Move on to give police panel more power
STAR-ADVERTISER
Louis Kealoha: HPD’s chief could be fired by a city panel if the charter is changed.
A Honolulu Charter Commission subcommittee wants Oahu voters to decide whether the Police Commission should be given more authority over the Honolulu Police Department and its chief.
The proposed amendment would change the Charter to give the Police Commission:
>> The power to fire or suspend the chief “for cause.” It lists four specific criteria for doing so.
>> The authority to subpoena evidence and witnesses when it investigates public charges of misconduct against HPD or its officers.
The commission heard testimony on the proposal Thursday and will decide at its meeting Wednesday whether to advance it and send it to its Style Committee. If the commission approves the proposal, it would go before voters on the Nov. 8 general election ballot along with other proposed amendments.
Commission Chairman David Rae said it’s unlikely that the substance of the proposal will change significantly, although technically the commission has until June 30 to submit its proposals to be included on the ballot.
Don't miss out on what's happening!
Stay in touch with breaking news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE!
The issue has been proposed as current Chief Louis Kealoha is coming under fire on several fronts, including a federal investigation into actions by him and his wife, city Deputy Prosecutor Katherine Puana Kealoha. The city Ethics Commission is also investigating the chief.
The City Charter says the chief serves at the pleasure of the Police Commission, and allows the commission to remove the chief for cause. But it lists only “gross or continuous maladmin-istration” on the chief’s part as one possible cause for removal but does not specify other possible causes.
The charter also does not allow the commission to suspend the chief.
The proposed amendment specifies four criteria under which the chief could be removed or suspended. The first criterion is if the chief has committed any acts that show “a reckless disregard for the safety of the public or another law enforcement officer.”
The chief could also be removed or suspended if he or she misrepresents material facts “for any improper or unlawful purpose,” is unable to perform competently due to a mental condition or acts solely in self-interest inconsistent with the interests of the public or the commission.
The second part of the proposed amendment would give the commission the power “to subpoena and require the production of evidence” tied to an investigation of complaints by the public against police officers, and to “administer oaths to such witnesses to the extent permissible by law.” When a recommendation regarding allegations of officer misconduct is made by the commission, the chief would need to respond to the commission in writing if he disagrees with the course of action to be taken.
Currently, the charter says the commission will investigate charges brought against the department and then submit its report to the chief.
The proposed amendment came from a three- member Charter Commission subcommittee tasked with looking into HPD and Police Commission issues.
Commission member Kevin Mulligan said the subcommittee considered a number of proposals that had been submitted regarding police affairs. “We believe our recommendation will benefit the larger community by increasing transparency and accountability, and the oversight function performed by the Police Commission,” he said.
Public faith in law enforcement has become an issue both nationally and locally, Mulligan said. “We took that very seriously,” he said. “In addition, there’s an expectation that there will be more independent, objective and transparent oversight of law enforcement.”
Under the charter, “short of malfeasance or illegal activity, making the case for removal of a police chief can be difficult,” Mulligan said. “Unlike other professions where there are often clear measures of effectiveness, the effectiveness of a law enforcement agency can be subjective and influenced by a variety of variables that are subject to multiple interpretations.”
The proposal, modeled after language found in Missouri Revised Statutes and the Los Angeles City Charter, “makes it clear that the police chief is an at-will employee who is completely accountable to the Police Commission throughout the five-year term.”
Barbara Wong, an attorney for the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers, said the police union opposes both changes in the proposed amendment.
Wong said that last year the department disagreed with and declined to sustain a recommendation by the Police Commission only once. “I think not sustaining one is not something that needs to be fixed,” she said.
As for giving the commission broader authority into police affairs, Honolulu’s charter commissions of the 1930s and 1940s found a need “to depoliticize the Police Department,” said Wong, a longtime officer and onetime assistant chief.
“The chief often has to make choices as far as resources,” even if those decisions might upset politicians, she said.
Ryan Toyomura, spokesman for state Sen. Will Espero, chairman of the Senate Public Safety Committee, who has been a strong critic of Kealoha and his administration, said the senator says the amendment does not go far enough.
Toyomura said the two changes in the proposal “fall short of the necessary checks and balances that he would like to see the commission have in the future.”
Espero (D, Ewa Beach-Iroquois Point) has proposed that Honolulu’s mayor should also have the authority to remove the chief with the approval of a majority of the commission, Toyomura said. He also wants the Police Commission to have the authority to discipline officers.
Mulligan said that giving the commission the authority to discipline officers was something considered by his group. “We thought that was going … way too far,” he said, adding that the group could find only one police commission in the U.S. that has such authority.
Aaron Hunger, a University of Hawaii doctoral researcher, said language now in the charter bars the Police Commission from dealing with the administrative affairs of HPD.
For more information on charter proposals, go to honoluluchartercommission.org.
29 responses to “Move on to give police panel more power”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Increased polical controls? Not needed nor wanted.
Make sure u go into the voting booth, if this appears on the ballot. Most of the time people don’t know what they are reading anyway in the voting booth. They have all kinds of legalese such that one almost needs to have passed the bar in order to understand the ballot.
One of the better questions that needed to be asked on the ballot, way back when Cousin Moofee was in charge, with a 70% majority requiring to pass, was or is: DO YOU WANT THE RAIL? YES OR NO. Not all of this conditional statements that makes us wonder if yes or no or if blank or if not showing up to vote is the best choice.
Get the politicians out of the picture entirely.
Now, what are they going to do about lying, dirty prosecutors?
During the 80s I was in a job that required me to testify in District, Circuit, and Federal Courts, often several times per week. I observed Deputy Prosecutors who were excellent and I observed DPs who were sometimes unprepared; usually because of scheduling issues, sometimes because of inexperience but I never ever observed DPs who were “lying” nor “dirty.”
I guess the great thing about this forum is that provides small people with no specialized knowledge a place to vent unsupported opinion. I suppose it’s cathartic in some manner. Perhaps the SA should charge five-cents for each comment. “The Psychiatrist is IN.” (thank you Charles Schulz)
Someone from this newspaper scans through all comments though, to get “The Best of The Best” and print them “In The Forum” section of the paper on Sundays.
Only once did I notice a quote of mine printed on Sunday. Other than that I don’t read that “In The Forum” section religiously to see if my quotes got in there. Also surprisingly they printed one of my letters to the editor.
These comment sections are better though. One does not need to say who they are, unless they are Dave_Reardon and Gene_Park, and a lot of good stuff comes out, although many a time, it’s just for fun.
What do you call the chief’s wife?
I too worked at a job that had us testifying in court. You ae right about the deputy prosecutors. I was lucky enough to work with now Judge Rom Trader who was outstanding. People like Mrs. Kealoha make it hard for good workers and bring morale down in their offices. Kind of like what Chief Kealoha is doing to HPD.
If you give the Police Commission more power, they’ll just use it to spread the whitewash faster. Maybe they’ll put the whitewash in a pressure washer.
Yes or something else has to be done. With the situation wth Kealoha and his wife he should fired and retirement privileges be denied. Kealoha is simply a joke but with the situation at hand he just thinks he is beyond the law
I do find it amazing he’s still pushing on through all the mukkity muck with that stone face as though he’s made of Teflon and knows nothing will hurt him. He must truly know the weakness of the mayor and police commission.
Any other chief with this sort of controversy surrounding him would have said “fuuug it…I retire”. Or they would have done the “honorable” thing and left the job to allow the department to heal. But I guess seeing how everyone works here, “honor” doesn’t really factor in.
They need to stay out of the limelight.
The police dept. can’t even control themselves and you want to give them more power. How about eliminating the commission completely.
Well the commission is a completely separate entity from the force itself.
If the commission doesn’t have the power to discipline officers … what’s the point in having them?
Like all government commissions and boards, they exist only to shield the politicians from public criticism. If Caldwell wanted him gone, he would be gone. Personally, I think they both should be retired along with Katherine Kealoha.
The commission thought Kealoha is doing a great job. Why give them even MORE political power? They are all appointed by the mayor, and they appoint the police chief. It’s all incestuous. If we want more open oversight of the police department, have the commission be elected by the public.
Lol,the public? It’s hard enough putting the X next to a name that you ini mini myni moed , because the choices were uuggh.
Can the journalists in this town even get a basic fact correct? Espero is NOT the chair of the Senate “Public Safety” committee. Senator Clarence Nishihara is the Chair of the Public Safety, Intergovernmental and Military Affairs committee in the Hawaii State Senate. Espero is the VICE-CHAIR. Why the television and print reporters go to Espero for every story on the police issues shows how lazy the reporters are and constantly give the same politicians air time on issues which they think the public need to hear again. No wonder why the “press” is so poorly thought of!
If elected, must have term limits, and without any retirement or other benefits to insure it will not be a career job, but an efficient law enforcement position.
How about a commission truly representing the community and not stacked with cronies, rubber stampers, political gift receivers and good ‘ol boys that keep this state in its perpetual quagmire of mediocrity?
I dob’t know if the problem is the powers and authority of the Commission, or who the commissioners are. Seems you have a history of rubber stamps on the Commission.
This is a County issue. This should be up to the Mayor and Council to work this out. I like the idea of the Police Commission having more authority, but I don’t want the State anywhere near this. Espresso is using this for political gain.
“‘The chief often has to make choices as far as resources,’ even if those decisions might upset politicians, she said.” One of those choices was to sue the Ethics Commission. That ties up some of their resources, which makes it more difficult for them to investigate him.
That move was probably done covertly with the resources and nudging of Ma’afala
“Integrity, Respect, Fairness” This motto seems to be directed more towards how they want the public to treat them then vice versa. What the Police Commission has done and is doing are standard procedure. If you were on the commission you would want the department to know where you live and come running if you called them and not waiting till they finish their coffee and donuts. You would want the police to give you warnings and not tickets if you break a road rule. That’s common sense..isn’t it? I mean, what fool would not want the Police on your side.
More panel power? Better hire up more officers first…..if state is going to release misdemeanor offenders, cops will be very, very busy.
It’s all Shibai.
“The issue has been proposed as current Chief Louis Kealoha is coming under fire on several fronts, including a federal investigation into actions by him and his wife, city Deputy Prosecutor Katherine Puana Kealoha. The city Ethics Commission is also investigating the chief.”
There is a ‘conflict of interest’ where the Chief of Police is allowed to have his wife ‘city Deputy Prosecutor’ both work for the city. I think that’s something that the Ethics commission has grossly overlooked. (Fox in the hen house)
Perhaps the Police commission doesn’t want to be the ‘Bad Guy’ and discipline the chief, after receiving a “Far Exceeds” review, but rather have the Charter Commission subcommittee kick-punt the decision to Oahu voters to decide whether the Police Commission should be given more authority over the Honolulu Police Department to make that decision due to the fact of probable recourse by the city Deputy Prosecutor Katherine Puana Kealoha, Chief Kealohas’ wife.
Indecision is preceded by ‘prose’ in the City Charter which doesn’t reflect a clear correlation with the charges. So change it. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
Which further brings me to Mayor Billy Kanoi. His legal team is strategizing his longevity/defense. The Attorney General is still ‘thinkin’ of term limits for his position so Billy is the furthest from his mind.
What’s the commotion with all these ‘LAWYERS’ ?
Definition of a Bad Lawyer – One who makes a case last for years.
Definition of a Good Lawyer – One who makes a case last even longer.
Most people here who comment are on the fringes of society: either seniors or the very young. Therefore as whole we must take any comment said here with a grain of salt, unless said person is wiling to attach their name to a comment.
Soo, the young and old don’t have a say. For us older people , we got some skin in the game and know a whole lot about life more than a people may think. The young are searching, they don’t know what for yet, but its good they are doing something. And you, I can’t read you yet. I don’t know if you are an arrogant arse or someone just fishing.