The state Office of the Ombudsman has welcomed complaints about state and county administrative agencies in Hawaii for over 50 years, but the past two have been extraordinary.

Based in the Territorial Office Building on the edge of downtown Honolulu, the 14-person office has gotten hit by a surge of complaints during the coronavirus pandemic, including some delivered with hostility.

The number of filed complaints within the office’s purview jumped by 718, or 20%, last fiscal year to 4,253 from 3,535 in the 2020 fiscal year, and is on pace to dip only a little in the current fiscal year ending June 30.

Robin Matsunaga, who has led the office for 24 years as Hawaii’s longest-­serving ombudsperson, said the increased workload over the past two years has been handled pretty effectively, though it’s been trying because of the troubling rise in uncivil behavior from some complainants.

“We’re not the enemy,” he said. “We’re not the agency being complained about. We are a complaints office.”

In testimony to the Legislature in February seeking to restore the office’s annual budget to $1.4 million for the next fiscal year after an 8% cut in the current fiscal year, Matsunaga said some complainants have verbally abused and even threatened staff.

“Complainants have been more frustrated with government than ever before, and this frustration has manifested itself in the form of more inappropriate, hostile, and sometimes threatening communications with our office,” he said in written testimony.

Most of the spike in complaints over the past two years has been directed at the state Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, which had immense difficulty processing an unprecedented flood of unemployment claims triggered by COVID- 19 mitigation efforts.

Some additional complaint volume also was directed at the state Department of Public Safety, which struggled badly to keep its prison and jail population safe from COVID-19.

For much of the office’s history, complaints directed at DPS have represented roughly 50% to 60% of all complaints within the office’s jurisdiction.

The office, established in 1967 by state lawmakers as an independent agency of the Legislature, is charged with investigating complaints against state and county administrative agencies and their employees. The office does not have jurisdiction over the Legislature, the governor, lieutenant governor, mayors, County Councils, state court system or federal government.

The office also does not deal with criminal complaints and does not have power to mandate changes. Instead, the office makes recommendations that are accepted by the offending agency over 90% of the time, according to Matsunaga.

Types of complaints include personal use of government vehicles, mistreatment of prisoners, property damage, billing disputes and program participation exclusions.

Improper or absent enforcement of rules also is another major complaint category, and has involved things such as public parking, park use, harbor use and other things.

In one notable case the office determined that some administrators were employing “casual hire” workers at public schools before criminal history background checks were complete.

State Department of Education rules require background checks of all employees because they work in proximity to children, and this applies to part-time casual-hire employees who get paid an hourly or daily wage and are sometimes hired to fill an urgent need.

Oddly enough, the Office of the Ombudsman didn’t receive a complaint about the hiring procedure being disregarded. Instead, the case in 2014 stemmed from a new casual hire who complained that she did not receive timely pay. An investigation led to the discovery that school administrators at a number of schools weren’t waiting for background checks before new hires started working.

As a result, DOE issued a memorandum emphasizing that its hiring policy is essential to safety and as such must be followed.

It’s not always the case that the office finds fault with an agency’s or employee’s actions. Some investigations validate what an agency or employee did was appropriate. Other cases have revealed flaws in a system where no simple change can be made because of administrative rules or laws. But the office in many cases does help right a wrong.

“When we can fix things, it’s rewarding,” Matsunaga said.

Publicizing cases is difficult because the office by law must maintain confidentiality of those involved. This includes witnesses, complaint targets and complainants, who in some cases are government workers.

The office historically has published annual case summaries where doing so doesn’t reveal identities of people involved.

“It’s hard to report on investigations without violating that (confidentiality requirement),” Matsunaga said.

The office did not publish summaries in its past two annual reports because Matsunaga said it would have impeded the office’s ability to handle the jump in case work, which has also become more challenging during the pandemic because some government workers are working remotely and don’t have normal access to records.

Out of 14 staff, eight are investigators who usually produce the summaries.

Also because of COVID-19 safety policy, Matsunaga closed his office to in-person public use, which did aggravate some complainants who want face-to-face discussions with staff instead of relying on phone or written communications.

“It wasn’t an easy decision,” he said. “But I felt it was what I had to do.”

Matsunaga said a COVID- 19 breakout in his office would frustrate the work that needs to be done at a time when more work exists.

In the fiscal year ended June 30, the office received 4,253 complaints subject to its jurisdiction as well as 415 nonjurisdictional complaints and 443 information requests.

About 65% of the complaints involving proper jurisdiction, or 2,749 cases, were declined mainly because a formal appeal process within an involved agency exists but hadn’t been pursued first. Other reasons for declined cases include complaints being made secondhand and too much time having lapsed.

Investigations were completed on 551 complaints, representing 13% of the total. Of these, 498 were not substantiated while 53 were.

Another 464 complaint investigations were discontinued for reasons that included complainants withdrawing their complaint, not cooperating and not providing sufficient information.

Last, 371 complaints led the office to assist complainants in resolving their issue directly with the involved agency while preserving an option to reengage the office if a resolution isn’t reached.

The volume of jurisdictional complaints this fiscal year as of last week was 3,726 with more than a month to go.

Lawmakers approved the office’s budget request but did not take up who will lead the office next.

Matsunaga’s last six-year term ended April 30, and he is barred by statute from another term. But he remains in a holdover position because the Legislature did not convene a joint House- Senate session this year to appoint a successor.

BY THE NUMBERS

Jurisdictional complaints received by Hawaii’s Office of the Ombudsman

FISCAL YEAR NUMBER

2021 4,253

2020 3,535

2019 3,355

2018 2,388

2017 2,357

2016 2,706

2015 3,106

2014 3,071

2013 3,128

2012 3,159

2011 3,399