My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2019-12-11 Fire Commission Regular Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Fire Department
>
Fire Commission
>
Minutes
>
2019 - 2020
>
2019
>
2019-12-11 Fire Commission Regular Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/9/2020 9:03:50 AM
Creation date
1/9/2020 9:03:47 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
Hawaii Fire Commission <br />Regular Session Minutes <br />December 11, 2019 <br />Page 5 <br />Deputy Corporation Counsel Masuda stated that the issue is whether the <br />commission will allow hearing it after the 60 -day deadline. He read excerpts <br />from Rule 9 ... "the Commission may allow the filing of a complaint after the <br />sixty-day period for the following reasons: a. Excusable neglect. b. Newly <br />discovered evidence, which by reasonable diligence, could not have been <br />discovered in time." <br />Both Commissioners Henkel and Yamada said they wanted to hear from the <br />complainants. <br />Wayne Cummins and his wife Mia Pia -Cummins came before the commission <br />and swore to tell the truth. <br />Chair Henkel asked if there was excusable neglect or newly discovered <br />evidence. <br />Mr. Cummins stated that there was newly discovered evidence. He sent a <br />complaint to the Chief. He sent a letter requesting a review of his actions and <br />demeanor. When he followed up, he was told that a letter was sent to him a <br />year ago. The fire truck was not on a test drive. <br />Mr. Masuda stated that they only want to know the reason for the late filing. <br />Mrs. Cummins stated that the picture they submitted was only sent to them <br />recently. They are finalizing their case. July 12 was closing of the hearing. <br />Mr. Cummins stated that they didn't know who the driver was until earlier in the <br />year. <br />Mrs. Cummins stated that they never received the letter when it was sent. <br />They only received an email copy sometime last year. The final award was <br />made and finalized in December. <br />Commissioner Yamada stated that it seemed okay to him that the commission <br />should hear this incident and set aside that 60 -day rule that caused the delay. <br />Commissioner Payesko agreed that it fell within the rule of excusable neglect <br />and newly discovered evidence. <br />Mrs. Cummins stated that this was a sheltered gag order. <br />Commissioner Yamada motioned that they accept the complaint for <br />investigation due to excusable neglect and newly discovered evidence. <br />Commissioner Payesko seconded, and it carried unanimously. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.