Editorial: Keep up standards for next Honolulu Police Department chief

In the annals of police work, 2020 may go down as one of the worst of times. Even if it hadn’t played out against the national backdrop of protest against perceived law enforcement brutality, the Honolulu Police Department weathered a rough year on the front lines of enforcing pandemic restrictions.

In addition, HPD was dealing with criminality that flared as a result of economic distress. And even before the lockdown, a Waikiki tenant facing eviction fired on police, killing two officers.

Police Chief Susan Ballard, who took the helm of HPD in 2017, did not come through this trying time unscathed. Ballard, the first woman to head the force, earned a less-than-glowing annual evaluation from the Honolulu Police Commission, a report released to the public last week.

Even so, it was a startling and disappointing development when Ballard, 64, announced her retirement, effective June 1. She asserted that she no longer has “the trust and support of the Police Commission or the new mayoral administration.”

And that assessment, delivered in a video statement on Friday, surprised both commission leadership and Mayor Rick Blangiardi, who insisted that he had been supportive of the chief.

The commission, of course, was on the record in criticizing Ballard, finding her performance “below expectations” in two key categories, leadership and management. The commission had directed Ballard to proceed on a performance improvement plan and to circle back in 60 days to show progress.

What’s disappointing is that Ballard could have accepted the call to improve, but chose not to.

This is the first such plan the commission has issued, and it signaled a willingness to fully use its oversight authority. That’s a welcome change from past commission habits — most notably demonstrated during the tenure of former Chief Louis Kealoha — of rubber-stamping whatever the top executive said.

Ballard decided instead to step down rather than to serve as a model of how a much more balanced give-and-take between chief and commission could work. That’s unfortunate, because an effective police department, dedicated to serving the public, should be willing and able to accept constructive criticism.

The chief had accrued a solid record of service over her 36 years with HPD, and early in her term as chief had exhibited a degree of openness with the commission and the public that was encouraging. When she hadn’t been available, she saw that one of her deputies responded. The evaluation was not without acknowledgement of her programs in homeless outreach and online training.

The overall impression was not positive, however, and some lapses were evident from beyond the commission’s purview. An examination of FBI reports shows HPD’s rate of clearing cases in 2019 at 25.7%, well below the 35.6% for similarly sized cities.

Recently, Ballard had become more remote to the media and the public, and that cannot be explained away by COVID-19 concerns alone. Statements were often prerecorded, which is acceptable only in the exceptional case but not as a rule.

More seriously, the chief was taken to task by HPD commanders and then by the commission for the spending of federal CARES Act grant money. These funds were spent by a special COVID-19 enforcement team, one that was suspended after an audit found 59 officers had logged more than 20 hours of overtime weekly.

That suggests a failing of management, and Ballard was answerable for it.

In the coming search for an interim and permanent replacement, the panel must stay the course and hold Ballard’s successor accountable to these reasonable standards. The commission in turn is accountable to the people, who should be able to have full confidence in their police chief.