KPD Blue: Truth puts on its shoes

I have read Tony's book and while his framing of events in racist terms, in my opinion misses the mark, and there are some minor factual errors it is on the whole more accurate than say typical reporting in most dailies. The real issue is insular corruption by the power structure. Many insular communities, like the rural southern community I grew up in, can and do display this level of corruption, and the power structures racial makeup is entirely different (which is to say white). The race of the power structure is historical artifact, and not the driver of corruption.

As to why Tony wrote it -- that should be self evident. Tony was ridden out of town on a rail for basically doing his job. As a consequence of a reporter becoming (an unwilling) part of the story, charges of "vendetta" can dismiss the truth of the tale being told. Corruption is still in full bloom today, but largely dismissed as understandable as evidenced by this quote from Joan Conrow's blog "...not because the cops were necessarily crooked or bad, but hesitant to bust anyone who was a relative or a friend." Excuse me! Isn't that the definition of corruption: differential treatment under the law based upon affiliation?

Tony had to rely primarily on Court records, because of County of Kauai secrecy that is still a HUGE problem as we speak, and many individual bad actors then, are in positions of power NOW. These problems are still with us manifesting themselves in a variety of ways and will not begin to be addressed by putting these events in the past tense creating the illusion that it is old news and filing it under again quoting Joan's blog, "dredging up the stinky muck one more time for those who perhaps never knew the details or, like me, prefer to have forgotten."

"Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it" while perhaps a trite shopworn phrase is still salient in the lives of Kauai citizens. There are years of executive session minutes still not released by the COK who is frightening tooth and nail to keep it that way. Both the Board of Ethics and Police Commission remain dysfunctional (and that's putting it kindly). KOC has and continues to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring outside attorneys to lose cases defending bad county actors.

Last election the COK council displayed an unbelievable abuse of political power by manufacturing a "tampering with a government document" conspiracy to attack a political opponent running for County Council (former police chief K.C. Lum) using what everyone knew was a sheet-feed error. Lum's house was raided right before the election. Think that played an role in his loss? Duh! After a six month investigation -- guess what? It was a sheet feed error. When the council hatched the conspiracy theory they demanded an apology from "members of the community that were trying to make the county look bad," but not a word of apology from the council members that concocted their lunatic conspiracy for their self-serving political gain. Talk about vendetta!

COK is more secretive today than ever and relies on Mark Twain's astute observation, "A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." KPD Blue put shoes on the truth which now must fight for relevancy amid the propaganda spin of "why dredge up ancient history", "lets put it behind us" and, "its much better now." Such propaganda is blowing smoke to obscure the ongoing corruption occurring in real-time before our very eyes.

MISTAKES AND COVERUPS

Whether in Washington or Lihue, the cover- up is more serious than the original mistake. What began as a mistake by the Board of Ethics that could have been corrected fairly easily has ballooned into a cover-up that implicates the board, county attorney’s office, mayor, and council and raises numerous questions.

What prompted the Board of Ethics to give two former county officials now serving on a board/commission permission to violate the plain meaning of charter section 20.02D, which prohibits officers and employees from appearing in behalf of private interests before any county board, commission or agency, and to do so contrary to its own interpretation of 20.02D as set forth on page six of its handbook, “A Guide to Ethical Issues in the Kauai County Government”?

What prompted the board to keep secret an opinion it sought from the county attorney’s office in the second case that it purportedly used to justify its decision to dishonor its published policy? What authority could the county attorney have cited to justify ignoring or contravening 20.02D?

What prompted an attorney sitting on the Charter Commission to propose a charter amendment exempting board/commission members from the requirements of 20.02D as soon as the second case, which involved the chairman of the Charter Commission, became public? What prompted the Board of Ethics to then propose exempting everyone?

What prompted the council to turn a blind eye to the evidence I presented in support of my three requests over a period of five months for the council to exercise its oversight role by calling for a public accounting from the Board of Ethics?

In my opinion, a due regard for the Sunshine Law and for the stated purpose of the Code of Ethics to “establish a high standard of integrity and morality in government service” would lead to a full public discussion and resolution of these and other questions related to the administration and enforcement of the Code of Ethics. County officials seem to prefer secrecy and silence, perhaps hoping at this point that a charter amendment will make the questions disappear.

Horace Stoessel

Kauai Council members promote self-serving scam?

Andy Parx may have uncovered a nationally franchised self-promotion scam (See: another-round-of-imaginary-kibble) to help local politicians be viewed more favorably by voters. It appears no money is involved beyond the waste of time on the part of the perps and their dupes (i.e. the politicians involved and the citizen marks that fall for the time-wasting scam). If the facts check out it appears to be a very sophisticated scam cooked up by the trade group for local politicians NACO , or the National Association of Counties and franchised around the country by NACO members. No one really gets hurt and it's a great way for councilmembers to boost their positive image in the community.

Keep citizens ignorant and blame them for their ignorance

I would like to respond to the quotations attributed to council member Yukimura in the article, "Government watchdogs on the prowl". Yukimura begins by stating that engaged citizens are a “very valuable resource,” and “Democracy only works well when we have actively participating citizens.” Yukimura is absolutely correct, but from that point on council member Yukimura begins a litany of "buts" and launches into thinly veiled left-handed attack critical of citizen involvement.

Yukimura advises, “When you get a soapbox to speak from, it’s really important to have your facts accurate and really listen carefully to what’s happening — not make assumptions, not jump to quick conclusions.” This advice in this context has the subtext that citizens may not have accurate facts, and may not listen carefully. Citizens may make assumptions and jumping to quick conclusions.

Yukimura continues, “You really have to become an expert in the subject so you can perform to the highest ideal. You can lead people in the wrong place.” The subtext: citizens may not be experts, may not perform to the highest ideals, and may lead people to the wrong place.

Yukimura concludes with an accurate description of the divide that exists today between county government and engaged citizens. “It can get to an attitude where, if you don’t agree with me, you’re wrong and stupid,” she said. “That’s more destructive than helpful.”

There is, however, an underlying fact not acknowledged by Yukimura when she gives advice that engaged citizens should have accurate facts, and become experts. To have accurate facts and becoming an expert is only possible if government allows engaged citizens access to information. If government boards, councils, and commissions refuse to disclose such information claiming "attorney-client privileged" then Yukimura's criticism is disingenuous.

It is the county government boards, councils, and commissions that refuse to release the facts and refuse to answer questions citizens ask so the citizen can get their facts straight and become experts.

Yukimura is critical of engaged citizens lacking the facts, not being experts, and not listening carefully while the count council does everything in its power to hide those facts under the cloak of attorney-client privilege.

Yukimura is a member of a county council that is responsible for keeping citizens ignorant, but rather than casting a critical eye on the actions of her colleagues (and perhaps herself) for refusing to waive attorney-client privilege she implies the fault lies with the engaged citizens, victims of government secrecy, for not having the facts, not being experts, and leading people to the wrong place.

Engaged citizens are not trying to lead people anywhere, but rather hold government officials accountable for their actions. Mahalo to council member Yukimura for at least speaking to this issue, and she can rest assured that engaged citizens are reading carefully, even between the lines.

Dirty deeds done in dark?

According to the State of Hawaii Office of information Practices Jan. 28, 2007 formal opinion the Kauai County Charter section 307.E supersedes and is compliant with Hawaii State Sunshine Law. Section 307.E reads in relevant parts;

E. The council shall meet regularly...With the exception of deliberations relating to confirmation of appointees or consultations with the county attorney on claims, all county council and committee meetings shall be open to the public.

The OIP opinion further found;

the charter provision does not cause a violation of attorney client privilege, but instead acts as a partial waiver of the privilege by the County as the client.

Now I'm not a lawyer but it appears the County Charter section 307.E supersedes and is compliant with State Sunshine Law and furthermore 307.E partially waives the attorney-client privilege.

Short conclusion: The County Council committed numerous violations of the County Charter, and the only people refusing to release the county attorney's opinion is the county council. Please note in the opinion of OIP the charter already partially waives this prividlege so it appears only the county council itself stands in the way of making the opinion public. Contrary to the Garden Island Newspaper headline "County protects legal opinion" it appears council members are just protecting themselves.

Dirty deeds done in dark? Read the opinion and you decide.

1. County attorney request for opinion to OIP
2. OIP Opinion to County Attorney

Kauai County Council - model of transparency?

Years ago when Robert Kennedy Jr. visited Kauai he told me, "Democracy not only gives people the right to ask a question, but more importantly get an answer." I guess his visit was not long enough to really get to know Kauai and how things are done around here. Illustrative of how things are done here is the the article "County protects legal opinion" (TGI 20/01/2008, A1) which can be summarized as follows;

1. A citizen asks if a county council action was in error as a matter of law.
2. The council member Fafuro assures the citizen he will get the citizen an answer and asks for a opinion from the county attorney.
3. The County attorney issues an opinion.
4. The Council refuses to release the opinion to the public.
5. A citizen asks the County Board of Ethics for an opinion.
6. The County Ethics Board refuses to give an opinion.
7. The County Council continues it's questionable action while council member Yukimura hopes people understand the council actions are taken with the "highest intentions."

Perhaps the council should spend less time protecting a secret "legal opinion" and try protecting a citizen's right to get an answer.

--- 30 ---

Everybody knows the dice are loaded

Everybody knows the dice are loaded I thought as I read County lawsuits reveal open records realities in the The Garden Island newspaper this morning. Inaccessible public records is not a reality but an ongoing nightmare for the citizens of Kaua`i, and only a philanthropist with money flowing out their nose, or a legion of pro bono attorneys with a sense of social justice will wake the people up and stop this abuse of process.

The article by Amanda Gregg recounted the tale of former Honolulu Star Bulletin reporter Anthony Sommer who was "allegedly" fired for making a "threat" when requesting County of Kaua`i 2002 executives session minutes. The article failed to mention the charge of terroristic threatening was made by a county attorney and although it got Tony "allegdly" fired the charge never proceeded to court.

Reporter Amanda Gregg writes "some plaintiffs wonder whether officials have been advised to hold out, banking on the chances that most residents have less of a bankroll the county to keep the fight ongoing in court" while attorney Dan Hempy notes that "he really hasn't seen an aggressive push for government records in county court." Could there be a nexus between a lack of money and taking the county to court? Ya think!

The ultra-secretive County of Kauai has never been shy about spending vast amount of the public's money keeping information about their doings out of the public eye. Kauai County has even sued the State Office of Information Practices to keep the public in the dark, and it is a safe bet that with rare exceptions the county can outspend the average citizen (if lawsuit money is short they simple raise taxes).

Combine a secretive spendthrift county with the apparent lack of pro-bono lawyers willing to delay their payday working for the public good (perhaps working as outside council for the county is more lucrative), and you have a neutered state open records law -- on the books, but like county public records are inaccessible to members of the public lacking the county's deep pockets.

Even Tony Sommer's case described in the article as having the "potential to set a precedent" settled for a document with sixteen paragraphs redacted (no doubt the most important parts). Unfortunately Tony "didn't have the financial stamina to keep the case going to the appellate level". Kudos to Tony for putting his financial foot forward, but his case is just the tip of the iceberg. There are literally hundreds of potential open records cases that never see the light of a courtroom due to the counties endless stream of public money and equal lack of prob bono lawyers willing to work in the public interest.

If anyone knows or is a rich philanthropist or a pro bono attorney with a sense of social justice give me a call. I need help clearing out a humongous backlog of open records requests but regrettably lack the financial stamina to avail myself of the judicial process.