An announcement from Governor Ige’s office yesterday left me wondering whether they know what they’re doing.

The governor’s office issued a news release yesterday announcing that the state transportation director would be moving into the position of administrative director in the governor’s office.

It was described as a new position, and was reported that way by the Star-Advertiser, “State DOT director will move to new Ige administrative post.”

The administrative director’s post is a new one in the Ige administration but will be similar to that of deputy chief of staff, an Ige spokeswoman said. The administration as been without a deputy chief of staff since Laurel Johnston left to be deputy director of budget and finance in December.

Civil Beat reported it in similar fashion:

While this is technically a new position, Ige spokeswoman Jodi Leong said the job description is similar to deputy chief of staff, which has been vacant since Laurel Johnston joined the Department of Budget and Finance in December.

But here’s the problem. The position of administrative director is actually one of the few positions created by the State Constitution.

Article V of the constitution establishes the framework of the executive branch, setting out the required qualifications of the governor as well as the governor’s powers and responsibilities.

And Section 5 of Article V concludes with this sentence:

The governor shall appoint an administrative director to serve at the governor’s pleasure.

Notice the term “shall,” meaning the appointment of an administrative director is required (rather than simply allowed) by the Constitution.

Further information on the position can be found in the Legislative Reference Bureau’s “Guide to Government in Hawai‘i”, section on the Office of the Governor.

The Governor’s authority includes the power to call the Legislature into special session, to veto legislation passed by the Legislature, to grant reprieves and pardons, and to arrange interstate compacts. The Governor is also the Commander in Chief of the armed forces of the State. Unless otherwise provided by law or the State Constitution, the Governor nominates and, with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoints members of boards and commissions and members of the Cabinet and fills vacancies in the House of Representatives and the Senate. From a list of nominees submitted by the Governor by the Judicial Selection Commission, the Governor fills vacancies in the Supreme, Intermediate Appellate, and Circuit Courts. In addition, the Governor, as required by the State Constitution, Article V, section 5, appoints an Administrative Director, who functions as the Governor’s chief of staff and assists in the supervision of the executive departments and major state initiatives. [emphasis added]

Further, the most recent state salary commission placed the administrative director’s salary in Tier 1, along with the Attorney General and the director of the Dept. Of Budget and Finance, which are state government’s highest paid administrators. As of this year, their salaries are set at $151,776, the same as the Lt. Governor.

So the administrative director’s salary is set by law, along with those of other executive employees.

And Civil Beat’s database of public employee salaries confirms that this is the current salary of Governor Ige’s chief of staff, Mike McCartney.

So now it gets complicated.

The constitution says there shall be a state administrative director. That title has been held by the governor’s chief of staff, as described by LRB, and confirmed by the salary of the current chief of staff. And the administrative director’s salary is currently being paid to the chief of staff.

But statements by the governor’s office appear to indicate that the work of the administrative director had in practice devolved to the deputy chief of staff, although the pay authorized for the administrative director continued to be paid to the chief of staff.

I have to wonder about the ethics and legality of that delegation of constitutional powers and responsibilities.

And if Governor Ige is now formally splitting the positions of chief of staff and administrative director, it would seem the salaries will have to be adjusted to conform to the law.

In this case, it would mean a significant reduction in the chief of staff salary, while the administrative director will be paid as required for a Tier 1 position.

Ah, details, details. Is is possible that these questions never came up as this was being discussed in the governor’s office?

And, as an aside, why didn’t any reporter or editor flag this staff shuffle as a problem?

I’m left with a broader question. If past practice has been to delegate the administrative director’s responsibilities to subordinates, could this be one reason that the state government is so often inefficient and ineffective? The constitution obviously considered the administrative director a key to making the system work, but this administration—and, most likely, prior administrations—apparently haven’t followed through on that constitutional scheme.