Ongoing problems in this administration have raised serious questions about the adequacy of our state procurement laws, and how those laws are being applied. In a February 2006 Honolulu Advertiser article, "Lingle aides bypass procurement process," we learned how the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism attempted to circumvent procurement laws by using a nonprofit organization to handle large donations solicited by DBEDT to fund the administration's trade missions to China and Korea.

Then again in September 2007, The Advertiser reported "Hawai'i firm got $7.3 million in non-bid work," unearthing a scheme in which employees of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands awarded millions of dollars in non-bid contracts to a company with which the DHHL employees had a previous relationship; those actions potentially violated a new procurement statute enacted by Gov. Lingle to combat cronyism and ensure a fair and impartial procurement process.

Now, new examples have surfaced surrounding DBEDT and its granting of a contract to manage the state's hydrogen investment capital fund. We can accept no further delay in providing Hawai'i's taxpayers with a close look at our procurement laws to determine if they are providing the selectivity and fairness they are meant to assure.

Briefly, the current situation is that DBEDT issued a request for proposals to manage a vital alternative-energy fund on behalf of the state. A committee received proposals, selected qualifying bidders and ranked them according to an established criteria. The department's director then reviewed the proposals again, and selected a contractor that was not the highest-qualifying bidder. The State Procurement Office has since reviewed DBEDT's actions and found that the procurement process did not comply with state law. Rather than reissue the contract to the rightful bidder, as the procurement office directed, DBEDT sought to disparage the reputation of the evaluation committee members in an attempt to cancel the RFP and contract.

These events give rise to several important concerns. First, the groups and individuals tasked with making purchasing decisions should be aware of the established process and be able to operate within its bounds; the state should not be forced to expend additional time and effort to repeat a review and selection process because of these types of errors.

Further, Hawai'i's taxpayers should not be left to wonder whether this sort of mishandling of the procurement process is an isolated event, or a more common but undetected event. One object of our procurement code is to provide the public with a higher level of confidence in how purchasing decisions are made. That confidence can only come as the result of a consistent and demonstrably fair system, where each and every purchasing decision will withstand scrutiny.

Finally, we can take this as a reminder that the procurement code deserves regular reviews to ensure that it provides the fairness and protections that we have a right to expect. Devising and perfecting a set of rules and practices can be a complicated process. It is only by regularly returning to the regulations themselves, and comparing actual performance against intended effects, can we ensure that we continue to make progress toward our goals of absolute fairness, consistency, and transparency.

I am proud to say that the Senate is taking action on each of these concerns. Within our majority package of legislation for the 2008 session, we have introduced bills that will provide for regular audits of procurement practices and purchasing decisions, training for state and county procurement officers, and a review of the effectiveness and implementation of the Hawai'i public procurement code. Other bills call for more timely corrective action when the State Procurement Office determines that such action is required, and more complete disclosures of how purchasing decisions have been made.

Additionally, the state Senate has passed a resolution that establishes a special investigative committee to look into the DBEDT's handling of the hydrogen investment capital fund management contract. Hawai'i's taxpayers, who ultimately bear the cost of the apparent errors and misjudgments that gave rise to this unfortunate and very troubling episode, should know how we reached this point.

My concern, and that of the Senate majority, is with accountability. It is our duty to provide the assurances that our government and our taxpayers deserve, so we can avoid facing a similar situation in the future. We can do no less if we expect to maintain the public's trust.

Sen. Donna Mercado Kim, D-14th (Halawa, Moanalua, Kamehameha Heights) is vice president of the state Senate. She wrote this commentary for The Advertiser.