Keep police chief selection on track

The entire debacle surrounding the former police chief — and now the struggle to find a replacement — has been such a corrosive experience it’s not surprising that the Honolulu Police Commission has eroded to its minimal dimensions.

One of the candidates to become the next chief of police, under review by the commission, is Thomas Aiu, Chairman Max Sword’s relative by marriage. Although the conflict should have been discussed earlier in the process, Sword ultimately made the right decision to recuse himself from the decisionmaking.

Along with the two vacant seats on the seven-member panel, that leaves only four voting commissioners. All four would have to agree on the selection, in order to represent a majority of a fully seated commission.

As difficult as arriving at a unanimous decision might be, negotiating toward that end is the course that the remaining voting members should pursue. The aim is to avoid any further unnecessary delay in choosing a new leader for the Honolulu Police Department.

At the same time, Mayor Kirk Caldwell must accelerate the task of filling the two vacancies. In the event that the commission’s members cannot reach consensus, it’s essential that the decisionmaking resume as soon as possible.

HPD has been in an unsettled state for far too long already.

The upheaval began, of course, with the years-long controversy over the previous chief, Louis Kealoha, who retired in January in the midst of an FBI corruption investigation that is still unresolved.

In the course of all the upheaval, the need for more independent thinking by the commission itself became apparent. Honest criticism of HPD’s leadership had been typically muted from the panel, which is meant to be the citizens’ representative, providing oversight of this crucial public safety agency.

There has been a sharpening of the commission’s role, some of that resulting when voters ratified a provision in the City Charter during last year’s election. The new language clarified the commission’s power to remove or suspend the chief of police and to subpoena witnesses.

Those provisions were supported by the two newest appointees, attorney Loretta Sheehan and retired state Supreme Court Associate Justice Steven Levinson.

The commission has put more distance between itself and the administration of the HPD, resulting in more supervision than rubber-stamping, and that is a healthy change.

But setting HPD on a more positive track through the appointment of a new chief is a critical task. All the political upheaval arising from the Kealoha incident has been destabilizing and demoralizing to the officers.

The initial paring of the candidates for the job was handled by an external review group.

There already had been a vacancy on the commission when concerns that the review group lacked diversity prompted the resignation of commission member Luella Costales, who quit in protest. The recusal of the chairman over the conflict-of-interest matter led to the current, compromised position of the voting commissioners, with this key action item before them.

Ideally, the evaluation of the seven finalists would be done by a full panel, allowing for a discussion among commissioners less constrained by the mandate for consensus. The four voting members each has his or her distinct viewpoint.

But the added pressure is not necessarily a bad thing, if it compels those supporting a leading candidate to make a robust and persuasive argument. Such a review could go a long way toward improving the public’s confidence in its police chief, the HPD — and the police commission itself.