I agree that Okubo has been playing fast and loose, which is one of the reasons why I think an investigation is called for.
But I also know that the OIP is legally responsible to verify the accuracy and appropriateness of responses that are appealed. Both of these responses made it past OIP inspection.
To realize what that means a person should look at the OIP Opinion Letter (can’t remember the number off-hand) where an agency denied access to a legal memo. The OIP’s first step was to ask to see the memo so they could decide whether it was properly denied. They discovered that the record had not been found after a reasonable search and ended up deciding that the agency didn’t have to produce the memo because it doesn’t exist; there wasn’t even a UIPA response to be given (denial of access or otherwise) because UIPA only applies to records that exist.
So the process is to look at the actual records and decide if they can be disclosed. If the records don’t exist the OIP would respond that there isn’t a UIPA answer that could be given(either access or denial of access) because UIPA only applies to records which exist.
IOW, if Joesting was following the protocols for UIPA appeals, she actually saw those records herself before she wrote to Terri K saying that the denial of access was proper.
Speaking of opinion letters, I think a good tactic might be to cite the opinion letter that showed file numbers were part of the Index Data and request all index data for the yakcheck.org cert number (of course, with no mention of Obama or any names) ... something like, “I am requesting index data for file number XXX in accordance with opinion letter XX dated XXX, pursuant to HRS 338-18(d). This is NOT a request for copies of any certificates, just index data associated with this specific number only.”
I think there’s a guy named Kurt Tsue at the DOH who might be more cooperative than Okubo. kurt.tsue@doh.hawaii.gov
Just a thought.