STILL ON PATROL

STILL ON PATROL: The recent decision by the Kaua`i Board of Ethics (BOE) to enforce the conflict-of-interest prohibitions as expressed in the county charter’s section 20.02(D) was an important first step in reforming what has evolved into a traditionally ethically-challenged political tool of administrations and councils.

And apparently members of the public aren’t going to rest on their laurels if Horace Stoessel’s communication asking the BOE to “schedule three reviews that I believe will serve the public interest as well as the board’s interest, with a brief rationale for each” is any indication.

Although Stoessel’s requests are matters that the BOE needs to examine until they come under a less political and more independent template and appointment system - similar to that of the State Ethics commission- any reforms may be merely akin to shifting deck chairs on the Titanic until the charter review commission decides (or a group of citizens petitions) to deal with the really problematic charter sections like the one governing the BOE’s structure.

That said, here’s Horace’s request:

----------

TO: Chairperson Sally Motta and members of the Board of Ethics
FROM: Horace Stoessel
SUBJECT: Request for Reviews
DATE: March 30, 2010

The purpose of this communication is to ask the Board of Ethics to schedule three reviews that I believe will serve the public interest as well as the board’s interest, with a brief rationale for each.

1. A review of the board’s Guide to Ethical Issues (2004), with a view to making appropriate revisions. Aside from routine corrections such as recognizing the creation of the Office of Boards and Commissions Administrator, potentially confusing references to the Code of Ethics need correcting. In the last paragraph of page one, for example, the Code is referred to as “these ordinances,” while the examples listed on pages 4-8 routinely cite the County Code ahead of the Charter—a practice that should be reversed.

2. A review of Chapter 3 Article 1 of the County Code in light of Charter Section 20.04D, with a view to recommending changes per 20.05D(5). In 1971 the Council enacted Section 25, entitled “ETHICS,” consisting of slightly more than two double-spaced pages. In 1976 the section was replaced with approximately six single-spaced pages entitled “CODE OF ETHICS.” It is reasonable to assume that the new title and expanded contents made it easy for people to assume that Chapter 3 Article 1, rather than Charter Article XX, contains the code of ethics. The title of 3.1 should be changed to something like “Supplements to the Code of Ethics,” and the contents should be reviewed in light of the requirement that ordinances should be necessary supplements to the code. For example, is mere repetition of sections from Article XX justified by 20.04D?

3. A review of the relationship between the Board of Ethics and the administration in light of the board’s authority and responsibility per Article XX, the job description of the Boards and Commissions Administrator (Charter Section 7.06 adopted in 2006), and the County Attorney’s role (Charter Section 8.04). The board is not a part of the administration, but the fact that the Boards and Commissions Administrator and the County Attorney are appointed by the Mayor and serve the board can lead to the perception that the board is just another part of the administration. One key issue is whether the board has the right to seek outside counsel when it deems such counsel is needed.

I request that this communication be placed on the board’s April 9 agenda.

WHICH WAY IS UP?

WHICH WAY IS UP?: Excuse us if we’re off chasing a pet peeve today but this weekend’s rescue in Hanakapi`ai has highlighted a problem somewhere in describing island locations.

We’re not quite sure where the problem is but we’re pretty sure it’s once again promulgated confusing if not erroneous information being disseminated.

Though the county press release doesn’t appear on the county web site today, the “lede” in the local newspaper says:

A multi-agency response Sunday afternoon led to the successful recovery of a family who got into trouble off Hanakapi`ai Beach on Na Pali Coast, a county press release states.

A 43-year-old father and his two sons, ages 10 and 12, were rescued from a cave west of Hanakapi`ai Beach on Sunday after a long operation, the release states (emphasis added).

Two problems appear to those who know Hanakapi`ai as well those who’ve noted a fairly recent penchant in describing directions in both county press releases and stories in the local newspaper.

First of all, while there are a couple of “temporary” caves that “appear” on the Ke`e Beach side of Hanakapi`ai – usually in the summer but sometimes in the spring- there are never any that appear “around a bend” on the Kalalau side.

You can probably see where we’re going here especially after reading this penultimate sentence in the newspaper which says:

Since 1970, there have been over 30 drowning deaths at Hanakapi`ai, according to various sources including Patrick Durkin’s Kaua`i Beach Hazard Survey and the Web site teok.com (The Edge Of Kaua`i Investigations), which indicates people getting swept westward from Hanakapi`ai Beach normally find no safe exit point for three to six miles (emphasis added).

That, as we said, is because there aren’t any. We suspect the editor might have known that but accepted the “west” description given by the county at face value and sought to reconcile it by describing a rather miraculous appearance of a cave on the Kalalau side.

It’s all because whomever is giving directions- whether the county or the paper- is using the continental designations of “east, west, north and south” rather than the island-friendly mauka and makai for toward the mountains and toward ocean and. more to the point, common reference points- such as Ke`e and Kalalau or `Ewa and Diamondhead in Honolulu- to indicate direction around the island.

This results in the wrong directions being reported because very few places are really strictly east or west as they move in a circular manner rather than straight lines. That’s has led to “choke” confusion in describing numerous car crashes and other police fire and rescue incidents.

Our road signs don’t indicate east west north and south simply because it leads to confusion especially if you’re going from say the northern most point on the island in Kilauea to the end of the road. While most might think and say you’re traveling “further north” actually you’re moving in more a westerly direction.

One more thing- we’ve noted that, as a matter of fact, the Honolulu newspapers always leave out mention of the four continental directions from their county-press-release- based reports as one did today.


So how ‘bout it Kaua`i folks- how about getting with the program and giving us directions in the terms we’re used to hearing and can use?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled rants.

DOGGIE PEE, DOGGIE DOO

DOGGIE PEE, DOGGIE DOO: It won’t be long now until dog poop is once again on the lips of the citizenry what with the expiration of the experimental “bikes on the dog path” law and the new law before the council promising a long hot summer of dog path hearings a-comin’.

So get out you doggie-doodoo-bag and pin it to your shirt because it’s already being spread pretty thick on the pages of the local newspaper- all before the public hearing on the bill to expand dog-crapping to the entire path and also before the required survey is available.

Just this weekend we’ve already been hit with a flaming bag-o-crap lobbed over the wall in a predictable disinformation campaign from the brownshirts of the so-called stakeholders committee: Dr. Randall C. Blake, Sue Hansen, Thomas Noyes, Dr. Becky Rhoades.

Even Joan Conrow- who is usually more concerned with topics of real importance such as her upcoming Honolulu Weekly piece on the latest from the Naue burials debacle- has been busy with watching where she walks after describing a little walk on the “linear park”

After a meeting of the persons if not the minds between her and Councilperson Tim Bynum, who has introduced the latest dog path bill and was an original proponent of the path, she wrote:

Koko and I found ourselves meeting Tim at Lihi Park — the southerly end of the section where dogs are allowed — yesterday afternoon.

Now, readers of this blog know that I am no fan of the Path, but it was a lovely day and the ocean — turquoise and glassy under an offshore wind — looked absolutely ono. Of course, I couldn’t legally access it for a swim so long as Koko was at my side, so I focused instead on the task at hand: listening to Tim.

For those who don’t generally delve into underworld of the anonymous trolls in the comments section of Joan’s blog, it’s pretty much of a zoo where the bored, lonely sophomoric and adolescent-minded baboons gather to mindlessly throw their own feces at each other and Joan.

And today, after mentioning the lawsuit against KIUC for refusing to do anything but talk about stopping their wholesale slaughter of Shearwaters, she wrote about what one particularly dedicated defacer posted over the weekend:

This topic always makes me think of the thoughtful “f the birds” comment left by the shift-key impaired, short dash-fixated “dwps” — aka “mainland mentality,” “Darwin was pretty smart,” “young white atheist male” and “anonymous” — who recently left the comment:

“only here, and a few weird places on the mainland populated by strange people, would a bike path be seen as some sort of bag thing. its bizarre”

I’m assuming he meant “bad” and not “bag,” so let me spell it out for him. A bike path that is part of a road system, so as to truly facilitate alternative transportation, could be seen as a good thing.

But a bike path that runs over a beach or burials, is constructed of coastline hardening concrete, delivers hordes of people to places previously untrammeled, exposes you to possible $500 fines and puts you on the radar of an over zealous enforcement officer riding a bicycle with a poodle in a basket, well, in my opinion, that’s a bad thing.

Although we generally skip the troll-fest we happened on this one and maybe not so coincidentally it stood out to us too.

So a little Kealia and island history is in order.

In 1976 a Japanese developer wanted to put a resort where the Kumukumu camp- right across the highway from the beach- had recently been shut down.

People fought like hell to stop it and did so successfully but at one point those who opposed it but thought it inevitable had suggested Kealia be officially designated as a county beach park to “protect” it from development.

Being malihini at the time we at first blanch didn’t get it. But on second thought we had been around the island long enough to have seen the pattern and saw what happened whenever a “park” designation was made.

Many local people knew full well what happens on Kaua`i when you make a beach or any other gathering place into a “park”.

Where people once had free reign to camp, fish, even drive right to the camping spot and generally be free of rules and restrictions, all of a sudden we now had permits, rangers, prohibitions- including against bringing dogs- and generally had to go somewhere else to relax on weekends ad holidays.

So we stopped the beach park at Kealia. Some of us tracked it for decades and every time the proposal came back up we nipped it in the bud.

Now comes the bike path- that had it’s origins in Kealia Kai- and we thought we had nixed the beach park idea again with a plan that would have the path just run along the old haul cane road.

But Bernard Carvalho- then head of at first the Parks and Rec Division and later the newly-created Department of Parks and Rec- unbeknownst to anyone including the council until it was a done deal, formed a secret committee (later called the stakeholders committee), filled it with bike path proponents and then “secretly” built illegal un-permitted pavilions along the bike path because they had “extra money” (don’t ya just love that one?).

Finally they had to tear down and re-do some of the pavilions that dotted the path. But instead of leaving well enough alone, when the “dog path” bill came along all of a sudden Bernard and his cronies had somehow “declared” the bike path with pavilions to be a “linear park” where dogs would be automatically banned,

Even though by law official designation of parks is supposed to be done by the council- not to mention that no one had ever heard of a “linear park” on Kaua`i before and in fact the term didn’t appear anywhere in our charter, ordinances or administrative rules- their “done deal” stood, especially when Bernard became Mayor.

So through the back door Kealia has essentially become a “beach park” despite citizen vigilance, all due to Bernard’s lack of foresight and bending and breaking of laws, rules and regs and the lack of anyone on the council willing to challenge anything having to do with the bike path since Mel Rapozo and Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho left

That’s just one of the corners cut and reasons why we have an ugly ribbon of concrete running along the beach instead of the natural unspoiled shoreline we used to enjoy.

As with many Kaua`i institutions, its not “bike paths” in general- or electric power co-ops or a dozen other mom-and-apple-pie ideas- it’s THIS bike path that causes us to have to sidestep another stinking pile.

DISBELIEVING IS SEEING

DISBELIEVING IS SEEING: We actually enjoy ridiculing the all too easy to mock Kaua`i administration and council for their ability to keep us guessing whether they are just totally incompetent or simply so addicted to secrecy that it just seems that way.

Once again the ability to play the game of public policy and related public relation has taken a pie in the face with the county’s press release announcing “County Charter now available online”

Actually it’s always been there but as anyone who has gone to the now defunct- without a redirect- on-line version of the charter knows it’s been woefully out of date with recent charter amendments not just missing from the charter but unavailable anywhere at the county’s web site.

So it was with hope we that we read:

In response to numerous requests, the codified version of the County Charter is now available online.

To access the charter, please go to www.kauai.gov/CountyCharter.
Originally adopted by voters in 1969, there have been many amendments to the County Charter over the years.

Codified? Sounds good. Sounds like it might just be the actual words passed by the voters- all of them up through those passed in 2008.

So will the real charter final please stand up? Will we be able to cease having to do a search of our own files in order to find the language of, oh say, the seemingly forgotten, still unenforced, citizen-petitioned, general plan enforcement amendment and others passed recently?

Yeah, right- just read the penultimate line for a clue:

The official document remains in the County Clerk’s office.

And it was worse when we went to the new and improved posting where it says

Disclaimer: This is the Unofficial Charter of the County of Kaua`i, and as such MAY NOT represent the law in its current form (no warranties are made regarding its accuracy or completeness). It is being provided as a courtesy while the official edition is being finalized.

Please Note: This information is being provided as a public service. Users should confirm the accuracy of the information with the handcopy available at the Office of the County Clerk. While the County of Kaua`i will strive to keep this material accurate and up-to-date, those people needing an official, accurate, and up-to-date edition of the Charter will be able to obtain hard copies of those documents and other pertinent information from the Office of the County Clerk.

So the first result of the change is that no one who previously bookmarked the charter and never saw the release or the newspaper regurgitation story will be able to find it without jumping through who knows how many hoops.

But if you do find it what you’ll find is the long missing index (inaccurate when used with the pdf pages) but just the same tired old lack of amendments- with the exception of the addition of the “County Auditor” amendment but without any of the other 2008 changes and sans some earlier ones- notable the general plan amendment.

It’d be nice if it was even one step forward two steps backward with these dolts now and again but instead we have three steps sideways with a moonwalk thrown in to boot.

No wonder we ask so often “can’t anyone here play this game?”

DREAMIN’ OF REALITY

DREAMIN’ OF REALITY: One of the peculiarities of the ease of travel over the past century or so is the lack of context that causes parachute residents of a new chosen community tend to think the local culture began the day they arrived.

And because the “local” Hawai`i culture is both so familiar and so foreign to newcomers it’s easy to forget that all may not be as it appears to them in retrospect.

It’s the reason why there is a difference between kama`aina- literally familiar with the land, including it’s history- and the malihini and why, while it occurs all over the county and indeed the world, it is a unique distinction in Hawai`i.

So it seems to be with our friend Joan Conrow’s “review” of John Wehrheim’s movie “Taylor Camp,” in which she apparently attempts to superimpose the island and culture she found on arrival with that of late 60’s and early 70’s Kaua`i.


Joan writes:

Taylor Camp was the beginning of the end for Kauai, especially the North Shore. Because the campers reflected an attitude that was sharply at odds with local culture, an attitude that still persists to this day.

The board brush approach of that statement seems to see a monolithic “local culture” but it’s impossible to analyze that culture without separating out what was culture derived from a truly unique, native and later mutli-cultural island and that superimposed at the time by years of cultural genocide courtesy of the western capitalist missionaries along with normal provincialism that yields cultural traits that can be found in any mid-western American town.

She continues:

Those who came to Taylor Camp didn’t care that no one else on the island wanted them here, except others like them who had arrived earlier and spread the word, encouraging more to come...

They didn’t care that locals were offended by their nudity and lifestyle, or that they largely lived apart from the locals, literally lost in their own little world, just like the mainland transplants of today who stick to themselves and don’t care that locals are offended by the extravagant eyesores they construct in the view planes. The campers with their treehouses were essentially no different than those who build mansions that are similarly occupied by transients who are just passing through, removed from the larger workings of the community.

A pretty strong statement that could be expected from someone who wasn’t there. But the reality was these people weren’t building even permanent structures much less mansions and the “treehouses" blocked no view planes and were in fact invisible from the road and most of the beach.

The fact is that most of the long oppressed working class locals and those few who still practiced a truly native culture were not just tolerant but unusually welcoming given the traits of this new and different kind of haole.

“Haole John’s” stylized depiction of an us and them dynamic- achieved through interviews with the likes of western luna’s stooge Mayor Malapit- notwithstanding, a very different dynamic was underway.

While the power elite- the same paternalistic white ruling class and selected “coconuts” (brown on the outside, white in the middle) may have taken this approach the vast majority, especially the young people, were at least curious and in many ways took the cultural revolution of the 60’s as a cue for their own cultural renaissance.

Joan continues:

I was struck by how the campers, with few exceptions, gave nothing back to the place that they supposedly loved so much. Instead, they just took: food stamps, welfare, the time and patience of Clorinda, the longtime Hanalei postmaster who had to pass out their mail through general delivery, rides from people who had the cars they couldn’t afford or eschewed, fish from the ocean, water from the streams, schooling for their children, medical care. They were skimmers, folks who came in and took the cream off the top, much like the land speculators and Realtors and vacation rental operators who continue to exploit “Paradise” today, leaving their trash and doo doo and houses behind.

If all you knew was what John put in the movie you might believe some of this to be true. The fact is that Clorinda and the Chings- and almost all of the Hanalei businesspeople- loved the campers and had none of the animosity, much less a barely tolerant attitude, that Joan may have gotten from John, who was certainly was in no way a camper and was more akin to the invading, rich, land-owning and raping haole that Joan apparently abhors.

While there were many more transient “campers” who might have fit Joan’s description what Wehrheim apparently intentionally left out of his movie is that most were gainfully- if not legally- employed in the pakalolo trade.

And guess what? In that sense they fit perfectly into the local culture because soon after their arrival, not so coincidentally every family on the island- including most of the members of the police department- were driving brand new four-wheel-drive trucks thanks to the “money trees” in their back yards.

But for the “hippies” it was a lot harder. Since they had no back yard- and did it as a job- they hiked miles up streams and mountains to grow their crops- working a lot harder than anyone could imagine.

More from “Joan”:

But what really jumped out was the campers' selfishness, their insistence on doing what they wanted with no thought to how it affected the locals or this place, their overall lack of respect. One example was how they started living on the beaches, which prompted county officials to shorten the shoreline camping period from one month to two weeks, so locals ended up getting screwed. They also gave fake names like “mermaid’s pool” to places that already had perfectly good names conferred on them from ancient times. Amazingly, not one person interviewed in the film expressed one word about the Hawaiian culture or history. Instead, it was as if the place never existed until they arrived.

Here is where the inability to put things into historical context is most egregious. First of the current county camping permits are the same as always- one month spread out over a year. Some changes were made but not until the 90’s but there is no such thing as a shoreline camping permit- only ones for designated county parks.

And as far as making up names there were few if any places that didn’t have haole or pidgin names way before anyone from camp got there. It’s only since the late 70’s that more and more have regained their own names. For example no one- not local people not anyone (although in retrospect we’re pretty sure the Chandlers knew)- ever mentioned the name “Makana” but rather called the mountain across from camp “Bali Hai” since it was the one depicted as the mythical island in the movie South Pacific... which is where many north shore places got the names that were used at the time.... and it was local people who gave them those names.

And, as we said before, in many ways the influx actually contributed to the beginnings of the revival of the kanaka maoli culture which had been suppressed to the point of virtual extinction until soon after the arrival of these new westerners who eschewed that suppression and encouraged cultural expression.

It’s also easy to conflate those at Taylor Camp with many of the other “hippie enclaves” on the island. Camp was a place that tolerated and in fact encouraged transients, being the “gateway” to and stopover for Na Pali where many hundreds of others came and went.

But Joan lumps the few dozen who actually lived there- many of whom at the time developed relationships with and now live as part of that same local culture Joan sees being disrespected- along with the transients who, like today rich or poor simply come to paradise to exploit it.

Joan’s view of a continuous kanaka culture ignores the fact that it was for all intent and purpose killed off way before the sixties, practiced perhaps by a few families who kept it alive at home but were either afraid or embarrassed to do so publicly.

Many of us who came to know these families - not necessarily campers, many of who moved to the Big Island where they are members of that community- especially in Anahola shared political support for the rebirth of that culture and provided an atmosphere where the fear and embarrassment were at least in part a thing of the past.

This is not to say that the hippies- and that covers a lot of ground from the political activists to the druggies and hangers on- somehow directly caused the rejuvenation and free expression of the native Hawaiian culture that bloomed shortly after they got here.

But the very attitudes that supported and encourage that renaissance make the contention that they somehow are to be lumped in with the rich haoles who now build gated mansions on the hill and wouldn’t know an ipu from mele is only possible if you overlay the current zealousness of native culture today on the suppressed, traditionally provincial, plantation-mentality of “local” culture of the day.

A COLD DAY IN HELL

A COLD DAY IN HELL: As Sir Lancelot in the person of local newspaper reporter Mike Levine prepares for his Friday departure from the paper- and, we hear, the island - as this brief shining moment of journalistic Camelot ends he’s left us with one last accurate depiction of last Wednesday’s council debate on how best to keep the upcoming budget hearings from being viewed by the public.

But as we watched slack-jawed at the insipidly transparent tossing of anykine noodles against the wall by those opposing Tim Bynum’s and Lani Kawahara’s quest to open the process to televised scrutiny it seemed more like a cartoonish melodrama than a sober legislative hearing.

So we take you to Frostbite Falls and The Further Adventures of Rocky “Lani” J. Squirrel and Bullwinkle “Tim” J. Moose in:

“How Much Sunshine Does it Take to Melt a Snow Job?” or “A Crony Enslaved Is A Crony Earned”

When last we left our heroes moose and squirrel, the evil Pottsyvanian Boris “Darryl” Badenov and his paramour Natasha “Derrick” Fatale were plotting to perpetuate Fearless Leader’s (guess who) plot for council domination as Jay-Peabody and his pet boy Dickie-Sherman looked on.

Bullwinkle: What are we going to do Rocky? We can’t let these no-good-nics thwart the people’s right to see the way we’re spending their money.

Rocky: I know Bullwinkle- we’ll put the matter on the agenda and everyone will see their evil plans and the people will rise up and demand ...

Bullwinkle: Uh, didn’t we try that last summer Rocky?

But when the time for debate came to economically downtrodden Frostbite Falls, knowing the public’s traditional gullibility and short attention span Boris and Natasha had some tricks up their sleeve.

Boris: People of Frostbite Falls. We must stop moose and squirrel’s from letting world know of incompetence and corruption, er I mean wise and compassionate use of tax dollars. If we spend $17,000 on televising budget hearings that will be sole cause for county employees furloughs. And we must keep sessions secret so bond rating people won’t have a record of utter stupidity, er I mean brilliant money management. Otherwise world will know of our waste and pork-barreling, er I mean benevolent oversight.

Natasha: Good one Boris- why not tout slush fund while you’re at it.

Fearless Leader: Stick to the script you two or you’ll be sent to the civil service gulag.

So- will our heroes get the budget hearings on TV? Will Boris get his kickback? Will fearless leader run again?

Tune in again next time for “Powder-puff For The People” or “White Noise Is Good Noise”

(Commercial for next $1 million, unaccountable, unsuccessful, down-the-rat-hole tourism grant).

Now it’s time to tell some fractured fairy tales so let’s get into the way back machine.

Peabody: Now Sherman, remembering I’m both for televising the meetings and against spending the money what do you have to say for yourself?

Sherman. Why don’t you see- even if we televise them no one will ever get to see them. Each day’s session lasts eight hours so it will only air in the middle of the night before the next day’s session goes on the air... because as everyone knows the days are only eight hours long here in the past and weekends and the future don’t exist.

(Next commercial for multi-million $ helicopter-toy).

When we last left our intrepid duo they were being cut off by fearless leader after the double-talking bamboozling of the rest of the council.

Rocky: What are we gonna do now Bullwinkle? Look like, the local newspaper’s on-line streaming notwithstanding, there’ll be no TV for most of the people who don’t have or use computers?

Bullwinkle: I know- we’ll introduce a bill to allow more vacation rentals and strip all the protections in the last bill.

Rocky: How will that get the budget hearings on TV?

Bullwinkle: It won’t. But I’m moving on. People will only remember we fought for them and won’t care if we give up. This may not be Chinatown but it is Kaua`i.

So will our heroes get the hearings televised? Will the local newspaper simply tape their “feed” and submit it to public access TV? Will the administration find $17,000 after they stole $130,000 from the line item for televising meetings for an on-line streaming project that should have been in next year’s budget?

Tune in again next time for:

“Broadband Melody” or “A penny encumbered is a pound yearned for”.

(PNN) CARVALHO, ISOBE VIOLATE CHARTER IN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION APPOINTMENT, APPLICATION REVEALS

CARVALHO, ISOBE VIOLATE CHARTER IN LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION APPOINTMENT, APPLICATION REVEALS

(PNN) -- When Rob Abrew first started his campaign to force the council to provide the public with the actual applications filed by prospective board and commission members and do so in a timely manner he suspected he might be opening a can of worms.

This past Wednesday his suspicions- that the lack of sunshine might be covering up at best incompetence and at worst malfeasance on the part of Mayor Bernard Carvalho and Boards and Commissions Administrator John Isobe- were confirmed when he examined one of the two applications submitted by people seeking council confirmation for their appointments.

Despite the fact that Heidy Huddy-Yamamoto’s application for appointment to the Liquor Control Commission clearly states she works for Costco- an establishment that sells liquor- the fact that her membership on the commission would clearly violate the county charter, Carvalho and Isobe didn’t seem to mind.

In article 16 section 3, Disqualifications of Liquor Control Commissioners, the county charter states:

No person shall be a member or the liquor control commission who is or becomes engaged, or is directly or indirectly interested in any business for the manufacture or sale of liquor... This provision shall be enforced by the mayor by the removal of the disqualified member whenever such disqualifications shall appear.

Abrew has been successful in not only making the applications available to the public but in causing Isobe to make changes to the application forms to make sure that they include all information required by the charter including a question as to political party affiliation so as to confirms that only “a bare majority” of members of any one party sit on any individual board or commission.

But while Abrew confirms that all the latest applications do ask that question the county still has no process for ascertaining the validity of information provided with the various political parties.

When he brought the subject up at the March 3 council meeting- the first for which the applications were made available- Councilmember Tim Bynum, who has supported Abrew in his efforts, told Abrew that he had confidence that the administration would be doing their job as far as confirming the information provided and presumably checking on the legality of each appointment.

However the very next meeting on March 17 the violation of the charter presented on Yamamoto’s application was either missed or ignored by Carvalho, Isobe and apparently the council itself which, after Abrew’s testimony, deferred the resolution confirming Yamamoto’s nomination pending an interview.

Abrew thinks the action may be a violation of the code of ethics since it is a violation of both Carvalho’s and Isobe’s oath of office in which they swear to uphold the county charter.

He also wonders how many other board and commission member’s appointments have violated the charter and/or ordinances since not only are the past applications unavailable but this seems to confirm that the administration may not even be reading them much less verifying the information contained.

Abrew says that some of the applications he has seen so far have been incomplete with many unanswered “blanks” including under “employment” which might also reveal conflicts-of-interest in violation of the provisions of the code of ethics contained in the charter and county code.

For background see previous PNN news stories:

Friday, January 8, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL IGNORES, FLOUTS OIP IN CONFIRMING BOARD, COMMISSION MEMBERS Monday, January 11, 2010 (PNN) ABREW FILES WRITTEN RECORDS, CLARIFICATION REQUESTS WITH COUNTY CLERK AT OIP’S URGING

Monday, January 25, 2010 (PNN) COUNCIL CONFIRMS B&C NOMINEES WITHOUT RELEASING APPLICATIONS, REFUSES KAWAHARA DEFERRAL REQUEST
Friday, February 19, 2010 (PNN) ABREW SUCCEEDS IN OBTAINING PROSPECTIVE B&C MEMBERS’ APPLICATIONS