| |
COMMENTARY
Who's Spreading The
Sunshine And Who's Not?
Commentary
by J.D. Won, Wailuku
There was an interesting matter that came up in the council chambers
of the County Building a couple weeks ago.
At a Committee of the Whole (COW) meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 1, Councilmembers
debated a proposal by Council Chairman Riki Hokama that Hawai‘i’s
four county councils be exempted from the state’s Sunshine
Law.
Hokama, in his proposal, asserted that the law often times interfered
with the council’s ability to do its business, and that the
council should be exempt from the law – just as the Legislature
was – and allowed to set its own open-meetings rules.
But, that’s not necessarily the interesting part of the story.
What’s interesting is the Nov. 2 viewpoint article authored
by Maui County Mayor Alan Arakawa that’s replete with blatant
misstatements and misinformation.
The Mayor’s viewpoint article says that identical proposals
to exempt the Council from the Sunshine Law were submitted by Council
Chair Riki Hokama and Budget Chair Dain Kane.
So the Mayor is asserting that Councilmember Kane submitted a proposal
that would exempt the county from the Sunshine Law.
Yet, a day later, The Maui News reports in “No action on proposed
Sunshine exemption” that it was only Council Chairman Hokama
– and not Councilmember Kane – that submitted the proposal.
The staff-reporter specifically stated that “Councilmembers
Dain Kane and Michelle Anderson were vehemently opposed to removing
the law.”
In fact, Councilmember Kane, opposing any exemption from the Sunshine
Law, was quoted as saying “Which is more important –
efficiency, or protecting the people’s right to know?”
So the interesting question is – who’s telling us the
truth? Is it Mayor Arakawa or The Maui News’ staff-writer
that’s misleading the public?
Thankfully, there’s television, video, and written and taped
minutes of the meeting.
You be the judge as to whether it’s our Mayor or The Maui
News’ staff-reporter that’s telling us the truth:
During the COW meeting, the mayor’s executive assistant, Don
Couch, acknowledged Councilmembers Anderson and Kane’s opposition
to the proposal by urging other members of the committee to take
the position that Members Anderson and Kane had taken – opposing
the proposal.
Councilmember Anderson did vehemently and passionately oppose Chair
Hokama’s proposal to exempt the counties from the Sunshine
Law.
Councilmember Kane calmly began by reading into the record the “policy
and intent” of Chapter 92, of the Hawaii Revised Statutes:
Ҥ92-1 Declaration of policy and intent.
In a democracy, the people are vested with the ultimate decision-making
power. Governmental agencies exist to aid the people in the formation
and conduct of public policy. Opening up the governmental processes
to public scrutiny and participation is the only viable and reasonable
method of protecting the public's interest. Therefore, the legislature
declares that it is the policy of this State that the formation
and conduct of public policy – the discussions, deliberations,
decisions, and action of governmental agencies - shall be conducted
as openly as possible. To implement this policy the legislature
declares that:
(1) It is the intent of this part to protect the people's right
to know;
(2) The provisions requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed;
and
(3) The provisions providing for exceptions to the open meeting
requirements shall be strictly construed against closed meetings.
Member Kane also referred to an Attorney General Opinion (Att. Gen.
Op. 86-5) saying that: “Interpretation of ‘board’
as excluding county council would be inconsistent with policy and
intent of sunshine law.”
Thereafter, Councilmember Kane offered his closing arguments as
follows:
“First, I agree that the people are vested with the ultimate
decision-making power;
Second, I agree that opening up the governmental processes to public
scrutiny and participation is the only viable and reasonable method
of protecting the public's interest; and,
Third, I agree that the formation and conduct of public policy should
be conducted as openly as possible.
Therefore, in order to protect the public’s right to know,
and in light of the legislature’s policy and intent, I cannot
support exempting the Maui County Council from the “Sunshine
Law”.
So, who’s telling us the truth? And, who’s misrepresenting
the facts and misleading the people? You be the judge.
|
