2022-01-07 EMC special meeting draft minutes

Home

that the plaintiff prove that he or she conferred a benefit upon the opposing party, and that the retention of the benefit would be unjust, cited from Durette v. Aloha Plastic Recycling, Inc. 105 Hawaii 490 504, 100 P. 3d 60, 74, 2004. Do you agree with Justice Nakamura’s description of unjust enrichment? MANSOUR: If an inspector made a mistake, the intention, it's a mistake. It's not for the purpose of purposely enriching the Department. I'm not familiar with the cited case that we have been cited in this conversation, but if intentionally, it was shown with disregard to the code, that's different. But if an inspector, I'm sayinga hypothetical, as if a mistake was made, it was not intentional. But in this situation, the inspector did the right thing based on the code, and the definition of the (unintelligible). HENDERSON: In the case of Kai Ala Partners LLC, since 1998, it has conferred a benefit to the county's Environmental Management Department in the sum of $7,888 in erroneous sewer charge fees, that the county's retention of these fees and that the county's retention of these fees is unjust. The remedy for unjust enrichment is restitution the return of $7,888 to Kai Ala Partners. Based on the above and what we reviewed, do you agree that these funds should be returned to Kai Ala Partners by the Environmental Management Department sewer division? MANSOUR: I don't think so. I still believe the inspector did the right thing based on what was given in the code. It's a county code. He was doing the job or her job. And as far as the interpretation is good and doing their job, I think they did it. They did it right. HENDERSON: No further questions, Chair, of this witness. ADAMS: Thank you. Okay. I understand. Ms. Kekai, do you have redirect examination of this witness? KEKAI: Not at this time, Chair. I will allow the commissioners to ask their questions. ADAMS: Okay. Do the commissioners have question for Director Mansour? McINTOSH: This is Commissioner Mcintosh. I had a question regarding the Y connection for the director. So if the building didn't have a Y connection, it went to the main building or the house, Would it still be considered an unoccupied unit? I was just trying to figure out when buildings are charged twice, or how that works. MANSOUR: If it doesn't have a Y connection, then it won't be serving, it won't be distributing to add wastewater into the sewage system, so it won't be considered as unoccupied because it's not connected to the sewer. So I would imagine the fixture units within that building would be contributing to a sewer system, the public sewer system. 14