• The emperor has no clothes • Tired of
misinformation
The emperor has no clothes
“The Emperor Has No Clothes” is an old parable, with a timeless message for not only the emperor, but more importantly for his subjects.
Whereas the story tells that emperors, like everyone else, can have eyes to see, but still be blind, the question for eternity is why no subject of his was willing to put the good of the kingdom ahead of their personal interest (in keeping their heads on their own shoulders).
Why did no voice state the truth, and thus avoid the inevitable outcome? Why do we have to be sued by our own employees and citizens in order for us to act pono?
American counties being sued for civil rights violations is old news, unless you are the taxpayer paying the bill. Like all counties, this county’s actions were legally indefensible for only one of two reasons. (1) That no one with authority or responsibility ever knew that labor law and the definition and enforcement of civil rights had changed since 1968, including an absolute obligation to prevent civil rights violations. (2) That the county was aware, and chose by omission or commission to intentionally ignore mandated changes, thus to conspire to criminally use local, state, and federal tax dollars while violating the civil rights of the plaintiff and every single person in, and every citizen of, the United States. (They did, after all, swear oaths or sign labor contracts requiring them to uphold the law in exchange for the pay check and perks.)
Settlements, with terms ensuring that changes occur, accept the polite fiction of the first choice and prevent the potential prosecutions associated with the second. In similar cases in other counties, future violations add zeros onto the settlement sums, and county employees and officials, past and present, risk prosecution, including for patterns of behavior.
Had the county demanded at the same moment in time the introspection and change in every department which has occurred under the stewardship of Chief Perry at KPD, we would likely not have been sued, and we would have achieved modernization and the associated cost savings years ago. This omission alone demonstrates my previous point regarding an indefensible legal position.
The emperor’s embarrassment on Kaua‘i was that for 40 years no one was willing to state the obvious — times changed, so must we. I thank Mayor Carvalho for recognizing this politically unpopular truth.
The Charter was approved and the current service system established in 1968. 1968 was also the year that Congress expanded an individual’s federal civil rights to include the states, as well as the culmination of Supreme Court decisions beginning in 1952 which also expanded individual federal rights and protections to the state and local levels. These rights and laws continue to be defined and change over time, which our Charter and service system didn’t acknowledge.
It is a great challenge discerning and managing the changes legalities require while maintaining operations. Of the changes we see, one is the beginning of compliance with the legalities of fiduciary responsibilities which demand public auditing, and public financial controls over all expenditures.
Another is that the mayor has created a H.R. function and begun employee training in modern workplace policy and procedures. Council Services, Roads, Public Works, Liquor Control, Cost Commission and others offer testimony demonstrating steps towards increased efficiency and functional record keeping.
Times change, whether we want them to or not. My thanks to everyone in the county who recognizes the need, and assists in making the changes needed today. Especially the mayor, who is personally supervising clothing the emperor with real clothes.
Lonnie Sykos, Kapa‘a
Tired of misinformation
The letter (“Defeat this detrimental bill,” April 14) is simply more disinformation from someone I have to assume is a left-wing, anti-business (or at least health care business) person. I did my research online (as I encourage everyone to do) on these bills.
HB1047 simply defines what qualifies a person to be a “Marriage and Family Therapist” and outlines minimum services that must be provided by the insurance companies. Nothing about denying coverage anywhere in the bill.
As for SB1247, this defines the requirements for licensing a contractor. What does this have to do with health care?
I assume the writer figured that no one would check out the “facts” that they stated in their letter. It is unfortunate that people feel it necessary to spread lies, and disinformation to purposely create unnecessary problems.
This falls in line with the latest left-wing nonsense about “starving grandma,” “killing women,” etc., that have been thrown about in the last few days.
It’s time for real discussion to solve our problems, not this silly rhetoric and political positioning that does nothing to advance us toward our goals.
Please stop! If you have nothing positive to contribute, stop wasting everyone’s time.
Barry Dittler, Wailua
