Most
noteworthy is the Board of Ethics finding that Councilman KipuKai
Kualii, who also works for the YWCA, does indeed have a conflict of
interest in matters related to county funding for his employer.
Still,
until we see the actual advisory opinion, it's a little unclear from both
the newspaper article and this recap of the meeting exactly what the
conflict covers:
Letter
dated 7/25/12 from Councilmember KipuKai Kualī‘i requesting an
advisory opinion from the Board of Ethics as to whether he has a
conflict of interest if he participates in County Council agenda
items as it relates to the YWCA of which he is an employee as well as
to recent and future budget matters involving the Office of the
Prosecuting Attorney’s VOCA program, and the Office of Economic
Development of which both fund some level of the YWCA’s programs.
(By a vote of 7:0, the Board found
that KipuKai Kualī‘i does have a conflict participating in and/or
voting on County Council agenda items as it relates to the VOCA
program and OED programs in conjunction with the YWCA; the County
Attorney to provide an Advisory Opinion)
To
me, it's kind of an ethical no-brainer, which is why I found it a
little troubling that KipuKai didn't actually believe there was a
conflict, even though he did recuse himself from voting on certain
budget line items. Plus he waited until July 25 to seek an opinion
from the BOE, and did so only because Councilwoman JoAnn Yukimura had
made a complaint.
I've
always liked Kipu Kai. I voted for him the first two times he ran and
even contributed $25 to his campaign earlier this year. But I was
disturbed when I saw him discussing and voting on issues that
involved the Office of Prosecuting Attorney, its POHAKU program and Prosecutor Shaylene
Iseri-Carvalho. I don't know if he felt pressured by his boss, Renae
Hamilton, who is a staunch Shay supporter, or if he is loyal to Shay
himself. But I didn't think it was right for him to be voting on
matters that involve an agency that gives his employer
money.
The
paper quotes a statement from KipuKai in which he says he sought the
opinion out of “an abundance of caution.” It appears, in light
of the BOE's action, it appears his caution was not abundant, but prudent.
Additionally, the
paper reported that the BOE
didn't take action on the Council's request to investigate POHAKU. However, it wasn't until the third paragraph that this reason was revealed: an investigation is already under way. The BOE also made it
clear that Walter Lewis, who opined at great erroneous length about
POHAKU in Sunday's paper, didn't know what he was talking about
regarding how an ethics complaint can be initiated.
Which
leads me other falsehoods promulgated by Lewis, as well as an“Anonymous” in
the comment section of this blog. Namely, that the appointment of
Special Counsel for the OPA is “not complete," and so BOE action should be delayed, and that Special
Counsel Gary Slovin was hired only to write an opinion and was then
dismissed by County Attorney Al Castillo.
In
fact, according to county spokeswoman Beth Tokioka:
There
should be no reason they [OPA] wouldn't have access to their special
counsel, which is the firm Goodsill Anderson Quinn and Stifel. The
contract is still in force and we have received no invoices to date
so presumably there is still funding left. If for some reason OPA has
chosen to sever their relationship with the firm would probably be a
question for Shay or Jake [Delaplane, first deputy].
I
asked her to please forward them my inquiry.
Getting
back to the ethics investigation into POHAKU, the Aug. 8 BOE special agenda included an executive session related to “Special Counsel
Motion to Compel compliance with a Subpoena Duces Tecum issued by the
Board of Ethics.”
Yes, the OPA was withholding information from the investigator. But I've learned Special Counsel for BOE and OPA — more proof OPA does have representation — worked it out without having to go to court.
Which leads me to how the Office of Information
Practices yesterday had to again order OPA to respond to my
request for public records. This is the third time OIP has had to
step in and direct OPA to comply with the law. To me, that speaks
volumes about the way Shay does business — no qualms
about flouting the law and needlessly costing agencies and people time and money.
Specifically,
I'm seeking “All expenditures for accessories identified explicitly
or implicitly with OPA’s POHAKU diversion program, including, but
not limited to, orange and black T-shirts, orange and blacks hopping
bags, orange and black hand-held fans, pens, baggies of Hawaiian salt
and bracelets, as well as OPA POHAKU booth fees for the County Farm
Fair in August 2011.”
Shay and Jake have claimed no county money was spent on POHAKU. So how were these
items purchased? Meanwhile, Shay has repeatedly claimed that she and
POHAKU were “cleared” by Slovin's opinion. If it's
all good, then Shay and Jake should kick down the expenditure info and let us
decide for ourselves.
Along
those lines, I asked Jake for a copy of Slovin's opinion when I first
heard it was out. But rather than provide it, so that we could read
it for ourselves, OPA chose to write a press release spinning the
information. It was only after the County Attorney rebutted the
release, and TGI had already printed a story using the spun info,
that the opinion was released.
And
finally, attorney Charley Foster, who was recently hired by the OPA to write press
releases and handle appeals, has had a recent string of pro-Shay posts on his blog. I wonder if it's included in the 60 to 70 hours that Shay requires her deputies to work each week, or if he's just giving her a little bonus.
The Board of Ethics refused to review POHAKU issue because there is no ethics issue to investigate. It looks legit. Sorry Joan, you're wrong on this one. Zing!
ReplyDeleteFrom http://www.kauaieclectic.blogspot.com/2012/06/council-asks-for-ethics-probe-of.html
ReplyDeleteRapozo agreed. “I'm under the impression this matter has already been forwarded to the Board of Ethics so I would agree it's duplicative and not necessary for this body because it's already being addressed in that capacity.”
Boy, the denial runs deep. A BOE investigation into POHAKU is already under way.
ReplyDeleteKipukai used to work for OPA. So did Mel. Both should recuse themselves from any Council matters involving OPA, shouldn't they?
ReplyDeleteJust because Shay's Mel's boss and Kipukai's employer gets money from Shay doesn't mean there's a conflict. This is Shay World.
ReplyDeleteGod the bullshit runs deep and far. Its ridiculous. Get rid of the whole lot and bring in new blood.
ReplyDeleteIf Mel is still being paid by OPA - then why, OH why, is he allowed to vote on ANY OPA bill/request/funding?
ReplyDeleteWho says he is being paid by OPA? You better check your sources becuase they don't know what the hell they talking about!
ReplyDeleteWho says he is being paid by OPA? You better check your sources becuase they don't know what the hell they talking about!
ReplyDeleteAugust 14, 2012 3:43 PM
trippy - you can't read or spell...because if you could - you would understand that IF is a conditional statement...and BECAUSE is not spelled the way you tried....
Mel says he's being paid by OPA.
ReplyDeleteWhy has TGI been printing headlines/stories that end up supporting Shay yet as you dig further, the story ends up changing. Hum I wonder why?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteIf one goes down, all will go down.
DeleteVote for KOLLAR
Vote for Hooser, Yukimura, Bynum, Furafaro (he is starting to see the light).
Let the people Vote for a county manager position (not someone from Kauai).
Kauai needs a FBI office.
Let's End the Corruption of Kauai's Mafia
Yes these same dirt bags has been trying to set me up for some years and they will use anybody to do their evil deeds. ANYBODY (Crackheads and all)!!!!!!
DeleteJake Delaplane is an example of a person not from Kauai that is easily manipulated and now his professional conduct is in question.
DeleteSometimes you have to wonder if the master of the bootlickers are leading them off of a cliff.
Looks like Charley's doing PR work full time.
ReplyDeleteI read Charley Foster's analysis of the procurement code's applicability to the arrangement between OPA and Strategic Justice Partners. Now I know why he's writing press releases for Shay instead of practicing law.
ReplyDeleteCharley writes:
"Waikīkī Windriders refers specifically to HRS § 103D-102, which states that the Procurement Code “shall apply to all procurement contracts made by governmental bodies whether the consideration for the contract is cash, revenues, realizations, receipts, or earnings, any of which the State receives or is owed; in kind benefits; or forbearance…”
“Consideration” in contract law refers to the thing – the reason or motive – that induces a party to enter into the contract: the money you pay in exchange for a car, for instance. It is required, in fact, for there to exist a contract. That is why the procurement code requires consideration in the first place.
Incidental costs for promotional purposes do not constitute consideration creating a contract, and proof that moneys were spent for promotion isn’t going to get this case around the law laid out in Waikīkī Windriders."
Charley overlooks the phrase "in kind benefits", which is defined as benefits provided for free or at a reduced cost. In this case, the oral contract required OPA to provide the following "in kind beneftis":
-deputy prosecutors screening cases to determine which defendants would be eligible for SJP's diversion program
-deputy prosecutors advising defendants of the benefits of SJP's diversion program
-deputy prosecutors giving defendants bank slips and instructing defendants to deposit the application fee into SJP's account
-OPA's marketing the program on SJP's behalf, which included:
-approximately 50 community meetings attended by Shay and her staff
-providing a booth at the Farm Fair
-purchasing and distributing Pohaku orange and black T-shirts, orange and black shopping bags, orange and black hand-held fans, pens, baggies of Hawaiian salt and bracelets
There may be other in kind benefits that OPA provided to SJP, but, as Joan has learned, Shay will not voluntarily disclose what should be public information.
Charley's perspective is limited (to put it kindly) and no doubt colored by the fact that Shay would fire him if his press releases/blog posts said anything critical of his boss.
The real problem is that Shay apparently claims that there is no written contract between SJP and OPA or the County. A written contract would clearly set forth SJP's and OPA's respective obligations. An oral contract allows Shay and her minions to maintain that the terms are whatever they say it should be.
So Shay and POHAKU are just friends with "in kind" benefits?
ReplyDelete