With mounting evidence indicating county officials violated the charter by failing to follow the process set forth for giving certain employees pay raises, the public deserves to hear the rationale behind the claims that everything was done by the book.
With mounting evidence indicating county officials violated the charter by failing to follow the process set forth for giving certain employees pay raises, the public deserves to hear the rationale behind the claims that everything was done by the book.
The Kaua‘i County Charter mandates the Salary Commission set its rules of procedures. As such, the commission has determined that the salary increase for certain non-elected officers is contingent on the personnel director’s receipt of the following:
— A memo from the officer’s or employee’s appointing authority at least 30 days prior to the increase certifying that appointee’s performance has been evaluated pursuant to procedures established by the personnel director.
— A copy of the officer’s or employee’s completed performance evaluation evidencing that the appointee has met or exceeded job requirements.
— Based on the evaluation, the appointing authority’s recommendation on whether a proposed increase should be granted.
Based on interviews with county officials and a review of the records this week, those criteria do not appear to have been met in the case involving the Kaua‘i County Council’s approval last year of a 7 percent pay raise for the county clerk and possibly other council appointees.
Regarding the first requirement, former Council Chair Kaipo Asing sent Personnel Director Malcolm Fernandez a memo regarding County Clerk Peter Nakamura’s job performance. But the memo was dated two weeks after the raise had already gone into effect — some 45 days later than the rules supposedly require.
As far as we have been able to determine, the second and third requirements were simply ignored altogether. The ability for authorized personnel to access the evaluation has even been called into question.
These three criteria are simple and straightforward. Nowhere do the rules say, “Just pick one of the following and try to come close to fulfilling it.” We can and should expect more from our well-paid county officials.
The county officials who enabled this improper pay raise should answer for their actions and the council members who continue to turn a blind eye need to face the facts.
We are not saying a raise for the clerk is necessarily unwarranted. Indeed, Nakamura puts in more hours of hard work than almost any other county employee and receives high praise from respected community leaders.
Incidentally, this work load will hopefully change for the clerk under new leadership on the council and maybe he will be able to take some time off as some of his colleagues have urged. As an aside, we hope the clerk is able to assist all seven members going forward.
There are rules, policies, procedures and laws in place for good reason. They should be followed — without exception — and those who break them need to be held accountable.
That said, even if these officials had appropriately adhered to the pay-raise process, we wonder how council members manage to sleep at night knowing they approved salary increases for everyone under their purview — including themselves — while the mayor froze department-head wages and implemented a furlough plan.
With the new council now considering action on the administration’s proposal this week to end the two-day per month furloughs that the vast majority of county workers have endured since July 1, we expect to hear a better explanation than “it was an election year” to defend last year’s decision to give raises to officials earning six figures in the midst of an “economic tsunami.”
