Monday, October 26, 2015

Musings: Listen Up

So what do you think? messaged a friend on Facebook.

Is the Kauai County Council's new rule prohibiting members from questioning folks during testimony warranted? Or is it a mad power grab by Chair Mel Rapozo, driven by his beef with the loquacious Councilwoman JoAnn Yukimura?

Well, it could be warranted, I replied. I think we've all heard Councilmembers — JoAnn perhaps foremost among them — yammering on, so that public testimony drags out way longer than is tediously typical.

But since their purpose is to contemplate and then decide on policy, my friend messaged back, and the sunshine law ensures that all debate happens within council chambers, I think that yammering is strongly preferable to silence?

The statement of opinion, followed by a question mark, indicated that my friend still had an open mind on the issue, as did I. But since all we had was The Garden Island's report, I knew I had to watch that part of the Council meeting myself. So I did.

For starters, this is not the first time Mel's been accused of power mongering for proposing rule changes. When he first assumed the Chairmanship, Councilman Gary Hooser falsely claimed that Mel was trying to reduce public testimony and ““deny Councilmembers the right to introduce bills.” Though the rule changes were approved, none of Gary's fears to came to pass.

The most recent change, which Gary again opposed, states:

The Chair may allow Councilmembers to ask speakers to repeat or rephrase statements made during their testimony, but Councilmembers shall not ask questions that give the speaker a greater opportunity to testify than others. Councilmembers shall not ask speakers about the substance of their testimony, or comment on testimony or speakers during the testimony period.

Mel's stated rationale for the rule change is “to encourage testimony from the public.” Apparently some folks have told him they're not comfortable with the Council questioning that often follows public testimony, with Mel quoting one guy who said, “Why I gotta be badgered when I'm just making a statement?”

The streamlined meetings that would result from shutting down the often extensive back-and-forth would be a by-product of the rule change, not the primary goal, Mel said.

“This is an extraordinary action that demands at minimum a public hearing,” Gary said, noting that he knew of no other legislative body that prohibited its members from asking questions.

But Mel said he'd basically taken the language from the rules of the Maui County Council, "where it works just fine."

The few who regularly testify before the Council weighed in on this issue, too, and they didn't like it, though John Patterson and Matt Bernabe could understand why Mel wanted to rein in the dialogue. 

“Some would use the word badgering, some would use the word waste of time, sound would use the word pandering,” Matt said, recounting citizen comments made to him. “This is the language that comes back to me on some of you and I's engagement.”

JoAnn wondered whether Mel, as chair, couldn't simply “exercise his prerogative to cut off conversation when it's not fruitful” rather than impose a no questions rule.

He could, but I think we've all seen JoAnn challenge him whenever he's tried to stop her from talking. It's not easy to get any Councilmember to shut up once they've got the floor.

As KipuKai Kualii noted: “Some of us might have attorney-style tactics, in the courtroom what they would call feeding the testimony to make our point.”

And that's what's really at the crux of the rule change. Asking questions to gain clarity or more information is one thing — a good thing. As JoAnn said, it makes it harder for the Council to gather information needed to make good decisions.

But as I listened to the Council going back and forth, I recalled Gary badgering the seed company reps during the 2491 hearings and lecturing a man who made a negative reference to haoles. I remembered how JoAnn had coddled the Cowerns and some of the other people who were testifying on behalf of the B&B ordinance, drawing out their own particular sob story.

And it always seemed inappropriate for Councilmembers to comment on the testimony – good, bad, moving, compelling, flawed, etc. It often seemed, from their interaction with the public, that they did already have their minds made up, and their questions/comments were intended to either let someone who shared their view testify way longer than was fair, or discredit someone who didn't agree with them.

So the problem isn't the Council rules, but the Council. Or more specifically, the ego maniacs on the Council who can't simply listen to testimony with an open mind, without trying to influence the process.

Though everyone but Gary and JoAnn went along with the rule change, Ross Kagawa noted that he did so with reservations. “We want to get more people to testify,” Ross said. “If this is a cure, let's give it a shot, and if it doesn't work, we can pull back at some point.”

If the Council wants to encourage testimony, it might consider making its meetings more user-friendly. As in holding hearings in the evenings, with testimony taken at very specific times, so that people don't burn an entire day in Council chambers waiting for their turn to speak. I can't count how many people have told me it's soul-deadening to hang at Council. And it's costly if you have to take off work.

It seems extreme to forbid any questions at all. But it's also aggravating as hell to listen to the prolonged back and forth between speaker and Council, which so rarely seems to result in any meaningful exchange. Folks should be able to share all they know in the six minutes allotted to them, which is double what any other county in Hawaii allows.

And since some Councilmembers have shown they're unable to exercise self-control, perhaps a total shutdown is needed so they can learn how to really listen to what people have to say. Once they've got that down, then perhaps the rules can be eased.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

Joann interrupts the speaker if she doesn't like what they're saying. She is not interested in understanding someone who disagrees with her.

Anonymous said...

Yes, yes, yes, yes. You have hit the nail on the head. It's the personalities and their egos that drive the bad behavior.

Anonymous said...

If I hadn't personally witnessed the badgering and other unfair tactics used by some council members, I wouldn't think this rule change was justified. I might even think it was outrageous. Unfortunately, for the current Kauai Council, it is necessary and appropriate.

Anonymous said...

When did the questions and answers lead to a law being changed? They want to convince you that they're right.

Anonymous said...

Have you seen the television commercial where the little kid hits a homerun and as he grows up he is always replaying the homerun over and over throughout the years. Can this be happening with out Council members wanting to see themselves over and over.
BTB, the other morning I heard the roosters crowing about 3:00am. They were all over the neighborhood. What was so strange was that I did not hear any dog barking. Only roosters crowing. What a lovely neighborhood I live in. I guess everyone fed the dogs and made sure they had enough water to lap up. Why was I up so early in the morning, I had to go p.

Anonymous said...

Melvin Rapozo has Kaipo Asing syndrome. Since he will never be Mayor, Melvin's trying to rule like he's an Ali'i.

Anonymous said...

Melvin Rapozo and his minions are the new show in town. Just sit back and get you a coconut water and enjoy the entertainment.

Funny thing is that he's not like "when I played high school football" Jay.

Melvin would be like "when I was a KPD cop lap dancing in the dept was free". Fricking Internet ruined everything for KPD. Oh the good Ol days are long gone.

Anonymous said...

So you don't think that every council and every legislative group does not have strong ego's and strong personalities? The problem is not with JoAnn but with Mel. He cannot handle JoAnn Yukimura and so passes a Rule where no one can talk. Sheesh. Let's see how long that lasts cause we know that braddah Ross never gonna like keep his mouth shut. He will want to remind people how he was the top vote getter and how only he represents the local people. The upcoming barking dog and pony show is going to be hilarious to watch.

Anonymous said...

I think the rule is excessive just because one irritating council member must stroke her own ego (masturbation?) and is not intelligent enough to understand what testifiers are actually saying. It's like she's an old schoolmarm that must repeat the question several times so the slower students have a chance to comprehend and write it down. Yes, Joann dumbs down the meetings to her level. It's a perfect example of how those of lesser intellect think that everyone else is on their level. She needs to retire and knit shawls. Unfortunately, she was elected by the voters most of whom probably never watch a council meeting and therefore aren't disturbed by her constant unwarranted questioning.

Anonymous said...

12:13 The vote totals are fact, not fiction like Hooser and his "people are getting sick, babies are deformed, and people are dying on the westside from the seed companies!" That was hilarious, that he got four other dumbshit council members to pass the invalid Bill 2491. You are the minority like Hooser, move back to where you came from.

Anonymous said...

Burn a day in Council chambers? How about an entire night listening to Joanne argue. Try that sometime.

Anonymous said...

With the new gag order, how will the incumbents campaign with the "free" air time that's really paid for by us taxpayers? I guess they'll just have to keep introducing new legislation to make up for their lost minutes. Heck it's an election year so expect to see lots of voter grabbing bills that propose to reduce taxes and fees. Most will probably be introduced by Hooser or Joann since they seem to be the two that will be most challenged to retain their seats. As they attempt to mess with housing, transportation, and property taxes, remember these 5 truths:

1.) You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2.) What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3.) The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4.) You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5.) When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Dawson said...

4:28PM said:
As they attempt to mess with housing, transportation, and property taxes, remember these 5 truths...
1.) You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2.) What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3.) The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4.) You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5.) When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.


You left out:

6.) Those five rightwing talking points (popularized by Christian right-wingnut Adrian Rogers) have spread across the face of the internet like acne, which is where 4:28 copied them from.
7.) They're trotted out like attack dogs any time a rightwinger smells a government body about to help the poor, improve the public infrastructure, raise the minimum wage, or feed more school lunches to hungry kids.

Anonymous said...

Confusing question followed by off the wall answer leads to brilliant decision making? I don't think so.

Anonymous said...

Mel is right on with this rule that stops Jabbering JoAnn and and Grandstanding Gary.
Now if only Mel would get the Council to look at all County Departments and get them to do their jobs. Ya know simple sh*t, like road paving, getting clear responses from Planning or Water, reviewing the vast payrolls and excessive number of overpaid County workers doing the work of three with a staff of 20, telling the Departments to cut back cost by 5 percent or the Council will do it via Budget.
This is a do nothing time in politics. The locals are living in crowded neighborhoods, 5 to 10 cars per house, 3 generations per home. And not one f*cking proposal to assist in getting homes for the folks by simple zoning changes.
The Council is like the GI quoting a newcomer home buyer who blames the high price of houses on newcomers buying houses. Or even bigger BS quotes from some newbie Realtor named Austin who gives some bizarre soliloquy on national politics and housing. The last time this Austin character sold a house to a local was NEVER. The NS Realtors are destroying Ag and local housing. But these guys are now the new locals.

Well Mel, you have your work cut out for you. The regular locals are lost in the maze of government bureaucracy that assists in higher prices for housing, taxes, sh*t roads and disrespectful Planning Department bigshots.
You can't blame the anti-housing triad of Mason, JoAnn and Gary for these fixable situations. The ball is yours and you can make the rules.

Anonymous said...

"If the Council wants to encourage testimony, it might consider making its meetings more user-friendly. As in holding hearings in the evenings, with testimony taken at very specific times, so that people don't burn an entire day in Council chambers waiting for their turn to speak. I can't count how many people have told me it's soul-deadening to hang at Council. And it's costly if you have to take off work." Mahalo for this positive suggestion, Joan. Next, how to get the council to utilize it?

Anonymous said...

Have you ever had a question to ask someone but the time is not right? You lose site of the conversation just waiting to ask your question. The Council should write down their questions and later hand it to the testifier after the testimony is given. If they want to answer the questions fine...if not...fine. At least we can enjoy more testimony instead of switching channels.

Anonymous said...

I try to watch the meetings every week and the same people show up so why don't they talk to the council before or after the meeting? Is that against the law?

Anonymous said...

Testimony is public driven. It's a time when the public gets to voice their opinion. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If you need clarification Council Chairman Rapozo allowed a five minute question period from Council members. Council members disregarded the rules and turned the time into an interrogation. If the testifiers went against their position they were badgered. If the testifiers agreed with their position they used the extra time for praise and grandstanding. It took a few council members to ruin it for all. If we continue on the path that we were on the testimony period should be changed to the " Public Interrogation Period".

Kudos to Council Chair Rapozo for controlling the problem with stricter rules. It needed to be done.