NAWILIWILI — Over the last few weeks animosity has been building among a few County Council members. The primary election is only five weeks away, and accusations of half-truths and unfairness have been flying high and low between council members
NAWILIWILI — Over the last few weeks animosity has been building among a few County Council members.
The primary election is only five weeks away, and accusations of half-truths and unfairness have been flying high and low between council members during broadcast meetings.
The latest and harshest spat happened Wednesday when Councilman Tim Bynum and Chair Kaipo Asing locked horns again, this time more fiercely.
Bynum said he had been trying for months to introduce three bills, all related to agriculture lands.
He said he had sent two memos to the chair, but got no response. Then he said he also had a meeting with the chair.
The chair is responsible for putting together the agenda for the weekly meetings at the council chambers. But county policies still allow council members to introduce bills without going through the chair. They can ask for a floor vote to introduce bills on the agenda.
Asing said the staff had legal concerns over Bynum’s bills, so Asing said he requested that the county attorney review the bills before introduction.
Out of the last 67 introduced bills, however, only two had been reviewed by the county attorney before first reading, said Bynum.
“I’m not open to a policy that is inequitably applied,” said Bynum, who asked for a floor vote to introduce the bills onto the agenda.
Asing said the issue needed explanation on his part, “as usual, to Tim Bynum’s half-truths.”
Staff members and Asing had discussed the bill with Bynum, said Asing. “Council member Bynum does not want to listen,” he said.
Furfaro tries to intervene
Council Vice Chair Jay Furfaro intervened, trying to stop personal discussion.
“I don’t want to know about you guys’ ukana (personal possessions or baggage),” said Furfaro, adding he would support putting the items on the agenda.
Bynum proceeded to give yet another explanation.
“I met with the chair,” he said, before being abruptly interrupted by Asing.
“Oh, now he’s saying ‘I met with the chair,’” said Asing, mocking Bynum.
Bynum told Asing to “please, calm down,” and tried to explain himself, but Furfaro asked for a recess, apparently trying to cool off the emotions, which only seemed to further frustrate Bynum.
“Excuse me, I have the floor, man. I’d like to continue,” Bynum told Furfaro.
Asing then slammed the gavel, ending the morning session.
“Recess. We’re going to break for lunch. Be back at 1:30,” he said.
Break doesn’t calm tempers
Back from break, the discussion was moved to the end of the agenda.
When the item was once again brought up, Asing said he wanted to “set the record straight,” explaining that he was following a normal standard process when he asked for a legal review.
“Evidently council member Bynum does not feel that that’s necessary,” said Asing, adding that if council members wanted to change that policy he had no problems with it.
“But I think we should work together with our staff. If they feel it should be reviewed prior to its been placed on the agenda, we could have a bill that is on the agenda that does not meet the so-called standards that the attorney’s office might have,” Asing said.
Bynum had a different opinion. He said staff members and the county attorney do not decide which bills go on the agenda, and they’re not elected officials.
Bynum also said he doesn’t believe the chair has the ability to veto bills that council members try to place on the agenda.
“I’m tired of this conflict between us. I think it’s unnecessary,” Bynum said. “I think it diminishes this body.”
“I recognize the chair of the council is the administrator, a coordinator, but he’s not superior to other council members. He’s not our boss,” Bynum said.
Councilman Derek Kawakami said if there are questionable legal issues in any of the bills, it will be “on the back of the introducer.”
“If it’s challenged later on, it’s just a reflection of the introducer,” Kawakami said.
Bynum said Kawakami “hit the nail on the head.
“If I was going to put something forward that was completely inappropriate, I’d look foolish,” Bynum said.
Kawahara weighs in
Councilwoman Lani Kawahara said the situation was “completely ludicrous.”
Introduced bills go through scrutiny, “from the county attorney to the public to no end,” said Kawahara. “I find it troubling that a unilateral decision was made, in this case Alaloa.
“Every elected official in this body can put something on the agenda,” said Kawahara, calling the discussion over-exaggerated and unfitting.
Furfaro said the county attorney will have two weeks to review the bills and “red-flag” anything that would possibly bring legal questions.
Furfaro, who is also chair of the council’s Planning Committee, said all the bills that touch on zoning issues go to the county Planning Committee after first reading. The department has two standing attorneys, funded by the council, who look for legal issues in such bills.
Despite Bynum saying only two out of the last 67 bills had a legal review prior to introduction, Furfaro said the majority of bills that reach the council’s Planning Committee already had legal review.
Councilman Daryl Kaneshiro said he was willing to support two of the bills, but he had legal concerns with the third one, therefore couldn’t support introducing the bill on the agenda before legal review.
Asing asked County Attorney Al Castillo if he had saw any legal concerns in the bills. Castillo, however, said he could not answer the question because of the state sunshine law.
The council approved, and on a five-to-two vote all three bills be included on the Aug. 25 agenda. The bills deal with agriculture subdivisions, building restrictions and density.
Go to www.kauai.gov for more information.
• Léo Azambuja, staff writer, can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 252) or lazambuja@kauaipubco.com.
