Limiting pCards a prudent move

The whole local-government “pCards” chronicle provides an excellent illustration for the expression, “You can have too much of a good thing.”

In concept, the purchase cards make perfect sense as a means to simplify government management procedures, enabling small transactions needed for day-to-day business be handled with a charge rather than purchase orders or reimbursement procedures.

But recent experience with the Honolulu City Council — not to mention the pCard scandal with Hawaii island Mayor Billy Kenoi — suggest they cause more trouble than they’re worth. Fortunately, it appears that the Council is moving to correct a potential vulnerability before it creates a Kenoi problem on Oahu.

City Council Chairman Ernie Martin followed the correct instinct by announcing a “precautionary” policy change barring Council members from using the city-issued cards to pay for travel and travel-related expenses.

On Thursday, Martin dispatched a memo to the other eight members, noting that the pCards would be taken away Dec. 29. Among the reasons, he said, were attempted identity theft as well as the work of tracking paperwork and answering queries about policies and delayed reimbursements.

The chairman’s executive assistant, Laura Figueira, confirmed “a recent attempt to compromise a Council pCard” but declined to say which member it was or disclose further details of that episode.

But surely there’s more at issue than paperwork management here, given the reform in procedure.

Instead of the individual cards, which Martin had instituted for the Council four years ago, members will continue to have access to the Council Administrative Services office pCard to pay for registration fees for conventions or meetings. That seems an efficient way to deal with those minor expenses.

But if they plan to travel, members will have to submit “intent to travel” forms in advance then pay their airfare and hotel bills with their own money, later getting reimbursed.

All of that seems aimed less at simplifying things than at bringing more oversight and control over expenses — which, as the Kenoi investigation suggests, is the right approach.

Kenoi has apologized publicly for improperly using his county- issued pCard to pay for drinks at bars and a variety of other personal expenses unrelated to county business, such as the purchase of a bicycle and surfboard. When the controversy came to light about a year ago, Kenoi had said he was in the process of reimbursing those expenditures.

The state Department of the Attorney General announced its investigation into the matter back in April. The Hawaii County Ethics Commission reportedly is awaiting the outcome of the AG inquiry before proceeding with its own probe.

There is a healthy measure of public transparency instituted already, with the provision of expense reports on the City Council website (bit.ly/HNLCouncil). Beneath each member’s photo is a “View Travel and Expense Reports” link to downloadable spreadsheets.

Simply knowing that their voters could easily see what was bought, or where the member traveled, should help curb inappropriate spending. But going one step further and removing the temptation altogether within the offices would make a violation of the public trust that much less likely.

The Honolulu City Council clearly should take care to avoid the laxity that became the practice in the mayor’s office in Hilo. The Billy Kenoi story should be treated as a cautionary tale, if ever there was one.