Leadership dispute unresolved after multiple nominations

5 hours of testimony precede deliberations

WAILUKU -- The dispute over who would lead the Maui County Council was unresolved as of 9:55 p.m. Monday, as council members were still deliberating after five hours of testimony that largely opposed Council Member Mike White's bid to return as council chairman.

After a push to make Council Members Bob Carroll and then Elle Cochran as chairperson both failed in 5-4 votes, Cochran nominated Council Member Don Guzman to serve as chairman.

"Mr. Guzman, number one, has been our vice chair," Cochran said. "It's sort of the normal progression to move up. . . . He has stated great things in being open and working with (others). I truly have confidence and trust that Mr. Guzman will do the best for all of us. He too can bring us together."

Decisions on committees, council staff and other organizational matters are still pending.

The issue of who would serve as chairperson drew a standing-room-only crowd to the first meeting of the term, which began at 2 p.m. Monday, as around 75 testifiers called for new leadership and greater transparency from elected officials.

Days after Nov. 8 election, White sent out a news release announcing that he would continue as chairman and that Carroll would serve as vice chairman. Residents and local organizations protested the announcement, saying it was a violation of the County Charter and the Sunshine Law for members to have decided on leadership before the council's first meeting.

Council members who said they had previously supported White in past terms said they lost trust when White announced he would continue as council chairman just days after the general election.

"I lost trust and I lost respect, period," Council Member Elle Cochran said. "How that's going to be brought back, I have no idea."

Guzman said that White was "fearful of what was going to happen if he lost control" and did not take the time to consult with incoming council members before making decisions.

"Mr. White has been a good leader and he's been a good man," Guzman said. "But every good man can make bad choices, and lately he's faced some of the consequences because the people are reacting to the bad decisions he's made."

After listening for hours to complaints over his actions, White responded that he believed he had "been very fair" in his actions.

"I've sat here very patiently all afternoon and I appreciate everyone coming out to have their say," White said.

"It's been a little hard to take because I know that's not what I did. I know that's not what I said. I think it's really quite rich to have members Cochran and Guzman say that they were willing to support me after spending the day trying to organize themselves. So I've been taking the hits for doing something that was exactly the same thing they had started to do at about the same time."

In December, Mark Sheehan of SHAKA (Sustainable Hawaiian Agriculture for the Keiki and the 'Aina) Movement and SAFE (Sustainable Action Fund for the Environment) filed a complaint with the Board of Ethics accusing White of violating the County Charter. He argued that White used the chair's office, time and resources to issue a news release "declaring unequivocally that the Maui County Council had organized for the upcoming term and that he will again serve as Chair for the next council session."

Last week, the Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action filed a complaint against White for discussing organization of the council without public notice or meeting.

The alliance requested an investigation and ruling by the Office of Information Practices for "egregious violations" of the state Sunshine Law.

Sheehan followed by starting impeachment proceedings with the county.

"It's high time Mike White is held accountable for his actions," Sheehan said in a news release announcing the impeachment proceedings. "He has shown that he thinks he is above the law, and the rules of the office he was elected to."

Testifiers said Monday afternoon that they were frustrated, saddened and embarrassed by the actions of certain council members, specifically White.

"It may not be a violation of the Sunshine Law, but it certainly is a violation of the spirit of the Sunshine Law," testifier Linda Puppolo said. "The leadership of the council is the first important decision of a new council. . . . We all have our theories as to why one would jump the gun, but jumping the gun is not good leadership."

Puppolo asked "for a do-over" and for White to call back the news release, "no hard feelings."

Testifiers said that cutting many standing committees from nine to seven to five or fewer was a way of pushing out the "minority" members.

"It's a power play to put those who are aligned with Mr. White in positions of power on planning, water and agriculture," testifier Paul Solomon said.

"The days of the old boy network are over. This is a violation of power."

Corporation Counsel Pat Wong said Monday afternoon that, according to an OIP opinion letter, "the obligations of the Sunshine Law are not imposed upon an elected council member until he or she begins term of office," which has been in effect since 2002.

Residents said that regardless of whether there was a violation or not, they'd lost trust in government.

"The perception is there's a railroading going on here, that this is not appropriate for getting the public to believe in our elected officials," testifier Susan Bradford said.

"And if we can't believe in you, then who to run our government? We can dicker about what's legal and what's not legal but the perception is that some acts were taken that undermine leadership."

* Colleen Uechi can be reached at cuechi@mauinews.com.