Ethics Commission Executive Director Charles Totto said that Patterson "violated the ethics laws by selecting family members for city contracts and rewarding co-workers on Peter Carlisle's campaign with contracts."

Totto said Patterson declined an attorney and cooperated in the investigation.

Patterson issued a written statement last night through Carlisle: "I have cooperated fully with the Ethics Commission and I did not intentionally violate any provision of the ethics laws. Upon reviewing their advisory opinion stating that I did not comply with the rules regarding standards of conduct, I requested that I begin my disciplinary action immediately. I regret that my actions have brought unwelcome attention to the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney and its staff."

The opinion stated that no evidence exists that Patterson personally benefited from the contracts.

When he found out there was wrongdoing going on within his office, Carlisle said, he researched it and reported it to the Ethics Commission.

He acknowledged the awkwardness of the situation but said he took the only correct action: "You do what you're supposed to do. You figure out why did that go wrong and make sure that it's not going to happen again."

Taking responsibility

In the opinion, Patterson was described as a chief coordinator and supporter of Carlisle's last two campaigns.

Carlisle said he took action when he found out what was going on. But, he added, "This is ultimately my responsibility as the administrator of this office. It's something that I should have been aware of."

The ruling noted that Patterson "rationalized her preferential treatment toward her relatives and campaign workers by referring to questionable past practices. However, the rationalizations do not justify her conduct."

Carlisle said he learned that there had been a previous history of using such positions for patronage but he rejected it as improper even if it had been done before. "It's an ethical violation. It's a practice that should be frowned upon and it's inappropriate," he said.

Carlisle said a new selection process has been put into place.

The office receives $100,000 each year to be distributed to process servers, who deliver legal papers on behalf of the office. From July 1997 to June 2004, the opinion said, 48 contracts were awarded to process servers for a total of about $643,000.

The ruling said Patterson selected family members and campaign volunteers for 23 of those contracts valued at $343,000.

Suspended without pay

Carlisle explained that the qualifications for process servers are basic: be 18 or older, have a valid driver's license and have no criminal history.

It appears that this is the first time the city Ethics Commission has called for a suspension of a city employee without pay. Totto said there has been no similar action during his five-year tenure and no similar action was noted previously.

Carlisle said the violations turned up during a Honolulu police investigation last year of an unrelated case involving Patterson's son, Craig Whang, who works as an investigator in the office.

In that case, Whang is accused of improperly taking home thousands of dollars worth of ammunition from the department. Whang's attorney has denied any wrongdoing and said his supervisors were aware that Whang kept the ammunition at his Mililani home.

Carlisle said his office has created a selection panel that screens candidates for process servers and interviews them in a competitive process.

Totto said the ruling is important because it reminds government workers and the public that hiring or selecting friends and relatives as a reward is against the law.

"You can't reward somebody with a city contract for political favors rendered," Totto said.