Keep his job, fire him, demote him, or promote him?

[kalakoa]

hahaha "held accountable", good one.

[HiloJulie]

In accordance with the HTH article, Kalilikane who today is 43 years old, has been charged with the following offenses:

• Running a stop sign on Oct. 9, 2000. (Would be 18 years old)
  
• Not wearing a seat belt on March 21, 2002 (Would be 20 years old)
  
• Not wearing a seat belt and driving without insurance on Jan. 22, 2004 (Would be 22 years old)
  
• Speeding, for driving 62 mph in a 45 mph zone (17 mph over) on May 25, 2004 (Would be 22 years old)
  

So, none of these offenses would be disqualifying maters as of today as their disqualifications have fallen off his record.

Now, the HTH article continues with the following offenses on Dec. 28, 2017 (would be 35 years old):

• Inattention to driving
  
• Driving without a license and insurance
  
• Obstructed license plate
  
• Delinquent vehicle weight tax
  
• No current safety check
  
• Registration not with vehicle.
  

While none of these would be disqualifying per se as of today, my questions now are:

When did the County hire him in a CDL license required job, and
Why did he NOT have a driver's license on Dec. 28, 2017?

At any event, his DUI is now a 1-year disqualification from driving, but the real test will be what the County actually does with his employment status.

---

hahaha "held accountable", good one.

You will note the sentence structure I used:

And to be clear, if he can't, or does not, then yes, it is the Mayor who has to (being this is Hawaii and even more so, Puna, I will insert SHOULD) be held accountable.

But, yes, hahaha!

[kalakoa]

I'm reminded of a quote:

"Note the use of the subjunctive, indicating a condition contrary to fact."

[TomK]

I'm reminded of a quote:

"Note the use of the subjunctive, indicating a condition contrary to fact."

It is astonishing you are reminded of this quote. I don't even know if it is a quote, and I won't waste my time finding out. Let me put it another way: Who fecking cares?