Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council committee advances audit of towing and vehicle‑removal practices after questioning HPD on wait times and documentation
Summary
The committee advanced Resolution 26‑58, directing an audit of towing and vehicle‑removal procedures. Councilmembers questioned HPD about officers waiting for tow companies, documentation of vehicle condition, contracting alternatives, and past contract management issues.
The Committee on International Legal Affairs voted to report Resolution 26‑58 out for adoption after department and auditor staff presentations and extended questioning of Honolulu Police Department towing practices.
Kimberly M. Hashiro of Customer Service told the committee her department "was able and willing to cooperate" with the audit process. Trio Shimasaki of the Office of the City Auditor said the auditor's office takes no position on the merits but can perform the audit as currently written.
Councilmembers pressed an HPD communications representative (identified in the transcript as Braydon) on whether officers must wait for tow trucks when vehicles are flagged. Braydon said generally officers do wait for tow companies to arrive so staff can document vehicle condition and confirm which tow company removed the vehicle; exceptions include 'tag and bag' procedures or designated morning/evening tow‑zone processing when officers cite vehicles and move on to handle higher call volume.
Councilmember Kia'āina asked whether the city could contract for automatic removal of vehicles in clearly posted tow‑away zones so officers would not have to wait; HPD said longstanding procedures include safeguards to ensure accurate documentation and chain of custody for vehicles, but acknowledged practices could be revisited. Several members said the audit should examine past contract administration: Vice Chair Tupola cited historical complexity in tow contracts, inconsistent payment schedules and a prior large payment (about $3 million) to a contractor, and noted unresolved situations with hundreds of towed vehicles left in lots while legal or liability questions were resolved.
Councilmember Weyer asked about unusual removals such as large shipping containers; HPD said those cases are often outside the tow contract's normal scope and require interagency work. After discussion, Chair Nishimoto recommended reporting Resolution 26‑58 out for adoption and the committee did so with no objections.
The committee did not record a roll‑call tally on the floor for this report‑out; the chair indicated no objections and reported the item out by unanimous consent. The audit, if adopted by the full Council, will examine towing procedures, contract management and related documentation practices.
