A Shibai of EPIC Proportions
Is or is not the Exotic Pest Insect Committee a public agency?
On the “is” side, we would note the fact that its initial members were appointed by Governor John Waihe’e.
On the “isn’t” side is the fact that, like legions of private firms, EPIC has a sole-source contract with the state to perform various ill-defined tasks.
On the “is” side, there’s the occasional reference to the panel by state personnel as the “Governor’s” committee.
On the “isn’t” side, we note that EPIC has no office in state quarters, lacks the state insignia on its stationery, is not wired into the state switchboard, and does not submit no–tice of its meetings to the Lieutenant Governor’s office.
Outweighing all this, however, are two circumstances that surely put the balance of the evidence on the “is” side. First, EPIC takes its funds from the state – and the state alone. Second, EPIC takes its direction from the state – and the state alone (in particular, Lyle Wong, director of the Department of Agriculture’s Plant Industry Division – and architect of the state’s scheme to promote irradiation).
No matter how much EPIC may posture as a private non-profit organization, it is a creature that would die without state support. This alone is sufficient, we would argue, to regard it as a state agency.
Neither Fish Nor Fowl
If EPIC were a bona fide private organization, it long ago would have filed articles of incor–poration with the state Department of Com–merce and Consumer Affairs. Such filings allow members of the public – and, potentially, parties with claims – to determine who is responsible for the organization’s ac–tivities and where legal notice may be served.
If EPIC were a for-profit corporation, it would be subject to the state’s general excise tax on income it receives. If it were a non–profit, no tax would be due, but, given the size of its income from the state, it would need to file with the Internal Revenue Service annual reports, disclosable on de–mand to the public, showing its income and expenditures and listing its responsible officers.
If EPIC were behaving as a non-profit, as it claims to be in its “articles of organization,” it would not be spending thousands of dollars on what seems to be a Washington lobbyist. In addition, it is questionable whether it could hire as its executive director Jon Okudara, whose occupation is that of lobby–ist at the state level.
Agencies of state government should be responsible for ensuring that those firms with which they enter into contracts are on the up-and-up – that they have filed prop–erly to do business in the state of Hawai’i; that they pay all taxes due; that they are, in short, legitimate business entities. The state Department of Agriculture and, before it, the Governor’s Agriculture Coordinating Committee, have failed on this score. Legally, EPIC is a chimera. It simply does not exist as a legitimate entity of any type in the state of Hawai’i – or elsewhere, for that matter.
A Reason for Being
Of course, the Department of Agriculture would have it no other way. By operating in a legal no-man’s-land, EPIC is able to do the DOA’s bidding, but without appearing to do so. When Lyle Wong wants to bring irradiation company executives to Hawai’i, for example, he does so by putting their tickets on his own charge account and hav–ing EPIC reimburse him for the cost. Or when he wants to legitimize a decision to take an option on the purchase of a cesium irradiator, he runs it by EPIC, which oblig–ingly provides him with its rubber-stamp endorsement.
EPIC’s members, which include farmers who have benefited economically from the shipments of fruit to Chicago for irradiation, have been able to travel at state expense to peddle their products at cooperating stores. Yet, while state employees must fill in elabo–rate travel reports, detailing every penny of public money spent on their trips, not so with the EPIC travelers.
In short, nearly all the evidence to date suggests that EPIC may fairly be regarded as little more than a slush fund to bolster Wong’s efforts to have Hawai’i lead the charge nationally for irradiation as a wide–spread food treatment technique. It is a sly, underhanded way to funnel tangible state support to the beneficiaries and advocates of irradiation while escaping accountability to the public who is underwriting this shibai.
We would invite the state Department of Taxation to look into EPIC. We would invite the attention of the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs as well. We would urge the Department of Ac–counting and General Services to review more carefully the Department of Agriculture’s request for approvals of sole– source contracts with EPIC. Finally, we would ask that the Department of Agricul–ture itself, starting with Lyle Wong, end this EPIC charade. It is dishonest, probably ille–gal, and unworthy of anyone who wishes to win the irradiation battle in a fair fight.
— Teresa Dawson
Volume 7, Number 10 April 1997