Tag Archives: University of Hawaii

Check these columns on UH, rail

17 Replies

Here are two columns worth reading.

Ka Leo, the UH Manoa student newspaper: “We deserve better”

Ka Leo takes aim at the UH administration’s handling of the Stevie Wonder concert debacle.

While the community may be upset, students should be furious. Each year, we pour millions of dollars into the university in the form of tuition and student fees. We continue to see tuition rates rise with no reprieve. We face ever-expanding class sizes and witness firsthand how much harder it is to meet academic requirements and graduate in four years.

Students, we deserve better than this.

By the way, did you see the news that UH Manoa’s flagship Hamilton Library is now one of the lowest ranked in the country, right there with institutions as Montana Tech, Green Mountain College, Juniata College, and Birmingham-Southern College.

A friend called me yesterday after learning that Hamilton Library is closed on Saturdays, and most special collections are closed on Sunday as well. So students wanting to actually study at the library and utilize its resources in their academic work pretty much have to write off the weekends. Perhaps this isn’t as important as it once was, given the growth in the digital world, but the rankings in the Princeton survey suggest otherwise.

And Dave Shapiro responds in a column today to those who lament that the court-ordered delay in rail construction will just cost the public money. Dave hits the nail right on the head.

It’s time political leaders and rail officials own up to the reality that the delay and additional costs are nobody’s fault but their own.

They ignored good advice to avoid cutting corners on archaeological and environmental studies, rushed to sign construction contracts years before they were ready to build and failed to write the contracts to protect taxpayers from delays caused by legal snags.

The big rush was a politically motivated gamble by the Mufi Hannemann and Peter Carlisle administrations that went bust.

And if the flawed mentality that got us here doesn’t change, city leaders will be digging the hole deeper instead of digging us out.

UH Athletic Department enjoyed unusual autonomy, access to top administrators

20 Replies

Employees of the University of Hawaii’s Athletic Department had unusual direct access to top “system” level administrators, apparently allowing them to bypass routine administrative channels, reviews, and safeguards on the Manoa campus, according to the factfinders report on the background of the failed Stevie Wonder concert.

The timeline outlined in the report appears to show then-Manoa Chancellor Virginia Hinshaw remained in the dark about the concert until just days before tickets went on sale, when UH President M.R.C. Greenwood sent her a message asking about the event. At that point, the concert planning had already been underway for three months.

Kathy Cutshaw, Vice Chancellor for Administration, Finance, and Operations on the Manoa campus, apparently didn’t learn of the concert until after a payment of $200,000 had already been sent to someone posing as an agent for Wonder.

Instead of working within the Manoa bureaucracy, key employees in the athletics department were able to go directly to the office of the university’s general counsel, which drafted the agreement setting up the concert deal with Honolulu promoter Bob Peyton. When questions were raised, athletics officials used what was actually only limited involvement of the general counsel’s office to deflect the concerns.

For example, Chancellor Hinshaw was contacted on June 19 by President Greenwood. Hinshaw then requested a briefing on the concert, which was provided by Athletic Director Jim Donovan, who told her athletics was working with the Office of the General Counsel. Hinshaw repeated this point in her reply to Greenwood. Apparently neither Greenwood nor Hinshaw pursued the matter further because mention of the university lawyers’ involvement acted as a shield against further scrutiny.

The chain of events underscores the degree to which control over the Manoa intercollegiate athletic program had shifted from campus administrators to top administrators of the statewide university system, contrary to NCAA rules and to assurances given to the NCAA during a program review last year.

In practice, though, this meant athletics was getting a pass and acting without adult supervision because system administrators are not used to reviewing issues until they had already undergone several different levels of review.

Plans for the Stevie Wonder concert proceeded without much substantive review for months, and then were rushed ahead without adequate final reviews because top system administrators were told the performer would withdraw unless the $200,000 payment was received immediately.

The athletics department had also previously received a special exemption from university rules limiting purchases that can be made without additional fiscal scrutiny. The standard limit is $25,000, according to policies cited in the factfinders report, while athletics was allowed to authorize unlimited expenditures. Further, the expenditure authority had been delegated to a fiscal officer in the department whose position was several layers down in the athletic hierarchy.

The report also notes the concert project moved ahead without complying with several different university rules or procedures.

For example, the fact-finders reported:

• The fact-finders could not identify any delegation of authority from the Manoa Chancellor to the director of athletics “to enter into a facilities use agreement with outside users” such as promoter Peyton.

• Factfinders could not identify any university policy authorizing “an outside user to pay a facilities fee after the event occurs. UH policy appears to require the payment of facilities use fees before the event.”

• Factfinders did not identify any policy authorizing UH from “advancing funds generated from ticket sales to an outside user to pay for expenses.”

• The factfinders reported that no one has accepted responsibility for authorizing concert ticket sales before cancellation insurance required by the contract with the promoter was confirmed to be in place.

• The factfinders said there was no explanation provided for why the terms of the university’s agreement with the promoter were not enforced.

That last point is illustrated by the requirement for an insurance policy that would protect the university if the concert were cancelled for any reason. The university insisted on this as a requirement for the deal to proceed. But while athletics staff were repeated reminded of the requirement and warned about the need to get the insurance before moving forward, no one blocked expenditures when the promoter failed to provide the insurance. It was Cutshaw who finally ordered that no further payments be made until the insurance issue was settled, and she hadn’t been alerted until after the big money had already been wired to a Florida bank.

The report notes:

June 14: Bob Peyton, the local promoter who suggested the concert idea to the athletic department, told Rich Sheriff, manager of the Sheriff Center and the primary person in the athletic department responsible for concert–“I have applied for it (the cancellation insurance)….it should be in place tomorrow.” It was the only written request identified by the factfinders regarding the insurance requirement.

June 18: Peyton emailed Sheriff saying he “should have the insurance later that day.”

June 26: Ryan Akamine, attorney in the UH General Counsel’s office, told VP and chief financial officer Howard Toda “the insurance would protect the University.”

June 29: Sheriff says he has been assured “the insurance is in process.” Akamine says he had requested the insurance policy “and that he was told ‘they are working on it.'”

July 2: Promoter Peyton sends an email “stating he should have the insurance the next day.” Athletic Director Donovan said he learned that day for the first time that cancellation insurance was needed.

July 5: Peyton again emailed saying the cancellation insurance would be “in hand tomorrow.”

July 6: Akamine emails Sheriff asking whether he had yet received a copy of the insurance policy.

July 9: Akamine finally said the promoter was in breach of the contract with the university if the insurance hadn’t been obtained.

July 10: Peyton sent Sheriff, Donovan, and Greenwood “the quote he had obtained for the cancellation insurance.”

Sheriff told investigators it wasn’t his responsibility to make sure the insurance was in place. He thought Associate Athletic Director Carl Clapp would block the $200,000 payment if the insurance policy hadn’t been provided.

But, according to investigators, no one confirmed the insurance was in place before the money was paid.

The overall impression is that the athletic department operated with unusual freedom from the routine rules and administrative oversight that other Manoa departments deal with on a daily basis, instead enjoying an unusual degree of autonomy.

I suggest it was the power struggle between the Manoa campus and the system office over control of athletics that left the athletic department pretty much in limbo and able to operate without day-to-day scrutiny from either direction.

One state legislator told me UH President Greenwood’s current problems “are of her own making,” referring to her wresting of control over athletics from the Manoa chancellor.

Deletions in UH report appear contrary to state’s public records law

11 Replies

If you’re read part or all of the recent “factfinders” report on how the University of Hawaii fell victim to a $200,000 scam, you will surely have noticed the blanks left where certain names or other information have been redacted. Put another way, university officials have, without explanation, refused to disclose key portions of the report.

The deletions raise significant questions and add to the public impression that the university willfully fails to follow the letter or the spirit of the state’s open records law.

Under the law, Chapter 92F, known as the Uniform Information Practices Act (Modified), all government records must be made available for public inspection unless they fall in one of a limited number of specific exemptions. The same provision applies to specific deletions of information contained in otherwise public documents such as the factfinders report.

Those exemptions are spelled out in Section 92F-13.

§92F-13 Government records; exceptions to general rule. This part shall not require disclosure of:

(1) Government records which, if disclosed, would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;

(2) Government records pertaining to the prosecution or defense of any judicial or quasi-judicial action to which the State or any county is or may be a party, to the extent that such records would not be discoverable;

(3) Government records that, by their nature, must be confidential in order for the government to avoid the frustration of a legitimate government function;

(4) Government records which, pursuant to state or federal law including an order of any state or federal court, are protected from disclosure; and

(5) Inchoate and draft working papers of legislative committees including budget worksheets and unfiled committee reports; work product; records or transcripts of an investigating committee of the legislature which are closed by rules adopted pursuant to section 21-4 and the personal files of members of the legislature. [L 1988, c 262, pt of §1; am L 1993, c 250, §1]

This means that any information that has been redacted must fall into one of these exemptions. If not, Chapter 92F requires that it be disclosed.

So take a look at specific examples of information that has been cut from the version of the report that has been made public. Many of these deletions can be easily identified from the context in which they appear.

—Deleted: All references to UH Manoa Chancellor Virginia Hinshaw. Hinshaw officially stepped down as chancellor on June 30.

—Deleted: All references to Stevie Wonder, who was to headline the concert.

—Deleted: The name of promoter Bob Peyton. Peyton’s role as promoter of the failed concert has been widely and publicly discussed, and acknowledged by Peyton himself, according to published reports.

—Deleted: The names of Epic Talent LLC and its officers, who claimed to represent Stevie Wonder.

—Deleted: The name of the Kuali financial management system. The university was making a major transfer to the new system at the time the scam was unfolding. This was identified as a potential factor that slowed or hindered reviews of the proposed concert by fiscal officers.

—Deleted: All references to those groups or categories of people eligible to purchase tickets during a “pre-sale” period before tickets were available to the general public. For example, from the report: “Tickets for the concert would be ‘pre-sold’ to [long space indicated a deletion].” Similar deletions regarding authorized pre-sale participants are made elsewhere in the report.

Now try to figure out how the university can claim that the deleted information properly falls within any of the exemptions spelled out in the law.

Looking more closely, exemption #5 clearly doesn’t apply, as it refers to legislative records. Neither does exemption #4, as there is no court order or law prohibiting disclosure.

Exemption #3 doesn’t appear to apply in this case, so we’re left with only two possible exemptions to consider.

Although it is possible that the university could find itself in litigation involving this case, the fact-finders report doesn’t appear to be protected by exemption #2, which only applies “to the extent that such records would not be discoverable.”

So now we’re down to just one potential exemption that applies with allows government records to be kept confidential if their release would be “a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

Notice all those adjectives. It isn’t enough that they would be an invasion of personal privacy. The disclosure would have to be “a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy” in order to be withheld.

And the law goes on to further limit the personal privacy exemption: “Disclosure of a government record shall not constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the privacy interests of the individual.”

With at least $200,000 in public money missing and what could be taken as a near total collapse of financial and administrative oversight of athletics, there is clearly great public interest in full disclosure of information about this unfortunate situation.

This personal privacy exemption typically relates to things like medical records, mental health records, personal financial information, etc. Nothing at all like the information that has been deleted here.

Frankly, I don’t see how the university or its many well-paid lawyers can argue that the former chancellor’s “personal privacy” would be invaded by having her identified in the report. Ditto with promoter Bob Peyton, since he was essentially a vendor doing business with the university. Personal privacy of the Kuali financial system? Give me a break. Epic Talent? No personal privacy there.

In a federal freedom of information dispute, an agency making these sorts of deletions from an otherwise public record would e required to identify the specific exemption that applies to each deletion. It’s time to make a similar request of the university. It will sure be interesting to hear their justifications, if any, for these bizarre bits of censorship.

Promoter of failed Stevie Wonder concert facing bank foreclosure on Kailua home

5 Replies

The local promoter at the center of the University of Hawaii’s botched Stevie Wonder concert is facing the possible loss of his Kailua home after allegedly defaulting on a $654,500 mortgage loan. The financial woes of promoter Robert V. Peyton appear to date back to another failed concert at the UH Stan Sheriff Center in 2005.

A foreclosure lawsuit against Peyton and his wife, Marie T. Peyton, was filed on November 21, 2011 by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, the current holder of the mortgage. The loan was originally made in 2005 by Option One Mortgage Corporation, now known as Sand Canyon Corporation.

The Peyton’s modest 1,242 square foot home on Mokapu Blvd. was originally purchased in July 1994, real estate records show. It is currently assessed for tax purposes at $642,100.

An earlier nonjudicial foreclosure threat was blocked by a lawsuit filed by Honolulu attorney Gary Dubin in October 2009 against Option One seeking cancellation of the original mortgage for alleged technical violations of the federal Truth in Lending Act.

Peyton’s lawsuit, originally filed in state court but later transferred to U.S. District Court in Honolulu, was eventually dismissed, but not before it succeeded in stalling the bank’s attempt to foreclose. Option One no longer holds the mortgage, which had already been transferred to Deutsche Bank, court records show.

Peyton is the sole officer of BPE Productions Inc., the company that was promoting the Wonder concert for the UH Athletic Department, according to published accounts. His wife, Marie, is listed as a director of the company, according to state business records. BPE and two other Peyton businesses list the Mokapu Blvd. home on business registration records.

It was reportedly at Peyton’s direction that the university wired $200,000 to a Florida bank account supposedly controlled by Epic Talent LLC. Although described as an escrow account, which should have been under the control of an independent third party, it now appears the money may have been paid into a regular account and quickly transferred elsewhere.

Peyton’s money woes appear to date back to 2005, when BPE Productions was promoting a pair of Mariah Carey concerts that were also to be held at Stan Sheriff Center in December of the same year. The Honolulu Star-Bulletin reported on November 14, 2005 that both concerts had been cancelled, citing a press release by Peyton.

In October 2005, Peyton obtained the $654,500 mortgage loan largely to consolidate existing debts, according to loan documents filed in the federal court proceedings.

Proceeds of the loan were used to pay off a series of Peyton’s debts, including $10,290.54 owed to American Express, $12.566.94 due on a Chase Bank charge card, and two Bank of Hawaii loans with balances of $243,531.47 and $250,980.27, as well as settlement costs and mortgage broker fees.

Peyton received the balance of $117,960.49 when the loan closed in October 2005..

A month later, the planned Mariah Carey concerts fell apart.

Peyton cancelled another show featuring a group from Las Vegas planned for November 2008, this time a fundraising event for HUGS, a local nonprofit. Within months, Peyton and his wife were facing threats of foreclosure after falling behind on mortgage payments, court records show.