a “rule” as “each agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect that implements, interprets, or prescribes law or policy, or describes the organization, procedure, or practice requirements of any agency.” However, “[t]he term does not include regulations concerning only the internal management of an agency and not affecting private rights of or procedures available to the public, nor does the term include declaratory rulings issued pursuant to section 91-8, nor intra-agency memoranda.” HRS § 91-1(4) (emphasis added). Under Hawaii case law, informal policies that relate to an agency’s hiring policies are not “rules” and therefore, are exempt from HAPA’s public rule-making requirements. See Gibb v. Spiker, 68 Haw. 432, 435, 718 P.2d 1076, 1078-79 (1986) (<HOLDING>). PSD’s suspension policy only affects current
holding that the decision not to rehire the former police chief based on an informal unwritten policy against hiring anyone under investigation for possible criminal wrongdoing was a purely internal management function not within the scope of hrs  9114 holding that both law and logic dictate that an unwritten agency policy is reviewable holding the chief of police was an atwill employee because the parties agreed that the chief of police was an appointed officer and the citys charter stated that officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the mayor with consent of the council recognizing that a showing of scope of employment is unnecessary under a negligent hiring theory holding that chief of police was entitled to immunity for demoting police officer pending appeal of hearing officers decision to contrary because although statute made hearing officers decision final and binding statute nowhere addressed enforceability of decision pending appeal thus chief of polices action was discretionary