REP PC 080 06/06/2006 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Communication 912 Page 4 of 5 she hopes everyone realizes she is a separate entity from Bob Jacobson, he's not God, he's a good guy and got his own ideas and so does she. Council Member Jacobson noted that Ms. Lively keeps at things until the job is finished and hopes that if she takes the seat, her colleagues will understand and work with her because she's very task oriented and will keep the people going through the process. He stated she's likely not to put up with any stonewalling or stops in the process as she seems to carry things through and appreciates that. Ms. Lively has been very involved in facilitating community groups and working with the community in the past and will be stepping down in some of those tasks and acknowledged she understands what a commitment this will be and will be available. Council Member Arakaki noted his concern that Ms. Lively is employed as a Council Member's aide and the Council Member will vote on the plan if it becomes an ordinance. Mr. Arakaki said he cannot vote for her not because she's not qualified but because of the perception that she works for a Council Member. He stated he would not be voting for her, he respects her integrity, her character and experience, but he thinks a council aide should not be on a committee when ultimately a council member will be making a decision on. Noted this was nothing personal. Council Member Holschuh shared the same concerns as Mr. Arakaki. Mr. Holschuh stated he has no doubt she speaks her own mind and feel her own way, but will have trouble supporting her because of the perceived conflict. Ms. Lively responded she thought long and hard about it, and her decision was based on the fact that it will not be her own personal interest, it wouldjust be making sure what the community comes up with is always up front and that's what's really important to her, to protect the process itself. Council Member Ikeda stated he has no problem with Barbara, asked Ms. Chang from the Planning Department what is the difference between Ms. Lively's situation and his being asked to resign from the Board of Appeals when he became a legislative assistant. Ms. Change recited the opinion from corporation counsel stating nothing precludes Ms. Lively from serving. She also stated she was unqualified to respond to Mr. Ikeda's question regarding the difference between the two situations. She concluded that in the group process (as one of eleven members) Ms. Lively would not be in a position to control decisions that come out of people who are all very independent thinkers. Council Member Safarik stated he believes that discussions regarding perception of conflict is valid and that there is an obligation to discuss this. He noted after reviewing his understanding of the corporation council's report, knowing Ms. Lively, her education component, her family component, her commitment to the island of Hawaii and also to the Puna region, these will surpass any potential conflict that may have been surfaced today and therefore supports her. Council Vice Chair Ms. Isbell stated she is very happy to support Ms. Lively because first of all, no one knows whether the person she's working for is going to be re-elected. Ms. Isbell also noted Ms. Lively is her own person and is impressed that she is her own person and suggests the council watch and see and if there are any problems, and if so, people can be removed as well. Committee Vice Chair Hoffmann noted that because Ms. Lively is a member of that community, she has vested interest in what goes on and wants to see it done well. Mr. Hoffmann does not see where her Ms. Lively's job would get in the way. He stated it's more important to recognize the contributions one makes, and that's important. He concluded he understood Mr. Arakaki's concern, however, as long as the community who selected her doesn't have a problem with her nomination, then he certainly doesn't. PC REPORT NO. 80