The state’s Office of Information Practices has, for the second time, determined that the Hawaiian Humane Society is an agency that must comply with the public records law and make its records available for public inspection as required by law.
Back in 1990, OIP issued a legal opinion (Op. #90-31) that dog license information maintained by the Humane Society had to be publicly disclosed. The licensing information was found to be public, even though it is held by the Humane Society rather than a government office, because it is collected and maintained by the organization under contract to carry out a traditional government function required by law.
The most recent opinion (Op. # 09-1), issued earlier this month, came after the Humane Society turned down a request for:
“any and all complaints and the disposition of such complaints, pertaining to the [woman known as the “Cat Lady”] and the animals in her possession, and any and all notes, investigative reports, photographs, e-mails, telephone messages, and all other documents regarding the woman and the animals she keeps” (the “Cat Lady Investigation”).
The request for these records came from Animal Advocate, Inc., which has been seeking them since last year.. The group provided this summary in an email early this year.
For the past 10 years or so, the “cat lady” has been keeping cats, kittens and other animals confned in small traps, cages, and carriers, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The animals are never let out of the cages, and their feet are never allowed to touch the ground. We have produced a 16-minute documentary which premiered on ‘Olelo on February 5, 2009, and has been showing since that time on Channels 49 and 54. If you missed seeing it, you can view it on our website.
In the video, we describe that we have written to Pamela Burns at the HHS regarding the situation, but we have never received any response to our letters. She did, however, deny our request to obtain the records of the HHS’ visits to the cat lady. Rigo Niera of the HHS says an officer visits her once each week. Since the inhumane confinement has been going on for about 10 years, and since we know many, many citizens have called and written to complain about the situation, we think it would be very useful to
obtain the records. (We know about the complaints because we were able to obtain some records from the City Customer Services Department and the DOH, Vector Branch.) After Ms. Burns denied our request for records (which we made under the provisions of the UIPA law), we appealed her denial to OIP.
In any case, OIP again considered whether the Hawaiian Humane Society is an agency subject to Hawaii’s public records law (Uniform Information Practices Act, Chapter 92F HRS).
OIP again found that government authority to enforce a series of animal-control laws is delegated to the Humane Society by contract. These laws cover matters such as cruelty to animals, fighting dogs, animal abandonment, barking dogs, regulation of dangerous dogs, etc.
The law defines a government “agency”:
“Agency” means any unit of government in this State, any county, or any combination of counties; department; institution; board; commission; district; council; bureau; office; governing authority; other instrumentality of state or county government; or corporation or other establishment owned, operated, or managed by or on behalf of this State or any county, but does not include the nonadministrative functions of the courts of this State.
OIP found:
Because the Animal Control Contract delegates the City’s duty to enforce certain animal control laws designated in the contract, OIP concludes that when HHS enforces such laws it substitutes for the City in performing a governmental function.
This led OIP to the conclusion that the Humane Society records relating to the functions it performs under contract with the city are subject to the public records law and must be disclosed unless they fall in one of the few enumerated exceptions to disclosure. And OIP said further that given the scope of the request, there are certainly records which will have to be turned over.
It’s an important decision, as it again spells out circumstances under which a private organization may be subject to the public records law. In the age of privatization, this becomes a very important issue.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Dear Ian-
Animal Rights Hawai’i received an invitation from a company named WHERE TALK WORKS, to a meeting on Sept. 2, 2009, at the Hawaiian Humane Society, regarding tethering and caging of dogs and cats.
I responded, asking several questions (copies of e-mails sent separately). The only response I received was a list of invitees. Two people on that list have as of Saturday, August 29–not received an invitation. Most egregiously, Pamela Davis, the originator of last session’s bill (SB1222) has been excluded.
This behavior of HHS is hardly conducive to successful cooperation to help animals. It does, moreover, illustrate the divisive, arrogant attitude of some of our local humane societies towards any ideas that do not originate with them.
Cathy Goeggel of Animal Rights Hawaii sent a message to you on 8/29/09 regarding a meeting at the Hawaiian Humane Society to discuss tethering and caging of dogs and cats.
In her transmittal she indicated that Pamela Davis and another unnamed individual had not been invited, though their names appeared on the list of invitees.
I appreciate and share her concern about two individuals on the invitation list that had allegedly not been invited. Just wanted to assure you that the individual specifically named, was mailed an invitation and follow-up survey the same time as all other invitees. We did not have contact information other than a mailing address, and, therefore have not been able to reach that person directly to verify their receipt of their invitation and to reiterate that their participation in the 9/2/09 meeting is welcome and would be much appreciated.
The meeting is intended to bring together a range of stakeholders to explore reaching consensus on appropriate methods for dealing with caging and tethering of cats and dogs. Invitations have been extended to The HSUS, Animal Advocates, Inc., Animal Rights Hawaii, OSPCA,the Hawaii Veterinary Medical Association, The Cat Clinic, The Hawaii Kennel Club, The Pet Spot and the Island Humane Societies across the state as well as two other individuals familiar with legislative issues.
I regret that this effort has been viewed negatively when the actual intent has been to convene a manageable sized cross sector group of stakeholders for thorough discussion of the aforementioned topic.
Where Talk Works, Inc. sent out the invitations and surveys as we will be providing a facilitator and recorder for the meetings. Just wanted to clarify our role and share this information with you.
Mahalo,
Linda Colburn – Where Talk Works, Inc.
[editor note: I considered editing out this comment, but it seems that criticism of the Hawaiian Humane Society strikes a very sensitive chord, and this comment clearly expresses one side of the issue. So I’m letting it through.]
What is it about the internet that gets people to make such wild unverifiable adversarial and just flat MEAN claims and accusations? Grow up!! Stomp a roach give a dove on your Zippy’s outside table lung cancer, ma foi! Why don’t you all go join the Steve Irwin and kill a few whalers? Or convince Africans to stop harvesting lion penis for the Chinese virility trade instead of hassling the folks(HHS) who are doing the best they can to protect companion animals? Roll your confused minds down to the legislatures and get the homeless some relief instead of chasing them from one bivouac to another. As long as we all fight one another there will be no peace anywhere
Ma Foi! quelle idiote! (Mme. Suzanne is perhaps sous l’influence…) sadly, when concern about animals is discussed, there is always someone who will exhort us to help the homeless- meaning homeless humans–I respond that there is room in our hearts for all creatures, houseless or not.