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.
Monday, June 8, 2009
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.
Friday, May 29, 2009
DIGGIN’ UP THE DIRT
DIGGIN’ UP THE DIRT: Public Broadcasting likes to tell us they “do what the commercial networks won’t”. And in Hawai`i they do, on the surface, with regularly scheduled local “public affairs” programming three nights a week where the local broadcast networks average about, well zero.
It’s questionable how topically relevant two of those programs are, like the local sports talk of “Leahey and Leahey” and Leslie Wilcox’s amazing ability to turn interviews with the most politically fascinating individuals in the state into fluff pieces in her “Long Story Short”.
But Dan Boylan’s “Island Insights” usually cooks up at least a promise of a wide ranging, panel discussion of the burning issue of the day.
That promise would be fulfilled if the panel actually pitted those who took diametrically opposed positions. But instead all too often the producer rounds up the usual suspects who represent the state’s corporate controlled oligarchy.
Never was that more so than last light’s installment on the “future of agriculture in Hawai`i”.
Promos promised discussion of “sustainability” and land issues and the political will to make diversified agriculture more than the empty campaign promise of aspiring pols.
But instead three of the four represented large corporate industrial money-driven farms and the fourth, Aussie transplant Gary Maunakea-Fort from the Big Island, an inarticulate organic farmer and opponent of what he called “industrial farms” who serves high end restaurants on Kona side with arugula on 4 acres there, although he is trying to expand to 16 acres.
The three corporate farmers included Adolph Helm of Moloka`i who represented the “Hawai`i Crop Improvement Association” and heads up the GMO-corn seed operation there, the Chair of the Hawai`i Board of Agriculture Sandra Lee Kunimoto and Richard Ha whose 600 acres Hamakua Farms plants 600 chemically-fertilized acres of whatever makes him the most money.
The sustainably discussion was a joke. Apparently none had any idea of what the movement toward sustainability was all about.
Ha was straightforward in re-defining sustainability as being economically based repeatedly saying whatever makes money is what is sustainable. Worse was Helm who not just agreed with Ha’s economic model but who claimed that “everyone has a different idea of what sustainability means” and went on to say how GMO corn seed is our best hope for sustaining agriculture”
Kunimoto seemed equally as clueless claiming that “best management practices” are the key.
The GMO discussion was equally obtuse with the three industrial farmers providing the tired old lies of “strict government oversight” and “higher yields” along with the “fully tested” and “strictly regulated”. The only real discussion was about how to deal with the “cultural” objections to GMO taro with the understanding among themselves that science” was on their side.
The fact that GMO products have never been fully tested and that science has been thrown under the bus with the precautionary principle—the main guiding standard in real science- getting the shortest of shrifts. Products are assumed safe with little scrutiny and voluntary compliance and self regulation providing for non-compliance- as violations and resulting fines across the county have shown- being the norm under the “deregulation” regimes of the last few decades.
When a viewer asked about labeling issue all they could do is repeat the “strict government regulation means it’s as safe an any other product” dodge.
Forth was not even asked to answer the question.
But if discussion on those two subjects were dismally one-sided the one on land use was doubly perverse.
The cost of land was never mentioned as a deterrent to farming even though any young aspiring farmer will tell you that that’s impediment number one. Even when the pressure to develop ag land came up the fact that, in order to farm one must invest more in land than one could ever possibly recover in order to start, never came up.
As a matter of fact they lauded the new “identification of important ag lands” study as the key to the future of agriculture, although none ventured a guess as to how reclassifying tons of ag land as urban and residential would help drive down ag land prices.
In an age when we are increasingly looking for ways to “grow” energy with solar wind and biomass “farming” to call any ag land at all “unimportant” is absolute insanity. Identifying land for development just squeezes that energy production onto more arable land, driving prices up not just for the land but the resulting food and energy even further.
That’s because every successful farmer in Hawai`i, for one reason or another, whether through inheritance subsidized lease or through some other circumstance, has not had to factor in land cost into the viability of their farm.
While some mentioned county regulation none recognized the state’s role in allowing “ag condominiums” over which the counties have zero control. That is what has driven prices sky high as ag land becomes “gentleman farms”.
None, including Forth, talked of sustainable small family farms. So of course the problems of hiring “agricultural workers” was the answer when Boylan asked why “young people don’t want to farm”.
That seems to be the mantra of corporate farmers almost all of whom started being land ag rich so never had to factor that cost into their profit equation. They simply seek to hire people to do the seasonal work at low wages rather than taking in partners or forming co-ops.
The fact is that there are hoards of young people who would love to become farmers- Forth says he hires them “for a few years” just so they can have the experience and had 75 applicants for 24 positions last year. But the cost of land is prohibitive because no crop and no amount of work can produce enough to sustain those who do the work and also pay off the exorbitant cost of obtaining land with prices that have been driven by making ag land in small de facto residential lots for rich mainland folks
The real solution to sustainable ag is multi pronged but not very complicated. It starts with bring down the cost by restricting use. Counties can easily remove density from ag land and open land and the state can just as easily eliminate agricultural condominiums making land useless for anything but agriculture.
The more of that “strictly ag use” land there is the lower the price will be. Every rezoning and ag subdivision drives prices higher still. Those need to stop entirely.
Once that is in place the business plan of the young farmer becomes easy to construct and one that, with hard work and knowledge, would make a career in farming a possibility.
The corporate model relies on “workers” and “jobs” that nobody wants- do you want to work for minimum wage (or less as farm workers may be paid)?
The fact that no one wants to do hard work for peanuts doesn’t mean young people don’t want to farm or do hard work at all. They just don’t want to farm for low wages for someone who somehow acquired land at a way-below-market-cost that they didn’t have to factor into their business plan.
The problem is that lip service to ag is all we get from short sighted pols who still think of sustainability in terms of an economically-driven industrial model of operation.
With people like Kunimoto overseeing and cheerleading factory farmers like Ha and “GMO is our future” Monsanto henchmen like Helm no one is holding their breath that our elected officials will remove the corporate yoke from farming by reforming our land use polices.
But we may never even get that far. When the “unimportant ag lands” study is done and most of the ag land is developed there may not be anything to reform.
It’s questionable how topically relevant two of those programs are, like the local sports talk of “Leahey and Leahey” and Leslie Wilcox’s amazing ability to turn interviews with the most politically fascinating individuals in the state into fluff pieces in her “Long Story Short”.
But Dan Boylan’s “Island Insights” usually cooks up at least a promise of a wide ranging, panel discussion of the burning issue of the day.
That promise would be fulfilled if the panel actually pitted those who took diametrically opposed positions. But instead all too often the producer rounds up the usual suspects who represent the state’s corporate controlled oligarchy.
Never was that more so than last light’s installment on the “future of agriculture in Hawai`i”.
Promos promised discussion of “sustainability” and land issues and the political will to make diversified agriculture more than the empty campaign promise of aspiring pols.
But instead three of the four represented large corporate industrial money-driven farms and the fourth, Aussie transplant Gary Maunakea-Fort from the Big Island, an inarticulate organic farmer and opponent of what he called “industrial farms” who serves high end restaurants on Kona side with arugula on 4 acres there, although he is trying to expand to 16 acres.
The three corporate farmers included Adolph Helm of Moloka`i who represented the “Hawai`i Crop Improvement Association” and heads up the GMO-corn seed operation there, the Chair of the Hawai`i Board of Agriculture Sandra Lee Kunimoto and Richard Ha whose 600 acres Hamakua Farms plants 600 chemically-fertilized acres of whatever makes him the most money.
The sustainably discussion was a joke. Apparently none had any idea of what the movement toward sustainability was all about.
Ha was straightforward in re-defining sustainability as being economically based repeatedly saying whatever makes money is what is sustainable. Worse was Helm who not just agreed with Ha’s economic model but who claimed that “everyone has a different idea of what sustainability means” and went on to say how GMO corn seed is our best hope for sustaining agriculture”
Kunimoto seemed equally as clueless claiming that “best management practices” are the key.
The GMO discussion was equally obtuse with the three industrial farmers providing the tired old lies of “strict government oversight” and “higher yields” along with the “fully tested” and “strictly regulated”. The only real discussion was about how to deal with the “cultural” objections to GMO taro with the understanding among themselves that science” was on their side.
The fact that GMO products have never been fully tested and that science has been thrown under the bus with the precautionary principle—the main guiding standard in real science- getting the shortest of shrifts. Products are assumed safe with little scrutiny and voluntary compliance and self regulation providing for non-compliance- as violations and resulting fines across the county have shown- being the norm under the “deregulation” regimes of the last few decades.
When a viewer asked about labeling issue all they could do is repeat the “strict government regulation means it’s as safe an any other product” dodge.
Forth was not even asked to answer the question.
But if discussion on those two subjects were dismally one-sided the one on land use was doubly perverse.
The cost of land was never mentioned as a deterrent to farming even though any young aspiring farmer will tell you that that’s impediment number one. Even when the pressure to develop ag land came up the fact that, in order to farm one must invest more in land than one could ever possibly recover in order to start, never came up.
As a matter of fact they lauded the new “identification of important ag lands” study as the key to the future of agriculture, although none ventured a guess as to how reclassifying tons of ag land as urban and residential would help drive down ag land prices.
In an age when we are increasingly looking for ways to “grow” energy with solar wind and biomass “farming” to call any ag land at all “unimportant” is absolute insanity. Identifying land for development just squeezes that energy production onto more arable land, driving prices up not just for the land but the resulting food and energy even further.
That’s because every successful farmer in Hawai`i, for one reason or another, whether through inheritance subsidized lease or through some other circumstance, has not had to factor in land cost into the viability of their farm.
While some mentioned county regulation none recognized the state’s role in allowing “ag condominiums” over which the counties have zero control. That is what has driven prices sky high as ag land becomes “gentleman farms”.
None, including Forth, talked of sustainable small family farms. So of course the problems of hiring “agricultural workers” was the answer when Boylan asked why “young people don’t want to farm”.
That seems to be the mantra of corporate farmers almost all of whom started being land ag rich so never had to factor that cost into their profit equation. They simply seek to hire people to do the seasonal work at low wages rather than taking in partners or forming co-ops.
The fact is that there are hoards of young people who would love to become farmers- Forth says he hires them “for a few years” just so they can have the experience and had 75 applicants for 24 positions last year. But the cost of land is prohibitive because no crop and no amount of work can produce enough to sustain those who do the work and also pay off the exorbitant cost of obtaining land with prices that have been driven by making ag land in small de facto residential lots for rich mainland folks
The real solution to sustainable ag is multi pronged but not very complicated. It starts with bring down the cost by restricting use. Counties can easily remove density from ag land and open land and the state can just as easily eliminate agricultural condominiums making land useless for anything but agriculture.
The more of that “strictly ag use” land there is the lower the price will be. Every rezoning and ag subdivision drives prices higher still. Those need to stop entirely.
Once that is in place the business plan of the young farmer becomes easy to construct and one that, with hard work and knowledge, would make a career in farming a possibility.
The corporate model relies on “workers” and “jobs” that nobody wants- do you want to work for minimum wage (or less as farm workers may be paid)?
The fact that no one wants to do hard work for peanuts doesn’t mean young people don’t want to farm or do hard work at all. They just don’t want to farm for low wages for someone who somehow acquired land at a way-below-market-cost that they didn’t have to factor into their business plan.
The problem is that lip service to ag is all we get from short sighted pols who still think of sustainability in terms of an economically-driven industrial model of operation.
With people like Kunimoto overseeing and cheerleading factory farmers like Ha and “GMO is our future” Monsanto henchmen like Helm no one is holding their breath that our elected officials will remove the corporate yoke from farming by reforming our land use polices.
But we may never even get that far. When the “unimportant ag lands” study is done and most of the ag land is developed there may not be anything to reform.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
(PNN) SAFETY OVERFLOW FEATURES TO DIVERT WATER FROM KA LOKO BACK TO MOLOA`A STREAM EXISTED, REMAIN IN DISUSE
SAFETY OVERFLOW FEATURES TO DIVERT WATER FROM KA LOKO BACK TO MOLOA`A STREAM EXISTED, REMAIN IN DISUSE
(PNN) There is apparently a portion of the Moloa`a Ditch system that was seemingly designed to return water from the recently illegally reconstructed Moloa`a Ditch to Moloa`a Stream, according to local architect and engineer Juan Wilson.
A map produced by Wilson and posted as part of a Moloa`a Diversion Forensics
article on his Island Breath web site depicts what he says is the system of ditches that feed into Ka Loko reservoir which gave way in 2006 killing seven people in Waiakalua valley.
The map shows Moloa`a Stream and tributaries in light blue toward the bottom of the frame. Ka Loko Reservoir is at the right in blue and with a potion of Moloa`a ditch running left to right in the center in blue, connecting the point of diversion of the water out of Moloa`a Stream’s Kalawa`a tributary (a potato chip shaped blue patch at the left) with the Ka Loko ditch system at a point just to the left of the reservoir.
Then the water apparently connects to and dumps into Ka Loko Reservoir.
But there is also a blue a section that runs from where all the ditches come together just above (to the left) the reservoir and lead back to the Moloa`a stream watershed.
Wilson says this may be a section of the Moloa`a Ditch system that was apparently designed as a safety feature to take excess water out of the system and return it to Moloa`a Stream and was designed to prevent the Ka Loko Reservoir from taking in more water than it could hold.
The elevation of the point just above the reservoir is more than a hundred feet higher than the point where it connects to Kalawa`a stream so it could only run in that direction according to Wilson.
PNN previously reported, first that a letter to the EPA said the main Moloa`a Ditch may have had its flow reversed 10 years ago but later reported that that, according to other documents, was apparently not the case. Wilson’s depiction may shed light on the discrepancy.
It’s unknown at this time whether the section in question was reconstructed when the diversion, as described above, was established about 10 years ago according to a recent county-funded study on agricultural water in the Moloa`a-to-Kilauea area, all centered around Ka Loko Reservoir.
It is apparently not referred to in any documents in the reports as being currently functional.
Though no proof exists as to who did the 10 year old work diverting Moloa`a Stream water, all evidence points to land owner Jimmy Pflueger who did extensive work in the area prior to the dam break and is scheduled to stand trial for manslaughter and in numerous civil cases this summer in connection with the dam break.
The map was put together by Wilson using Google Earth 3D and his work on cataloguing ahupua`a on Kaua`i as well as information contained in the recently released county-funded Kilauea Irrigation Water Engineering Design and Monitoring Study and state Godby Report on the dam break as depicted and provided by Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a.
Kallai says there are signs in the various reports that there are currently non-functional parts of the system designed to take excess water out of the ditches and return it to Moloa`a Stream before it gets to the reservoir. She says she isn’t sure where this specific depiction by Wilson fits in but that apparently there is an “clean out weir” that can dump excess water down a small valley that leads from the area above Ka Loko to either Moloa`a Stream’s Kalawa`a tributary or Moloa`a Stream proper.
The problem has been that exhibits in both reports are at times contradictory and it’s unknown whether, when the documents were prepared- some going back decades- they were based on factual material or speculation at the time.
It isn’t known how may “safety features” may have been built in the past and the one described by Wilson may, Kallai says, be one of as may as three according to the documents.
Kallai says that it seems that she believes that water can be returned to Moloa`a Stream as easily as turning a valves to release the water, citing a time when this apparently happened for a period of days last summer during the time the county study was being conducted when the valve was turned and she and others noted that Moloa`a Stream flowed as it had prior to the diversion 10 years ago.
What is apparent is that currently no water return mechanism is in use.
For further details see the left rail for prior PNN reports on the theft of Moloa`a Water. PNN will continue to follow the story as details emerge.
(PNN) There is apparently a portion of the Moloa`a Ditch system that was seemingly designed to return water from the recently illegally reconstructed Moloa`a Ditch to Moloa`a Stream, according to local architect and engineer Juan Wilson.
A map produced by Wilson and posted as part of a Moloa`a Diversion Forensics
article on his Island Breath web site depicts what he says is the system of ditches that feed into Ka Loko reservoir which gave way in 2006 killing seven people in Waiakalua valley.
The map shows Moloa`a Stream and tributaries in light blue toward the bottom of the frame. Ka Loko Reservoir is at the right in blue and with a potion of Moloa`a ditch running left to right in the center in blue, connecting the point of diversion of the water out of Moloa`a Stream’s Kalawa`a tributary (a potato chip shaped blue patch at the left) with the Ka Loko ditch system at a point just to the left of the reservoir.
Then the water apparently connects to and dumps into Ka Loko Reservoir.
But there is also a blue a section that runs from where all the ditches come together just above (to the left) the reservoir and lead back to the Moloa`a stream watershed.
Wilson says this may be a section of the Moloa`a Ditch system that was apparently designed as a safety feature to take excess water out of the system and return it to Moloa`a Stream and was designed to prevent the Ka Loko Reservoir from taking in more water than it could hold.
The elevation of the point just above the reservoir is more than a hundred feet higher than the point where it connects to Kalawa`a stream so it could only run in that direction according to Wilson.
PNN previously reported, first that a letter to the EPA said the main Moloa`a Ditch may have had its flow reversed 10 years ago but later reported that that, according to other documents, was apparently not the case. Wilson’s depiction may shed light on the discrepancy.
It’s unknown at this time whether the section in question was reconstructed when the diversion, as described above, was established about 10 years ago according to a recent county-funded study on agricultural water in the Moloa`a-to-Kilauea area, all centered around Ka Loko Reservoir.
It is apparently not referred to in any documents in the reports as being currently functional.
Though no proof exists as to who did the 10 year old work diverting Moloa`a Stream water, all evidence points to land owner Jimmy Pflueger who did extensive work in the area prior to the dam break and is scheduled to stand trial for manslaughter and in numerous civil cases this summer in connection with the dam break.
The map was put together by Wilson using Google Earth 3D and his work on cataloguing ahupua`a on Kaua`i as well as information contained in the recently released county-funded Kilauea Irrigation Water Engineering Design and Monitoring Study and state Godby Report on the dam break as depicted and provided by Hope Kallai of Malama Moloa`a.
Kallai says there are signs in the various reports that there are currently non-functional parts of the system designed to take excess water out of the ditches and return it to Moloa`a Stream before it gets to the reservoir. She says she isn’t sure where this specific depiction by Wilson fits in but that apparently there is an “clean out weir” that can dump excess water down a small valley that leads from the area above Ka Loko to either Moloa`a Stream’s Kalawa`a tributary or Moloa`a Stream proper.
The problem has been that exhibits in both reports are at times contradictory and it’s unknown whether, when the documents were prepared- some going back decades- they were based on factual material or speculation at the time.
It isn’t known how may “safety features” may have been built in the past and the one described by Wilson may, Kallai says, be one of as may as three according to the documents.
Kallai says that it seems that she believes that water can be returned to Moloa`a Stream as easily as turning a valves to release the water, citing a time when this apparently happened for a period of days last summer during the time the county study was being conducted when the valve was turned and she and others noted that Moloa`a Stream flowed as it had prior to the diversion 10 years ago.
What is apparent is that currently no water return mechanism is in use.
For further details see the left rail for prior PNN reports on the theft of Moloa`a Water. PNN will continue to follow the story as details emerge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
