Kusaka reverses decision, discloses committee

LIHU’E — Mayor Maryanne Kusaka reversed an earlier decision Wednesday and

released the names of committee members currently evaluating proposals to

divert solid waste from the county landfill.

The mayor’s original decision

to withhold the names generated questions about the legality of doing so and

led to media reports questioning the move.

“Revealing the names at this

point is still premature, because we are legally justified in keeping the names

confidential until contract award, which is several months away,” Kusaka

said.

“However, several factors have contributed to our decision to share

this information at this point in time.”

Despite her announced intent to

keep the names confidential, Kusaka identified potential committee members at a

public visioning meeting Feb. 15 attended by County Council members and

Administration officials.

She said Wednesday that the minutes of that

meeting will soon become public record and will contain a list of names of

potential committee members.

“We know that once the names are revealed in

these minutes, the media will bombard these individuals to either confirm or

deny their participation, and possibly to disclose the details of their work on

this process,” Kusaka said.

“That’s exactly what we are trying to avoid

and that’s precisely why we kept the names confidential to begin with,” she

said.

Committee members have signed a non-disclosure statement, which

prohibits them from discussing this matter with anyone, including friends and

family, the mayor said.

In addition, the county finance director has been

directed to issue an addendum to all bidders that will clearly state that any

contact with these individuals with respect to this procurement is prohibited,

and will be grounds for rejection.

Recent media reports have suggested that

the Kusaka administration is cloaking the County’s Request for Qualified

Providers (RFQP) for Solid Waste Diversion in a “veil of secrecy” by not

releasing committee members’ names or opening their meetings to the public,

Kusaka said.

“Nothing could be further from the truth,” she

said.

“Although the names are being released at this time, their meetings

will remain closed until we are legally required to disclose the contents of

the contract file.”

The State Procurement Code, she said, states that the

“Sunshine Law” does not apply to the discussions, deliberations, or decisions

required to be conducted or made confidential under the Procurement

Code.

Also, Hawaii Administrative Rules state that the existing contract

file may be available for public inspection upon notice of award, and shall be

available for public inspection after the contract is signed by all

parties.

Because of the highly technical and proprietary nature of many

of the proposals, and the potentially enormous high contract value, this RFQP

process was designed to allow the evaluation committee time to review the

proposals without interference from outside influences which might taint the

proceedings, County Finance Director Wallace G. Rezentes, Jr. said.

Despite

the fact that committee members’ names have been disclosed, Deputy County

Attorney Galen Nakamura has reservations.

“In the county’s judgment,” he

said, “publicly releasing committee members’ names any time before contract

award puts them at risk of being lobbied by potential vendors.”

Nakamura

said the county will “vigorously argue” its case before the Office of

Information Practices because the OIP’s decision on this issue could have a

major impact on future county procurements and similar procurements all over

the state.

An OIP staff attorney told The Garden Island last week that the

office had contacted County Attorney Hartwell Blake’s office and extended the

county the opportunity to get an expedited opinion from OIP via “some kind of

oral presentation.”

They declined, the attorney said.

Kusaka said that

from the beginning, the Administration said committee member names would be

released at the appropriate time.

“We have nothing to hide, but we do have

much to lose if the integrity of the procurement process is compromised,” she

said.

The process, as outlined in the RFQP, calls for a preliminary review

by the evaluation committee, after which a recommendation of the five most

favorable proposals would be made to the Director of Finance, who will select

the five finalists.

The five finalists will then be required to present

non-proprietary, non-commercial aspects of their proposal at a public meeting,

where public comments will be solicited.

Following discussions with

bidders, review of public comments, and receipt of “best and final” offers, the

committee will again meet to review the five proposals and make a final

recommendation on the winning proposal to the Director of Finance.

Six of

the members of the evaluation committee are private citizens. Their backgrounds

are in the areas of engineering, construction engineering and management,

environmental health, procurement, finance and accounting, and law.

At

this point, committee members have graded the proposals according to the

evaluation criteria specified in the RFQP without discussion. When the grading

Is complete, the numerical results will be summarized, and then discussion will

commence based on the rankings.

The committee has nearly completed the

first phase, and expects to narrow the number of proposals to five finalists

within the next two weeks.

“We specifically designed this RFQP to allow

for public involvement and input,” Kusaka said.

“We have always involved

the public in issues of major impact, and this case is no different,” she said.

“Whoever wins this bid will be required to obtain pertinent state and county

permits, which will provide numerous opportunities for public input.”

The

RFQP was issued so that most or all of the county’s solid waste would be

diverted from the Kekaha landfill. The landfill was designed to meet the

County’s solid waste needs through approximately the year 2010, however, debris

generated by Hurricane Iniki in 1992 reduced the life of the landfill by at

least four years.