DON’T LET GO, DON’T LET GO: Kaua`i has never been a hotbed of citizen participation when it comes to local government.
Even among the activist “usual suspects” most prefer to glom onto political issues that are state or even national in nature and if county government is involved they enter with a sense of helplessness as if approaching, if at all, an amorphous phagocyte ready to gobble them up dare they approach the monolithic blob.
Those of us who dare enter the labyrinth of the Minotaurs are steeled against its tentacles and though outrage is the coin of our realm it’s never a sure bet that our indignation will translate to community-wide ire.
How else do you explain why it took two years for Councilperson Tim Bynum to go public with the fact that councilmembers are not permitted to introduce legislation without the approval of the paternalistic hierarchy?
How else do you explain that it took another Councilperson Lani Kawahara to expose the lack of availability of public documents?
The trepidation Bynum and Kawahara felt over the months over openly challenging the status quo and leading up to last Wednesday’s challenge was only overcome after a last ditch effort at an end run around the beast that ended in humiliation and defeat.
For some reason this stab at the heart of our representational form of government has seemingly lit a spark if the daily letters to the editor of the local newspaper- which are now posted at the kauaiinfo.org web site set up by Bynum and Kawahara- are any indication.
Today someone went a step further by anonymously posting an on-line petition - with 42 signatories as of press time- that reads:
We, the residents of Kaua`i, respectfully request County Council agenda time for public discussion on open government, including, but not limited to, proposals related to the following items:
1. Councilmember's access to the agenda;
2. The placement of public documents, including meeting minutes, on the County's website;
3. Equitable and timely circulation of council service documents;
4. General access to information by the public and Councilmembers.
But don’t expect the agenda for next Wednesday’s full council meeting to reflect public anger when it’s posted tomorrow- or any time in the near future, especially as long as the protestations are made from afar.
While it’s gratifying to see the outpouring of support for the two councilmembers who dared to speak up for the community it’s only a first step in reclaiming our local government.
Future steps must include focusing on the machinations of the power elite, learning their stonewalling and obfuscating ways and, especially, showing up when they meet and holding their feet to the fire on every item.
Beyond the issues Bynum and Kawahara have raised are issues involving the webcast and cablecasts of council meetings which could be sent out live at no extra cost with the flip of a switch. Others include demanding full descriptions of agenda items and a full reading of them at the meetings. Eventually we must demand to have live telephone and email testimony taken on all items as many jurisdictions across the country allow.
Even if this agenda-access issue is resolved favorably if people go back to sleep when it’s over and allow not just the council but the administration to twist and warp laws and rules to their own ends, we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves when the good guys on the council just give up- as many have done in the past- and “join ‘em” when they figure out the people won’t stand by their sides when they “fight ‘em”.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
(PNN) OIP OPENS INVESTIGATION OF COUNCIL’S EXECUTIVE SESSION ON DENYING AGENDA ACCESS TO COUNCILMEMBERS.
OIP OPENS INVESTIGATION OF COUNCIL’S EXECUTIVE SESSION ON DENYING AGENDA ACCESS TO COUNCILMEMBERS.
(PNN) The state Office of Information Practices (OIP) has opened an investigation of the “unforeseen” executive session held at the June 3 meeting of the Kaua`i County Council.
As PNN reported last week, the un-agendaed secret meeting was held to discuss the attempt by Councilperson Tim Bynum to place an amendment to the council rules on the agenda for the purposes of clarifying the rule that states that Chair Kaipo Asing could not block councilmembers from introducing bills and resolutions, as Bynum alleges Asing has routinely done for at least two-and-a-half years.
Bynum has said and presented documentation showing how Asing has used an administrative rule provision requiring Asing “initial” agenda items to block introduction of measures.
A complaint filed by Kaua`i resident Brad Parsons on June 4 asks for an “investigation and enforcement actions by all means necessary” and cites both PNN’s report and one that appeared in the local paper.
Parsons asked that:
the OIP look into the appropriateness of the use of Executive Session during the events of Wed. June 3, 2009, by the Kaua`i County Council described in the above reports. I would also request that the OIP look at the all of the events and supporting documentation at Kauaiinfo.org to develop an effective case for broader action on these unacceptable matters inconsistent with "one man, one vote" standards of representative democracy.
In response OIP launched investigation S INVES-P 09-08 and on June 5 sent the following letter to Asing.
Dear Chair Asing,
The Office of Information Practices has received a complaint from Mr. Brad Parsons concerning the Kaua`i County Council (“the Council). Specifically Mr. Parsons asks whether the executive sessions held on June 3, 2009 violated part 1 of section 92 Hawai`i Revised Statutes (the Sunshine Law). A copy of Mr. Parson’s (sic) complaint is enclosed for your information.
We ask for your assistance in our review of this complaint. Please provide us with a detailed explanation. including any relevant legal citations setting forth the council’s position on this matter and any other information you deem relevant to this inquiry. We request that the council provide this response to the OIP no later than ten days from receipt of this letter.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned attorney.
Very truly yours,
Jennifer Z. Brooks,
Staff Attorney.
To clarify our coverage of last Thursday, Bynum attempted to place the matter on the agenda by making a “motion to amend” when the matter of the agenda came up at the meeting. That motion was seconded by councilperson Lani Kawahara but the motion was apparently never voted upon by the council.
Instead County Clerk Peter Nakamura reminded Asing that the approval of the agenda was left pending due to a previous motion for approval and second.
The council’s vote to approve was apparently approval of the agenda, not the amendment even though according to rules of order the amendment should have taken precedence.
According to the Sunshine Law and previous OIP rulings “unanticipated” matters that come up during a council meeting may be heard in executive sessions but that is only for items that are actually on the agenda.
Each council agenda contains a caveat saying
(p)ursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. (“H.R.S.”) §92-7(a), the Council may, when deemed necessary, hold an executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the executive session was not anticipated in advance.
As to adding a matter to the agenda the Sunshine Law reads
No board shall change the agenda, once filed, by adding items thereto without a two-thirds recorded vote of all members to which the board is entitled; provided that no item shall be added to the agenda if it is of reasonably major importance and action thereon by the board will affect a significant number of persons.
It should be noted that both conditions must be present for the matter to be rejected as an addition to the agenda. Since the current rules call for all councilmembers to be able to add items to the agenda it is unknown how clarifying that council rule- a basic tenet of American republican representational government- would be of “either major importance” or “affect a significant number of persons”.
At the meeting county Attorney Al Castillo briefly maintained that both conditions were met he did not say how, saying only that “council rules are important” and “affect everyone on the island”.
He then repeatedly cut off discussion by of the matter councilmembers Bynum and Kawahara in public session and demanded an executive session, even though his role is advisory.
Those wishing to view the meeting this weekend were greeted by a blank screens on Ch. 53 of Ho`ike Community Television which is paid by the county to tape and cablecast the meetings.
Although PNN called Saturday to alert them to the situation and talked to an employee who said he would take care of the matter, the screen remained blank all weekend during a time when most people are known to watch the meetings, especially those that have been controversial.
Asing and County Clerk Nakamura are in charge of administering the council’s portion of the Ho`ike contract and determine which council sessions will be presented on Public access TV.
In the past OIP has ordered that minutes of executive sessions that were illegally held must be made public immediately. In one such ruling the county sued the OIP delaying release for two years.
Presuming the OIP letter to Asing that was sent Friday arrived yesterday (6/9) a response is due June 19.
(PNN) The state Office of Information Practices (OIP) has opened an investigation of the “unforeseen” executive session held at the June 3 meeting of the Kaua`i County Council.
As PNN reported last week, the un-agendaed secret meeting was held to discuss the attempt by Councilperson Tim Bynum to place an amendment to the council rules on the agenda for the purposes of clarifying the rule that states that Chair Kaipo Asing could not block councilmembers from introducing bills and resolutions, as Bynum alleges Asing has routinely done for at least two-and-a-half years.
Bynum has said and presented documentation showing how Asing has used an administrative rule provision requiring Asing “initial” agenda items to block introduction of measures.
A complaint filed by Kaua`i resident Brad Parsons on June 4 asks for an “investigation and enforcement actions by all means necessary” and cites both PNN’s report and one that appeared in the local paper.
Parsons asked that:
the OIP look into the appropriateness of the use of Executive Session during the events of Wed. June 3, 2009, by the Kaua`i County Council described in the above reports. I would also request that the OIP look at the all of the events and supporting documentation at Kauaiinfo.org to develop an effective case for broader action on these unacceptable matters inconsistent with "one man, one vote" standards of representative democracy.
In response OIP launched investigation S INVES-P 09-08 and on June 5 sent the following letter to Asing.
Dear Chair Asing,
The Office of Information Practices has received a complaint from Mr. Brad Parsons concerning the Kaua`i County Council (“the Council). Specifically Mr. Parsons asks whether the executive sessions held on June 3, 2009 violated part 1 of section 92 Hawai`i Revised Statutes (the Sunshine Law). A copy of Mr. Parson’s (sic) complaint is enclosed for your information.
We ask for your assistance in our review of this complaint. Please provide us with a detailed explanation. including any relevant legal citations setting forth the council’s position on this matter and any other information you deem relevant to this inquiry. We request that the council provide this response to the OIP no later than ten days from receipt of this letter.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned attorney.
Very truly yours,
Jennifer Z. Brooks,
Staff Attorney.
To clarify our coverage of last Thursday, Bynum attempted to place the matter on the agenda by making a “motion to amend” when the matter of the agenda came up at the meeting. That motion was seconded by councilperson Lani Kawahara but the motion was apparently never voted upon by the council.
Instead County Clerk Peter Nakamura reminded Asing that the approval of the agenda was left pending due to a previous motion for approval and second.
The council’s vote to approve was apparently approval of the agenda, not the amendment even though according to rules of order the amendment should have taken precedence.
According to the Sunshine Law and previous OIP rulings “unanticipated” matters that come up during a council meeting may be heard in executive sessions but that is only for items that are actually on the agenda.
Each council agenda contains a caveat saying
(p)ursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. (“H.R.S.”) §92-7(a), the Council may, when deemed necessary, hold an executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the executive session was not anticipated in advance.
As to adding a matter to the agenda the Sunshine Law reads
No board shall change the agenda, once filed, by adding items thereto without a two-thirds recorded vote of all members to which the board is entitled; provided that no item shall be added to the agenda if it is of reasonably major importance and action thereon by the board will affect a significant number of persons.
It should be noted that both conditions must be present for the matter to be rejected as an addition to the agenda. Since the current rules call for all councilmembers to be able to add items to the agenda it is unknown how clarifying that council rule- a basic tenet of American republican representational government- would be of “either major importance” or “affect a significant number of persons”.
At the meeting county Attorney Al Castillo briefly maintained that both conditions were met he did not say how, saying only that “council rules are important” and “affect everyone on the island”.
He then repeatedly cut off discussion by of the matter councilmembers Bynum and Kawahara in public session and demanded an executive session, even though his role is advisory.
Those wishing to view the meeting this weekend were greeted by a blank screens on Ch. 53 of Ho`ike Community Television which is paid by the county to tape and cablecast the meetings.
Although PNN called Saturday to alert them to the situation and talked to an employee who said he would take care of the matter, the screen remained blank all weekend during a time when most people are known to watch the meetings, especially those that have been controversial.
Asing and County Clerk Nakamura are in charge of administering the council’s portion of the Ho`ike contract and determine which council sessions will be presented on Public access TV.
In the past OIP has ordered that minutes of executive sessions that were illegally held must be made public immediately. In one such ruling the county sued the OIP delaying release for two years.
Presuming the OIP letter to Asing that was sent Friday arrived yesterday (6/9) a response is due June 19.
Monday, June 8, 2009
ANOTHER BARK IN THE DARK
ANOTHER BARK IN THE DARK: Anthony Sommer’s book KPD Blue (see left rail) continues be a Kaua`i best seller and to draw readers to this space with another dozen or so perusing its pages just this weekend.
In addition to exposing the corruption in the Kaua`i Police Department, the book details the political machinations that led to the removal of two chiefs and the no-so-coincidental resultant hiring of current chief Darryl Perry whose promoters saw to it that Chief KC Lum and Police Commission Chair Michael Ching were purged after Lum originally beat out Perry for the job.
The result for the island has been that, while Lum and his predecessor George Freitas were adherents of progressive tenets of modern policing who understood and kept up with the dynamics of the changing face of law enforcement, Perry remains something of a dinosaur.
And when it comes to drug policy Perry seems incapable of examining national studies and trends and seems entrenched in his own provincial rigid views rooted in the 1950’s if not the 1930’s marijuana scare campaigns.
There are few left who won’t admit that the war on drugs has been an utter failure. Drugs are more prevalent than ever, our jails are overflowing with non violent users and the streets are littered with bodies that are the result, not of the drug use itself but of the war being waged.
The rational examination of the absurd circular logic of “all drugs are bad because they are illegal and they are illegal because they are bad” has led to a movement including most of the past national “drug czars” and top leaders in law enforcement calling for an end to the war and a more rational harm reduction approach including the elimination of programs like D.A.R.E. which refuses to distinguish between more innocuous drugs like marijuana and destructive drugs like crystal methamphetamine or “ice”.
Studies, including a 2003 US General Accounting Office report, have shown that lumping all drugs together for the purposes of demonizing them equally in anti-drug programs like D.A.R.E has actually caused the use of more dangerous drugs and even related deaths when kids find out that they’ve been lied to about marijuana and assume the warnings about the more lethal drugs are equally untrue.
Worse still has been the appropriation of scarce funds to engage in these marijuana eradication programs which not only waste money and destroy medicine used for medical treatment but make scarce a substance far less harmful than “meth” which kids who can’t get marijuana any more flock to.
While it is certainly preferable that kids don’t ingest any drugs- alcohol and tobacco included- the undeniable fact is they do and always will and if we don’t engage in a little “harm reduction” we’re not just whistling in the grave yard but actually causing the rise in the use of the more harmful drugs.
Those whose ignorance perpetuates that increased harm should be the ones who are held responsible for the results.
Enter Perry who in his column in the local newspaper yesterday unequivocally joins the team of kid-killers who cling to outdated and outmoded ideas.
Presented in a Q&A format, yesterday’s “On The Beat” column was as usual characterized by another of those quite obviously solicited “Q’s” along the lines of “you’re so wise and good- please tell us how others could possibly be so stupid?”
In it, “Greg” asked.
Q: Recently there have been several articles in the newspapers about marijuana. The first was in the Honolulu Advertiser on May 25, “War on marijuana a waste of time, money,” and then the next day there was an opinion in The Garden Island, “Alcohol vs. marijuana,” but the worst one was The Garden Island editorial on May 31, “Red light for Green Harvest.” Then just the other day, “Don’t fear the reefer.” It seems as though you guys are being blasted from all angles for doing your job.
It also seems to me that the stupid editorial by The Garden Island didn’t help matters any. I supposed we should just let all the druggies take over. Sorry about my rant, but I’m just frustrated. Well, I want to get it from the horse’s mouth, where do you stand on this?
Predictably Perry responded
I certainly understand your frustration, as I have experienced those same feelings throughout my police career. The comments and criticism don’t change just the faces and names who believe that they know better... I do agree that it sent the wrong message to our community.
The problem is that it’s not a matter of “believing” anything or sending some kind of “message” except on the part of Perry who can’t seem to digest the facts that have emerged, especially the differences between substances.
It’s pretty scary to think about what it takes to say this but this sentence tells you all you need to know about what Perry thinks.
Drugs destroy families, whether it’s marijuana, crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, or alcohol.
Marijuana does not destroy families. It is a medically accepted treatment for a wide range of maladies and is used responsibly and recreationally by tens of millions of Americans. To lump all those drugs together with marijuana is an absurd constriction that doesn’t jibe with reality.
But Perry seems unable or unwilling to grasp that the data is in and that marijuana is a fairly innocuous substance which when used in a responsible manner has no long term ill effects.
To his credit he does acknowledge that treatment is a key to harm reduction for those who use dangerous drugs. But he still demands money for marijuana interdiction due to his inability to distinguish between harmful and innocuous substances.
He writes
Do we stop eradicating marijuana because the numbers were low on this mission? That is exactly what commercial growers would want so that they could continue to sell dope to your children. Or, do we continue in our efforts? Remember that in prior missions we eradicated thousands of marijuana plants that did not find there way into homes and the brain cells of individuals cruising the same highways as you do...
We have not lost the war on drugs and it is not a failed policy...
The contorted logic and “brain cell” warning are reminiscent of the reefer madness campaigns of the distant past. Yet Perry seems stuck in just that “boogey-man” model.
His conclusion, based on that illogic, is to continue to throw money down the rathole of marijuana eradication programs even criticizing those on the Big Island who put a stop to the practice.
Perry concentrates on a recent reported $27,000 that destroyed 75 plants asking of it was worth that much for so little. But he fails to ask the bigger question of whether no matter what the result is this a wise use of scarce funds.
What’s more he fails to mention that the $75,000 is a small fraction of the approximately quarter million a year that our county accepts from the federal government to fight the “marijuana scourge”.
And that doesn’t take into account the time that police officers put into the effort. What isn’t widely reported is that police in each of the state’s four counties have a contingent of officers who go to the other three islands to assist in the eradication efforts there, taking them off the streets and away from the efforts to stop methamphetamine use and violent crime.
Perry writes
I also disagree with the suggestion that the citizens on the Big Island got it right by deprioritizing marijuana and not accepting federal funds to conduct eradication missions. I can only imagine the negative impact this decision will have in the long-term.
Fortunately, the Drug Enforcement Administration will continue its efforts with the assistance of county police.
What is most dangerous here is that Perry’s attitude- which is shared by other island PD’s- seems to forget who is running things in this country... at least theoretically.
Just as the political apparatus of a democracy maintains civilian control of the military so do the civilian police commissions provide for oversight of our paramilitary constabularies.
If nothing else “KPD Blue” describes the lead up to how, in Perry’s case, that civilian control mechanism failed when independent elements of the civilian control were purged and the commission bowed to political pressure born of internal department attempts to control policy.
What we sadly have as a result is Perry- the old soldier whose vision has been warped by too many years in the trenches and too set in his ways, incapable of seeing contemporary reality, caught up in circular reasoning and in fact committing the very atrocities he seeks to end.
In addition to exposing the corruption in the Kaua`i Police Department, the book details the political machinations that led to the removal of two chiefs and the no-so-coincidental resultant hiring of current chief Darryl Perry whose promoters saw to it that Chief KC Lum and Police Commission Chair Michael Ching were purged after Lum originally beat out Perry for the job.
The result for the island has been that, while Lum and his predecessor George Freitas were adherents of progressive tenets of modern policing who understood and kept up with the dynamics of the changing face of law enforcement, Perry remains something of a dinosaur.
And when it comes to drug policy Perry seems incapable of examining national studies and trends and seems entrenched in his own provincial rigid views rooted in the 1950’s if not the 1930’s marijuana scare campaigns.
There are few left who won’t admit that the war on drugs has been an utter failure. Drugs are more prevalent than ever, our jails are overflowing with non violent users and the streets are littered with bodies that are the result, not of the drug use itself but of the war being waged.
The rational examination of the absurd circular logic of “all drugs are bad because they are illegal and they are illegal because they are bad” has led to a movement including most of the past national “drug czars” and top leaders in law enforcement calling for an end to the war and a more rational harm reduction approach including the elimination of programs like D.A.R.E. which refuses to distinguish between more innocuous drugs like marijuana and destructive drugs like crystal methamphetamine or “ice”.
Studies, including a 2003 US General Accounting Office report, have shown that lumping all drugs together for the purposes of demonizing them equally in anti-drug programs like D.A.R.E has actually caused the use of more dangerous drugs and even related deaths when kids find out that they’ve been lied to about marijuana and assume the warnings about the more lethal drugs are equally untrue.
Worse still has been the appropriation of scarce funds to engage in these marijuana eradication programs which not only waste money and destroy medicine used for medical treatment but make scarce a substance far less harmful than “meth” which kids who can’t get marijuana any more flock to.
While it is certainly preferable that kids don’t ingest any drugs- alcohol and tobacco included- the undeniable fact is they do and always will and if we don’t engage in a little “harm reduction” we’re not just whistling in the grave yard but actually causing the rise in the use of the more harmful drugs.
Those whose ignorance perpetuates that increased harm should be the ones who are held responsible for the results.
Enter Perry who in his column in the local newspaper yesterday unequivocally joins the team of kid-killers who cling to outdated and outmoded ideas.
Presented in a Q&A format, yesterday’s “On The Beat” column was as usual characterized by another of those quite obviously solicited “Q’s” along the lines of “you’re so wise and good- please tell us how others could possibly be so stupid?”
In it, “Greg” asked.
Q: Recently there have been several articles in the newspapers about marijuana. The first was in the Honolulu Advertiser on May 25, “War on marijuana a waste of time, money,” and then the next day there was an opinion in The Garden Island, “Alcohol vs. marijuana,” but the worst one was The Garden Island editorial on May 31, “Red light for Green Harvest.” Then just the other day, “Don’t fear the reefer.” It seems as though you guys are being blasted from all angles for doing your job.
It also seems to me that the stupid editorial by The Garden Island didn’t help matters any. I supposed we should just let all the druggies take over. Sorry about my rant, but I’m just frustrated. Well, I want to get it from the horse’s mouth, where do you stand on this?
Predictably Perry responded
I certainly understand your frustration, as I have experienced those same feelings throughout my police career. The comments and criticism don’t change just the faces and names who believe that they know better... I do agree that it sent the wrong message to our community.
The problem is that it’s not a matter of “believing” anything or sending some kind of “message” except on the part of Perry who can’t seem to digest the facts that have emerged, especially the differences between substances.
It’s pretty scary to think about what it takes to say this but this sentence tells you all you need to know about what Perry thinks.
Drugs destroy families, whether it’s marijuana, crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, or alcohol.
Marijuana does not destroy families. It is a medically accepted treatment for a wide range of maladies and is used responsibly and recreationally by tens of millions of Americans. To lump all those drugs together with marijuana is an absurd constriction that doesn’t jibe with reality.
But Perry seems unable or unwilling to grasp that the data is in and that marijuana is a fairly innocuous substance which when used in a responsible manner has no long term ill effects.
To his credit he does acknowledge that treatment is a key to harm reduction for those who use dangerous drugs. But he still demands money for marijuana interdiction due to his inability to distinguish between harmful and innocuous substances.
He writes
Do we stop eradicating marijuana because the numbers were low on this mission? That is exactly what commercial growers would want so that they could continue to sell dope to your children. Or, do we continue in our efforts? Remember that in prior missions we eradicated thousands of marijuana plants that did not find there way into homes and the brain cells of individuals cruising the same highways as you do...
We have not lost the war on drugs and it is not a failed policy...
The contorted logic and “brain cell” warning are reminiscent of the reefer madness campaigns of the distant past. Yet Perry seems stuck in just that “boogey-man” model.
His conclusion, based on that illogic, is to continue to throw money down the rathole of marijuana eradication programs even criticizing those on the Big Island who put a stop to the practice.
Perry concentrates on a recent reported $27,000 that destroyed 75 plants asking of it was worth that much for so little. But he fails to ask the bigger question of whether no matter what the result is this a wise use of scarce funds.
What’s more he fails to mention that the $75,000 is a small fraction of the approximately quarter million a year that our county accepts from the federal government to fight the “marijuana scourge”.
And that doesn’t take into account the time that police officers put into the effort. What isn’t widely reported is that police in each of the state’s four counties have a contingent of officers who go to the other three islands to assist in the eradication efforts there, taking them off the streets and away from the efforts to stop methamphetamine use and violent crime.
Perry writes
I also disagree with the suggestion that the citizens on the Big Island got it right by deprioritizing marijuana and not accepting federal funds to conduct eradication missions. I can only imagine the negative impact this decision will have in the long-term.
Fortunately, the Drug Enforcement Administration will continue its efforts with the assistance of county police.
What is most dangerous here is that Perry’s attitude- which is shared by other island PD’s- seems to forget who is running things in this country... at least theoretically.
Just as the political apparatus of a democracy maintains civilian control of the military so do the civilian police commissions provide for oversight of our paramilitary constabularies.
If nothing else “KPD Blue” describes the lead up to how, in Perry’s case, that civilian control mechanism failed when independent elements of the civilian control were purged and the commission bowed to political pressure born of internal department attempts to control policy.
What we sadly have as a result is Perry- the old soldier whose vision has been warped by too many years in the trenches and too set in his ways, incapable of seeing contemporary reality, caught up in circular reasoning and in fact committing the very atrocities he seeks to end.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
BYNUM AND KAWAHARA REBUKE ASING, NAKAMURA IN SCATHING DUAL ESSAYS ON NEW WEB SITE AFTER CONTENTIOUS COUNCIL SHOWDOWN
BYNUM AND KAWAHARA REBUKE ASING, NAKAMURA IN SCATHING DUAL ESSAYS ON NEW WEB SITE AFTER CONTENTIOUS COUNCIL SHOWDOWN
(PNN)- In a stunning and scathing rebuke to the substance and style of the leadership of Kaua`i County Council Chair Kaipo Asing, dissident Councilmembers Tim Bynum and Lani Kawahara have written duel essays detailing a two year quest for basic fairness and democratic principles and adherence to council rules and state law in their own shadow web site kauaiinfo.org .
Bynum’s essay details how Asing has blocked measures Bynum has attempted to introduce from appearing on the agenda including “a bill related to release of County Attorney opinions; a bill proposing funding for a study to address erosion and safety issues at Po`ipu Beach; and rules related to the release of confidential documents”.
It details his two year quest to appeal to reason and enforce what he calls a “basic tenet of democracy”- that in our representational, republican form of government elected members of a legislative body have the right to place items before the body for consideration.
Although council rules state that any member may introduce measures for consideration they also call for the chair to “initial” all items for the agenda and Asing has simply used that administrative measure to refuse to initial any item he doesn’t want introduced.
It all spilled over onto the council floor yesterday when Bynum attempted to place a rule clarification on the agenda to say the chair could not use the initialing power to block introduction of legislation.
The resolution however was never actually mentioned during the meeting with Asing successfully blocking pubic discussion with the aid of new County Attorney Al Castillo
The Sunshine Law allows items to be added to the agenda under certain circumstances but, despite an Office of Information Practices OIP memo stating the specific addition complied with the advance notification provisions in the law, Asing successfully blocked the discussion with the support of the other four members of the council.
Kawahara’s letter details many of the public information and sunshine law issues she raised in an exclusive interview with PNN last month when she ran into roadblocks from Asing and County Clerk Peter Nakamura in getting council minutes, public documents and agenda-related communications posted on-line.
In it she says that “(t)he current practices at Council Services that control access to information are indefensible and an embarrassment. They stand in stark contrast to your legal right to expect your government to inform you, educate you and urge you to become an active participant”.
In addition both Bynum and Kawahara say that they were denied documents that other councilmembers were given and that councilmembers could not get “electronic versions” of documents that were created in that form causing them and the pubic at large to physically travel to Lihu`e to pick up paper versions of them.
Documents posted at the site also detail how the administration, under former Mayor the late Bryan Baptiste and his IT specialist Eric Knutzen had made a concerted effort to put the information and documents from all administrative boards and commissions on-line over the past two and a half years and offered to help Nakamura and council services to do the same.
Their help was rejected by Asing and Nakamura.
Also on the web site is an example from yesterday’s meeting of the council agenda information packet that the council- and the public if they request it and go down and pick it up- are given for each meeting.
In his essay entitled “Sunshine on Kaua`i?” Bynum first describes his “love for democracy” and how people should “honor each other’s ideas in a spirit of compromise and work together with mutual respect on a level playing field, good decisions are reached and implemented”
Then he writes:
(S)adly I have found that the legislative process as currently practiced on Kauai falls far short of fundamental democratic standards. Access to basic legislative information is being restricted, open dialog and debate is significantly stifled and frequently misinterpreted and often ignored rules of conduct are rendered ineffective.
When I started on the Council in December 2006 I was determined to work hard, go slow, and learn from the senior members on the Council. I felt a huge responsibility having one of seven votes on issues that are important to our community. At first I was in no hurry to put my own proposals forward as there were important issues already on the plate, and I had plenty to learn. My time would come. The one issue I felt I could move on was improving public access to what is clearly public information. To my dismay, however, access to information is not only difficult for the general public. My access as a Council Member is strictly controlled. In a number of ways that will be outlined by Council Member Kawahara, many documents intended for all Council Members are screened, delayed, or even withheld by the County Clerk. I soon discovered that some Council Members had access to information that others did not. I found this situation intolerable and inexcusable. In March 2007 I asked for it to be rectified immediately, a request that remains unfulfilled. The County Clerk—who by adopted Council rules is required to “ forward at once to the proper parties all communications and other matters either directly of through committee as the case maybe “—refused to rectify the situation, telling me he required direction from the Council Chair, who, by Council rules, supervises the Clerk. The Council Chair refused to address my concerns in any manner. To this day, the Council Chair refuses to sit down with the County Clerk and me to discuss the inequities.
He goes on to describe his two year quest to persistently but quietly change the autocratic system to a democratic one, not just by detailing Asing and Nakamura’s rebukes but by providing links to copies of the documents showing his efforts.
In her essay entitled “Just Do It: Government Transparency at Kauai County Council” Kawahara expresses her outrage over her experiences since she joined the council last November, especially at the lack of availability of documents and the way the public and she herself are denied access to what should be public documents
She writes:
Since my election to the Kauai County Council in December, I have been working to advance the council’s use of the internet to support efficient operations, provide more timely responses to constituents, and to widely disseminate our council and committee meeting minutes to educate/inform more citizens about issues that affect their daily lives.
Unfortunately, you will be disappointed to find out that efforts to provide council and committee meeting minutes in electronic format for the public on our county council website or for emailing, are opposed by Council Chair Asing and his appointed County Clerk Peter Nakamura.
Just as troubling is the lack of information coming into the Council Members’ offices from outside. Communications addressed to all Councilmembers (including emails, US mail, and Interoffice mail) are consistently and systematically screened by Mr. Nakamura. Mail for “all council members” does not necessarily get to all council members, and if it does, it may be delayed by days or weeks. Mail is doled out according to some criteria that are unknown to me and much of it is not delivered at all.
Imagine coming into a council meeting or committee meeting to find documents date- stamped “received” days earlier that are related to the agenda / or decision-making to be done that day. Imagine, even more interestingly, that such information may be provided to some but not all council members. Email intended for all Councilmembers is not sent electronically and when eventually circulated does not contain the return email address making it impossible to even acknowledge the communication or respond in any way.
In his time on the Council, council member Bynum has diligently attempted to address these issues by seeking an open dialog, clarifying council rules and leading legislative efforts to increase the availability of information but has been denied access to the Council agenda (an issue that he will outline separately).
She goes on to describe what she hopes to do by providing the kauaiinfo web site
Councilmember Bynum and I have set up an alternate website, www.kauaiinfo.org, which documents our attempts to work with Chair Asing and Mr. Nakamura to advance the County Council into 21st century government transparency. Visit www.kauaiinfo.org where we will also provide the public documents which we are unable to post on the county council website due to the environment cultivated by Chair Asing and Mr. Nakamura. We will get the public information to you. We’re doing it because they won’t.
Right now, our dedicated staff and council members spend copious amounts of time photocopying, collating and generally using reams upon reams of paper getting ready for each and every council meeting and attending to every request for information that comes across the desk. And constituents drive from all over the island to retrieve those copies. Then they drive back home. The State Senate started going paperless in 2007. Most of their work is now online. The Mayor’s administration and all Kauai County boards and commissions provide meeting minutes online. It is past time the County Council provide that same standard of government transparency.
The current practices at Council Services that control access to information are indefensible and an embarrassment. They stand in stark contrast to your legal right to expect your government to inform you, educate you and urge you to become an active participant.
Kawahara told PNN that the dustup at yesterday’s meeting happened because introducing an addition to the agenda at the meeting itself was the only avenue that they had left to address the situation internally before going public with the web site. She said she and Bynum felt compelled to try to accomplish their goals through the one internal avenue they had left after having been denied agenda access by Asing.
The council actually voted to place the item on the agenda at the beginning of the meeting but it was immediately moved to the end of the agenda by Asing who was caught by surprise by the move.
But when it finally came up Asing objected to adding it to the agenda claiming the item could not be added to the agenda even though it had already been so placed.
Section 92-7(d) of the state Sunshine law says that all items must be placed on the council agenda six days in advance if they are “of reasonably major importance and action thereon by the board will affect a significant number of persons.”. If they are not they may be added to the agenda by a 2/3 vote of the council
According to a May 15 OIP memo obtained by Bynum in anticipation of the introduction of the rule change
The proposed change to Council Rule 10(c) set forth in the attached Resolution does not appear to be of reasonably major importance or to affect a significant number of people. Thus, the Resolution appears suitable to be added to the agenda by 2/3 vote, and the Council would be acting in good faith in so adding it.
But even though an OIP opinion trumps any ruling on the Sunshine Law that a county may want to make, Castillo insisted that the discussion would indeed effect everyone on Kaua`i and is of “reasonably major importance”.
Then bafflingly he insisted that the discussion be held but held in secret “executive” session and reasoned that it was “unanticipated”
Asing and Castillo would not even allow Bynum to discuss the matter and, with Nakamura pacing, arms-crossed around the table and alternately glaring at Bynum and nodding with Asing’s comments, Castillo claimed that the question of placing the item on the agenda should be discussed in executive session without prior discussion.
Although the council is allowed to “consult with the board's attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the board's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities” it must do so in a regularly agendaed item.
There is though an exception which Castillo cited. The law, as printed on all agendas, is that “(p)ursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. (“H.R.S.”) §92-7(a), the Council may, when deemed necessary, hold an executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the executive session was not anticipated in advance” (emphasis added).
Castillo did not explain how the council could discuss whether to place an item on the agenda in executive session since that would presume it was on the agenda in order to be heard in an “unanticipated” executive session .
When the council returned from secret apparently illegal confab Castillo claimed that any further discussion would violate the Sunshine Law and the item should not have been placed on the agenda although no vote was ever taken to remove it.
When Bynum and Kawahara attempted to bring up the OIP opinion they were rebuked by Castillo.
Bynum did get to say that it was “ironic” that the sunshine law was being used to “censor discussion” and Kawahara added that anyone watching would have no idea what the discussion was even all about. She did though manage to say it was about council rules and read from her good governance manual about how the council rules were a living document and should always be subject to update.
When Bynum said that “there was nothing said in the executive session that couldn’t have been said in public” Asing, forehead veins bulging, screamed “no- you cannot do that” admonishing Bynum that he was revealing executive matters even though characterizations of the general nature of the executive session are done routinely by councilmembers, even by Asing himself.
According to the Sunshine Law minutes of an executive session are to be released as soon as the reason for secrecy no longer exists although on Kaua`i none ever have been. If Bynum was saying that that was immediately the case that would seemingly be legitimate subject for discussion as long as no specifics were mentioned.
Finally it was Castillo himself who mentioned that “I know you have an OIP opinion” but his advice was that the measure was of major importance affecting all of Kaua`i causing Bynum to ask “so it’s fair to say you disagree with the OIP opinion?”.
At that point all hell broke loose, with Castillo screaming similarly vein-bulgingly at Bynum and Asing quickly bringing the meeting back to order and then quickly adjourning the session.
Another account of the meeting by reporter Michael Levine appears in today’s local paper.
In it Levine reported that after adjournment
(t)he chair was asked if there were plans to include Bynum’s resolution on the agenda for the next meeting.
“No,” he said
When asked if there was any reason why it would not be, as there is now enough time to bring the council into compliance with the Sunshine Law by posting the agenda item in advance of the June 16 meeting, Asing said, “Nothing especially.”
“I am just following the rules of the council,” he said.
It should be noted that in the confusion the measure, which had been legally placed on the agenda by council vote at the beginning of the session was never either removed from the agenda by vote or “received for the record” so legally it remains on the agenda and where by rule it should be placed on the next full council agenda for action.
(PNN)- In a stunning and scathing rebuke to the substance and style of the leadership of Kaua`i County Council Chair Kaipo Asing, dissident Councilmembers Tim Bynum and Lani Kawahara have written duel essays detailing a two year quest for basic fairness and democratic principles and adherence to council rules and state law in their own shadow web site kauaiinfo.org .
Bynum’s essay details how Asing has blocked measures Bynum has attempted to introduce from appearing on the agenda including “a bill related to release of County Attorney opinions; a bill proposing funding for a study to address erosion and safety issues at Po`ipu Beach; and rules related to the release of confidential documents”.
It details his two year quest to appeal to reason and enforce what he calls a “basic tenet of democracy”- that in our representational, republican form of government elected members of a legislative body have the right to place items before the body for consideration.
Although council rules state that any member may introduce measures for consideration they also call for the chair to “initial” all items for the agenda and Asing has simply used that administrative measure to refuse to initial any item he doesn’t want introduced.
It all spilled over onto the council floor yesterday when Bynum attempted to place a rule clarification on the agenda to say the chair could not use the initialing power to block introduction of legislation.
The resolution however was never actually mentioned during the meeting with Asing successfully blocking pubic discussion with the aid of new County Attorney Al Castillo
The Sunshine Law allows items to be added to the agenda under certain circumstances but, despite an Office of Information Practices OIP memo stating the specific addition complied with the advance notification provisions in the law, Asing successfully blocked the discussion with the support of the other four members of the council.
Kawahara’s letter details many of the public information and sunshine law issues she raised in an exclusive interview with PNN last month when she ran into roadblocks from Asing and County Clerk Peter Nakamura in getting council minutes, public documents and agenda-related communications posted on-line.
In it she says that “(t)he current practices at Council Services that control access to information are indefensible and an embarrassment. They stand in stark contrast to your legal right to expect your government to inform you, educate you and urge you to become an active participant”.
In addition both Bynum and Kawahara say that they were denied documents that other councilmembers were given and that councilmembers could not get “electronic versions” of documents that were created in that form causing them and the pubic at large to physically travel to Lihu`e to pick up paper versions of them.
Documents posted at the site also detail how the administration, under former Mayor the late Bryan Baptiste and his IT specialist Eric Knutzen had made a concerted effort to put the information and documents from all administrative boards and commissions on-line over the past two and a half years and offered to help Nakamura and council services to do the same.
Their help was rejected by Asing and Nakamura.
Also on the web site is an example from yesterday’s meeting of the council agenda information packet that the council- and the public if they request it and go down and pick it up- are given for each meeting.
In his essay entitled “Sunshine on Kaua`i?” Bynum first describes his “love for democracy” and how people should “honor each other’s ideas in a spirit of compromise and work together with mutual respect on a level playing field, good decisions are reached and implemented”
Then he writes:
(S)adly I have found that the legislative process as currently practiced on Kauai falls far short of fundamental democratic standards. Access to basic legislative information is being restricted, open dialog and debate is significantly stifled and frequently misinterpreted and often ignored rules of conduct are rendered ineffective.
When I started on the Council in December 2006 I was determined to work hard, go slow, and learn from the senior members on the Council. I felt a huge responsibility having one of seven votes on issues that are important to our community. At first I was in no hurry to put my own proposals forward as there were important issues already on the plate, and I had plenty to learn. My time would come. The one issue I felt I could move on was improving public access to what is clearly public information. To my dismay, however, access to information is not only difficult for the general public. My access as a Council Member is strictly controlled. In a number of ways that will be outlined by Council Member Kawahara, many documents intended for all Council Members are screened, delayed, or even withheld by the County Clerk. I soon discovered that some Council Members had access to information that others did not. I found this situation intolerable and inexcusable. In March 2007 I asked for it to be rectified immediately, a request that remains unfulfilled. The County Clerk—who by adopted Council rules is required to “ forward at once to the proper parties all communications and other matters either directly of through committee as the case maybe “—refused to rectify the situation, telling me he required direction from the Council Chair, who, by Council rules, supervises the Clerk. The Council Chair refused to address my concerns in any manner. To this day, the Council Chair refuses to sit down with the County Clerk and me to discuss the inequities.
He goes on to describe his two year quest to persistently but quietly change the autocratic system to a democratic one, not just by detailing Asing and Nakamura’s rebukes but by providing links to copies of the documents showing his efforts.
In her essay entitled “Just Do It: Government Transparency at Kauai County Council” Kawahara expresses her outrage over her experiences since she joined the council last November, especially at the lack of availability of documents and the way the public and she herself are denied access to what should be public documents
She writes:
Since my election to the Kauai County Council in December, I have been working to advance the council’s use of the internet to support efficient operations, provide more timely responses to constituents, and to widely disseminate our council and committee meeting minutes to educate/inform more citizens about issues that affect their daily lives.
Unfortunately, you will be disappointed to find out that efforts to provide council and committee meeting minutes in electronic format for the public on our county council website or for emailing, are opposed by Council Chair Asing and his appointed County Clerk Peter Nakamura.
Just as troubling is the lack of information coming into the Council Members’ offices from outside. Communications addressed to all Councilmembers (including emails, US mail, and Interoffice mail) are consistently and systematically screened by Mr. Nakamura. Mail for “all council members” does not necessarily get to all council members, and if it does, it may be delayed by days or weeks. Mail is doled out according to some criteria that are unknown to me and much of it is not delivered at all.
Imagine coming into a council meeting or committee meeting to find documents date- stamped “received” days earlier that are related to the agenda / or decision-making to be done that day. Imagine, even more interestingly, that such information may be provided to some but not all council members. Email intended for all Councilmembers is not sent electronically and when eventually circulated does not contain the return email address making it impossible to even acknowledge the communication or respond in any way.
In his time on the Council, council member Bynum has diligently attempted to address these issues by seeking an open dialog, clarifying council rules and leading legislative efforts to increase the availability of information but has been denied access to the Council agenda (an issue that he will outline separately).
She goes on to describe what she hopes to do by providing the kauaiinfo web site
Councilmember Bynum and I have set up an alternate website, www.kauaiinfo.org, which documents our attempts to work with Chair Asing and Mr. Nakamura to advance the County Council into 21st century government transparency. Visit www.kauaiinfo.org where we will also provide the public documents which we are unable to post on the county council website due to the environment cultivated by Chair Asing and Mr. Nakamura. We will get the public information to you. We’re doing it because they won’t.
Right now, our dedicated staff and council members spend copious amounts of time photocopying, collating and generally using reams upon reams of paper getting ready for each and every council meeting and attending to every request for information that comes across the desk. And constituents drive from all over the island to retrieve those copies. Then they drive back home. The State Senate started going paperless in 2007. Most of their work is now online. The Mayor’s administration and all Kauai County boards and commissions provide meeting minutes online. It is past time the County Council provide that same standard of government transparency.
The current practices at Council Services that control access to information are indefensible and an embarrassment. They stand in stark contrast to your legal right to expect your government to inform you, educate you and urge you to become an active participant.
Kawahara told PNN that the dustup at yesterday’s meeting happened because introducing an addition to the agenda at the meeting itself was the only avenue that they had left to address the situation internally before going public with the web site. She said she and Bynum felt compelled to try to accomplish their goals through the one internal avenue they had left after having been denied agenda access by Asing.
The council actually voted to place the item on the agenda at the beginning of the meeting but it was immediately moved to the end of the agenda by Asing who was caught by surprise by the move.
But when it finally came up Asing objected to adding it to the agenda claiming the item could not be added to the agenda even though it had already been so placed.
Section 92-7(d) of the state Sunshine law says that all items must be placed on the council agenda six days in advance if they are “of reasonably major importance and action thereon by the board will affect a significant number of persons.”. If they are not they may be added to the agenda by a 2/3 vote of the council
According to a May 15 OIP memo obtained by Bynum in anticipation of the introduction of the rule change
The proposed change to Council Rule 10(c) set forth in the attached Resolution does not appear to be of reasonably major importance or to affect a significant number of people. Thus, the Resolution appears suitable to be added to the agenda by 2/3 vote, and the Council would be acting in good faith in so adding it.
But even though an OIP opinion trumps any ruling on the Sunshine Law that a county may want to make, Castillo insisted that the discussion would indeed effect everyone on Kaua`i and is of “reasonably major importance”.
Then bafflingly he insisted that the discussion be held but held in secret “executive” session and reasoned that it was “unanticipated”
Asing and Castillo would not even allow Bynum to discuss the matter and, with Nakamura pacing, arms-crossed around the table and alternately glaring at Bynum and nodding with Asing’s comments, Castillo claimed that the question of placing the item on the agenda should be discussed in executive session without prior discussion.
Although the council is allowed to “consult with the board's attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the board's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities” it must do so in a regularly agendaed item.
There is though an exception which Castillo cited. The law, as printed on all agendas, is that “(p)ursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. (“H.R.S.”) §92-7(a), the Council may, when deemed necessary, hold an executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the executive session was not anticipated in advance” (emphasis added).
Castillo did not explain how the council could discuss whether to place an item on the agenda in executive session since that would presume it was on the agenda in order to be heard in an “unanticipated” executive session .
When the council returned from secret apparently illegal confab Castillo claimed that any further discussion would violate the Sunshine Law and the item should not have been placed on the agenda although no vote was ever taken to remove it.
When Bynum and Kawahara attempted to bring up the OIP opinion they were rebuked by Castillo.
Bynum did get to say that it was “ironic” that the sunshine law was being used to “censor discussion” and Kawahara added that anyone watching would have no idea what the discussion was even all about. She did though manage to say it was about council rules and read from her good governance manual about how the council rules were a living document and should always be subject to update.
When Bynum said that “there was nothing said in the executive session that couldn’t have been said in public” Asing, forehead veins bulging, screamed “no- you cannot do that” admonishing Bynum that he was revealing executive matters even though characterizations of the general nature of the executive session are done routinely by councilmembers, even by Asing himself.
According to the Sunshine Law minutes of an executive session are to be released as soon as the reason for secrecy no longer exists although on Kaua`i none ever have been. If Bynum was saying that that was immediately the case that would seemingly be legitimate subject for discussion as long as no specifics were mentioned.
Finally it was Castillo himself who mentioned that “I know you have an OIP opinion” but his advice was that the measure was of major importance affecting all of Kaua`i causing Bynum to ask “so it’s fair to say you disagree with the OIP opinion?”.
At that point all hell broke loose, with Castillo screaming similarly vein-bulgingly at Bynum and Asing quickly bringing the meeting back to order and then quickly adjourning the session.
Another account of the meeting by reporter Michael Levine appears in today’s local paper.
In it Levine reported that after adjournment
(t)he chair was asked if there were plans to include Bynum’s resolution on the agenda for the next meeting.
“No,” he said
When asked if there was any reason why it would not be, as there is now enough time to bring the council into compliance with the Sunshine Law by posting the agenda item in advance of the June 16 meeting, Asing said, “Nothing especially.”
“I am just following the rules of the council,” he said.
It should be noted that in the confusion the measure, which had been legally placed on the agenda by council vote at the beginning of the session was never either removed from the agenda by vote or “received for the record” so legally it remains on the agenda and where by rule it should be placed on the next full council agenda for action.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
KEEPING THE DARK AS DARK AS CAN BE:
KEEPING THE DARK AS DARK AS CAN BE: The illegal conspiracy between Council Chair Kaipo Asing, County Clerk Peter Nakamura and various county attorneys to methodically violate the sunshine law has been the well documented in this space during the past year and a half.
Lately it’s only gotten worse with the description of agenda items containing less and less of the specific information required by law, leaving out key details, especially those that might raise an eyebrow or two or find their way into this space.
Sometimes the actual reading of the agenda item at the meeting- the first most of the viewing public has heard of the matter- lacks even the specificity the printed agenda contains, especially when we’ve picked apart and highlighted some of the more outrageous items.
Most recently when we picked up on a discrimination complaint filed with the national EEOC by former county attorney Margaret Hanson Sueoka, although the EEOC and Sueoka were mentioned on the official agenda neither was mentioned in the reading of the executive session item appropriating money to fight the claim.
None of this could be done without the benevolence of the county attorney (CA) whose function has morphed in the last decade from having a public component to merely being the attorney representing the council and administration. Opinions upon which those in public service rely never see the light of day any more- or didn’t until a recent vote by the Board of Ethics (BOE) to release one.
The county attorney is hired and presumably fired by the council and the administration together according to the county charter. But a resolution from the Salary Commission up for council approval at today’s council meeting seeks to remove the council as a whole from evaluating the county attorney for purposes of determining his or her salary and give that power to the council chair and mayor alone.
And of course the change, written into the details of the resolution and not in the multiple “whereas’”, is not listed on the agenda item either.
The agenda item reads
C 2009-194 Communication (04/28/2009) from Virginia Kapali, Chairperson, Kaua`i Salary Commission, transmitting for Council information, Resolution No. 2009-01, relating to the salaries of certain officers and employees of the County of Kaua`i which was adopted by the Salary Commission at its April 28, 2009 meeting, and recommending amendments to the Kaua`i County Code related to salaries of certain officers, the County Council, and Council Services employees.
And in the list of whereas’ it says
Whereas the Commission further desires to minimize confusion by eliminating inconstancies between the provisions contained in the Kaua`i County Code and any Salary Commission resolutions approved by the County.
Sound pretty innocuous- just some “housekeeping” changes, eh?
The effect is to cut members of the council out of the equation and currently that serves to silence council “dissidents” Lani Kawahara and Tim Bynum from their crusade to open up the council’s doings to the disinfectant of Sunshine.
As PNN reported last month Kawahara has simply sought to have all the public information that the council gets every week be available to the public on-line rather than having them printed out on reams of paper and distributed only to those willing to drive to Lihu`e and specifically request all the accompanying paper work that goes with each agenda item.
Kawahara is so frustrated she has threatened to take the paperwork, re-scan it (since they won’t make electronic versions available to her) and post them on a web site independent of the county or council services.
As has been reported here and in the pages of the local paper Bynum has been engaged for years- all in vain- in a campaign to open the pages of county attorney opinions to public scrutiny and has been blocked by Asing and Nakamura at every juncture.
That could not have been done without the acquiescence and direction of the last three county attorneys who at first stopped the council from simply voting to release the opinions as they had in the past until they put in place a standard procedure for doing that.
This allowed Asing to block the introduction of such a resolution for about a year and when Bynum pushed harder, eventually with Kawahara on his side, Asing and the CA said that they needed to wait until a county-wide policy was put in place for a standard way for all boards and commissions to release the opinions.
Although the recent BOE opinion was released, that was done in the face of a “request” from the CA to hold off until this long awaited policy is drawn up and approved by all of the boards and commissions- a process that could take years.
The salaries of appointed officials like the CA are set in a “range” according to the County Code 3-2.1, all dependant on an evaluation of the “appointing authority”.
Even if a salary is set at say $107,335 a year like that of the new county auditor- which is set in the salary commission’s resolution pursuant to the new charter amendment passed last November- it could be much lower at the discretion of the person appointing the new auditor, based on a standard evaluation form to be provided by the director of the Department of Personal.
But whereas the current ordinance reads “(t)he county attorney’s salary shall be evaluated by the mayor and the council” the proposed ordnance deletes that and substitutes “the county attorney’s performance shall be conducted (sic) through an equally weighed evaluation that shall be jointly administered by the mayor and the council chairperson”.
Though it may seem like a minor change since the council chair serves at the pleasure of the majority of the council, in the case of Asing, who apparently abuses his discretionary power at every chance, it’s a change that only consolidates the power of the minotaur with another blind alley in the undersea labyrinth that squelches dissidents and allows him to “do what’s wrong as long as he can”.
---------
(We’ve been asked recently “what’s all this minotaur stuff?” We were going to link again to the video of the Minotaur Song by the Incredible String Band we previously posted but it apparently has been removed from youtube by the poster. But never fear- someone has done a new and improved full length version linked below. )
(If you are one of our email subscribers click here).
Lately it’s only gotten worse with the description of agenda items containing less and less of the specific information required by law, leaving out key details, especially those that might raise an eyebrow or two or find their way into this space.
Sometimes the actual reading of the agenda item at the meeting- the first most of the viewing public has heard of the matter- lacks even the specificity the printed agenda contains, especially when we’ve picked apart and highlighted some of the more outrageous items.
Most recently when we picked up on a discrimination complaint filed with the national EEOC by former county attorney Margaret Hanson Sueoka, although the EEOC and Sueoka were mentioned on the official agenda neither was mentioned in the reading of the executive session item appropriating money to fight the claim.
None of this could be done without the benevolence of the county attorney (CA) whose function has morphed in the last decade from having a public component to merely being the attorney representing the council and administration. Opinions upon which those in public service rely never see the light of day any more- or didn’t until a recent vote by the Board of Ethics (BOE) to release one.
The county attorney is hired and presumably fired by the council and the administration together according to the county charter. But a resolution from the Salary Commission up for council approval at today’s council meeting seeks to remove the council as a whole from evaluating the county attorney for purposes of determining his or her salary and give that power to the council chair and mayor alone.
And of course the change, written into the details of the resolution and not in the multiple “whereas’”, is not listed on the agenda item either.
The agenda item reads
C 2009-194 Communication (04/28/2009) from Virginia Kapali, Chairperson, Kaua`i Salary Commission, transmitting for Council information, Resolution No. 2009-01, relating to the salaries of certain officers and employees of the County of Kaua`i which was adopted by the Salary Commission at its April 28, 2009 meeting, and recommending amendments to the Kaua`i County Code related to salaries of certain officers, the County Council, and Council Services employees.
And in the list of whereas’ it says
Whereas the Commission further desires to minimize confusion by eliminating inconstancies between the provisions contained in the Kaua`i County Code and any Salary Commission resolutions approved by the County.
Sound pretty innocuous- just some “housekeeping” changes, eh?
The effect is to cut members of the council out of the equation and currently that serves to silence council “dissidents” Lani Kawahara and Tim Bynum from their crusade to open up the council’s doings to the disinfectant of Sunshine.
As PNN reported last month Kawahara has simply sought to have all the public information that the council gets every week be available to the public on-line rather than having them printed out on reams of paper and distributed only to those willing to drive to Lihu`e and specifically request all the accompanying paper work that goes with each agenda item.
Kawahara is so frustrated she has threatened to take the paperwork, re-scan it (since they won’t make electronic versions available to her) and post them on a web site independent of the county or council services.
As has been reported here and in the pages of the local paper Bynum has been engaged for years- all in vain- in a campaign to open the pages of county attorney opinions to public scrutiny and has been blocked by Asing and Nakamura at every juncture.
That could not have been done without the acquiescence and direction of the last three county attorneys who at first stopped the council from simply voting to release the opinions as they had in the past until they put in place a standard procedure for doing that.
This allowed Asing to block the introduction of such a resolution for about a year and when Bynum pushed harder, eventually with Kawahara on his side, Asing and the CA said that they needed to wait until a county-wide policy was put in place for a standard way for all boards and commissions to release the opinions.
Although the recent BOE opinion was released, that was done in the face of a “request” from the CA to hold off until this long awaited policy is drawn up and approved by all of the boards and commissions- a process that could take years.
The salaries of appointed officials like the CA are set in a “range” according to the County Code 3-2.1, all dependant on an evaluation of the “appointing authority”.
Even if a salary is set at say $107,335 a year like that of the new county auditor- which is set in the salary commission’s resolution pursuant to the new charter amendment passed last November- it could be much lower at the discretion of the person appointing the new auditor, based on a standard evaluation form to be provided by the director of the Department of Personal.
But whereas the current ordinance reads “(t)he county attorney’s salary shall be evaluated by the mayor and the council” the proposed ordnance deletes that and substitutes “the county attorney’s performance shall be conducted (sic) through an equally weighed evaluation that shall be jointly administered by the mayor and the council chairperson”.
Though it may seem like a minor change since the council chair serves at the pleasure of the majority of the council, in the case of Asing, who apparently abuses his discretionary power at every chance, it’s a change that only consolidates the power of the minotaur with another blind alley in the undersea labyrinth that squelches dissidents and allows him to “do what’s wrong as long as he can”.
---------
(We’ve been asked recently “what’s all this minotaur stuff?” We were going to link again to the video of the Minotaur Song by the Incredible String Band we previously posted but it apparently has been removed from youtube by the poster. But never fear- someone has done a new and improved full length version linked below. )
(If you are one of our email subscribers click here).
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
UNEARTHING THE BONES OF CONTENTION
UNEARTHING THE BONES OF CONTENTION: The Kaua`i County Council usually has seven committees that, like the full council, meet on alternate Wednesdays with each councilmember chairing one or another.
And pity the poor chair who has a hot-potato or political football dumped in his or her lap. Or pity the poor bill or measure because often it is deferred indefinitely to flounder forever in committee purgatory, usually awaiting a “response” to questions for the administration combined with a committee chair’s reluctance to “rock the boat”.
Such was the case with Bill 2149, which was supposed to allow camping at Lydgate Park when it was introduced in September of 2005.
But when the bill hit the council’s table it turned out that, in the finest “fire, ready, aim” tradition of the administration of the Late Mayor Bryan Baptiste, the campground had already been constructed without the approval- or even knowledge- of just about anyone.
Anyone that is except current Mayor Bernard Carvalho who, in Batiste’s haste to get the area south of the traditional Lydgate area “cleaned up” was appointed to a head a secret “Mayor’s Advisory Task Force” in conjunction with his appointment to a newly created (just to give Carvalho an important job) “Office of Community Assistance”.
The problem was that Carvalho and the handful of county employees who filled out the force failed to check with anyone and even had it built without asking anyone about American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement... anyone including the Mayor’s ADA coordinator and the Mayor’s ADA Advisory Council.
It was even worse when it was found that the bathrooms were insufficient to handle the number of campers projected and there were no county employees to clean the place, much less enforce the camping regulations, much less provide 24 hour security for the area, much less a half-a-dozen other things.
At the time it was apparent that a few camping areas that were already built would have to be completely torn out and rebuilt to comply with the ADA. Plus the camp grounds were to become the first “paid” camping area under county administration and the scheme for fees and the number of campers in each area seemed to have been pulled out of someone’s er, sleeve.
After the councilmembers outrage subsided a bit, it became obvious that at least the issues would need to be resolved before anyone started camping in the area.
The last time anyone ever saw the bill it was deferred awaiting Carvalho’s answers to 11 questions posed on January 2006 when, a year or so later he was again asked to answer the questions in March of 2007.
The bill has suddenly resurfaced at the request of Parks and Transportation Committee member Tim Bynum who had chaired the Parks and Public Works Committee at the time and had been snubbed by Carvalho with his 2007 request for info.
Bynum came to the council by way of his leadership of the “Friends of Kamalani”, the citizens group that took up unofficial but de facto leadership of the entire Lydgate Park and bike path project that snakes it’s way through the park until it hits the end of the campgrounds and loops back on itself rather than going on it’s merry way to Nawiliwili where it may, someday- if there’s a lot more money forthcoming- come to a final terminus.
The administration was granted a deferral again last Wed. and has promised to be there next Wed. to answer the 11 questions and probably many more.
But while a select few know what the rush was that caused the campgrounds to rebuilt without any regard to the issues it’s existence raised, most don’t.
So a little history lesson is in order.
It actually goes back to Mayor Maryann Kusaka’s crusade to chase the local gay community from Kuna- aka Donkey- Beach back in the 90’s which itself is intimately tied into the origins of the bike path and the rise of Kusaka’s protégé Baptiste.
Kusaka’s efforts to roust the gays who held weekly campfires at the beach were quite public including calling for their removal at a press conference where she held up apparently used condoms that she said she personally collected in the area.
Then she got a group from her church to cut down trees and brush that shielded the beach from view from the cane road, all without the necessary SMA permits, causing members of the public to call for a criminal investigation.
This effort led to the attempt to receive the “gift” of the beach area from Kealia Kai owner and developer Tom McCloskey who shared Kusaka’s homophobia and tried to attach restriction to the deed to the land that included 24-hour golf-cart-roving security and nighttime closings of the area so as to also create a private beach for those who bought million dollar house sites in his agricultural ocean view subdivision.
And it would relieve him of a taxable yet useless for development parcel and, with the restrictions, still maintain control of who used the park.
Baptiste was the councilmember who introduced the deed for the area declaring the deal to be ready for approval upon submittal. But then Councilmember Gary Hooser saw the Trojan (no pun intended) Horse nature of the deed and delayed it for months until McCloskey gave up on many of the restrictions on the “county park”, angering Kusaka and Baptiste.
When Baptiste was publicly embarrassed by the revelation that, despite his statement that he had “just met” McCloskey at the council meeting, he had had breakfast with him that morning, Baptiste- after meeting with the brains behind the operation, Kusaka- came up with the plan for a Bike Path.
It would begin at the “gift parcel” and go all the way to Lihu`e. It would be paid for with $40 million in a federal “bike path for transportation, not recreation” grant and the 20% county matching share would come from the value of the land “gift” from McCloskey.
Of course that money and match are long since spent and the commitment to finish the transportation bike path remains the county’s responsibility, thus far costing at least another $10-15 million just to complete the chunk that ends at Lydgate- about half of the proposed length.
But the bike path isn’t the only “connection” between Kuna and Lydgate
With the public scrutiny- and many “incidents” of threats and even assaults by other church members who were now alerted to the “’scourge’ of the gay community at Donkey Beach”- they found a new area to congregate... the overgrown area south of Lydgate Park.
That was too much for Kusaka who was now on a new additional crusade- not just to rid the new area of dreaded homosexuals but to do so by extending the “bike path” into the area and then opening up a new campground- even though Lydgate camping was shut down years earlier because of drunken rowdiness and reports of drug dealing in the area up by the “big” pavilion.
When administrations changed and Baptiste replaced Kusaka he put his protégé, Carvalho, in charge of putting in the campgrounds- and to do it quickly.
Baptiste formed a “take force” without telling anyone and before anyone really knew what was happening the campgrounds were planned, built and installed all with no notification of the public or seemingly, many on the council.
They had blindly gone about it without complying with county and state codes for things like facilities and of course ADA compliance. But in a fait accompli they had “developed” the area removing the “undesirable element”.
The bill will be take up at the Wed. June 10, at the Park and Transportation Committee meeting sometime after 9 a.m. in the council chambers at the Historic County Building in Lihu`e.
And pity the poor chair who has a hot-potato or political football dumped in his or her lap. Or pity the poor bill or measure because often it is deferred indefinitely to flounder forever in committee purgatory, usually awaiting a “response” to questions for the administration combined with a committee chair’s reluctance to “rock the boat”.
Such was the case with Bill 2149, which was supposed to allow camping at Lydgate Park when it was introduced in September of 2005.
But when the bill hit the council’s table it turned out that, in the finest “fire, ready, aim” tradition of the administration of the Late Mayor Bryan Baptiste, the campground had already been constructed without the approval- or even knowledge- of just about anyone.
Anyone that is except current Mayor Bernard Carvalho who, in Batiste’s haste to get the area south of the traditional Lydgate area “cleaned up” was appointed to a head a secret “Mayor’s Advisory Task Force” in conjunction with his appointment to a newly created (just to give Carvalho an important job) “Office of Community Assistance”.
The problem was that Carvalho and the handful of county employees who filled out the force failed to check with anyone and even had it built without asking anyone about American with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirement... anyone including the Mayor’s ADA coordinator and the Mayor’s ADA Advisory Council.
It was even worse when it was found that the bathrooms were insufficient to handle the number of campers projected and there were no county employees to clean the place, much less enforce the camping regulations, much less provide 24 hour security for the area, much less a half-a-dozen other things.
At the time it was apparent that a few camping areas that were already built would have to be completely torn out and rebuilt to comply with the ADA. Plus the camp grounds were to become the first “paid” camping area under county administration and the scheme for fees and the number of campers in each area seemed to have been pulled out of someone’s er, sleeve.
After the councilmembers outrage subsided a bit, it became obvious that at least the issues would need to be resolved before anyone started camping in the area.
The last time anyone ever saw the bill it was deferred awaiting Carvalho’s answers to 11 questions posed on January 2006 when, a year or so later he was again asked to answer the questions in March of 2007.
The bill has suddenly resurfaced at the request of Parks and Transportation Committee member Tim Bynum who had chaired the Parks and Public Works Committee at the time and had been snubbed by Carvalho with his 2007 request for info.
Bynum came to the council by way of his leadership of the “Friends of Kamalani”, the citizens group that took up unofficial but de facto leadership of the entire Lydgate Park and bike path project that snakes it’s way through the park until it hits the end of the campgrounds and loops back on itself rather than going on it’s merry way to Nawiliwili where it may, someday- if there’s a lot more money forthcoming- come to a final terminus.
The administration was granted a deferral again last Wed. and has promised to be there next Wed. to answer the 11 questions and probably many more.
But while a select few know what the rush was that caused the campgrounds to rebuilt without any regard to the issues it’s existence raised, most don’t.
So a little history lesson is in order.
It actually goes back to Mayor Maryann Kusaka’s crusade to chase the local gay community from Kuna- aka Donkey- Beach back in the 90’s which itself is intimately tied into the origins of the bike path and the rise of Kusaka’s protégé Baptiste.
Kusaka’s efforts to roust the gays who held weekly campfires at the beach were quite public including calling for their removal at a press conference where she held up apparently used condoms that she said she personally collected in the area.
Then she got a group from her church to cut down trees and brush that shielded the beach from view from the cane road, all without the necessary SMA permits, causing members of the public to call for a criminal investigation.
This effort led to the attempt to receive the “gift” of the beach area from Kealia Kai owner and developer Tom McCloskey who shared Kusaka’s homophobia and tried to attach restriction to the deed to the land that included 24-hour golf-cart-roving security and nighttime closings of the area so as to also create a private beach for those who bought million dollar house sites in his agricultural ocean view subdivision.
And it would relieve him of a taxable yet useless for development parcel and, with the restrictions, still maintain control of who used the park.
Baptiste was the councilmember who introduced the deed for the area declaring the deal to be ready for approval upon submittal. But then Councilmember Gary Hooser saw the Trojan (no pun intended) Horse nature of the deed and delayed it for months until McCloskey gave up on many of the restrictions on the “county park”, angering Kusaka and Baptiste.
When Baptiste was publicly embarrassed by the revelation that, despite his statement that he had “just met” McCloskey at the council meeting, he had had breakfast with him that morning, Baptiste- after meeting with the brains behind the operation, Kusaka- came up with the plan for a Bike Path.
It would begin at the “gift parcel” and go all the way to Lihu`e. It would be paid for with $40 million in a federal “bike path for transportation, not recreation” grant and the 20% county matching share would come from the value of the land “gift” from McCloskey.
Of course that money and match are long since spent and the commitment to finish the transportation bike path remains the county’s responsibility, thus far costing at least another $10-15 million just to complete the chunk that ends at Lydgate- about half of the proposed length.
But the bike path isn’t the only “connection” between Kuna and Lydgate
With the public scrutiny- and many “incidents” of threats and even assaults by other church members who were now alerted to the “’scourge’ of the gay community at Donkey Beach”- they found a new area to congregate... the overgrown area south of Lydgate Park.
That was too much for Kusaka who was now on a new additional crusade- not just to rid the new area of dreaded homosexuals but to do so by extending the “bike path” into the area and then opening up a new campground- even though Lydgate camping was shut down years earlier because of drunken rowdiness and reports of drug dealing in the area up by the “big” pavilion.
When administrations changed and Baptiste replaced Kusaka he put his protégé, Carvalho, in charge of putting in the campgrounds- and to do it quickly.
Baptiste formed a “take force” without telling anyone and before anyone really knew what was happening the campgrounds were planned, built and installed all with no notification of the public or seemingly, many on the council.
They had blindly gone about it without complying with county and state codes for things like facilities and of course ADA compliance. But in a fait accompli they had “developed” the area removing the “undesirable element”.
The bill will be take up at the Wed. June 10, at the Park and Transportation Committee meeting sometime after 9 a.m. in the council chambers at the Historic County Building in Lihu`e.
Monday, June 1, 2009
SIMPLY SHOCKING
SIMPLY SHOCKING: The nooks and crannies of labyrinth of Kaua`i county government oft contain the meat that feeds the Minotaur.
At first blush a communication (C-2009-203) on this week’s council agenda from Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri Carvalho seems innocuous, enough asking for the council’s
approval to apply,(sic) receive and expend federal funds in the amount of $191,079.00 to expend funds on salaries, and training and for the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, as well as replace AED equipment, the K-PAL Football and Cheerleading Program, training and overtime for the Kaua`i Police Department.
(No, don’t worry- it’s just Carvalho’s notorious difficulty with the English language that might make it sound like she’s going to “replace... the K-PAL Football and Cheerleading Program” and KPD “training and overtime” in the grant budget.)
Seems innocuous enough. Your guess at what “AED equipment” might be is as good as ours was if you just read the communication itself- some kind of “automatic exercise device” for football or cheerleading perhaps.
To find out what it really is you read the “attachment”. Buried in the middle of the third page of a seven page document- much of which details of the department’s notorious process serving backlog as well as other prosecutorial needs- is these two paragraphs.
The Kaua`i Police Department currently has a total of 15 Auto External Defibrillators (AED). The 15 AED machines are spread between each beat, substation as well as the County of Kaua`i cell block. The AED machines were first purchased in 1999. Training for the AED is typically completed at the same time each Officer is trained in First Responder and in CPR. Although there has not been a recorded incident when these machines have had to be used, it is still very necessary to have them available as often times KPD Officers are the first to arrive on a scene, and may need them in case of emergency.
Replacing all of the AED’s is necessary as some no longer function as the batteries are no longer in service. Having the same AED’s for each beat, substation and cell block will help with the consistency and training for officers in utilizing these machines that can ultimately result in saving someone’s life.
After reeling in our jaw it was hard to know where to begin with this bit of absurdity.
The most obvious questions pertains to exactly why they haven’t been used for 10 years. If it’s “very necessary (not just necessary but VERY necessary) to have them available as often times KPD Officers are the first to arrive on a scene”, and “may need them in case of emergency” the fact they haven’t been used would seem somewhat incongruous.
Did they forget they were there? If so, how many died because of that? Nah, presumably there was some other reason, most likely that they never had a need to use them.
So why would we need to replace them? If 10 years of never having an instance to use them isn’t proof that they will never be needed, how long would that take?
We suspect that it’s possible the procedure when someone’s heart is stopped is to start CRP first and continue that until EMT shows up. If so, why have them in possession of officers whose standard procedure is to never use them?
An email to the county’s Public Information Office seeking information as to why they were never used remains unanswered at press time.
But beyond that is why they need to be replaced- at a cost, according to the attachment, of $2070 per AED or $31,050 total for the 15- especially if they were never used?
If it’s the batteries, that raises questions all by itself. How did they get to be “dead” if they were never used? Were they neglected and never “recharged”? Can the batteries be replaced?
Whatever the situation, there are really only two possibilities here- either the AED's are defective in that with zero use they need to be replaced or the standard manufacturer recommended maintenance was neglected.
The grant is from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program which “allows states and local governments to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal justice system...
“Purpose Areas include:
Law enforcement programs.
Prosecution and court programs.
Prevention and education programs.
Corrections and community corrections programs.
Drug treatment and enforcement programs.
Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs.
Crime victim and witness programs (other than compensation).”
With all the backlog of warrants, subpoenas and the like and the terrible problem the prosecutor has had- and Carvalho describes in the attachment- getting them served, wouldn’t the extra $30,000 help to clear that backlog? Or how about drug treatment- an area severely neglected on Kaua`i?
$30,000 may not seem like much but the list programs certainly includes some NGO-provided services that the county council and administration said it simply could not funds for in this year’s budget.
The council will take up the item at 9 a.m. or thereafter during this Wednesday’s council meeting at the Historic County Building.
At first blush a communication (C-2009-203) on this week’s council agenda from Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri Carvalho seems innocuous, enough asking for the council’s
approval to apply,(sic) receive and expend federal funds in the amount of $191,079.00 to expend funds on salaries, and training and for the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, as well as replace AED equipment, the K-PAL Football and Cheerleading Program, training and overtime for the Kaua`i Police Department.
(No, don’t worry- it’s just Carvalho’s notorious difficulty with the English language that might make it sound like she’s going to “replace... the K-PAL Football and Cheerleading Program” and KPD “training and overtime” in the grant budget.)
Seems innocuous enough. Your guess at what “AED equipment” might be is as good as ours was if you just read the communication itself- some kind of “automatic exercise device” for football or cheerleading perhaps.
To find out what it really is you read the “attachment”. Buried in the middle of the third page of a seven page document- much of which details of the department’s notorious process serving backlog as well as other prosecutorial needs- is these two paragraphs.
The Kaua`i Police Department currently has a total of 15 Auto External Defibrillators (AED). The 15 AED machines are spread between each beat, substation as well as the County of Kaua`i cell block. The AED machines were first purchased in 1999. Training for the AED is typically completed at the same time each Officer is trained in First Responder and in CPR. Although there has not been a recorded incident when these machines have had to be used, it is still very necessary to have them available as often times KPD Officers are the first to arrive on a scene, and may need them in case of emergency.
Replacing all of the AED’s is necessary as some no longer function as the batteries are no longer in service. Having the same AED’s for each beat, substation and cell block will help with the consistency and training for officers in utilizing these machines that can ultimately result in saving someone’s life.
After reeling in our jaw it was hard to know where to begin with this bit of absurdity.
The most obvious questions pertains to exactly why they haven’t been used for 10 years. If it’s “very necessary (not just necessary but VERY necessary) to have them available as often times KPD Officers are the first to arrive on a scene”, and “may need them in case of emergency” the fact they haven’t been used would seem somewhat incongruous.
Did they forget they were there? If so, how many died because of that? Nah, presumably there was some other reason, most likely that they never had a need to use them.
So why would we need to replace them? If 10 years of never having an instance to use them isn’t proof that they will never be needed, how long would that take?
We suspect that it’s possible the procedure when someone’s heart is stopped is to start CRP first and continue that until EMT shows up. If so, why have them in possession of officers whose standard procedure is to never use them?
An email to the county’s Public Information Office seeking information as to why they were never used remains unanswered at press time.
But beyond that is why they need to be replaced- at a cost, according to the attachment, of $2070 per AED or $31,050 total for the 15- especially if they were never used?
If it’s the batteries, that raises questions all by itself. How did they get to be “dead” if they were never used? Were they neglected and never “recharged”? Can the batteries be replaced?
Whatever the situation, there are really only two possibilities here- either the AED's are defective in that with zero use they need to be replaced or the standard manufacturer recommended maintenance was neglected.
The grant is from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program which “allows states and local governments to support a broad range of activities to prevent and control crime and to improve the criminal justice system...
“Purpose Areas include:
Law enforcement programs.
Prosecution and court programs.
Prevention and education programs.
Corrections and community corrections programs.
Drug treatment and enforcement programs.
Planning, evaluation, and technology improvement programs.
Crime victim and witness programs (other than compensation).”
With all the backlog of warrants, subpoenas and the like and the terrible problem the prosecutor has had- and Carvalho describes in the attachment- getting them served, wouldn’t the extra $30,000 help to clear that backlog? Or how about drug treatment- an area severely neglected on Kaua`i?
$30,000 may not seem like much but the list programs certainly includes some NGO-provided services that the county council and administration said it simply could not funds for in this year’s budget.
The council will take up the item at 9 a.m. or thereafter during this Wednesday’s council meeting at the Historic County Building.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
