The new law establishing a board overseeing law enforcement standards and training statewide deserves a chance, despite the strikes against it: namely, a skeptical assessment by the law enforcement agencies the board seeks to oversee.

So it was gratifying to see that Gov. David Ige was willing to enact House Bill 2071 without his signature. In his statement on Tuesday, the governor vowed to work collaboratively with state and county law enforcement officials on implementation, and those agencies should do the same.

Ige had put HB 2071 on his “intent to veto” list of bills initially, explaining that he shares the state’s police chiefs’ concerns about the timeline and resources for the “law enforcement standards board” now authorized by statute.

There is some reason to worry about the timeline — the law requires the standards and certification process be in place by July 1 next year. Even under ideal circumstances (and an election year could never be described as optimal, from a scheduling standpoint), that’s a short timeline.

Still, in his statement issued with the decision, Ige rightly applauds the intent of the bill, adding that he recognizes “the need for accountability and public confidence in law enforcement.” It is rational to press for timely delivery on a critical objective, and reassuring Hawaii residents that their police are accountable and trustworthy is such a goal.

Hawaii has a spotty record of police transparency about disciplinary records, although some egregious examples of bad behavior found their way into public notice.

Topping the headlines has been the saga of Honolulu’s former police chief, Louis Kealoha, embroiled in a federal fraud and conspiracy case, but there’s a lot more.

One appalling instance involves Ethan Ferguson, sentenced in 2016 for sexual assault. That episode occurred on a Hilo beach, while he worked as a state Department of Land and Natural Resources officer. Ferguson already had been fired for misconduct by the Honolulu Police Department.

An oversight board such as the new one established by law would have been empowered to decertify this agent as eligible for hire by DLNR. That case alone bolsters the case for the board, but there is also a long history of agencies keeping disciplinary records under wraps; more sunshine is needed here, and the new law could help provide it.

This measure appropriates $100,000 and directs the money to a special fund dedicated to defraying costs of the board to be set up, mitigating the worries about resources.

The board would develop minimum standards, set up training programs and provide continuing education programs for law-enforcement officers.

How much of that latter activity would be sustainable for the long term remains to be seen, but the other tasks should not overwhelm existing staff. Each law enforcement agency already should be able to supply a template of its own standards and training.

There is no need to reinvent the wheel here: There are many models across the country to ease the job of drafting standards. Hawaii is, according to HB 2071, one of the few states lacking minimum standards.

The U.S. Department of Justice Community Relations Service, in a “Policing 101” guide for public education, indicated that “states typically have minimum standards for their local police agencies.”

Decertification could follow a felony conviction, a record of domestic abuse or sexual offenses, driving under the influence and a poor driving record, according to the guide.

These are minimum standards. One might assume that the county police departments already go above and beyond them.

Even so, sharpening state oversight would give the public some peace of mind — the sense that bad actors in law enforcement will be less likely to slip between the cracks.