Earlier this week, Civil Beat’s Nick Grube had an important story showing that Honolulu rail officials misused a confidential executive session to discuss their approach to lobbying for an extension of the general excise tax for rail (“Behind Closed Doors: Honolulu Rail Officials Planned Political Strategy in Executive Session“).
Directors of the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transit justified the executive session as an opportunity to discuss legal issues with the board’s attorney, “especially the General Excise Tax (GET) surcharge”.
But the minutes show that the board’s conversation focused almost entirely on the political maneuvering that would be necessary to extend the general excise tax surcharge for the $6 billion project beyond its 2022 sunset. There was little, if any, questioning of Takeuchi reflected in the minutes.
Civil Beat Law Center for the Public Interest Executive Director Brian Black said it’s troubling that such discussions took place out of public view, especially when HART said it needed the privacy to talk with attorneys. He added that this specific example highlights the need for better enforcement of possible Sunshine Law violations.
“It almost seems to validate everyone’s fears,” Black said. “Many people fear that the boards use the exceptions, such as the legal advice exemption, and that they just use it for themselves to be able to talk frankly.”
It seems to have been a pretty blatant abuse of the section of the state’s sunshine law which provides for executive sessions.
Here’s the general premise of the sunshine law:
Every meeting of all boards shall be open to the public and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting unless otherwise provided in the constitution or as closed pursuant to sections 92-4 and 92-5….
Closed executive sessions are allowed for certain reasons specified in the statute.
§92-5 Exceptions. (a) A board may hold a meeting closed to the public pursuant to section 92-4 for one or more of the following purposes:
(1) To consider and evaluate personal information relating to individuals applying for professional or vocational licenses cited in section 26-9 or both;
(2) To consider the hire, evaluation, dismissal, or discipline of an officer or employee or of charges brought against the officer or employee, where consideration of matters affecting privacy will be involved; provided that if the individual concerned requests an open meeting, an open meeting shall be held;
(3) To deliberate concerning the authority of persons designated by the board to conduct labor negotiations or to negotiate the acquisition of public property, or during the conduct of such negotiations;
(4) To consult with the board’s attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the board’s powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities;
(5) To investigate proceedings regarding criminal misconduct;
(6) To consider sensitive matters related to public safety or security;
(7) To consider matters relating to the solicitation and acceptance of private donations; and
(8) To deliberate or make a decision upon a matter that requires the consideration of information that must be kept confidential pursuant to a state or federal law, or a court order.
But the minutes show there weren’t questions about legal issues raised, only issues about political strategy.
What we don’t know is how common this sort of end run around the sunshine law is, whether for this board or others.
And the article doesn’t indicate what triggered Grube’s interest in this particular set of minutes.
In any case, it was a good catch by Civil Beat, another example of why it’s good to have CB providing competition to the other daily news media.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Civil Beat, 12/2014:
http://www.civilbeat.com/2014/12/got-a-700m-shortfall-set-the-cycle-to-spin/
“After Grabauskas’ presentation, board member Don Horner asked his colleagues if they wanted to ‘huddle up’ and go into executive session to ‘have a pretty candid discussion’ about the latest projections.
“Horner did not cite a reason under the state’s Sunshine Law for the executive session, although the agenda specified it could be to meet with attorneys.”
HART Executive Director Brennon Morioka was well known for his public be damned philosophy while at DOT. What a perfect fit for HART.
Secretive and unethical leadership is the norm at both agencies, all at taxpayer expense. Perhaps we can merge HART and DOT leadership but substitute the usual free golf junkets with a one way ticket to Somalia.They will find plenty of like minded leaders.
Civil Beat did a great job. It is too bad that the Star Advertiser is so pro-rail that they would never have printed this information.
I’m trying to recall whether Ian has covered how other states handle their own executive session type issues. It seems like something that would have been covered in these pages before. Now may be a good time for a refresher. Perhaps the conduct Nick Grube uncovered could prove to be a catalyst for improvement.
It’s good to see this brought out in the open, however, it’s such a good story that it concerns me that Nick Grube may be approaching phase 4 of something I feel as if I’ve observed before and will refer to here as the Oahu rail reporter career cycle. Some reporters get to phase 1 and never leave it. Other’s go directly from phase 1 to phase 4, bypassing the middle phases. It seems Mr. Grube is in for the full ride.
In phase 1 the reporter’s product is largely informed by rail PR and can sound somewhat similar to mainland stories that praise Honolulu’s rail for characteristics it does not possess. With time the reporter grows better informed and enters phase 2 which is marked by stories that are more newsworthy and better reflect reality. Finally, the reporter moves into phase 3, when the reporter’s understanding of at least some aspects of this rail project and instinct to inform the public becomes dangerously high. Around this time some rail proponents may begin to accuse the reporter of exhibiting ant-rail bias. Unfortunately, phase 3 is usually followed by phase 4, when the reporter moves on to some other pasture that does not involve talking about rail. I’d like to hope it won’t be the case here, but I fear a job as a spokesperson or a job away from this island may be looming in Mr. Grube’s not so distant future. Then, the cycle will begin anew with the careful selection of a fresh reporter who possesses a slate unburdened by deep knowledge or experience with what has been going on here on Oahu since 2005.
It’s interesting to contrast Nick Grube’s significant current work with this earlier short bit penned in 2013 that demonstrates how effective the rail project’s PR people can be at what they are paid to do, even when a solid journalist is on the receiving end:
—
http://hawaii.news.blogs.civilbeat.com/post/56177344216/todays-honolulu-summer-traffic-could-be-year-round
I certainly hope Nick Grube will continue his investigating of the corrupt project. The people of Honolulu would be grateful. Maybe he could even get an award for exposing the corruption?