The minority leader of the state Senate continued to push for the suspension of a Honolulu police major in connection with allegations of aggressive management and discrimination, while the interim police chief maintains the department is investigating while following HPD policies.

In an Oct. 13 letter to the Honolulu Police Commission that was sent to the media Monday, Sen. Kurt Fevella wrote that “sufficient reasons” exist for interim HPD Chief Rade Vanic to restrict Maj. Stephen Gerona’s police authority in order “to ensure HPD officers are afforded a safe work environment.”

“While the allegations made against Major Gerona are serious, they do not meet the criteria for situations which may result in restricted authority,” said Vanic in a statement to the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. “ROPA (restriction of police authority) would restrict Major Gerona’s ability to exercise police authority, not supervisory authority. Therefore, Senator Fevella’s argument that applying ROPA is necessary to ensure that officers are able to perform their duties both competently and safely is not valid. A better approach would be to reassign Major Gerona, which has already occurred.”

Gerona was transferred Oct. 3 from his command of HPD’s Criminal Investigation Division to the Legislative Liaison Office.

HPD and the city Department of Human Resources are collaborating on an internal investigation into allegations that Gerona harassed and bullied subordinates who did not agree with his management style and decision-making.

HPD is working with the city Equal Opportunity Office, Corporation Counsel and Department of Human Resources to address the accusations made by some officers in a lawsuit and confidential complaints that Gerona harassed them and retaliated against them for reporting his behavior.

“First, Detective Maile Rego’s complaint stated that the reassignment of her immediate supervisor unreasonably interfered with her work performance by creating an intimidating, hostile and offensive work environment. Secondly, HPD has reassigned Gerona due to a recent sexual harassment complaint which acknowledges the seriousness of the complaints filed against Gerona,” Fevella wrote.

Fevella alleged that officers’ complaints to supervisors or to the HPD Professional Standards Office did not change Gerona’s behavior and that media coverage inspired more officers to come forward and complain. Vanic said he was not aware of any officers or employees coming forward to initiate a complaint as a result of media coverage of Gerona.

“The employees’ ‘concerns’ raised through the HPD’s internal processes are currently under investigation. Once the investigations are complete, their complaints will be addressed in an appropriate manner,” Vanic said.

If the officer is not satisfied with the resolution, a grievance under the collective bargaining grievance procedure, if applicable, or additional complaints may be filed with outside agencies.

Fevella also took issue with Vanic taking action against officers who spoke to the media about Gerona by issuing written “384” warnings. The warnings are notices to officers that they violated HPD policies by speaking to the media without approval. Fevella told commissioners in the Oct. 13 letter that he was informed that a “384” does amount to disciplinary action because by “contract it is a non-grievable step taken before disciplinary action and that the written warning is placed in the officers’ personal files at the divisional level.”

Vanic cited article 13, section A, of the collective bargaining agreement with the State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers, which defines discipline as “written reprimands, suspensions, dismissals, disciplinary transfers and disciplinary demotions.”

“A Divisional Counseling (HPD-384) is not included in this list and not considered discipline. Additionally, the issuance of an HPD-384 is not a ‘step taken before disciplinary action,’ as stated by Senator Fevella,” said Vanic. “The Divisional Counselling (HPD-384) is placed in the employee’s divisional folder as documentation. It is not placed in the employee’s personnel folder (in the department’s Human Resources Division) as part of his or her permanent rec­ord.”

Letter to Honolulu Police C… by Honolulu Star-Advertiser