Recent actions by the Honolulu Police Commission in its selection of a new chief are as puzzling as they are disappointing.

As The Advertiser has reported, the search advisory committee for the chief forwarded four names to the commission, and when the commission asked for two more names, specifically assistant chiefs Debora Tandal and Delbert Tatsuyama, two members of the search committee resigned.

The committee members aren't talking about their specific reasons for quitting, but commission chairwoman Christine Camp said it had to do with them "responding to us drawing a deeper list than what they were going to send up." She said there was no manipulation of the process.

All last week, we sought biographical information about the six finalists prior to Friday's public hearing. The commission's executive officer George Clemente told Advertiser Staffer Gordon Pang that the information could not be released because the candidates had not given their approval. Camp told Pang that the commission had signed releases allowing us only to have the candidates' names and positions, which commissioners released the previous week.

There was also confusion between the Honolulu Police Department and the Police Commission as to who should release the information. Throughout the week, Pang called each of the candidates. All but two — Putzulu and Tatsuyama — provided information and Tatsuyama told another of our reporters that he didn't want to taint the process by providing us any information.

On Thursday afternoon, the commission released all the biographies, which appeared in Friday's newspaper and the day of the public hearing. Camp said she was looking for the public's input, but what input could the public have when the commission waited to release biographical information for the city's top law enforcement position until the last moment?

Transparency has not been the commission's strong suit. It refused our request to release the initial short list of 13 names who passed the written exam. Commissioners also said they decided not to renew Boisse Correa's contract in May because he could not commit to a full five years after he told them he would be willing to work just one more. It was clear that Correa would not remain in his job even if he had promised to work longer, and the commission should have said so.

Our hope is that the selection is not further tainted and the commission succeeds in picking a chief who can overcome this awkwardly handled process and values openness in his or her adminstration.