Editorial: Honolulu Police Department must move on real reforms

The sentencings of Louis and Katherine Kealoha on Monday — to seven- and 13-year prison terms, respectively — closed at least one chapter in Honolulu’s most disgraceful chronicle of corruption. In addition, former officers Derek Hahn and Minh-Hung “Bobby” Nguyen also got jail time, deepening the stain on the Honolulu Police Department.

It’s a shamefully well-worn story that’s still playing out.

The scandal that brought down the former police chief and his estranged wife, the former deputy prosecutor, also drew attention to other key city lawyers: outgoing Prosecuting Attorney Keith Kaneshiro, whose elected term finally ends Jan. 2, and former Corporation Counsel Donna Leong.

Both had received target letters in the FBI probe of the Kealoha case and were placed on paid leave; Leong resigned her appointed position in July.

No charges have resulted there yet; nevertheless, it’s still casting a pall over the city’s handling of criminal and civil misconduct, an unsettled issue that needs resolution. The fact that Oahu voters changed the City Charter to set term limits for the prosecutor speaks to the general unease over the entire episode.

But the federal investigation’s primary focus was on HPD, an agency that continues to demonstrate why it demands more public transparency and vigorous oversight by the Honolulu Police Commission.

Most recently, the City Auditor last week released a report identifying what may be the heart of the problem at the HPD: It investigates reports of police misconduct but doesn’t take action that could prevent them from happening over and over again.

This is what must change if the department is to establish a healthier relationship of trust wtih the community.

There’s hope that some of that needed resolve is emerging. The leadership on the police commission, now offering more outspoken criticism of the department’s operations and management, has sharpened since the years of weak oversight that predated and coincided with the Kealoha affair.

Current developments signal the end of that lax stance, or the public can hope so. It’s going to take work to reverse course in any sustained way.

But here’s a start: The city is now working to claw back $250,000 in retirement settlement from the former chief, a package that years earlier had been cleared by the commission.

Taxpayers are in a long line of parties seeking restitution for the Kealohas’ tapping of family funds and other incidents in the conspiracy and obstruction-of-justice case, but the city is right to pursue the claim, however belatedly.

This effort is heaped on top of an even more disheartening problem: the allegation about overtime pay violations, funded with federal dollars for enforcement of COVID-19 regulations. It’s an outrage that money would be misspent in this way, when families suffering through the pandemic have real needs.

The OT complaints, first referenced in a Nov. 10 HPD memo citing an internal audit, came to light with the aid of the commission, especially its chairwoman, Shannon Alivado.

That audit found that 59 police officers claimed more than 130 hours each in overtime between late September and October. Two officers put in more than 300 hours each in overtime, and all of this happened despite a rule to keep claims to 100 OT hours during the five-week period, or 20 hours per week.

Police Chief Susan Ballard has said the department would investigate to find out how these excesses were allowed, meanwhile suspending the work of the COVID-19 enforcement teams that were tagging violators of city rules on mask-wearing and social gathering.

Ballard said last week that the inquiry is likely to take months, in that it involves 160 officers volunteering for the team at a time. In addition, she said, supervisors are also accountable for the misuse of funds. Their involvement may be the worst element of all. Careless or even complicit behavior would suggest a systemic corruption that must be rooted out.

Last week’s City Auditor’s report noted that changes are only made “reactively to incidents.” Among its conclusions: Information from HPD reviews is not used to make “responsive proactive changes that could result in prevention of misconduct or reduction of complaints.”

The report noted that the unionized officers’ grievance process tends to reduce final discipline. The union has opposed a recent new law making police discipline more transparent, so this is not surprising — but it is concerning.

Ballard has said in response to the auditor’s report that she agrees with its findings, and said HPD has begun changes in training, policies and supervision to reduce misconduct.

Let’s hope she carries that through, and implements reforms in the full light of public disclosure. If the Kealoha saga has taught Honolulu anything, it’s that powerful people conduct themselves in secrecy at the peril of public trust and the public purse.

Such erosion, which started long before the Kealoha case, is something that HPD must work hard and continuously to repair.