Is veto valid? Kenoi staffer returns vetoed bill to council two hours after term ended

HILO — Former Mayor Billy Kenoi was no longer the mayor when the Clerk’s Office received his veto of a bill giving the County Council more say over the hiring and firing of the county’s civil attorneys.

The fact that the veto was time-stamped 2:05 p.m. Dec. 5, when Kenoi left office at noon that day, nullifies the action, according to Hilo Councilman Aaron Chung, an attorney and the author of the bill.

“It could be argued that Billy signed the veto message before he left office. But we don’t know that,” Chung said Tuesday in a statement. “All we know for sure is that the bill was returned two hours after his term expired — while we were all getting inaugurated. Billy Kenoi was no longer the mayor and therefore had no authority to return the bill under the title of that office.”

The county charter states, “If the mayor disapproves a bill, the mayor shall return the bill together with any objections in writing to the clerk within ten days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) after receipt.”

An employee from Kenoi’s office hand-carried the document into the clerk’s office and it was time-stamped immediately upon receipt, said Deputy Clerk Jon Henricks. Employees in the Mayor’s Office serve coterminous with the mayor.

Kenoi, who is also an attorney, had vetoed the bill as one of his last acts as mayor. In his veto message, he said the bill was contrary to charter and would politicize the process of picking the county’s top civil lawyer.

Bill 254 would require council approval of hirings and firings of deputy corporation counsel attorneys.

Chung had introduced the bill after learning Mayor Harry Kim’s choice of corporation counsel, Joe Kamelamela, had notified deputies of pending job losses even before he himself had been confirmed by the County Council to fill the top post. Chung publicly took Kamelamela to task at a recent council meeting and Kamelamela apologized.

The corporation counsel is appointed by the mayor, confirmed by the council and may be removed by the mayor with the approval of the council, under the charter. Unlike other top officials in county government, the corporation counsel represents the council as well as the administration. All the attorneys’ positions run coterminous with the mayor.

Corporation Counsel Molly Stebbins, unlike other department heads, continues in her post under the new mayoral administration, serving as the chief civil attorney until her replacement is confirmed by the council. A confirmation hearing for Kamelamela is scheduled for the first week of January in Hilo.

Stebbins said Tuesday she believed the veto is valid, because Kenoi wrote and signed his veto message before leaving office and he returned it to the County Council within the 10-day period allowed under the charter.

“The action of vetoing, which is drafting a veto message and signing it, was within the term of mayor,” Stebbins said. “I would say the action is valid.”

Kenoi could not be reached for comment by press time Tuesday.

The council had approved Bill 254 on a 6-2 vote last month. Hamakua Councilwoman Valerie Poindexter and North Kona Councilwoman Karen Eoff voted no.

While an interesting intellectual exercise, the entire affair may well be moot. Chung, who earlier said he’s unlikely to call for a veto override vote, on Tuesday said he’ll likely ask for repeal of the bill, which he now considers passed. Chung said he’d do that out of respect for Kenoi and deference to “what he most likely intended to be his last executive action.”

Still, he added, “the irony of his vetoing my bill on the basis that it was contrary to charter hasn’t escaped my attention. But let’s just have a good laugh about this and put the matter to bed. After all, the council did make its point, which is simply this: We will not turn a blind eye if we become aware of unfair or disrespectful treatment toward our employees.”