|
minutes 12-08-99Page 7 of 31
<br />the very beginning when I came on, the officers didn’t come at all, and part of that was because SHOPO said, you don’t have
<br />to talk to them; don’t go there; don’t say anything; don’t do anything, and so they didn’t. I think that, partly due to the work
<br />of our investigator, they got to feeling more comfortable with talking to the investigator, and now, in a lot of cases, we have
<br />officers coming to Commission meetings, to give their side of what happened, at that particular incident. So, we’re making
<br />some progress. Part of where we have the problem is, depending on the decision that we make, if we do find in favor of the
<br />complainant, then we still haven’t been able to find out from the Chief what kind of action that was taken.
<br />IRVINE: I guess that led into my second question, which was, it does say in the Charter that you’re supposed to get periodic
<br />reports from the Police Chief on the activities of the Police Department, and about actions taken on cases. What would be
<br />reasonable? Every quarter? Every year?
<br />SCHEELE: We have a Commission meeting once a month, and the Chief and the Deputy and the Assistant Chiefs come to
<br />the meeting. We get crime reports, traffic reports, that kind of thing. These are the same kind of reports that are released to
<br />the media, about how many investigations they’ve done, or how many cases they’ve solved. So, we get that on a regular
<br />basis. What we hadn’t been getting until this last meeting, was even just the actions on - and part of this, I think - and
<br />Honolulu, the Commission knows almost immediately what action the Chief has taken. But we have, I think, this, kind of,
<br />conflict going on between the Commission thinking we should have that information, the Chief not wanting to give it, and the
<br />Corporation Counsel saying, well, we need to look into this and we need to think about this, and well, we don’t know
<br />whether they should have that information because it’s confidential.
<br />RAY: To the best of your knowledge, are the legal issues, or the Union issues, any different in the City and County than they
<br />are here?
<br />SCHEELE: Not that I know of. We all operate under the same SHOPO contract. Do you want Jo-Anna to go ahead with what
<br />she was going -
<br />RAY: Sure.
<br />J. HERKES: Perhaps, if I may, go back to some of the questions that you had, and unfortunately, we weren’t here to answer
<br />for you. I assume that all of you have the proposed Amendments in front of you.
<br />For instance, a question was asked, why we had rearranged the Charter. Honestly, it was strictly a matter of style, no other
<br />reason. Another question that was asked regarding legislative matters, the Commission felt that right now there probably is a
<br />police coalition, putting together legislative work for this coming session. In many cases, it would behoove the Police
<br />Department to come before the Commission, and have the Commission, also, either agree or discuss what is, or might be,
<br />good for the County. What the Police Chief and/or the three other Counties think should be legislative work does not
<br />necessarily reflect what the community thinks. So, if we have that opportunity to sit down with them, and go through it, all of
<br />our members, then we could come, perhaps, to some unity. Not just have our four departments from other Counties decide on
<br />what should be legislative input or not. That’s a policy decision, and I think why we did a major change was the difference
<br />between policy and administration. We don’t want to be involved with the everyday administration, nor should we. This
<br />Commission should not be assigned that, but the assignment, I believe, reads that we should be policy makers. Somehow the
<br />Police Chief should be discussing, with a civilian body like ourselves, a Commission, as to what policies should be adhered
<br />to. I’ll give you an example and maybe it will be a little bit easier. The Counties have Chambers, and the Chambers are
<br />comprised of the Administrative staff, which is normally the President or Executive Director, and a Board. The Board makes
<br />policy, and that policy is then administered through their Director or President of that Chamber. That’s administrative work.
<br />If there’s legislation to be put forth by that Chamber, then it’s discussed by the Board. The Board has that opportunity to
<br />listen to its membership and the Executive Director, or President, then has that opportunity to go forth and either testify with
<br />the legislation, or not. And so, I think, if we put it in that perspective, you might understand where we’re coming from. It’s
<br />broad policy that we’d like to adhere to, or the Charter would reflect, so that we can carry that duty out.
<br />Questions?
<br />IRVINE: I guess I agree with you, that you folks should be involved with policy rather than administration, but you asked us
<br />to knock out the provision that says you can’t meddle in Administration. I just wondered if you were going at it from the
<br />wrong way. At least the way I read it, under (b), you said no individual member of the Commission shall interfere in any way
<br />with the administrative affairs of the department except for the purposes of inquiry.
<br />J. HERKES: That’s correct.
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 12-08-99.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|