" and serve "social justice"...ie, makes you happy. I'll just sit here in my first class seat and await the destruction.

Despite the fact that the comments are always “I” this and “me” that they are smart enough to hide exactly who “I” is. But that isn’t necessarily the case for the streams of ugly Americans who are blown in with the tide of daily jets.

Just sit one of these types down at the Tahiti Nui bar, put a few drinks in everyone and see how long before someone cracks ‘em one.

Does anyone wonder why when they amble up to a bar and start in with the “ya know what they ought to do” rants about how dumb the local people are because they didn’t bend over for a resort on the beach or a Superferry spitting thousands of extra cars or about how “they don’t know what’s good for them- they ought to be thanking us.”

The newspaper tries to depict it as some kind of abstraction saying:

Some are chalking such verbal and physical attacks up to incensed idiots simply taking their personal frustrations — with the dire financial outlook or the dilution of Hawaiian culture in a sea of Johnny-come-latelys — out on the nearest target. Others feel they are being wrongfully blamed for the current state of affairs here.

But many if not most of these incidents are the stuff of real, personal, immediate and premeditated provocations.

And worst of all is when they get in your face and then ask “what happened to the Aloha spirit”.

As the editorial ironically put it:

Why can’t we heap aloha on everyone instead of hurling insults at strangers? Why can’t we pick friends instead of fights?...

Reach out to a visitor as you would your neighbor. Offer some useful information without divulging favorite local secrets. When a friend or family member treats another person — any person — harshly or unfairly, step up and tell them to knock it off. That type of regrettable behavior demeans us all

We wouldn’t want to tell “bwana tourista” to knock it off would we? We’re used to being demeaned so what’s one more?

“Why can’t we heap aloha on everyone?” Oh- you must mean the Kauai Visitors Bureau produced bumper-sticker-kine aloha- the one that reads “Aloha- it’s Kauai’s Spirit”.

When akamai island people see that they read “Plantation- it’s Kauai’s Mentality”.

The fact is that these fat blobs of privilege that blew in from the pan-Pacific plastic patch wouldn’t know aloha if it stung ‘em like a jellyfish.

Aloha is when you see a mango tree in someone’s yard and you knock on the door and ask if you can have one from the ground and they not only come out with the picker and pluck you a bag of the bes’ kine- from the tree in the back- but they invite you in for dinner and probably let you marry their daughter.

But aloha is also when you march into the yard and try to take fruit without asking and the same people come out of the house and chase you down the road with shotguns a-blazin’.

The root of aloha is respect. It isn’t about cleaning tourists’ toilets with your tongue for minimum wage and smiling as you say “thank you sir- can I have another?”.

And aloha, like respect is earned.

AS LONG AS THEY CAN

AS LONG AS THEY CAN: By far the most often violated ethics provision in the document dump provided by reporter Michael Levine- whose article on the $3 million the county has spent on outside attorneys since Jan 2007 appears in today’s print version of the local newspaper and is far more extensive than his preliminary report posted on-line Tuesday night- is of course the oft-flouted section 20.02(d) of the county charter which states that “(n)o officer or employee of the county shall (a)ppear in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency”

Far and away the grand prize winner in the batch with at least 14 violations is Roger M. Caires, the CEO of CLS Hawaii Land Surveying & Mapping who according to the CLS web site

is a life long resident of Kauai. He started this business after retiring from the State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, with twenty-five (25) years of experience. Mr. Caires leads a team of land surveyors using the latest surveying technologies including the GPS (Global Positioning System), total stations, electronic data collection, and CAD equipment.

According to his disclosure statement Caires sits on the Public Access Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Fund Commission and his “(c)lients represented before Kauai County Planning Commission during 2008 for subdivision applications” include “Perl Kato, Marilyn Planas, Robert Keown, Rodney Soares, Andrew Baik, Bruce Narramore, Daryl Kaneshiro , Rick Haupt, Kurt Bosshard, Kapaa 382 LLC, Stephen Gatchell, Seatrace Inc., Alan Packer, (and) Kevin P. Hurst.

Caires and his wife Susan C., who apparently also works for CLS, reported a combined income from the company of $31,600.

The Public Access Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Fund Commission is administratively attached to the planning department and commission which means that, unlike other apparent violations recently exposed Caires serves in the same department as the one he has appeared before.

Is Caires a “bad guy” because he is in violation of the county charter? Probably not.

But should he be serving on a county board or commission while “(a)ppear(ing) in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency”. Certainly not.

Nonetheless, in the upside down, black is white and up is down world of the county’s Board of Ethics (BOE) where the county ordinance can overrule the county charter- and that of the county attorney who can’t seem to provide simple legal advice without jumping down the rabbit hole and that of a mayor who can’t seem to find qualified people to serve among the 99% of the local people who never “(a)ppear in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency”- all in hunky-dory is Lihu`e la-la land.

It is presumably the job of the BOE to review these disclosure forms for conflicts-of-interest. That’s why the charter mandates they be delivered to the BOE. But despite blatant violations such as the ones we detailed yesterday and Wednesday there has never been a conflict of interest charge filed by the BOE itself based on the information provided on any disclosure form... presuming they can even read some of them, another matter the BOE seemingly ignores.

The fact that Caires so cavalierly lists his clients before the planning commission either means he doesn’t read the newspaper or more likely has chosen to drink CA Al Castillo’s Kool-aid. And until someone files suit to force the BOE to follow the charter’s code of ethics the dysfunctional labyrinth of the minotaur will keep filling the crevices of the maze and posting Sergeant Schultz clones at the gates with those who are willing to do what’s wrong as long as they can.

DESIGNS ON THE DOGHOUSE

DESIGNS ON THE DOGHOUSE: The disclosure statements obtained by reporter Michael Levine and posted at the web site of the local newspaper which we discussed yesterday seem to have one thing in common – with a few exceptions each seems to raises questions of potential and real conflict-of-interest to one extent or another.

Though many are familiar by now with the notorious section 20.02(d) of the county charter which states that “(n)o officer or employee of the county shall (a)ppear in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency” fewer are aware of much less controversial section 20.02(c) which states that “(n)o officer or employee of the county shall (a)cquire financial interest in business enterprises which he may be directly involved in official action to be taken by him”.

Which is why today we are looking at the disclosure form for Kaua`i County Director of Planning Ian Costa.

According to Costa’s notarized submission dated July 28, 2009 Costa is the “Owner...Sole Proprietor (and) 100% owner” of “Costa Architectural Design” located at 1104 Kealoha St. in Kapa`a.

This appears to be a direct and irrefutable violation of the county code of ethics, especially since Costa, an architect by education and trade, lists an income of $40,000 from the business.

The question is whether Costa “may be directly involved in official action to be taken by him”, noting that he doesn’t have to have actually been involved, only that it is conceivable that he “may be involved”.

And the “action” need not be taken by him, only that he be “involved” in the action.

Presumably if Costa is doing “architectural design” on Kaua`i, his designs are likely to come up before his planning department or, most likely, the planning commission although the disclousre form does not list clients.

Under charter “section 14.05- Powers, Duties and Functions of the Director
The planning director shall:
A. Prepare a general plan and development plans for the improvement and development of the county.
B. Be charged with the administration of the zoning and subdivision ordinance and the regulations adopted thereunder.
C. Prepare zoning and subdivision ordinances, zoning maps and regulations and any amendments or modifications thereto for the council.
D. Consolidate the lists of proposed capital improvements contemplated by the several departments in the order of their priority for the county.
E. Advise the mayor, council and planning commission on matters concerning the planning programs of the county.”

Any one of those functions could have his in a position of being “directly involved in official action” especially B and D.

The planning director serves as the clerk of the planning commission and attends all meeting usually sitting to the left of the chair and advises the chair and commission including whispered asides to the chair on many occasions.

The “administration of the zoning and subdivision ordinance and the regulations adopted thereunder” also involved wide discretionary powers on the part of the director who oversees all planning employees.

Any citizen who thinks that Costa may be guilty of violating the county’s Code of Ethics can file charges with the Board of Ethics (BOE) by contacting Administrator of the Office of Boards and Commissions, John Isobe or the BOE’s Secretary, Barbara Davis by calling 241-4919 (fax 241-5721) or writing them at 4444 Rice St. suite 150 Lihu`e HI. 96766.

LOVE AT FIRST BITE

LOVE AT FIRST BITE: After perusing today’s news in the local paper this morning and reading Board of Ethics (BOE) watchdog Horace Stoessel’s description of the latest debacle in the continuing quest for enforcement of charter provision 20.02(d)- examined in excruciating detail in this space including our three part report (see left rail)- we just happened to turn back to the “Kaua`i News” page and scroll down past today’s entries to catch an article seen only in the “previous headlines” section entitled “TOMORROW'S NEWS — $3M requested for special counsel since 2007”.

Apparently reporter Michael Levine’s quest for county documents is bearing fruit and County Attorney Al Castillo is giving up long-sought documents after they were requested by Levine in the name of the local newspaper.

The new, apparently permanent page at the paper’s website shows that Levine received the list of 42 county appropriations for outside council dating back to January 2007 along with the case and amounts for each.

But that list is something anyone could have compiled albeit with a painstaking examination of past agendas and “recap memos” although the latter have just recently been made available.

The big accomplishment is in getting the BOE to give up the actual disclosure statements of various recent applicants for various board and commission members.

In the past the BOE has kept these statements under close wraps and actually edited them and blacked out the potential conflicts of interest that violated 20.02(d) as well as other information calling it “an invasion of privacy” even though they are called “public disclosure documents”.

Although it is certainly not a complete list – they appear under two separate links- a quick run-through shows on first blush a pattern of appearance before other boards and commissions on behalf of private interests on the part of many of the applicants heretofore unreported.

Another pattern is illegible handwriting making many of the documents virtually useless.

But one statement stands out for simply it’s lack of any information- and it’s one that is an all-important link to what happens with huge stacks of county, state and federal taxpayer monies.

Though few will recognize the name Randy Finlay- whose address and phone number are not blacked out as the law requires- anyone who has passed by a road repaving or construction project will recognize the name of the company he owns and runs- Unlimited Construction.

His application to continue to be a member of the Cost Control Commission (CCC) is devoid of any information required and instead lists “no change” on all the information points required to be included when one fills out the form.

But what’s interesting in the fact that he is serving on the CCC when his company has been complicit in one of the biggest-yet underreported rip-offs on the island.

To try to be brief, a few years back- make that more than a decade ago- council “nitpicker” Glen Mickens began to notice that, as he took his daily walks pieces of broken off pavement sat by the side of the road which upon measurement were apparently thinner than the standard and required 1 ½ inches thick.

He made it his quest- one that, despite detailed presentation to the council no one so far seems to want to hear- to inform the council about how not only is the county paying for 1 ½ inch paving and not getting it but that, for some reason no one can adequately explain, on Kaua`i the standard of 90 sq. ft. of asphalt per ton is used while the national standard is 120 sq. ft. per ton to get that 1 ½”.

That means that, if anything, we should be getting roads that are 33% thinker than 1 ½” or 2” thick.

The question is, where is the extra asphalt going- a question the Public Works Department has been unable to answer.

And when Mickens presented the facts for the umpteenth time- as he has to each new council and individually to all new councilmembers over the last decade plus- one of the suggestions has been to have the CCC look into it.

Of course the more basic question is whether someone who bids on tens of millions of dollars worth of county contracts should be serving on a county commission where he might be considering cost savings such as investigating county road repaving methodologies and contracts.

Mickens’ full detailed written testimony before the council from this year’s budget hearings in April is presented at the end of this post for all those who want to fully understand this scam that has been going on for years with the apparent complicity of Unlimited Construction as well as Niu construction which Mickens mentions in his testimony

We’ll be getting out the fine tooth comb in coming days for the other disclosures, as well as filing for the statements for the council, mayor, department heads and their deputies and the rest of the sitting board and commission members covered by the pubic disclosure laws.

In the meantime we welcome you to peruse the current ones and let us know anything you might find missing from the forms or less than apparent conflicts raised by the disclosures.

-------

Glenn Mickens’ Testimony April 2009:

Our code for resurfacing roads as outlined in your Standard Details manual shows a thickness of 1 1/2". Two bids that Ryan was nice enough to give me both show the same specifications---1 1/2".If you will check the Asphalt Paving Job Calculator that all paving contractors use or if you will use simple mathematics, you will see that by using 1 TON of asphalt (AC) to pave 108 square feet, you will get a thickness of 1 1/2".

Yet, if you will refer to the memo I have from public works you will see that we use 1 Ton of AC to pave 90 square feet.

Also a check of the 07-08 Island Wide Resurfacing list will verify that we ARE using this 1 ton of AC to pave 90 square feet. A check of the calculator will show that 1 Ton of AC per 90 square feet will give a thickness of about 1 7/8"

To put this into perspective:
If we pave 1 mile of road using the 1 ton per 90 sq ft. we would use 1056 tons of AC. At today's price of about $200 per ton that cost would be 1056 x $200 or $211,200.

By using the 1 ton of AC to pave 108 sq. ft. (to give the 1 1/2" that code specifies) we would need 880 tons to pave 1 mile or, 880 x $200 = $176,000.

Thus we are spending $35,200 MORE for each mile of road that we pave. Since we have 300 miles of county roads on Kauai that means it is costing the tax payers $10,560,000 more by using the county method over the correct method.

You might argue that we are getting 3/8" more AC put on our roads but the contractors are bidding on 1 1/2" so they would lose money if their bid was for 1 1/2" and they put down 1 7/8". Also, I have picked up pieces of AC from our roads (I walk 4 miles a day over them) and they are less than an inch thick. So not only are we not getting the extra 3/8" we are paying for, we are not even getting the 1 1/2" that be bid specifies.

So, the questions are, (1) why are we using the 1 ton of AC to pave 90 sq ft. instead of the correct 1 ton to pave 108 sq ft.? (2) Where is the extra AC going or where is the money going that is costing us more? (3) Shouldn't the weight ticket at the AC plant and the core samples taken from the roads match the amount of money we are being charged for?

Also for clarity, In the 2 bids that Ryan gave me from Niu and Glover. Glovers bid (cost per ton) on 10 roads went from $268 to $762 or an average of $416 per ton all in the Waimea district, close to their plant. This was for phase 2.
Niu appears to have gotten the bid (both they and Glover for 06-07) for phase 1 on the North Shore. Their bid per ton was for an average of $224 so why this huge difference in the bids that they were awarded.

My next question. Why are we not following the Hawaii Asphalt Paving Industry (HAPI) standards for paving our roads? Both Grace Pacific and Glover are members of HAPI and they abide by their recommended paving methods.

When I spoke to a roads engineer from Glover he told me that he has asked and suggested to Public Works that they use HAPI standards but was told that our county doesn't have the funds to do it that way Thus we are being penny smart and dollar stupid as even if our roads would cost more to originally pave they will last 15 to 20 years (WITHOUT POTHOLES) or deterioration instead of being in the shape they are in now.

In other words when the county issues an RFP they do not specify replacing the old cracked base or putting a leveling course down before the final layer---all HAPI specifications. So why don't we ask for more money in the budget and do the job right with whatever funds we have?

And, if I understood what Ryan told me, we used the 07-08 budget for resurfacing for the 08-09 year and thus, instead of paving more roads with the extra money we got in 07-08 (I believe it was over $3 million) we are actually repaving less since we have less money. I asked this question since I have never seen the budget for 08-09. If I am wrong maybe Ryan can correct me.

At about $200 per ton for AC today and a budget of under 2 million dollars a year, we are only capable of paving about 10 miles of roads. That means it would take 30 years to pave all 300 miles of our county roads plus by using these incorrect methods of paving our roads will only remain a mess.

The shoulders of our paved and repaved roads. In the bid contract it states that the level of the shoulders will be put back to the level of the newly resurfaced road BUT that it will be done by Public Works. Many of our repaved roads have never had the shoulders fixed to these standards and it is a hazard. I have addressed this to PW many times but it still has not been taken care of. .

Striping our roads. I have addressed this to Donald many times and he said that unless the road is at least 20 feet wide it is their POLICY not to stripe them. This "POLICY" should be changed as it is dangerous for vehicles driving at night or in rain not to have a reference point or for opposite driving vehicles to stay on their side of the road. Hauiki road is a good example of this as it was just repaved, is 18' wide and has no stripe.

Pot Holes. Code states that pot holes will be cut on a square or rectangular pattern, new 4" of base course put in, and 2" of AC compacted into the hole. All we do now (and have done in my 20 Years on Island) is dump cold mix in the hole (sometimes with water still in it) do not compact it, and it is gone after the next rain. So we waste our time, material, and manpower doing the job wrong----this MUST be changed.

Picking the roads to be resurfaced. There is no methodology as to which roads are to be paved. As long as we only have finite money in the budget for roads repaving and can only do about 10 miles a year, we need to pick the heaviest traveled roads and the ones that are in the worst shape. But this isn't done. As an example Kealia Road was resurfaced in the 05-06 budget year at a cost of $250,800. This road has few homes along it---most of it with none---but it was still repaved. A 2000 acre subdivision is going in at the top of this road but the tax payers shouldn't have to pay the cost of a road that benefits a developer.

SILENT TREATMENT

SILENT TREATMENT: It was less than a year ago that you couldn’t pick up a progressive journal without someone asking the questions “where’s the outrage”.

Yet it’s hard to find one these days that hasn’t got it’s head so far up butt of the new administration’s continued genocide in Afghanistan that you see the editor’s face when Obama speaks.

We had to rely on the grapevine to hear about the plans of one of the only constant anti-partisan anti-war protest voices, Cindy Sheehan, to reestablish her “Camp Casey”- which attracted thousands to Crawford, Texas a few presidential summer vacations back galvanizing the anti –war movement- at Martha’s Vineyard where the current-est occupant was busy today playing golf with the “Swiss Bank” USB’s top executive in the US.

Yet the MSM seems oblivious, preferring to slather our screens with happy shiny people hawking Obama ice-cream, beer and t-shirts or replaying the rantings of the handful of wackos at various “I (heart) my Medicate/Keep government out of heath care” rallies, busily earning membership in our “too stupid to live” club.

And is it any wonder that you haven’t heard anything about it with a quote like this from ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson regarding potential ABC coverage of Sheehan’s protest.

“And you look at somebody like (Sheehan) and you think here's somebody who's just trying to find some meaning in her son's death. And you have to be sympathetic to her. Anybody who has given a son to this country has made an enormous sacrifice, and you have to be sympathetic. But enough already.”

Enough already? How about enough of Gibson’s rah rah coverage of the continued occupation of Afghanistan and his building-up of expectations of escalation al la Vietnam/Iraq that are developing with the aid of the corporate networks?

Or as Cindy writes in response:

“Enough already?” Hmmm…I don’t know Charlie Gibson and I don’t pay any attention to his career, but I seem to agree with him on this one: “Enough already.”

Enough with the killing, torturing, wounding and profiting off of the backs of our troops and off of the lives of the people of Iraq-Af-Pak: as our brothers and sisters in Latin America say: “Basta!”

Somehow, I don’t think that this is what Charlie Gibson meant, though. I am sure that he just wants me to go away like most of the rest of the anti-war movement has done under the Obama presidency.

One of the things I hear quite often from people from all over the political spectrum is: “Why don’t you just go away, you’ve had your 15 minutes of fame.”

Yes, that’s exactly what I thought as soon as I heard that my son was killed in the US’s illegal and immoral war in Iraq: “this is a perfect opportunity to get my 15 minutes of fame.” Actually, after I slowly recovered from the shock and horror, the pain always remains, I thought that I had to do everything I can to end this nightmare so other mothers/families wouldn’t have to go through what I was going through and what I am going through.

I certainly am not the anchor of a major network news show, but last time I checked, people are still dying at a heartrending clip in Iraq-Af-Pak.

If my goal was “15 minutes of fame,” I could have gone quietly away a long time ago. I started because I wanted the wars to end, and I will figure I can go away when the wars end…but when is that going to be? In my lifetime, probably not.

I am cutting my writing-staycation short to head to Martha’s Vineyard because I think the new titular head of the empire needs to know that his policies are devastating people as much as the same policies did when Bush was president.

I would rather be able to go away and spend the rest of my life worshipping my grandchildren, writing, reading, resting, and doing humanitarian work where I am needed.

I wish the wars would go away, but they aren’t going away if we the people don’t get more militantly insistent.

Ya Basta, indeed.

(PNN) NEW LANDFILL SITE WILL BE IN KALAHEO

(PNN) NEW LANDFILL SITE WILL BE IN KALAHEO: PNN has learned that the new landfill site on Kaua`i- reportedly set to be announced this week- will apparently be the one located just south of Kalaheo’s Brideswood subdivision, according to multiple sources both inside and outside the administration.

The so called Umi site (map) sits on east side of the north-south leg of Halewili Road (the “back road” from Kalaheo to `Ele`ele through Numila by the Kaua`i Coffee plant) about ¾ of a mile from the intersection with Kaumuali`i Highway and was recommended or “selected” by a mayor’s advisory committee originally formed and appointed in February of 2008 by the late Mayor Bryan Baptiste.

“Selected” is in quotes because, although the site was originally supposed to be ranked processed and selected by the committee, instead it apparently only developed the criteria for the rankings and filled out the score sheets which were then processed and completed by the county’s consultant, RM Towill.

The process also wasn’t exactly as open and transparent a process as many expected after reading the original Public Message regarding (the Mayor’s) Advisory Committee which said “all meetings of the Committee will be governed by the State Sunshine Law and will be open for the public to attend and to listen as the Committee conducts its deliberations.”

Instead, according to the minutes of the March 17, 2009 meeting, when the consultant “presented the names of the sites that the committee’s criteria and weighting had ranked as well as their scores and order... (i)t was agreed by the Committee that this information would not be posted until the completion of the Committee’s process.”

And indeed an examination of the minutes of the committee do not reveal the consultants reports or the specific comparative information leading to the selection of the Kalaheo site over the six others that were proposed.

Expectations were so far from actualities that the committee was apparently adamant toward the end that the original “charge” to the committee be amended to indicate the way the process actually occurred after they were cut out of completing the ranking process.

The April 21, 2009 minutes say:

The Committee requested that the wording concerning the Mayor’s charge to the Committee be clarified to better reflect that the task was to develop and weight the criteria which the consultant applied to the sites resulting in the ranking.

That indicates that the consultant RM Towill did not just “facilitate the MACLS with the objective to identify and recommend a site for Kauai’s next Landfill” as the county web site notice from August 13, 2008 reads but actually was the one who applied the criteria that the committee developed and made the final recommendation.

But even more disturbing is what various sources have been saying since the beginning- that the administration came in trying to force the Kekaha site on the committee with the membership “stacked”, some say, to insure that the dump remained in an area right across the highway and adjacent to the county’s only current landfill.

One source with knowledge of the process confirmed what many were saying last year- that the committee was told at the first meeting that "experts" had already made their preliminary studies and had come to the conclusion that the present site in Kekaha was the most favorable, "geographically" and "climatically".

That however was under Mayor Baptiste who, many county observers say, was trying to placate the desire of the current landfill workforce to keep the jobs in the area.

The one caveat on the selection of the Kalaheo site– which was ranked #1 by the consultant with the Kekaha site coming in #2 site and Kipu site in third- is that the administration in the person of the mayor is the one making the final designation since, as the minutes indicate over and over, the committee was only there to make a “recommendation” not a “selection”.

Although our sources agree that the Kalaheo site is the one that will be announced this week by current Mayor Bernard Carvalho, he did have the final say and because he could have changed his mind and selected a different site, nothing is “final” until the announcement is officially made.

The members of the committee- whose names were found nowhere at the county web site except in the meeting minutes- were:

Gary Pacheco, David Sproat, Ted Inouye, George Costa, Mike Curtis, Mary J. Buza-Sims, Jose Bulatao, Jr., Michael V. Layosa, Edward Kawamura, Keith Nitta, Kenny Ishii, Palmer Hafdahl, Glenn Frazier, Diana Simao, Kathleen Hurd;
County DPW: Troy Tanigawa, Emily Ishida;
Consultant: Brian Takeda;
Facilitator: Dee Dee Letts

ALL EARS

ALL EARS: The case of the release of the minutes of the infamous ES 177 Kauai County Council meeting was heard by the Supreme Court of Hawai`i on August 10. We’re still looking for the transcript but for your weekend listening pleasure you may now listen to the entire audio recording in mp3 format.

The ruling is apparently still pending.

For a detailed analysis of and links to the OIP brief see our July 1 post.

Here’s some background from the state judicary web site.

ORAL ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT
NO. 29059 - Monday, August 10, 2009 - 11 a.m.

COUNTY OF KAUAI, KAUAI COUNTY COUNCIL; BILL "KAIPO" ASING, JAMES KUNANE TOKIOKA, JAY FURFARO, SHAYLENE ISERI-CARVALHO, DARYL W. KANESHIRO, MEL RAPOZO, JOANN A. YUKIMURA, and PETER A. NAKAMURA, in their official capacities, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

vs.

OFFICE OF INFORMATION PRACTICES, STATE OF HAWAII; and the Director of the Office of Information Practices, in his official capacity, Defendants-Appellants.(Declaratory Judgment)

Attorney(s) for Petitioners-Defendants-Appellant(s)Paul T. Tsukiyama, Cathy L. Takase and Jennifer Z. Brooks, Office of Information Practices, and Gail Y. Cosgrove and Kunio Kuwabe (Hisaka Yoshida & Cosgrove)

Attorney(s) for Respondents-Plaintiffs-Appellee(s)Honorable Matthew S. K. Pyun, Jr., County Attorney, County of Kauai, and David J. Minkin and Becky T. Chestnut (McCorristion Miller Mukai MacKinnon)

NOTE: Certificate of Recusal by Justice Mark E. Recktenwald, filed 5/15/09.

NOTE: Order assigning Judge Glenn Hara in place of Recktenwald, recused, filed 5/18/09.

NOTE: Oral argument rescheduled from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.

COURT: RTYM, CJ; PAN, SRA & JED, JJ, and Circuit Judge Glenn Hara in place of Recktenwald, recused.

Brief description:
Petitioners/Defendants-Appellants Office of Information Practices, State of Hawai`i (OIP) and the Director of OIP, in his official capacity (collectively “OIP”) filed an application for writ of certiorari seeking review of the Intermediate Court of Appeals’ (ICA’s) February 19, 2009 judgment on appeal in support of its January 30, 2009 opinion. The ICA’s opinion affirmed the Circuit Court of the Fifth Circuit’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Respondents-Plaintiffs-Appellees County of Kaua`i, Kaua`i County Council, and Bill “Kaipo” Asing, James Kunane Tokioka, Jay Furfaro, Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, Daryl W. Kaneshiro, Mel Rapozo, Joann A. Yukimura, and Peter A. Nakamura in their official capacities (collectively “the County”) and ordered that the minutes from a meeting conducted by the Kaua`i County Council on January 20, 2005, identified as Executive Session 177 (ES-177), shall not be disclosed. In its application for writ of certiorari before this court, OIP asserts that the ICA gravely erred in (1) affirming the circuit court’s jurisdiction to hear the Council’s original action under the Sunshine Law, Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) chapter 92, without then limiting its review to determining the applicability of that chapter; (2) not giving effect to the Kauai County Charter’s more restrictive standard for closing a counsel meeting; (3) failing to consider the legislative history indicating that the Legislature intentionally narrowed the attorney-client executive meeting purpose provided by HRS § 92-5(a)(4); and (4) failing to defer to OIP’s interpretation of Sunshine Law provisions under the palpably erroneous standard.