When our elected leaders fail to do everything in their power to bring their business before us, we fail as a community. Their business, governing us on behalf of us, is our business. We become concerned when we learn from
When our elected leaders fail to do everything in their power to bring their business before us, we fail as a community. Their business, governing us on behalf of us, is our business.
We become concerned when we learn from a couple crusading Kauai County Council members that there has been a concious decision and a pile of excuses by County Clerk Peter Nakamura to not do simple things like hand out mail in a timely manner or post meeting minutes online to make it easier for us constituents to follow what our representatives are doing in office.
We grow alarmed when we hear that Council Chair Kaipo Asing routinely twists a rule so he can essentially hold veto power over setting the agenda.
An unfortunately limited sector of the public has for years hollered for a more open government. Fortunately, Council members Tim Bynum and Lani Kawahara stood up last month and went all in. The chips are on the table, their cards have been flipped over.
While we’re not ready to place a wager on this political gamble, we will applaud a smart move when we see one. In the least, it took a lot of guts. It would be nice if this was simply them doing a part of the job that we put them their to do. But we know that politically it would have been a lot easier to just sit on the sidelines and deal with the current malfunctioning system.
As it turns out, all seven members of our local legislative body are playing this hand so they each deserve credit. Even the man who tried to stop the cards from being dealt.
The council unanimously decided last week to have a public talk next month on government transparency. The communication from Bynum and Kawahara, which each member voted in favor of discussing, details three primary issues:
Sadly, the maverick duo had to perform some tricky political maneuvering to even have the item considered by the body. After getting shut down the prior week over a concern about violating the Sunshine Law by introducing an item of “reasonable …” to the agenda the same day as the meeting, the pair tried again the next week by asking to have a future discussion on the issue instead of trying to have the debate right then. This passed the county attorney’s sniff test and next thing the chair knew even he was voting in favor of having a discussion on government transparency.
How could he not? Or the other members for that matter? Their hands were forced.
With the camera rolling and an eager journalist jotting notes, Asing couldn’t hide behind closed doors this time to shut down such an initiative. His only other apparent move would have been to go on the public record against wanting to talk about government transparency. That would have been political suicide, which he might not care about given the fact that last election season he said this would be his last term, but it would have been a blemish on his 26-year career as a councilman.
His opinions on the matter have remained mostly private. The only time we were able to let the public in on what their top-ranked county lawmaker thought about Bynum and Kawahara’s push to have this talk was after the June __ meeting when Asing simply said he had no plans to put the matter on the agenda and for no particular reason.
We aren’t sure if we want to just take his word at face value and think he really is comfortable with the way the council is being run, or if we should call his bluff and fear the worst. But we digress.
When Bynum and Kawahara threw their ace in the hole on the table at the June __ meeting, it was all smiles until the joker landed on top. The amendment to the communication that gave the chair some leeway in terms of when the discussion should be held – at the July 8 or July 22 meeting— was irksome.
Bynum’s willingness to accept it was hard to swallow considering he’s been trying to have these changes made for the past two years. A more appropriate amendment would have been a request to hold a special council meeting so the issue could be discussed in the time it deserves, free from the shackles of a multi-page agenda packed with other pressing matters. But we can stomach his “so what’s another couple weeks” mentality because it was such a struggle to get to this point.
We strongly urge the council chair to put the communication on the agenda sooner, rather than later. We also ask that he not tack it on at the end of the agenda, which can limit public participation and bring down the quality of the discussion due to simple fatigue. It would show a commitment to serving the people.
In the spirit of healthy dialogue, let’s have an honest talk about government transparency, our current pitfalls and the steps needed to let some more sunshine into these stuffy chambers. It’s our business, now let’s get down to it.
