My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
RES 266 Draft 01 2024-2026
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Resolutions
>
2024-2026
>
RES 266 Draft 01 2024-2026
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/15/2025 3:35:48 PM
Creation date
8/7/2025 8:54:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Bill/Resolution
Bill/Resolution - Type
RES
Bill/Resolution - Council Term
2024-2026
Bill/Resolution
266
Draft
01
Introducer
Mark D. Disher, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Referred To
FC
Action 1
FC-78: Recommended adoption - 8/19/2025
Action 2
Council: Adopts Res. 266-25 & FC-78 - 9/3/25
Status
Adopted
Date To Mayor or Adoption Date
9/3/2025
Reading Number
1
Reading Date
9/3/2025
Ayes
8-Galimba, Hustace, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Onishi, and Villegas
Noes
0
Absent
1-Kaneali'i-Kleinfelder
Excused
0
Document Relationships
AGE COUNCIL 2025-09-03 2024-2026
(Related To)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2024-2026\Council
AGE FC 2025-08-19 2024-2026
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\2024-2026\Finance Committee (FC)
COM 0428.000 2024-2026
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\2024-2026
REP FC 078 2025-08-19 2024-2026
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Reports\2024-2026\Finance Committee (FC)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
10 <br />54. Plaintiff, an openly and obvious older gay male had no chance despite his <br />impressive qualifications. <br />55. On March 7, 2022, Mr. Adams informed Plaintiff via blind copy email that the <br />position had "opened" and was now publicly posted but Adams never had any intention on even <br />interviewing the Plaintiff because Plaintiff was an older gay male, and NOT a young attractive <br />female. <br />56. Upon reviewing the post, Plaintiff noted that the application window was for a very <br />small window of only nine days. <br />57. Plaintiff checked the county website and confirmed that the physical office location <br />for the film commissioner was located in Hilo, Hawaii. <br />58. Accordingly, Plaintiff applied for the position of Economic Development Specialist <br />III SR-24 and listed Hilo as Plaintiff's location. <br />59. On April 11, 2022, Plaintiff received a confirmation email from Defendant that <br />Plaintiff received a rating of 70 and was eligible for hire to the position. <br />60. Other than an automated confirmation that Plaintiff's application had been <br />submitted, Plaintiff did not receive any further communication or feedback from the County of <br />Hawaii with respect to his application. <br />61. Upon information and belief, Adams purpose decided to ignore Plaintiff's <br />application and not even consider him for a position because Adams wanted to hire young <br />attractive females ONLY. <br />62. Defendant County of Hawaii admits that in May 2022, Mr. Douglas Adams, <br />Director of the Department of Research and Development received an inquiry from Claimant <br />regarding his application. <br />-10- <br />EXHIBIT "A" Pg10 <br />Page 10 of 25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.