2010-08-27 TFOULK - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

HOUSEL: Thank you. Mr. Ghalamfarsa, since you are representing yourself, do you have any objections to the presiding officer handling this contested case? GHALAMFARSA: I have no objection in this bit of moving things along. HOUSEL: Okay. Commissioners, do you have comments? Okay, thank you. Now the – keep going, get this done – the presiding officer controls the course of hearings, administers oaths, rules on questions of evidence, holds appropriate conferences before and during hearings, rules upon all objections or motions which do not involve a final determination of the proceeding, receives offers of proof, fixes the time for the filing of briefs, disposes of any other matter that normally and properly arises in the course of a hearing, and takes all other actions authorized by law that are deemed necessary for the orderly and just conduct of a hearing. Are there any objections to this arrangement from the parties? OLSON: No, Mr. Chairman. GHALAMFARSA: No objections. YEH: No objections. SELF: No objections. HOUSEL: Thank you. The hearings officer means a person or persons duly designated, authorized by the Commission to conduct proceedings on matters within the jurisdiction of the Commission for the purposes of taking testimony and to report findings and recommendations to the Commission. As stated previously, the Commission as a whole will be considered the hearings officer for this matter. We’ll follow Rule 4. Parties may waive or amend procedures by stipulation agreement. Once the hearing commences, the parties will be asked if they have any agreements to waive or amend the procedures – so please be prepared. Parties have the right to present testimony, cross-examine and present documentary exhibits. Strict Rules of Evidence do not apply, Rule 4-7; so we don’t have Strict Rules of Evidence. Parties have the right to appeal the decision to the courts – that’s Rule 4-27 and HRS 91-14. Are there any questions? Now, we can return to the question of the continuance, now that we’ve gotten our housekeeping done. YEH: Mr. Chairman, Tom Yeh, again. You know, in light of the issue of the Commissioners’ tenure, you know, that does pose a real practical problem for us. And the Commissioners having been on the site, having heard at least the testimony so far, it would obviously be our purpose to have the same body and members that are sitting here today, determining the questions that are before it. So I think it might be better to set like a three-month deadline and see where we go from there. And hopefully, we can satisfy the informational requirements by then. And then from there, you know, once either the status conference or the continued hearing is set, we set some, perhaps some new intermediate deadlines for the submission of exhibits, because I suspect 29 EXHIBIT C