i L i n d . n e t

Whew. There were more surprises yesterday than I expected.

I was prepared for Ann Kobayashi’s entry into the race for mayor. I have to wonder whether there’s any polling data to suggest that Hannemann could be vulnerable. Absent that, why Kobayashi would give up her secure seat on the council is puzzling. Hannemann would be a daunting opponent even with his $2+ million campaign account that is still growing. Kobayashi had $145,840 in the bank as of June 30, far short of what’s going to be needed for a serious island-wide campaign. And Kobayashi has not had a challenging race for some time. In 2004, she spent under $40,000 in her campaign, so ramping up for a serious mayoral bid will be an organizational as well as a financial challenge.

But Rep. Kirk Caldwell’s decision to go for Kobayashi’s council seat was a real surprise. Although well known in his House district, I don’t know that Caldwell can boast good name recognition in the rest of the larger council district. In 2004, there were under 11,000 votes cast in his House district, while the larger council district had about twice the number of voters. Bainum, on the other hand, will have high name recognition and lots of personal money to spend, although his four-year absence from the political scene is going to be grist for the opposing campaigns.

What are the residency requirements for the City Council? The City Charter says simply:

Section 3-104. Qualifications of Councilmembers –
To be eligible for election or appointment to the council, a person must be a duly qualified elector of the council district from which the person seeks to be elected. Any councilmember who removes his or her residence from the district from which the councilmember was elected or appointed shall, by that fact, be deemed to have vacated the office. (1992 General Election Charter Amendment Question No. 17)

But does that mean that you must be “a duly qualified elector of the council district” at the time of the election or when filing to run? I’m presuming it means the former, giving Bainum time to straighten out his legal residence, but could be wrong. I’m sure others are already asking the question.

I noticed that Rep. Rida Cabanilla’s office manager filed to run against her before noticing blog posts on that race by Derrick DePledge and Doug White.

We took in this scene a few mornings back just a block or so from our house. It’s a sight not everyone enjoys, nets being mended in preparation for another day’s fishing. Just another slice of life in Kaaawa.

Update: It’s now official, according to latest Advertiser breaking news. Ann Kobayashi has announced that she will run for mayor. As a result, I imagine there are some busy people now racing down to pick up papers and collect signatures to run for her seat. It’s going to be a whirlwind day for those folks and their supporters!

[Earlier entry] The Advertiser’s “breaking news” is reporting that City Council member Ann Kobayashi will decide this morning whether to leave her council seat to challenge Mayor Hannemann. It’s an interesting situation. Her challenge could end up aiding Hannemann by splitting the anti-Mufi vote with highway engineer Panos Prevedouros, who has already entered the race as an anti-rail candidate. And, of course, it opens the door for last minute candidates for the council seat Kobayashi would vacate.

Kobayashi promises an announcement this morning. Stay tuned.

When I checked the S-B early this a.m., I quickly noted this interesting item:
“» TheBuzz: HSF rebrands itself”

Wow! Rebranding the Superferry already? Not so. It appears this was a typo, as Erika Engle’s TheBuzz column was actually about rebranding by the Hawaii Advertising Federation, HAF.

Monday was a busy day for candidates, with quite a few filing their nomination papers ahead of today’s last minute crush. The State Office of Elections already updated its candidate list to reflect the day’s activity.

Sen. Ron Menor got his papers in. Three more candidates filed in the Big Island’s 1st Representative District, where Rep. Dwight Takamine’s Senate run left an open seat. Gene Ward won’t get a free ride this year after retired foreign service officer Amy Monk filed to run against him as a Democrat. That should make for an interesting race. Rep. Jon Riki Karamatsu picked up both a primary opponent and a Republican opponent.

I wonder whether there will be any last minute surprises before today’s 4:30 deadline?

If you run into this week’s Pacific Business News, don’t forget to check Cathy Cruz-George’s story on attorney John Komeiji’s jump to Hawaiian Telcom, which she agrees is “unusual”. The story outlines many of the issues raised here last week, and this blog is mentioned at the tail end.

Komeiji’s move fueled whispers that the interconnections between Komeiji’s firm, Hawaiian Telcom and Hawaiian Electric Industries Inc. were pointing to some sort of merger or linkage. Jeffrey Watanabe, of counsel to Watanabe, Ing & Komeiji, is non-executive chairman of the board of HEI, and until recently Yeaman was a top executive of the utility company.

The talk broke beyond Bishop Street when they were reported on a blog run by former newspaper reporter Ian Lind.

“The first time I heard about it was when I read Ian Lind’s blog,” Komeiji said. “I read it and laughed.”

Unfortunately, the story failed to break through the “aw, shucks, it just sounded like a challenging job” narrative, so we’ll have to wait some more for the “real” story.

Check out the long list of comments on this blog, Patterico.com, which invited readers to interpret Honolulu’s Charter provisions for placing initiative questions on the ballot. The identity of the city and the political context were not disclosed in order to avoid coloring the responses. Very interesting. Says one reader: “Looks like Gertrude Stein is back from the dead.”

On the rail issue, one person I spoke with yesterday said she came out against rail after Mayor Mufi responded flippantly to a serious question about the impact of energy costs on the rail’s long term operating budget. Hawaii’s rail system would be electrically powered, and Hawaii has perhaps the highest electricity costs of any city with a rail system, meaning that energy costs to run the system will exceed those in any other part of the country. In her telling, the mayor failed to deal with the issue. It seems like a good point, another reason that the economics may not work out as favorably here as they have in other communities.

The last day for candidates to file to run in this year’s election is tomorrow. The current listing of those who have filed or at least picked up nomination papers was updated Sunday morning.

Those who appear to have free rides–no one has filed or even taken out nomination papers to run against them–include Democrats David Ige and Bobby Bunda in the senate. In the house, it’s Democrats Jerry Chang, Bob Herkes, Mele Carroll, James Tokioka, Lyla Berg, Scott Nishimoto, Scott Saiki, Kirk Caldwell, Della Au Belatti, Sylvia Luke, Blake Oshiro, Mark Takai, Ryan Yamane, Marcus Oshiro, Ken Ito, and Pono Chong, along with Lynn Finnegan and Cynthia Thielen.

Others currently unopposed but with potential opponents who might file before tomorrow’s deadline are Clift Tsuji, Cindy Evans, Mina Morita, Roland Sagum, Gene Ward, Barbara Marumoto-Coons, Calvin Say, Corinne Ching, Karl Rhoads, Joey Manahan, John Mizuno, Glenn Wakai, Roy Takumi and Jon Riki Karamatsu.

Senator Ron Menor has not yet filed. If he does run, he’ll face opponent Resa Tsuneyoshi.

Rep. Mazie Hirono has not yet filed, according to the latest listing, although she’s been campaigning hard for some time.

To get a bit of that behind the scenes feeling, check out Legistorm.com (”Transparency’s Sidekick”), which now provides public access to personal financial disclosures filed by members of Congress and, in a recent addition, Congressional staff. Here’s a link to the Hawaii delegation.

We spent a couple of hours Sunday afternoon with a friend who was told two months ago that he only had a month to live. I’m so glad we were able to be with him for a bit. He’s beating the odds so far, and every day is an accomplishment, time he knows he can’t count on. He had an interesting assessment. “Nothing is certain, there is no certainty. Everything can change in a brief moment.” He’s relearning that lesson every day.

It was hard to hear his poor assessment of care at Kaiser. His wife put it this way–Kaiser is great until you get sick.

I really didn’t know what to expect when Toby’s favorite twins and their parents paid a visit to Kaaawa during a short stay back in the islands. It’s been over a year since he’s seen them. Would he run and hide like the rest of our scaredy cats when the unfamiliar car pulled into the driveway and people piled out and headed for the front door? Would he even show up? After all, we hadn’t seen him in several hours.

But no worries. I walked up the street with Sarah and Katie to the driveway of their former house and Toby calmly strolled out from under or behind the hedge across the street. Then, without hesitation, he accepted the first pets and it never stopped. For the next couple of hours, Toby and his favorite twins were all in ecstasy. Not only did he follow us back to our house, but he then proceeded to let himself be the center of attention. The bits of ham offered as bribes didn’t hurt, but the main thing is that he obviously remembered them and immediately fell back into their previous relationship. No hemming and hawing. No hesitation. Toby was right there. It was a great scene. We had a great dinner, too, but I failed to get any pictures of that

So just click on the photo for more of Toby and his best friends.

I knew that it would happen at some point, but that’s different from the reality of suddenly being plunged into the task of finding immediate assistance and perhaps a new living situation for my parents, who are struggling with new medical problems. As someone who has not been through this before, just figuring out the available options and then finding a reputable outfit to deliver is a real challenge. Friends have been helpful, and a broadside email to my University High School class brought a number of good suggestions.

Your suggestions are definitely welcome. Email ian(at)ilind.net.

Andy Parx on Kauai responded to my Honolulu Weekly column on campaign funding by again questioning why the recent Supreme Court decision could be expected to impact on Hawaii’s scheme for public funding of candidates.

I still don’t see it Ian and neither Bopp nor you make it clear why you conflate raising the amount allowed to be contributed by private sources (which is what was ruled unconstitutional) and the public finding provided to a candidate who receives no private contributions.

The two are very different especially when you look at what the trigger for unconstitutionality was: giving an unfair advantage- i.e. one not given across the board. Nothing in the public financing system restricts the privately financed candidate or advantages the publicly financed. candidate. The privately funded one can opt for public funding in an equal manner and the public financing increases no matter where they privately funded person got their money.

Here’s my reply to Andy:

The logic spelled out in the decision includes something like this, as I read it and understand it.

By ramping up fund available to a publicly funded candidate, you are in essence penalizing the privately funded candidate, and any possible independent groups, for fully exercising their right to spread their message in the election. The more they exercise their right to spend money or speak, the more they boost the publicly funded opponent.

It’s that perhaps indirect impediment to free speech that the court has targeted in this decision.

It’s not the normal approach that we’re used to, and that’s why it seems to me the decision is so disruptive.

Here’s one part of the decision which cites favorably a Minnesota case (Day v. Holahan), a case which struck down the kind of sliding scale for public funding based on the expenditures of the privately funded opponent or independent political groups:

While BCRA does not impose a cap on a candidate’s expenditure of personal funds, it imposes an unprecedented penalty on any candidate who robustly exercises that First Amendment right. Section 319(a) requires a candidate to choose between the First Amend-ment right to engage in unfettered political speech and subjection to discriminatory fundraising limitations. Many candidates who can afford to make large personal expenditures to support their campaigns may choose to do so despite §319(a), but they must shoulder a special and potentially significant burden if they make that choice. See Day v. Holahan, 34 F. 3d 1356, 1359–1360 (CA8 1994) (concluding that a Minnesota law that increased a candidate’s expenditure limits and eligibility for public funds based on independent expenditures against her candidacy burdened the speech of those making the independent expenditures)…

I’m not a lawyer, that that seems to be a pretty clear statement of the Supreme Court’s view and it’s not favorable towards the kind of public finance scheme we’ve decided to experiment with.

With Honolulu Advertiser employees cope with labor issues, folks in the Star-Bulletin newsroom have been reading a Seattle Weekly profile of David Black, owner of the S-B and MidWeek, as well as a chain of newspapers in the U.S. and Canada. The story describes Black’s Sound Publishing subsidiary as “the newspaper entity in Washington with the highest aggregate circulation”.

Across the chain, about one-third of Black’s newspapers are unionized, with the majority of those employees in Hawaii and Vancouver. On the whole, his papers are thinly staffed. At his non-daily properties, you’ll generally find an editor, a reporter or two, and maybe a photographer. Hence, after conducting an interview, young writers a couple of years out of college are likely to set their notepads aside and un-sling a camera to snap a few shots of their subjects.

A reporter working for Sound Publishing in Washington makes around $27,000, an average annual salary generally higher than those offered by competing community papers and even some small dailies (compared to job openings posted by the WNPA or at journalismjobs.com, among other sources). Generally, two different types of journalists are attracted to Black-owned papers. There are doe-eyed cub reporters, fresh out of journalism school, wanting to get experience and build a portfolio of clips. They stick around for a couple of years, grouse about covering homecoming games and community parades, and typically move on to bigger newspapers.

The other breed is gray-haired veterans, content to put themselves out to pasture. They’re tired of the deadlines at dailies, tired of following breaking news from Portland to Idaho to Los Angeles, sleeping in cheap motels, and not coming home to their spouses and children until late at night.

Hey, these Bushies must be assigned to read and reread 1984. It shows in their exercise of language. This week’s example:

“Timeline”. One word. Attributed to a defeatist Democratic concept. Definitely bad.

“Time horizon”. Two words. Very different. Definitely neither a timeline nor defeatist. And obviously good.

Amazing.

And for your weekend reading, check out the new version of The Memory Hole, a great source for unusual government documents and reports.

I awoke this morning to the flashing clock that told me the power had been out. Luckily, power had already been restored. More of life in Kaaawa.

This in from the Hawaii Newspaper Guild:

At noon Friday, union workers at The Honolulu Advertiser will rally in support of 54 co-workers who were notified that they will be laid off.

The rally will take place on the sidewalk in front of The Honolulu Advertiser, 605 Kapiolani Blvd, at the corner of South St.

Superferry watchers might be interested in my Honolulu Weekly column this week, which takes a peek at some of the gifts that exchanged hands at the State Capitol this past year.

On January 14, Gov. Linda Lingle and House Speaker Calvin Say each received replicas of the first Hawai’i Superferry vessel from John F. Lehman, the company’s chairman and its largest investor. The model ships, valued at $500 by Lingle and $200 by Say, were presented less than three months after Lingle called the Legislature back into an extraordinary special session that swept aside a Supreme Court decision in order to allow Hawai’i Superferry to begin interisland service.

Senate President Colleen Hanabusa was given a framed photo of the Superferry, valued at $50, back in November, just a week after the bill had been signed into law.

The State Ethics Code (Chapter 84 Hawai’i Revised Statutes) prohibits legislators or other state employees from soliciting, accepting or receiving any gift “under circumstances in which it can reasonably be inferred that the gift is intended to influence the legislator or employee in the performance” of their official duties “or is intended as a reward for any official action” on their part.

The law also requires public disclosure of any gifts from a single source, which, singly or in aggregate, are worth more than $200.

The recipients all properly reported the Superferry’s gifts to the ethics commission. But were they “intended as a reward” for successful passage of the bill that launched the ferry into service, and therefore prohibited?

Unfortunately, that ended up being a largely rhetorical question. Gifts are an area that still give the State Ethics Commission a headache, and many issues remain unresolved.

Last week’s Weekly column expanded my assessment of the Supreme Court’s recent campaign spending case on Hawaii’s new campaign spending law which, incidentally, became law last week without the governor’s signature.

Have you noticed that John McCain’s camaign themes include the catchy claim, “I know how to win wars.”

I wonder where he was supposed to learn that and what evidence there might be to support the claim?

Like Bush, McCain brags about being a poor student, making his “I was fifth from the bottom in my class” a routine part of his folksy pitch.

In any case, I don’t think it’s unfair to say that McCain’s military record just doesn’t seem to indicate that he was in any position to have proved his “I know how to win wars” claim.

News from Denver is that, sure enough, the transit stop closest to the Pepsi Center, where the Democratic National Convention will be held, is going to be closed during convention week. Delegates and others will have to walk from the next stop if they use transit, although there will be regular buses running between the delegate hotels and the Pepsi Center that should bypass this hangup.

This is Mr. Romeo surveying his domain. We notice that the cats are spending more time on the floor during this hot weather, taking advantage of the old “hot air rises” observaton.

In any case, click on Romeo’s photo for more Friday Felines.

The news in local news yesterday was dominated by the sudden layoffs announced at the Advertiser. It didn’t take long for the word to spread around town and for the first breaking news to be posted to both Advertiser and Star-Bulletin web sites.

According to the S-B this morning, the cuts include “54 positions, or about 9 percent of the work force, including 45 to 46 union positions.”

KHON’s Gina Mangieri reported:

The move came on the same day paper owner Gannett announced a 36 percent hit to profits. [BUT] A corporate spokesperson told KHON2 no other Gannett papers announced layoffs in response and that the Honolulu Advertiser made a local decision.

Okay, I added that editorial “But” to emphasize that, at least according to Gannett, the cuts were a local decision. Mangieri’s extra effort gave an extra punch to her reporting.

One reader quipped: “”Whenever a Gannett honcho begins a sentence with ‘aloha,’ it’s a good time to head for the hills.”

There are two ways to frame these cuts. One is the larger newspaper industry woes, but the other is the labor problems here at the Advertiser which is one of the last Gannett newspaper with strong unions representing most of its workforce in the newsroom as well as in sales, production, and distribution.

This prompted one former reporter to offer an extended comment:

As far as I know, there is no way Dick Adair would be at the bottom of the seniority list in the newsroom, yet KHON is reporting he is on the “cut list”. Since the Tiser union contract calls for consultation before layoffs as well as layoffs by seniority, the company is violating the contract in two places.

Section 4(a): “In case of layoff, or recall after such layoff, length of continuous services with the Employer shall govern where employees are competent to perform the job.” Obviously, the company knows this provision is in the contract; suggesting otherwise is a waste of time. The contract also says: “The Employer shall notify the Guild three weeks in advance of such layoff…..” The company knows this provision and is choosing to violate it for the moment.

Why? All of this is just heavy tactical maneuvering amid labor contract negotiations. The union likely will grieve against Adair’s layoff, unless Adair consents to being laid off, and get him reinstated. I’m also going to guess that the three other laid-off people in the Tiser newsroom also have seniority over others, so they will file grievances and be reinstated as well, assuming they don’t go quietly. So, in other words, no layoffs in the Tiser newsroom ……. for the moment.

But the Tiser gets to send a clear message to the staff that they can and will lay people off if the staff does not cooperate during negotiations. This is a perfect bargaining tactic. The Tiser can scare the shit out of the newsroom and the entire company without actually touching the news staffing. Unless Adair actually wants to leave his well-paying job, I will bet you will still see his cartoons in the Tiser a year from now. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong.

Regardless, Wayne Cahill at the News Guild needs to head to the National Labor Relations Board office tomorrow morning and file charges against the Tiser and Gannett. This is bad-faith bargaining and union intimidation. Anything less from the Guild will be sad, in my view. Gannett has finally taken the gloves off at the Advertiser. Time for a good fight!

Other news is the back-and-forth over whether the anti-rail initiative can qualify to appear on the November General Election ballot.

Yesterday it was reported that the city clerk has taken the position that it cannot appear on the general election ballot because a reference in the petition to being voted on in “a special election” precludes adding the measure for the General Election.

Unfortunately, although there was lots of he said-she said, there wasn’t much light shed on the issue. I just went back to look at the Stop Rail Now petition itself. I’m not a fan of this initiative, but I have to say that it looks to me like the city’s position is wrong.

Here’s a link to the petition which has been circulating for signatures. The ballot question itself appears in bold and contains no reference to a special election.

The question is simply worded:

SHALL AN ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED TO PROHIBIT TRAINS AND RAIL TRANSIT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU?

WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, AS DULY REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, WITH FULL KNOWLEDGE OF THE CONTENT OF THIS PETITION, PROPOSE AN ORDINANCE SUBSTANTIALLY IN THE MANNER SET FORTH: 1. TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF TRAINS OR RAIL TRANSIT IN ANY MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM WITHIN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU; AND 2. TO BE EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON APPROVAL.SHALL AN ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED TO PROHIBIT TRAINS AND RAIL TRANSIT IN THE CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU?

The special election reference appears in an introductory sentence clearly separate from “the question”.

The following question is being submitted to the People of the City and County of Honolulu to be voted upon at a special election

Here’s what the City Charter has to say, according to the version on the city’s web site:

(As of February 20, 2001) Section 3-404. Submission of Proposal to Electors –

1. For General Elections. Any petition for proposed ordinance which has been filed with the council at least ninety days prior to a general election and which has been certified by the clerk, shall be submitted to electors for the aforementioned general election.

2. For Scheduled Special Elections. If any petition for proposed ordinance is filed at least ninety days before a scheduled special election within the city and which has been certified by the clerk, it shall be submitted to the electors for the aforementioned special election.

3. For Initiative Special Elections. A special election for an ordinance by initiative power shall be called within ninety days of filing of the petition if signed by duly registered voters equal in number to at least fifteen percent of the votes cast for mayor in the last regular mayoral election, and if such petition specifies that a special election be called; provided that if the clerk certifies less than fifteen percent but at least ten percent, the proposed ordinance shall be submitted at the next general election or scheduled special election. No special initiative election shall be held if an election is scheduled within one hundred eighty days of submission of the proposal.

4. Adoption by the Council. If the council introduces and adopts after three separate readings, including a public hearing, the proposed ordinance which was the basis for a petition on or before ten days prior to date of publication of the proposed ordinance as required in this charter, then the proposed ordinance need not be submitted to the electors. (Petition No. 17 (1982); 1992 General Election Charter Amendment Question No. 32A( 7))

Since the actual question presented on the anti-rail petition does not reference a special election, the city’s concern seems a red herring. The Charter seems clear. “Any petition for proposed ordinance which has been filed with the council at least ninety days prior to a general election” should go on the ballot once sufficient signatures have been certified.

It’s not that hard to give people the primary information instead of relying wholly on the back and forth of rival group representatives. Why don’t editors demand it and reporters routinely do it?

Matt Pulle of the Nashville Scene muses over highs and lows of that city’s Gannett paper, including a breaking news item on a hot July day referring to a forecast snowfall.