• Councilman rebuts mayor’s explanations • Hydro, yes… FERC, no • Drug testing Councilman rebuts mayor’s explanations My questioning of the Administration having created those five (& other) new positions half-way through the current fiscal year was not a criticism
• Councilman rebuts mayor’s explanations •
Hydro, yes… FERC, no • Drug
testing
Councilman rebuts mayor’s explanations
My questioning of the Administration having created those five (& other) new positions half-way through the current fiscal year was not a criticism of whether the Administration had the right to create those positions or whether they would be able to justify the need for those positions. Instead, I was (and am) questioning the Administration’s unilateral re-creation or reallocation of those or any positions mid-year without coming to the Council (& the people) with a justification for each. Without a process that obligates the Administration to get Council approval (as with the Budget process), there can be no “check and balance” by the Council for the people.
In Friday’s cover story, the Mayor’s own words were “Have new positions been added? Well, more accurately, existing vacant positions have been filled.” While the Mayor may win the legal argument that he didn’t technically create new positions, he will not win the “people’s argument” since any reasonable person would agree that when you take a vacant position, change the title, change the duties and change the salary (in one case even doubling the salary from $50k to $96k) before filling that position, you are no longer just filling a vacant position. In fact, for all practical purposes, the people see and know that you’re creating a new position. The creation of new positions, for budgetary reasons and more, should be formally (as with mid-year money bills) presented to the Council for approval. In several cases this past year, at a cost of over $2 million, they were not.
If I didn’t speak up about this, I wouldn’t be doing my job. As the people’s councilmember, my fiduciary responsibility to be a “check and balance” of the Administration is the most important obligation I have to the people. For that reason, I will keep my head and heart to the grind and push further for what is right including considering budget amendments regarding positions and the practice of $1-funding. To that end, I would like to say, most sincerely, to those individuals that may be directly affected, that I’m doing this with only the genuine interest of the people and what is “pono” (“right”) as my motivation and without any intent to personally harm any individual’s livelihood or reputation. This isn’t personal. Yet, it indeed is very personal for me when it comes to being committed to and entirely passionate about serving the people and doing what’s right.
Councilman KipuKai Kuali‘i, Lihu‘e
Hydro, yes… FERC, no
It is my understanding that a ballot being sent out to KIUC members asks the seemingly simple question of “Do you favor hydro power?” or “Do you not favor hydro power?” (or to that effect). What it does not say is anything at all about the FERC process, or the propriety of the agreement with FFP, that is attached to the question.
By answering “I favor hydro” to the ballot, one is implying that the voter concurs with KIUC’s process, which is a distortion of the question and — most would think — a blatant attempt to mislead the voter in order to bolster KIUC’s position regarding the process that is being so widely criticized.
KIUC is apparently banking on the “either/or” strategy to hoodwink members into voting to favor hydro, even if they don’t like the process.
I would urge members, therefore, to vote “I do not favor hydro” on this ballot, because a non-favoring vote will only kill the FERC/FFP situation. Hydro will still happen, but on reasonable terms without Federal intervention. We need hydro power. We do not need the FERC/FFP deal.
I also believe that, if KIUC persists in this sort of smoke and mirrors strategy, it will backfire on management in a huge way when the public finally “gets it” that they are being taken for a ride.
Elaine Albertson, Waimea
Drug testing
I think it’s time that the professional surfing association start testing the contestants for drugs, just like professional baseball, football, and basketball, etc. If they had been doing this, maybe Andy Irons would still be alive. It’s time to improve the image of professional surfers as well as all surfers. Kids look up to these people. The Irons family should have never tried to cover up the autopsy. Instead, they should be out making public speeches condemning drugs.
Doug Henry, Kalaheo
