My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
01-09-18 Regular Session Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2011-2018
>
2018
>
01-09-18 Regular Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/7/2019 1:19:21 PM
Creation date
2/13/2018 4:04:17 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
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
Mr. Yoshimoto: You're referencing our pre -conference rules that normally happens <br />when there is a prehearing conference ... so ... the standard rules of <br />confidentiality would apply in pre -hearing conferences if we did <br />have one and this particular case there were no pre -hearing <br />conferences right so... <br />Mr. Tucker: Right but how do you maintain confidentiality in a pre -hearing <br />conference? <br />Mr. Yoshimoto: Well when you have a pre -hearing conference you would have the <br />parties there so in terms of confidentiality you would already know <br />who the parties are so I'm not sure what your question is <br />because ... this rule that we're ... that you're asking about pertains to <br />records, reports and documents right ... and it basically says that <br />they're confidential until presented to the board in an open public <br />hearing so the context of the pre -hearing conference you need to <br />elaborate because a pre -hearing conference suggest that the parties <br />are known to each other and you know who the parties are and <br />you're gonna present documents like you would in a regular <br />case ... like in a formal hearing ... so I don't understand your <br />question because.... <br />Mr. Tucker: Well I'm trying to understand how in this situation the parties were <br />not known to each other... <br />Mr. Yoshimoto: That's not a legal question I mean that's between you and the <br />department and I know you were working with the department so <br />obviously you had knowledge of them and they had knowledge of <br />you right? I mean you're ... yeah so I don't have any knowledge of <br />that ... I don't have any first-hand knowledge ... I'm just assuming <br />based on what you're telling me right so... <br />Mr. Tucker: Well if their written response... they had two weeks or more to <br />prepare a response to my complaint and I had two and half seconds <br />to digest that information prior to the hearing ... now that's a <br />structural disadvantage now maybe you're relying on ... some <br />procedural code that in my mind is might be in conflict with State <br />code ... but ... in your processes here and examining how you guys <br />are looking to amend your business... this might be an area in <br />which you want to amend your business. <br />Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Goodenow. <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.