The State Procurement Office (SPO) is requesting that the Procurement Policy Board reconsider its decision regarding the selection of a new Administrator and allow the 4 qualified applicants, including 3 current SPO staff, to be submitted to the Governor for consideration. The SPO argues that rejecting applicants without disclosing criteria in advance is unfair and that the Board's role by statute is to submit 3 to 5 names rather than select fewer or rank applicants. Additionally, the SPO notes the Administrator position is governed by statute rather than being an ordinary exempt position. The SPO offers to help the Board draft rules establishing a selection process if desired.

1. NEfL ABERCROMBIE AARON S. FUJIOKA
GOVERNOR ADMINISTRATOR
STATE OF HAWAII
STATE PROCUREMENT OFFICE
P.O. Box 119
Honolulu, Hawaii 96810-0119
Telephone: (808) 587-4700
e-mail: state.procurement.offlce~hawaii.gov SPO 13-188
http://hawaii.gov/spo
June 24, 2013
Mr. Gregory King, Chair
Mr. David Langille, Vice-Chair
Mi. Dean Seki, Secretary
Mr. Howard Garval, Member
Mr. Ronald Hirano, Member
Ms. Kathy Suzuki-Kitagawa, Member
Procurement Policy Board
do State Comptroller
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Dear Chair King and Members ofthe Board:
SUBJECT: Request for Reconsideration on Board’s Decision
for the Position ofAdministrator, State Procurement Office
The State Procurement Office (SPO) is aware that 3 of its staff members have applied for the
position of Administrator. The SPO applicants have the advantage of knowing the outcome of
the regular Procurement Policy Board (Board) public meeting on June 20, 2013, whereas the 4th
applicant is totally in the dark which is unfair to that applicant and the SPO advocates for that
applicant too.
One area of concern is:
• The Board’s action of not being able to recommend more than 2 names to the Governor, it
is being interpreted that they are eliminating at least 1 and possibly 2 of the qualified
applicants from the SPO and the statement made “. . . that the new solicitation would be
able to recruit at a higher salary. . .“ gives the added impression that the Board is
dissatisfied with all 4 of the current qualified applicants.
SPO’s position:
SPO is not asking for preferential treatment, just fair and equal treatment for the 4
qualified applicants as it is improper to reject any of the 4 qualified applicants. There
was no requirement in the solicitation (the notice and application) or any disclosure by
the Board prior to the interviews, about any requirements needing to be met in order to
have your name submitted to the Governor for consideration. If such disclosure or
requirement had been known prior to the interviews, SPO would have raised its
objections at that time on the applicability of any additional requirements.

2. Mr. Gregory King, Chair, et a! SPO 13-188
June 24, 2013
Page 2
In discussion with the Department of Accounting and General Services, Personnel Office it was
disclosed that the position of Administrator is classified as an exempt position. Exempt positions
have no rights under the civil service laws. An exempt position serves “at will” by the
appointing authority. The concern is:
• The Board is recruiting for the Administrator as an exempt position.
SPO’s position:
The Board is not the appointing authority.
The Administrator’s position may be classified as an exempt position, similar to
department heads or deputies, but it is unique in that this particular position is governed
by statute. Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) §103D-204 (b) sets the parameters and
limitations of submission by the Board of the names to the Governor. This recruitment
process is required by statute to be initiated every four years.
The statute overrides the normal circumstances that apply to the appointment of an
exempt position, department head or deputy. The role ofthe Board by statute is to submit
a list ofno less than three and no more thanfive names.. “to the Governor.
In addition:
• There are no Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) adopted by the Board establishing a
process for the submission of names to the Governor, such as to allow the Board to rank
or select.
SPO’s position:
The HRS and HAR do not allow the Board to create a process, extend the term of the
incumbent or terminate “at will”. Past recruitments have had receipt of less than 3
qualified applicants, which means not meeting the minimum for submission to the
Governor, resulted in a resolicitation.
Once a qualified list is given to the Board, the statute does not allow making up a process
as they move towards the submission of the names to the Governor. The Board requires
statutory authority which only the Legislature may authorize to establish a process for
submission of names to the Governor. Alternatively the Board would need to promulgate
and adopt FIARs establishing a process for submission of names to the Governor.
As stated in our June 21, 2013 letter, we are requesting that the Board reconsider its decision and
allow the selection process to continue as required by statute, by submitting the names and
applications of the 4 qualified applicants to the Governor. At the time of submission, the Board
may decide to inform the Governor that they are unable to recommend 2 of the applicants,
explaining their reluctance.

3. Mr. Gregory King, Chair, et al SPO 13-188
June 24, 2013
Page 3
As the Board is required to schedule a meeting to address this request, please let me know if you
would like SPO to survey the availability of the board members as we usually do. Moving
forward, the SPO will work with the Board to draft HARs establishing a process for the
submission ofnames to the Governor, ifthe Board so desires.
Sincerely,
Aaron S. Fujioka
c: The Honorable Bruce Coppa, Chief of Staff
Office ofthe Governor
The Honorable Barbara Krieg, Director
Department of Human Resources Development
Ms. Dianne Matsuura, Department Personnel Officer
Department of Accounting and General Services
Ms. Stella Kam, Deputy Attorney General
Ms. Ruth Yamaguchi, State Procurement Office
Ms. Mara Smith, State Procurement Office