i L i n d . n e t

Thanks to Peter Boylan for this morning’s detailed account of yesterday afternoon’s sentencing in the email extortion case that briefly made “Bob Awana” a very familiar name.

In the e-mails Patkar accessed, Awana attempted to get Patkar’s girlfriend, a woman named Julie Mae, to join Awana, his girlfriend Jet Ebale, and his “friends” for a weekend in the Philippines during a trade mission Awana was on with Lingle, Byrne said.

Also:

“She would receive favors, including money and the ability to come to Hawai’i to finish nursing school, if she performed favors for his friends,” said Byrne, speaking outside of court. “It was men behaving badly.”

Boylan reports that the case has prompted the FBI to investigate Lingle administration “trade missions to China, South Korea and the Philippines over the past three years”.

The other men involved are not named in Boylan’s story.

Those questions about state policy in this regard and any changes this case might have set in motion that I directed to Gov. Lingle’s office back in July have never been acknowledged or responded to. Nor, as far as we can tell from the public record, have any of the mainstream reporters pressed the governor for further details on her administration’s response to the rather sordid details of what her Chief of Staff was willing to do to entertain men traveling with official delegations. We don’t know whether governor ever ordered an internal investigation, whether any of this was known, whether they even made an attempt to confirm or deny the allegations about Awana’s behavior, whether Awana’s communications were from a state-owned computer, etc., etc.

So far, the teflon governor has been given a free pass. Maybe the mainstream media will surprise me and dig further.

There’s obviously danger in praising public agencies, as it may give the powers that be ideas for more temporarily public information to squelch. That was certainly the case with yesterday’s mention of the availability of the Superferry court transcripts from the proceedings on Maui, which were temporarily accessible from the main menu of the Legislature’s web site. I assumed this was intentional and approved. Apparently that was not the case, since the links to the transcripts from the main page had disappeared by the time I checked back mid-afternoon, although deeper links still worked.

According to one reader’s comment here yesterday:

…at least one court reporter from Maui has expressed concern that materials sealed by the Court may have been included (presumably, inadvertently). Concern may also arise from the fact that court reporters make their kala transcribing their notes and selling the transcripts at rates set by statute. Not clear whether they were compensated, or were due compensation, for this publication of their work product.

Meanwhile, I received the following comment on my contribution to Honolulu Weekly in the issue that’s been on the street racks since last Wednesday:

That issue is HECO’s propensity to shift costs around amongst ratepayers and away from shareholders whenever possible. Of course, they are first and foremost (in their mind, at least) accountable to the shareholders so boosting revenue and cutting costs is not irrational and certainly not surprising. My beef is disclosure, man, disclosure.

Like the proposed, if tabled, “Renewable Energy Infrastructure Surcharge” would work, we all now pay the “Integrated Resource Planning,” or “IRP,” surcharge. HECO fought demand management programs tooth and nail (reduces revenues), like net metering (power to the people? I think not!). However, once the legislature and the PUC insisted on it, HECO made sure to co-opt those programs. So, at least for the time being (pending, perhaps, enactment of legislation “decoupling” allowable profits from electricity production), HECO takes some of that IRP money to pay itself for lost revenues attributable to the success of demand management programs (go figure!?!) and to fund rebates for purchase/installation of energy efficient technologies. It’s this last one, or at least the failure to disclose the source of the rebate funds, that really gets under my skin.

HECO bragged in its last “Consumer Link” newsletter stuffed in our monthly bill that rebates are being paid on certain appliances “thanks to a new program we’re offering” and that “we will reward you with cash rebates.” Even the Consumer Advocate, which is supposed to be looking out for us, gets into the act. The October issue of its newsletter, “Consumer Spotlight,” explains how “HECO increased its rebate” on solar technology and that “HECO offers rebates” on certain appliances. Funny, the rebate is from the ratepayers, not from HECO!…(HECO spokespersons) acknowledge that rebates are paid from IRP funds but that HECO does nothing to disclose the source of these funds in promotional materials or to those who apply for the rebates….when HECO claims that IT is paying the money, the shareholder/ratepayer distinction is one that most will miss. More importantly, if the distinction is clear to HECO, it should have no problem making it clear to everyone else, unless it is purposely seeking to take advantage of the misperception. Imagine that!

I, for one, have had it with this turgid, phlegmatic monopoly fighting every effort to wean us off imported fossil fuels and then, when it loses, taking credit for those very efforts! It’s reminiscent of the days when our dear ex-mayor used to put his “shaka” logo on every public works sign with the text “another project brought to you by Frank F. Fasi, Mayor of the City and County of Honolulu.” Partly because he ran roughshod over them and partly because that statement was just plain false, the City Council ended this practice when it banished politician’s names from public works projects signs in 1991. Now, those signs rightly read “brought to you by the taxpayers of the City and County of Honolulu.”

Well, it’s time for the ratepayers to get their due. Putting aside, for the moment, the wisdom of having a utility in charge of demand management programs, all rebate promotional materials and rebate applications produced by HECO should clearly disclose that the source of rebate funds is the ratepayer. HECO should no longer be allowed to make itself look all “green” at our expense. Hopefully, the legislature and/or the PUC will put an end to this self-aggrandizement and let consumers make informed choices about energy efficient technology purchases and, just as importantly, express informed gratitude to those who make their purchases more affordable — the ratepayer.

Whew! You may not get all of that without a program listing the players, but you’ll get the general thrust and perhaps appreciate it more in the future.

Another reader commented on the lack of local coverage of Boston’s victory in the World Series:

just a comment. I grew up on Cape Cod. Actually I was a Brooklyn Dodger fan, but had some interest in the Red Sox.

Today I looked at ’tiser and ‘tin on line for coverage of the recent world series.

It must be so yesterday’s news! No headline in either except about upcoming individual contract talks for other teams.

make sense to you?

normally, I’d be happy if sports got low priority. But what I see is low priority sports getting priority.

cheers

For months, we’ve been walking on the sand in this stretch of beach in Kaaawa. Yesterday waves were breaking and washing debris on the highway. Instead of counting sand crabs, I was trying to keep my camera dry as spray blew around us. I guess this means winter surf season has officially arrived.