Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-01-16 Merit Appeals Board MinutesREGULAR SESSION Merit Appeals Board Hilo Council Chambers Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street, First Floor, Room 1401 Hilo, Hawaii January 16, 2025 (Thursday) Call to Order (Item 1) The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was called to order at 8:31 a.m. by Chair Gabriella M. Cabanas, at the Hilo Council Chambers, Hawaii County Building, 25 Aupuni Street, First Floor, Room 1401, Hilo, Hawaii, on Thursday, January 16, 2025. Roll Call — Present Ms. Gabriella M. Cabanas, Chair Ms. Suzi Bond, Vice -Chair Ms. Gay Mathews, Member Also Present Mr. Sinclair Salas-Ferguson, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Mr. J Yoshimoto, Assistant Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Ms. Sommer J. Tokihiro, Director, Human Resources Department Mr. James E. Halvorson, Deputy Attorney General, Department of the Attorney General (via Zoom) Mr. Justin C. Lee, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Mr. Mark Disher, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Ms. Sherilyn K. Tavares, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Mr. Ryan Thomas, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel Mr. Ted. H. S. Hong, Esquire, Attorney at Law Mr. Lyndon P. K. Turner, Automotive Storekeeper (TA to Construction Repair Supervisor II), Public Works Department Mr. Jonah Kaye, Water Safety Officer II, Fire Department Mr. John Kaye, Public Member Mr. Tony Enriquez, Appellant (via Zoom) Mr. Daniel Volpe, Deputy Chief, Fire Department Ms. Naomi Leialoha, Human Resources Technician I, Public Works Department Ms. Glynis Yamada, Secretary -Reporter, Human Resources Department Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 Call to Order (Item 1) CHR. CABANAS: Good morning, everyone. It is 8:31 on January 16, 2025, the regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board is called to order. I'm Gabriella Cabanas, Chair of the Merit Appeals Board, and we have quorum today with three Board membersmyself, our Vice -Chair to the left of me is Gay Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Good morning. CHR. CABANAS: And to her left, is our other Board member, Ms. Suzi Bond. The other two Board members resigned in December, so it is three of us today. I'd like to make other introductions. Sitting to my right is our Deputy Corporation Counsel, Sinclair Salas-Ferguson, and we also have Legal Counsel for our hearing this morning —and it is Mr. Jim Halvorson appearing via Zoom from Oahu. He is with the Attorney General's Office. Good morning, Jim. MR. HALVORSON: Good morning, everybody. Nice to be here. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Also appearing via Zoom is Mr. Tony Enriquez. Good morning, Mr. Enriquez. Mr. Enriquez, can you hear me? MR. ENRIQUEZ: Yeah, I can hear you now. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, great —Happy New Year. MR. ENRIQUEZ: Happy New Year. CHR. CABANAS: And also sitting in the gallery with us, I'm going just introduce everyone because I know all of you. So, I'll start with the Attorneys from the Office of the Corporation Counsel —Mr. Mark Disher, Ms. Sherilyn Tavares, Mr. Ryan Thomas they are all Deputy Corporation Counsels. Also we have Mr. Jonah Kaye, an employee from the Hawaii Fire Department; Mr. Lyndon Turner, employee from the Department of Public Works; Mr. Ted Hong, Esquire; Sommer Tokihiro, Director of Human Resources; and Naomi Leialoha, Human Resources Specialist, from Department of Public Works. Addendum to Agenda (Item 2) CHR. CABANAS: There is no addendum to the agenda. Page 2 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 Statements from the Public (Item 3) CHR. CABANAS: Any "Statements from the Public" on any of the agenda items? If not, I'll move along. Approval of Minutes (Item 4) CHR. CABANAS: There's no "Approval of Minutes." Director's Report (Item 5) CHR. CABANAS: The "Director's Report" we have none for this meeting, but it will be on the agenda for our next meeting in February. Communications (Item 6) CHR. CABANAS: There are no "Communications." New Business (Item 7) Election of Merit Appeals Board Chair and Vice -Chair for calendar year 2025 CHR. CABANAS: So, we are now on "New Business" the election of the Merit Appeals Board Chair and Vice -Chair the calendar year 2025. I'd like to start by reading the Board Chair's responsibilities and they are the following —sets agenda for Board meetings with Secretary -Reporter and Attorney from Corporation Counsel and approves agenda; drafts correspondence for the Board; oversees matters concerning the Board and discusses such matters with Corporation Counsel or the Deputy Attorney General, as appropriate; signs Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, letters, documents, et cetera, for the Board; and facilitates Board meetings and appeal hearings. At this time, I'd like to entertain a motion for the Board Chair for the calendar year 2025. MS. MATHEWS: I move that Gabriella Cabanas is the Chair. MS. BOND: I'll second that. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Any discussion? If not, I'll start a rollcall vote with Ms. Gay Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. Page 3 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. BOND: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Cabanas —aye. Three ayes. Motion carried, and thank you for your support and confidence in me as the Board Chair for the calendar year 2025. Next is the Vice -Chair. The situation is this right now the Administration is currently seeking nominees to fill our two Board vacancies. Ms. Mathews term is up, but in accordance with our Board Rules, she can stay on for 90 days, which she has gladly said yes to serving for 90 days. And that would leave Ms. Bond and me after the 90 days. So, I'm hoping the Administration will be able to submit the nominations to the Council soon. They are working on it. But what do you want to do with the Vice -Chair position `cause, Gay, you are currently our Vice -Chair. MS. MATHEWS: I was thinking that it would make sense for us to have Ms. Bond be the Vice -Chair, unless you have a reason that we should delay that motion. CHR. CABANAS: I'd like to ask Ms. Bond how she feels with that. Do you feel comfortable, `cause you're new on the Board —do you feel comfortable serving as the Vice -Chair in the event I'm not able to attend a meeting? MS. BOND: Yes, I think I can handle it. CHR. CABANAS: You can handle it —okay, great. Okay, so that settles that. So, is there a nomination for the Vice -Chair position? MS. MATHEWS: I move that Ms. Suzi Bond be our new Vice -Chair. CHR. CABANAS: I'll second it. Any discussion? If not, I'll start a rollcall vote with Ms. Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. MS. BOND: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Cabanas —aye. Three ayes. Motion carried. Congratulations, Ms. Bond, you are now the Vice -Chair for the calendar year 2025. Thank you so much. Page 4 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 Unfinished Business (Item 8) A) Communication No. 24-02.05, Received December 30, 2024, From Deputy Attorney General James E. Halvorson, Transmitting The "Findings Of Facts, Conclusions Of Law And Order" Concerning An Appeal Hearing Held On April 25, 2024, Regarding Communication No. 24-02, Received On February 12, 2024, From Appellant, Appealing The Following Actions By The County Of Hawai`i's Department Of Public Works: Recruitment And Examination, Classification Or Reclassification Of A Particular Position, And Initial Pricing Of Class (Of Work) (Executive Session: The Merit Appeals Board Anticipates Convening One Or More Executive Meetings Regarding The Above Matter, Pursuant To HRS Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(2) And 92-5(a)(4), For The Purpose Of Evaluating An Officer Or Employee Of The County Of Hawaii, Where The Consideration Of Matters Affecting Privacy Will Be Involved And Consulting With The Board's Attorney On Questions And Issues Pertaining To The Board's Powers, Duties, Privileges, Immunities, And Liabilities. A 2/3 Vote Of The Members Present Pursuant To HRS Section 92-4 Is Necessary To Hold An Executive Meeting. Board Action Required. Approval Of The Findings Of Facts, Conclusions Of Law And Order) CHR. CABANAS: We are now on "Unfinished Business" for discussion and appropriate action —and this is "A)" Communication number 24-02.05. So, have you had the chance to review the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Order —and, if you have, may I have a motion to accept and file and approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Order. MS. MATHEWS: So moved. CHR. CABANAS: Is there a second? MS. BOND: Second. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Any discussion? If not, I'll start a rollcall vote with Ms. Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. MS. BOND: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Cabanas —aye. Three ayes. Motion carried to approve the Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Order for this particular communication. Okay, moving along. Page 5 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 B) Communication No. 24-03.22, From The Merit Appeals Board, Dated December 3, 2024, To Ted Hong, Esquire, Requesting He Provide Any Compensation Wages As It Relates To Mr. Lyndon P. K Turner's Appeal Hearing; And Communication No. 24-03.23, Received On December 13, 2024, From Ted H. S. Hong, Esquire, On Behalf Of The Appellant, Regarding The "Declaration Of Lyndon P. K. Turner; Exhibit 1": And (Note: At The Merit Appeals Board Meeting Held On December 16, 2024, The Above Matters Were Postponed.); And Communication No. 24-03.24, From The Merit Appeals Board, Dated December 20, 2024, To Sommer J. Tokihiro, Director, Department Of Human Resources; And Hugh Ono, P.E., Director, Department Of Public Works, Requesting Their Presence At The Merit Appeals Board Meeting Scheduled For January 16, 2025, To Address Concerns Re Compensation Adjustments And Other Questions That May Arise (Executive Session: The Merit Appeals Board Anticipates Convening One Or More Executive Meetings Regarding The Above Matter, Pursuant To HRS Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(2) And 92-5(a)(4), For The Purpose Of Evaluating An Officer Or Employee Of The County Of Hawaii, Where The Consideration Of Matters Affecting Privacy Will Be Involved And Consulting With The Board's Attorney On Questions And Issues Pertaining To The Board's Powers, Duties, Privileges, Immunities, And Liabilities. A 2/3 Vote Of The Members Present Pursuant To HRS Section 92-4 Is Necessary To Hold An Executive Meeting) CHR. CABANAS: We are now on Communication number 24.03.22. (Chair Cabanas proceeded to read into the record Communication Numbers 24-03.22 through 24-03.24.) CHR. CABANAS: So, Mr. Hong and Mr. Turner, would you approach the dais, please? And also, Ms. Tavares, and Ms. Tokihiro. (At this time, Mr. Ted H. S. Hong, Legal Counsel for Mr. Turner, and Mr. Lyndon P. K. Turner, Automotive Storekeeper (TA to Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II), Public Works Department; and Ms. Sherilyn K. Tavares, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Office of the Corporation Counsel, and Ms. Sommer J. Tokihiro, Director, Human Resources Department, came forward.) CHR. CABANAS: Mr. Hong had submitted a letterI believe it was a letter —where he indicated the compensation wages and that is Communication number 24-03.24. Mr. Hong, you indicated that you are seeking, on behalf of Mr. Turner, a retroactive pay adjustment in the amount of $1,716.19 regarding compensation wages relating to Mr. Turner's appeal hearing. MR. HONG: That's correct. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. And, for the Board, how did you arrive with that amount? Page 6 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: The "Exhibit I" that we attached to Mr. Turner's declaration, indicates that he highlighted the part about the retroactive pay adjustment that was taken from him. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, you are referring to that paystub? MR. HONG: That's correct. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. And so, the Board's concern was, is that amount correct —and so, we also asked Ms. Tokihiro from Human Resources and Ms. Leialoha, who is appearing for Hugh Ono from the Department of Public Works to indicate if that amount is correct or is it a higher amount, is it a lesser amount? Ms. Naomi you can come up front also. (At this time, Ms. Naomi Leialoha, Human Resources Technician I, Public Works Department, came forward.) CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Okay, please proceed, Ms. Tavares. MS. TAVARES: I'll let Ms. Tokihiro and MR. HALVORSON: Can she get closer to the microphone, I can't hear her. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: I'll let the experts explain, because we don't agree with the amount and (inaudible). CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, for everyone who didn't hear, Ms. Tavares is indicating that they don't agree with the amount that Mr. Hong has listed in his exhibit. So, please explain? Can you go closer to the mic.? MS. LEIALOHA: So, for the amount, I'm not too sure —for the amount, we're not sure what it will be at this time. CHR. CABANAS: And why is that? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, there were a couple of issues with effectuating the Board's Order. And so, there's been some confusion on the part of the department and also in our Transactions team as far as how we effectuate the Order that the Board provided. When we talk about reinstatement, normally that word is associated with reinstatement to a person's last held permanent position. In this case, because Mr. Turner hadn't passed probation, that wasn't his last held permanent. I think it was —or I want to understand the Board's intent, which I believe was to return Mr. Turner to the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II position. Page 7 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 Reinstating him with an effective date of December 1st, also has some other consequences. While Mr. Turner is on TA to the position of Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor because he's a "Tier II" employee according —for ERS purposes that's the "Employee Retirement System" —his TA earnings are not counted towards his retirement calculation. So, when we talk about actions —corrective actions —in this case, I believe this is the Board's intent to take a corrective action. We talked about making an employee whole. And so, when we make an employee whole, we basically are undoing the action so that there's no adverse action —as if he had never been removed from the position. So, rather than reinstatement as of December 1st, I'm wondering if it was the Board's intent to return him to the position, as if my action in voiding his appointment, had never occurred. What would happen in that instance, it would be that Mr. Turner would be returned to the position as if he had never been removed from it, and the salary would —calculation —would be addressed through payroll, so that when that action was taken, he would be paid the salary of the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II position for the entire period, and that would resolve any difference in earnings. It also makes him whole, so that his full base salary is counted towards his Employee Retirement System contributions. And, so basically, it would be the Board just saying —reversing my action with no adverse action to Mr. Turner. So, just a couple of clarifications. In the Board's Order, the position title would also need to be corrected. I believe the —it says, "Construction Equipment Supervisor II"I think "Repair" was inadvertently omitted from the title. So, for clarification, we would need the title to be corrected and, if it is the Board's intent —as I described to restore him to the position as if my action had never taken place then the Board may want to consider re -wording to "return" him to the position and reverse the action that I took in voiding his appointment. That should address all the issues. We're not totally sure of the difference in earnings. The amount indicated on the paystub could be related to this, but it could be related to other things because it's a general line entry on the paystub and is not necessarily specifically associated with this. I will say because Mr. Turner was on TA there could actually be a possibility that he would have earned more in some months than he would have earned if he was in the position, because TA is based on —it's payment for actual hours worked, whereas our salaries are semi-monthly regardless of the number of days in a pay period. So, to make it as clear as possible, the Board may want to consider amending that wording. My one other note would be with regard to the probation period. I know the Board had indicated that when Mr. Turner would be returned to the position, that he would serve the remainder of the probation period —or I believe that that was said and that was the Board's intent —and there really isn't a way for us to apply that retroactively, right. So, if someone is in a position and for whatever reason during their new probationary period, if they leave that position and are returned to their former position —and then, for whatever reason, Page 8 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 return to the former position —we don't have them serve the remainder of the probation period, they would have to serve a new probation. So, we don't have a way to credit the time for probation served in —previously. So, it's like if you're completing a new probationary period and for whatever reason you don't complete it, if you later return to that position, you serve a new probationary period again. In this instance CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Tokihiro, what date —what dateI don't have it right in front of me but what date are we looking at as a return date? Was it a November date? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the Order says that he was to be returned CHR. CABANAS: No. In your proposal now? MS. TOKIHIRO: My proposal would be that my action would be overturned as if it had never occurred— CHR. CABANAS: Right. MS. TOKIHIRO: —and so, as of March 16'h he would be returned to the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II position. CHR. CABANAS: March 16, 2024? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. So, for our employees that are in a position, unless they're notified in writing before the end of the probationary period, that the probation is going to be extended for some reason, they pass probation by default, after six months. So, if the Board's intent —well, I'm just saying that the language regarding completion of the probation period is also problematic and we don't have an authority to apply that and have him serve just the remaining two months of the probationary period but, again, with the proposed action, if we're returning him to the position as of March 16'h that probation would have been completed by default at the end of the probation period. In Mr. Turner's case, he has been performing in that position on TA for the entire duration, so I don't know if the Board may be comfortable with stepping away from the language regarding probation as part of the Order. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. If I recall, we don't have the meeting minutes finalized yet —but if I recallI think it was just a question in our mind as to whether he would serve a difference to make up the six months. That was just a question. It was not a decision by the Board. MS. TOKIHIRO: Okay. So, I just wanted to Page 9 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: So, (inaudible) no input at that time when we rendered our vote. There was no discussion about any of that. The thought of it came up afterwards. MS. TAVARES: Yeah, Mr. Lee —and I'm standing in for him today because he's over in Circuit Court— CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: but that was his question because he posed that question, "Is it the Board's intent for Mr. Turner to complete the period of probation" —and the response, and the way he interpret it was, "Yes, that the Board did intend for Mr. Turner to complete probation" —and so that's why we're in this situation, like, if the Board wants him to complete probation —how — what is the mechanism? Because effectively if Ms. Tokihiro's decision is reversed, then he would have ultimately CHR. CABANAS: Correct. MS. TAVARES: completed probation CHR. CABANAS: And that's logical. MS. TAVARES: (Inaudible) he doesn't need any further CHR. CABANAS: That's logical. That's logical. MS. TAVARES: (inaudible). CHR. CABANAS: Correct. MS. TAVARES: So, that was just a clarification. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, very good. Mm-hmm. MS. TOKIHIRO: Sorry. So, I just wanted to raise all of the concerns and make the Board aware of the implications of the language CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. MS. TOKIHIRO: so that you could be clear moving forward with how to make Mr. Turner whole. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Do I have a motion? Oh, well, before we go there, I need to check with Mr. Hong. Mr. Hong, do you have any concerns at this time regarding what the Director has reported? Page 10 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: I have a lot of concerns. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, well, please proceed. MR. HONG: The first is, this was agendized and the Director and the Department of Corporation Counsel knew this issue was going to come up. If they wanted to amend the Order, they should have filed a motion to amend the Order and then stated its reasons in writing. Because we had aweMr. Turner and I are at a fundamental disadvantage. We don't have access to all these records, payroll, or anything else. All he's got is a paystub, right. So, for them to come today, this morning, and say all of this —how is it that we can actually refute it or challenge it, or question it? We don't have the information. So, I think that with respect to the present motion or their wanting to amend the Board's Order, they should have done that in writing —and they had more than ample time to do it. And they're providing you no reason or excuse why they waited till today to do this. Because these are highly technical issues. If she had concerns, we should have seen that in writing so what we can —Mr. Turner and I can talk and go, "Eh, what about this and what about that" but we're just sitting here and having it wash over us. The other thing, too, is with respect to ERS contributions that's apples and oranges. We have to figure out what's going to —what affects him now. If he wants to beef it with the contributions with ERS because, unfortunately, I practice in front of ERS a lot, too that's another issue entirely. So, that's another venue and forum. So, that shouldn't be holding up what should be happening here. And it seems to me that, again, this is being drawn out intentionally to put or disadvantage my client because my understanding is that my client's supervisor, Randy Riley, is now under some kind of a scrutiny by the present Administration and now to put Mr. Turner back on probation again, on a new probation, I can predict is what we're going to happen — SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. HONG: —let me finish! Can I finish? CHR. CABANAS: Yes, please proceed Mr. Hong. MR. HONG: And so, one of the concerns I have is we put him on another probationary or a new probation, I can predict we'll be back in front of the Board on some kind of disciplinary action regarding my client. So, we submit that should —if the Corporation Counsel and the Director wanted to amend the Order, they should have done it in writing. And in terms of their objections, I think that —or concern, they shouldn't be considered for lack of timeliness and that barring —and they're not even sure that the $1,700.00 is accurate. Page 11 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 And I just don't understand that. They have payroll specialists. The department has payroll specialists in terms of Public Works and also the Department of Human Resources, so they have all the expertise, they have all the knowledge, they have all the data —and still they're coming to you today knowing this is going to be on the agenda, knowing this is going to be the issue —and saying that, "They're not sure"so, at this stage of the game, my client's been waiting a long time for this. That we submit that the Board should grant his $1,700.00 and direct him to be reappointed. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Mr. Hong. Ms. Tavares? MS. TAVARES: While I'm not going to speak for Mr. Lee this Order did come out last Friday. And so, I understand Mr. Hong's suggestion that we should have filed a motion to amend the Order. We're simply asking for clarification because I am hopeful that the explanation that Ms. Tokihiro provided, actually, expand what is written in the Order in Mr. Turner's benefit. We're not asking for or suggesting a new term of probation, if the Board is willing to consider just reversing Ms. Tokihiro's decision. It would effectively eliminate any further probation because it would —and I don't want to say the word "reinstate" but make him whole from March 16'', rather than December I". So, it's increasing the time than what is currently written in the Order. But, if Mr. Hong has an objection to it, we'll just defer to the Board's decision. But it was not our intent to drag anything out or to, somehow, penalize Mr. Turner. I would hope that the explanation that Ms. Tokihiro provided actually improves his position, if that is what the Board intended to do with reversing the decision that Ms. Tokihiro made and making him whole from March rather than December. But we'll defer to the Board for your decision. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you, Ms. Tavares. I'd like to call upon our Legal Counsel, Mr. Halvorson. MR. HALVORSON: I had to make sure I was unmuted. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HALVORSON: Yes, do you have a question? CHR. CABANAS: Yes. Well, Ias the Chair, I wish we had this information prior to our deliberating at the last meeting because it, pretty much, kind of, changes the scenario. The Board's intent was not to penalize Mr. Turner for what had transpired with Public Works. So, now Ms. Tokihiro is indicating that in accordance with the Administrative Rules and the Page 12 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 terminology, that the Board should have used the wording of "return" instead of "reinstatement." We wanted to make him whole and not penalize him any further. So, as the Chair, I'm seeking your advice, and maybe we need to go into executive session, but MR. HALVORSON: Actually, I don't think you need to. CHR. CABANAS: We don't need to. Okay. MR. HALVORSON: From what I've heard —from what I've heard from both parties is that there is some kind of amendment to the Order that would satisfy the Employer as well as the Appellant. And so, I would suggest that they go ahead and provide that and then the Board can rule on that. CHR. CABANAS: So, we should receive something in writing from them? MR. HALVORSON: Yes. They outlinedI heard them outline a way to address all of their concerns, and so they should just do it, and submit that to the Board for them to —for you to adopt that as an amendment to the Order. MS. MATHEWS: May I ask a question? CHR. CABANAS: Yes, go ahead. MS. MATHEWS: So, I'm hearing that we actually have two issues here. One, is that it — basically, we're vacating your original Order, correct? And, Number two, are the wages. I want to make sure we do this as expeditiously as possible. And I'd like to make sure that the first thing that happens, particularly, since I heard you say there's some questions with the new Administration that that part is done, so there is no more you're not on probation. That's done and that was our intent— CHR. CABANAS: Yes. MS. MATHEWS: at the last meeting. So, if this has to be bifurcated in some way, at least let's make sure that that happens. And then, if there's an adjustment on the salary you've already been dinged, you kind of managed to make it —and the intent is to make sure you're whole that they could continue with that but then but we make sure you are protected going forward. Is everybody agreeing with me here or does somebody have some heartache? MR. HONG: No, I totally agree. In fact, one of the points I was going to make is that wherever we go from here that it's clear he doesn't have to serve a new probationary period. Page 13 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. MR. HONG: So, I completely agree with you. MS. TOKIHIRO: With regard to the earnings, if Mr. Turner is returned to the position as if the action was never taken, that will that process and updating our system, our Human Resources system, will correct any payroll discrepancies. So, it will happen at the same time. It does not need to be bifurcated. The other thing that will come into account is any wages that Mr. Turner was paid through a special check run that are not accounted for on a paystub. So, that will correct, if there's any earnings difference from what he would have been paid in his salary versus what he earned on TA for this entire period. So, again, it wasn't —when we received the Order, I needed to see what the Order was from the Board, in order to be able to effectuate the change when we were working with the department with the Order that we received, to try and implement this that was when we realized that there were some issues and then I had concerns because I didn't feel the Order was making him whole and I was concerned that it was not what the Board intended and also not in Mr. Turner's best interest, possibly —so that's why I wanted to raise all of the issues with you, to get that clarification. So, I apologize for any delay. MS. MATHEWS: Thank you for that. Could you tell me what you need that motion to look like and then we'll see if Mr. Hong agrees with it, and then we will make. How does that sound? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the wording would be to "return" Mr. Turner to the "Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II" position as if my action had never been taken —as if I had never voided his appointment. CHR. CABANAS: I think we need to be a little bit more clear on that because "return Mr. Turner to the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor 11 position" and list the date "...return him to March 16'', 2024, and, accordingly, he now will complete his new probationary period." Yes? MS. MATHEWS: Wait, I'm not sure you meant that. You don't want him to have a new probationary period? CHR. CABANAS: No, no, no —he will have completed his new probationary period. MS. MATHEWS: Right. So, I think we need to state that. CHR. CABANAS: Yes. Okay. Maybe I twisted the words (inaudible). MS. MATHEWS: Yeah, I think Page 14 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: "...will have completed his new probationary period." MS. TOKIHIRO: You actually don't I think it's probably clearer if the Board doesn't address probation because if he's returned to the position as of March 16', he would have passed probation by default within, like, by May or June lst So, if the Board doesn't address it, there's no possibility of an adverse action or him having to serve a new probation. CHR. CABANAS: As long as we're clear with that, because I don't want it to come back and say, "Oh, you know, our motion didn't..." MS. TOKIHIRO: No. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MS. TOKIHIRO: No. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, I want to be really clear about that, `cause we're going back and forth, and Mr. Turner has been waiting here, patiently, and spending a lot of money having an attorney —and I don't like to see that when —at the —for an employee. We need to be prepared —even the dollar amount. Why couldn't you come up with a dollar amount as a possible scenario —if you're thinking you're coming here to the Board saying, "Okay, I'm going to suggest that he be returned to his posi to the position March 16, 2024"couldn't you have some sort of scenario dollar -wise? Couldn't you folks figure it out? Instead of us going back and forth on all of this? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, when the department received the Order and was attempting to do the calculation because of the confusion about how to apply it, they didn't start doing that calculation because the dates made that difficult. So, if he was being returned as of December 15, then they would go back to March 16'h and calculate the difference between the TA and the salary, but it's not necessarily a simple calculation and CHR. CABANAS: But, if you're coming here proposing he be returned to the date that he got promoted, which is March 16, 2024, that's one scenario. You could have come up with another scenario using the December date you know what I mean? It's present to the Board and the attorneys several scenarios. I mean, is that, kind of, like you can't do it? MS. LEIALOHA: So, as a general —in regards to compensation, once he is returned or reinstated to the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II position CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. MS. LEIALOHA: the pay will be the difference between what he was paid Page 15 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HALVORSON: I can't hear the person speaking. MS. LEIALOHA: Okay. So, the compensation in the end will be like a two -week delay —and I don't know how to say this, but the difference between what he got for TA and what he should get at the Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor 11 salary because he is on full TA CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. MS. LEIALOHA: not TA for hours worked. He's been on full TA all this time. So, he's been getting the half-month's salary. So, there really is no difference, once he's put back in the position, he'll get the half-month's salary at that Construction Equipment Repair Supervisor II and the half -month for the TA in one paycheck. CHR. CABANAS: I don't understand that. I mean, we don't understand that. How would he get half -a -month of TA because we are restoring him in full, back to March 16th. MS. LEIALOHA: Because Temporary Assignment pay is paid one pay period behind. CHR. CABANAS: Oh, okay. MS. LEIALOHA: Yes. MS. MATHEWS: If we're going back to March and his probationary period would have ended six months later. Is that correct? No, it would have ended when? SPEAKER: June 1st MS. MATHEWS: June I". How do we have a half -month thing? Is the pay exactly the same what that pay would be —exactly the same or not? One is salary, one is hourly? Is that one of the things you're CHR. CABANAS: It's for hours worked. MS. LEIALOHA: It's actually not for hours worked— CHR. CABANAS: For the TA? MS. LEIALOHA: Correct. The TA was offered as a full TA, so whether he was on leave or MR. HALVORSON: Again, I cannot hear the witness. CHR. CABANAS: You got to talk louder, Naomi. MS. LEIALOHA: Okay. So, he's on full Temporary Assignment —TA —so, he gets compensated for any and all work or non -work. Page 16 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. LEIALOHA: Yeah, so there's amount owed, technically, for Mr. Turner. MS. MATHEWS: Except for the $1,700.00 he was dinged in the first place? MR. HONG: Can we —my client wanted to say something about that? CHR. CABANAS: Oh, yes, please, Mr. Turner. MR. TURNER: So, I think to clarify everything, what they're trying to say is, the full day for me is, I get paid no matter what. They take into consideration, if I had called out —all that stuff. If I wasn't full TA'd, then I wouldn't get all of that adjustments. My concern is when I got removed from the 15'', I got removed back to the Storekeeper position, so the negative 17-something whatever the payroll adjustment says —is reflecting on what I got paid as a Storekeeper versus what I'm getting paid as a CERSIL So, the half -month that Naomi, I think, is reflecting is that March 16' to the 31 `—is the half -month that, if you guys make the wording adjustment —then it'll be back down to the 16''so I would get that half -month back, which would pretty much sum up the 1,700 in question —and then (inaudible) and stuff. So, I totally understand what Sommer's trying to make right. I just want to make sure that we clarify that I don't have to carry out my or continue my probation period probationary period, yeah. MS. MATHEWS: Okay, so the simple thing is, as long as you're not on probation, this is going to correct itself MR. TURNER: Correct. MS. MATHEWS: —and you'll be made whole. MR. TURNER: Correct. MS. MATHEWS: I'm happy. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, Mr. Hong. MR. HONG: May I suggest that the proposed changes be submitted by the Office of the Corporation Counsel for the next meeting and then we can, hopefully, all agree on that? If it's agreeable to my client —if they submit it before the actual day and time of the meeting, I can actually have my client look at it and then, if we agree to it, we can come in and we'll stipulate to it or file a statement that we stipulate to it. Page 17 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 But I'd like to see it in writing —and I'd like to see it in writing and discuss with my client. And I would just note, in the private sector, when somebody holds somebody else's money, they're entitled to interest —but I'll ask for it, but I know that the Rules don't —may not allow it —but I'm going to ask for it. MS. MATHEWS: Okay, Mr. Hong, I basically agree with you but, I'm going back to what he said about there's some question with the new Administration and, therefore, I need to make sure that we have action in place that nothing can happen to him and I don't want to wait for Corp. Cou you know, Counsel to draft something. How do we make that work? MR. HONG: I think that I think —and Mr. Halvorson can comment on this, too —I think that if it's abundantly clear on the record, right now, that that's everybody's intent, including the Human Resources Director and Corporation Counsel then I think that would have a binding effect —and then, we can see it in writing next —before next month or before the next Board meeting. But as long as we all the record is clear, then it's reduced to writing then I don't think everybody can renege on it. MS. MATHEWS: Mr. Halvorson, do you agree? MR. HALVORSON: Yeah, I think the simplest way to do that is to do a motion that specific specifies that is —he's being returned to his position, effective March 16, I believe is the date, and his probation would continue from that date. MS. TAVARES: No. No probation. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, the County is saying no probation because they feel that it would be taken care of when, on paper, Mr. Turner is returned to his position. MR. HALVORSON: That's what I'm saying. He's returned to his position, effective March 16th, his probation would continue from that period on and will be completed by June 1st. CHR. CABANAS: Correct. Okay. MR. HALVORSON: Do that in a motion and I don't think you need it in writing. MS. TAVARES: I think the simplest and fairest way to end this today, so that Mr. Turner does not need to come back again, and we do not need to prolong this —is to make those simple changes to the Order, that the Board can discuss and vote on today. Simply changing the word "reinstate" in the Board's January IOth order, to the word "return" in the second line; adding in the word "Repair" between "Equipment" and "Supervisor" in both mentions to essentially reflect the correct title of the position; and changing "December 1st 2024" to "March 16, 2024." It's as simple as that Page 18 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. MATHEWS: So moved. MS. TAVARES: to solve all of this problems. MS. BOND: Second. MS. TAVARES: We don't want to put anything about "probation" in there because it's not the County's intent for Mr. Turner to serve a single minute more of probation; and with changing that "December 1 s" date to "March 16''" we are making him whole from when the action happened and not from last month. And so, that is the proposal that's all that needs to change. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, Ms. Tavares. So, are you making you made the motion? MS. MATHEWS: I'm making the motion off of exactly what she said. CHR. CABANAS: That she said? MS. MATHEWS: Yes. CHR. CABANAS: And you second it? MS. BOND: Yes, I seconded it. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, any discussion because I don't want to ignore Mr. Hong's concerns. So, Mr. Hong, have you changed your concerns or you want to go with the flow and we approve this motion? MR. HONG: Well, based on those three technical changes, I don't have an objection. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Anyone else? Ms. Tavares, you're okay? Mr. Lee is here and Mr. Lee was the assigned attorney, so I don't know if you want to piggyback together or — MR. LEE: I just want to thank Ms. Tavares (inaudible). CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lee MS. MATHEWS: I want to thank everybody. CHR. CABANAS: —for showing —for showing up here. Okay. So, discussion phase done. I'm going to call for the vote with Ms. Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. Page 19 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. BOND: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Cabanas —aye. Motion carried. Three ayes, motion is approved. Okay, Mr. Turner, thank you so much for waiting so patiently. This is almost one-year and I'm glad that you will be you are returned to the CERSII position effective March 16, 2024. And if this can be expedited on your end, at Public Works, HR end —so that he gets the Form 13's immediately. MS. TAVARES: So, just for clarification, because it is our desire to make this as immediate as possible CHR. CABANAS: Yes. MS. TAVARES: Would you like Corporation Counsel to submit the amended Order or will be Board be doing that —because that's all we need, is the Order —and I can have Mr. Lee prepare that. CHR. CABANAS: I have to ask Mr. Halvorson. Mr. Halvorson, they're offering to amend the Order but what is the proper protocol here, `cause don't you usually do it for us? MR. HALVORSON: Well, I can. But it's not uncommon for the prevailing parry or one of the parties to be asked to prepare the Order. So, I've got no problem with Mr. Lee or Corp. Counsel preparing the Order. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Fine. I think for it to be expeditiously done, if you could please do the Order, Office of the Corporation Counsel. Thank you very much —appreciate it. MR. HALVORSON: When you prepare the Order, make sure you send me your draft, as well as Mr. Hong'sso we could have our comments. I don't anticipate any but just to make sure. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you very much. Okay, thank you. Thank you all, for coming today. Mr. Turner, good luck. Thank you. Okay, we are now going to go on to other communications. But before I do, I do see —let's see, another individual in the gallery. Would you kindly introduce yourself, sir? Just state your legal name? MR. KAYE: My legal name is John Kaye. CHR. CABANAS: John Kaye —okay, Mr. Kaye, thank you. Page 20 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 C) Communication No. 24-13: Received On July 25, 2024, From Appellant, Appealing The Following Action By The County Of Hawai`i's Office Of The Mayor: An Employment Action Taken Under Chapter 76, Hawai`i Revised Statutes; And Communication No. 24-13.01: Received On August 29, 2024, From Appellant, Transmitting Documents Entitled "Representation And Correspondence." The Appellant Requests The Following: 1) The Hearing Be Delayed Until The Appellant Can Obtain Proper Legal Counsel; And 2) Merit Appeals Board Chair, Gabriella Cabanas, Be Recused From Making Any Decisions Involving Appellants Appeal; And Communication No. 24-13.02: Received On August 29, 2024, From Appellee Regarding Appellee's Position Statement; Exhibits "A" — "H". Note: At The Merit Appeals Board (Board) Hearing Held On October 4, 2024, It Was Established That The Appellant Desired To Obtain Legal Counsel Before Proceeding On The Jurisdictional Issue. The Board Agreed And Requested The Appellant Provide An Update On The Status Of Obtaining Legal Counsel. The Appellant Provided An Update At Its Meeting Held On November 26, 2024, And Will Provide An Update At Its Meeting Scheduled For January 16, 2025 (A Future Hearing Date On The Jurisdictional Issue May Be Scheduled Conditional Upon Whether The Appellant Is Able To Obtain Legal Counsel) (Executive Session: The Merit Appeals Board Anticipates Convening One Or More Executive Meetings Regarding The Above Matter, Pursuant To HRS Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(2) And 92-5(a)(4), For The Purpose Of Evaluating An Officer Or Employee Of The County Of Hawaii, Where The Consideration Of Matters Affecting Privacy Will Be Involved And Consulting With The Board's Attorney On Questions And Issues Pertaining To The Board's Powers, Duties, Privileges, Immunities, And Liabilities. A 2/3 Vote Of The Members Present Pursuant To HRS Section 92-4 Is Necessary To Hold An Executive Meeting) CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, the next communication covers —well, it's several communications —and this is actually a closed —continuation of a closed meeting covering Communication number 24-13, Communication number 24-13.01, and Communication number 24-13.02, as stated on the agenda for today. So, because it is a closed meeting, I'm going to kindly ask that individuals exit the Council Chambers and we will call you back into the room when we open our meeting. Thank you so much. (At this time, the individuals seated in the Council Chambers exited the room.) CHR. CABANAS: Mr. Halvorson and Mr. Enriquez, we're having a computer issue that might take ten minutes to resolve, so we are going to take a ten-minute recess and the staff from the Clerk's Office will have to exit you out from Zoom, and when we're ready, we will contact you to get back on Zoom. So, ten minutes. MR. HALVORSON: Understood. Thank you. Page 21 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Mr. Halvorson. Mr. Enriquez, you —did you get that info.? I can't read what that says. He's muted. Okay. Okay, Glynis will call you, Mr. Enriquez. Okay, ten-minute. RECESS: The Chair called for a recess at 9:24 a.m. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 9:52 a.m. in open session. 9:00 A.M.: HEARING RE COMMUNICATION NO. 24-14 Communication No. 24-14, Received On September 12, 2024, From Ted H. S. Hong, Esquire, On Behalf Of Appellant, Appealing The Following Action By The County Of Hawai`i's Fire Department: Recruitment And Examination; And Communication No. 24-14.01, Received On October 28, 2024, From Appellant, Regarding Appellant's Supplemental Exhibit "3" In Support Of Appellant's Appeal To The Merit Appeals Board Submitted On September 12, 2024; Exhibits "3"; And Communication No. 24-14.02, Received On October 29, 2024, From Appellee, Regarding Appellee's Statement Of No Opposition To The Jurisdiction Of The Merit Appeals Board To Hear This Appeal; And Communication No. 24-14-03, Received On December 12, 2024, From Ted H. S. Hong, Esquire, On Behalf Of The Appellant, Regarding Appellant's Witness List; And Communication No. 24-14.04, Received On December 12, 2024, From Ted H. S. Hong, Esquire, On Behalf Of The Appellant, Regarding Appellant's Exhibit List; And Communication No. 24-14.05, Received On December 12, 2024, From Appellee, Regarding Appellee's Witness List; And Communication No. 24-14.06, Received On December 12, 2024, From Appellee, Regarding Appellee's Exhibit List; Exhibits "A" — "D" (Executive Session: The Merit Appeals Board Anticipates Convening One Or More Executive Meetings Regarding The Above Matter, Pursuant To HRS Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(2) And 92-5(a)(4), For The Purpose Of Evaluating An Officer Or Employee Of The County Of Hawaii, Where The Consideration Of Matters Affecting Privacy Will Be Involved And Consulting With The Board's Attorney On Questions And Issues Pertaining To The Board's Powers, Duties, Privileges, Immunities, And Liabilities. A 2/3 Vote Of The Members Present Pursuant To HRS Section 92-4 Is Necessary To Hold An Executive Meeting) CHR. CABANAS: Okay, it is 9:52 a.m. on January 16, 2025. This is a hearing regarding Communication number 24-14, 24-14.01, 24-14.02, 24-14.03, 24-14.04, 24-14.05, and Communication number 24-14.06. This hearing pertains to Jonah Kaye with the Hawaii Fire Department. May I have a motion to accept and file all of the communications that I have read? MS. MATHEWS: So moved. CHR. CABANAS: Is there a second? Page 22 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. BOND: Yeah. Sorry —second. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Any discussion? MS. BOND: Is it just me or isin the middle of this, something about Lyndon's case? CHR. CABANAS: No. MS. BOND: This "Exhibit 37 (At this time, Ms. Yamada assisted Ms. Bond with her documents.) MS. HALVORSON: I can't hear you. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond is trying to find her appropriate page in her binder, but while she's doing that —first of all, before the hearing starts, I need to make a full disclosure. I've worked as —I've worked for the Department of Human Resources for over 30 years. And I've conducted training for all County employees, including employees from the Hawaii Fire Department, the Fire Chief Kazuo Todd and Assistant Fire Chief Darwin Okinaka—have attended my training while I was working. I'm six years retired now. So, I wanted to disclose that. I am blood -related to Assistant Fire Chief Darwin Okinaka. I think I'm, like, his second cousin —first removed. And, also, my son is employed by the Hawaii Fire Department, but he's a Fire Equipment Operator the fire operations side. So, I wanted to make that full disclosure. I've also worked with Mr. Hong when he was our Assistant Corporation Counsel. I think it was in the 1990's, when you first started, Mr. Hong —and we worked on appeals together. I oriented him about the Recruitment and Examination function. And so, I wanted to also disclose that before we even start today's hearing. If there's any objections or concerns, please kindly state that now. I believe I can be and will be objective to both parties to Mr. Kaye and to the County of Hawaii because in my job, when I worked, I kept all other factors aside and I focused on the facts when advising individuals or departments that, et cetera. And I take my job here very seriously as the Chair of the Merit Appeals Board. MR. HONG: So, if we have to put anything on the record, I have no objections to you continuing to serve. CHR. CABANAS: Oh, thank you, Mr. Hong. MS. TAVARES: Likewise, the County has no objections (inaudible). Page 23 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Ms. Tavares. Okay, so, Mr. Kaye, do you want an open or closed hearing? MR. KAYE: (Inaudible.) CHR. CABANAS: Open. Okay, great. I'd like to, again, introduce the Board members to you and our Legal Counsel. I'm Gabriella Cabanas, the Chair; Gay Mathews, to my left, is the Vice -Chair; and to her left is Suzi Bond, member of the Board. So there are three Board members. We do have quorum. Our Legal Attorney is appearing via Zoom, Mr. James Halvorson, with the Office of the Attorney General. He is our attorney for the appeal hearing. I'd also like for the record —will state who is present in the Council Chambers this morning. Our Secretary -Reporter seated in the back of us, Ms. Glynis Yamada; we have Mr. Jonah Kaye, the Appellant; his Attorney, Mr. Ted Hong, Esquire; representing the County is Ms. Sherilyn Tavares with the Office of the Corporation Counsel; we have Sommer Tokihiro, the Director of Human Resources; we have Mr. Kaye —John Kaye, sitting in on the hearing; and we also have the Deputy Fire Chief Volpe, sitting in on the hearing. Okay. Our Deputy Attorney, James Halvorson, will be participating via Zoom. Both parties are present and introductions will be —have been made. This hearing is on the appeal filed by Mr. Jonah Kaye. The issue in this case has been identified as Number one —Did the Employer, the Fire Department of the County of Hawaii, violate any statutes, regulations, rules, or personnel policies regarding the following actions pertaining to Recruitment and Examination. And Number two, if the answer to the above is "yes" then what remedy can be awarded by the Merit Appeals Board? Are there any questions or disputes concerning the Board's jurisdiction over this matter? Mr. Hong? MR. HONG: None. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Ms. Tavares? MS. TAVARES: No. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Do you have —do both parties have any statements or concerns in regard to the issue in this case? MR. HONG: On behalf of Mr. Kaye no. I will just note as an administrative matter that Counsel for the department and I have agreed to stipulate both of our exhibits into evidence. Page 24 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay, great. Thank you both for doing that. Ms. Tavares, do you have any other comments or concerns to make? MS. TAVARES: Not at this time. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, great. Strict rules of evidence will not apply in this hearing; however, the Board requests that all parties confine themselves to the matters connected with today's hearing and the issue before the Board. If witnesses are used, the opposite parties will be allowed to cross-examine the witness. Members of the Board may also question the witness after the witness' testimony. Are there any questions? If not, we shall begin. Okay. Mr. Kaye and Mr. Hong, we'll allow you to make an opening statement. The opening statement is timed for three -minutes and it's generala general summary of the issues that you want to cover during the hearing. You may waive an opening statement, but if you want to, you may make it now. MR. HONG: Madam Chair, and members of the Board, good morning. Ted Hong, on behalf of the Appellant, Jonah Kaye. The only opening statement I wanted to make was just outline our presentation this morning. And Mr. Kaye's going to talk about how he was aoriginally, a Water Safety Officer IL He went through the recruitment process for the Water Safety Officer III position, he was serving in that position for approximately three months. And then, he was notified by the Department of Human Resources Development (sic.) that his recruitment was cancelled and that he was forced to be demoted back down to a Water Safety Officer II. And one of the points that Mr. Kaye is going to talk about is he has suffered a lot of ridicule and humiliation because the department —the Fire Department published that he was now being, essentially, demoted to the Water Safety Officer II position. The remedy that we're going to request is that he be reinstated or put back to his position and made whole, so he can either continue on as a Water Safety Officer III. And that this has been this has had a very profound effect on himself and his family. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Mr. Hong. Ms. Tavares, you are allowed also to make an opening statement for three -minutes. You may waive making the statement, but if you so wish to, you may proceed for three -minutes —keeping in mind that it is a general summary of the issues that you will cover during the hearing. MS. TAVARES: The County waives. Page 25 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you. Okay. So, Mr. Hong, you may present your case and bring in your first witness. MR. HONG: Our first and only witness is this morning, is Jonah Kaye. (At this time, Mr. Jonah Kaye, Water Safety Officer II, Fire Department, came forward.) CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, Mr. Kaye, thank you for coming up to the counter here. I need to swear you in, so if you could raise your right hand —and do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? MR. KAYE: Yes. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. MR. HONG: Sir, would you state your name —for the record spell your last name? MR. KAYE: My name is Jonah Kaye. And my last name is spelled K A Y E. MR. HONG: All right. Thanks, Jonah. How old are you? MR. KAYE: I'm 48 years -old. MR. HONG: And could you tell us your address, please? MR. KAYE: Nineteen -A West Kawili Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720. MR. HONG: Okay. Are you married? MR. KAYE: No. MR. HONG: Do you have any kids? MR. KAYE: Yeah. I have three sons. MR. HONG: How old are they? MR. KAYE: Nineteen, 20, and 22. MR. HONG: Okay. Tell us about your educational background, starting from where you graduated from high school and when, and then work up. MR. KAYE: I graduated from Hammond High School in Colombia, Maryland, in 1994. And then, I went to college at UH-Manoa, and I graduated in 1999 with a degree in (inaudible). And after that, I attended some classes at Chaminade and got my teaching license. Page 26 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: Okay. In terms of your teaching —well in terms of your professional experience, could you tell us about that? So, you got your teacher license —where did you teach? MR. KAYE: Yeah. I moved down to Waianae and I became a special ed. teacher for boys and girls with severe emotional and behavioral problems, and I did that job for a few years in Waianae. And when I start to have —when I found out I was going to be a dad, my wife and I moved from there to the Big Island where I continued teaching boys and girls in an off -campus DOE setting for therapeutic classroom for teenagers with at -risk or just severe behavior problems. And I did that for a total of 14-and-a-half years. And I loved it. It was a great experience. MR. HONG: And why did you leave the DOE? MR. KAYE: I left being a teacher —it had to do with some fundamental things I had learned in —about special ed. in teaching college mainly —when you're a special ed. teacher, I believed that the classroom should be different. The experience should be different. The way these kids was —were to learn, would be different. And a lot of times I'd get administrators who absolutely understood this. And so, they were happy with implementing things like community -based instruction and all those amazing things that are proven to work for these type of students. And then, you would get an administrator who would want you to recreate a regular classroom or integrate students into a more regular ed. setting. And it was too frustrating for me to, kind of, give up on the mission, which was education —high schoolers whoI just felt it was a waste of time to be preparing them for regular ed. classroom in their senior year, when we should have been thinking about post -graduate plans and graduate and entering the workforce. And that's really was my main goal as, kind of, aan approach to get kids ready to be a part of a world that welcomes them. MR. HONG: So, after the DOE, where did you go? MR. KAYE: The Hawaii County Fire Department. I became a beach lifeguard and I had a dream of being a lifeguard, right before I became a schoolteacher. I surfed Makaha constantly and I was a North Shore surfer. I was friends with a lot of lifeguards. I was involved in lifeguard races paddle board races that —those kind of things. And so, as soon as I realized teaching had gotten played out in my life, I got a job in 2015 working for the Hawaii County Fire Department Ocean Safety. And it was amazing. MR. HONG: What was your position when you first started/ MR. KAYE: WSO I —and it I was just so lucky because there, I really think I came in at a great time the Fire Department, we had a great Battalion Chief who encouraged older guards to train younger guards. So, I got to meet great trainers. Page 27 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: And how long were you a WSO I? MR. KAYE: I was a WSO I for, I believe, exactly 2,080 hours. And then, I because a WSO II. MR. HONG: How did you do that? Did you go through the recruitment process? MR. KAYE: Yeah. For WSO II, you just —you apply and you prove that you've worked a certain amount of hours, and you can become a WSO IL And that's what I was for —until I became a WSO III. MR .HONG: Before we get to WSO III, while you were a WSO I and WSO II, have you received any awards for your duties and responsibilities? MR. KAYE: Yeah, I have. I've only been in this room three times, including today. And the first time I was in this room, I got a (inaudible) award —we had ait was just a year -and -a -half ago —or January 8, 2023, a three year -old had a submersion injury where she drowned and her heart stopped beating, and she went into cardiac arrest, which is normal for a drowning. And I got her out of the water and did CPR on her, and she survived, and they gave me an award for it. MR. HONG: And in your estimation, how many "saves" have you done as a lifeguard? MR. KAYE: It's a tough one. I think I made hundreds of rescues. It's not really fair because I've worked at some of the most crowded beaches on the island, but I work a lot of snorkel beaches. And snorkel beaches, historically, have way more rescue then surfer beaches or big wave beaches. Snorkeling involves a really wide variety of patrons and we have a lot of visitors who don't know how to swim. And also we have a lot of folks who have medical issues in the water —heart attacks, strokes. And so, when you work at a snorkel beach, you're busy. MR. HONG: Okay. So, let's talk about the WSO III position. MR. KAYE: Mm-hmm. MR. HONG: How did you first find out about it? MR. KAYE: There was a job announcement and it was big deal because that was the first time there had been a promotion in my whole career with Ocean Safety in nine years. And so, I applied and I wasI applied online with the County HR kind of website and then they sent me a letter saying that I met the qualifications, and that I would be contacted for a interview date, and I interviewed for it. MR. HONG: Okay. Who did you interview with? MR. KAYE: Inside the room was our the Lieutenant from Hapuna Beach, which is Robin Feliciano; then the Captain from the West side, which was Ricky Alvarez; and then, our Assistant Chief, Darwin Okinaka. Page 28 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: Did someone clear you or state that you had the minimum qualifications for WSO III? MR. KAYE: Yes. MR. HONG: Who was that? MR. KAYE: I'm not exactly sure who that person was, but it was in a letter after I had applied online and it had said, "You have met the minimum qualifications and you'll be contacted for an interview soon." MR. HONG: And you went to the interview? MR. KAYE: Mm-hmm. MR. HONG: And that's a "yes?" MR. KAYE: Yes. MR. HONG: And that was on —in terms of the interview, were you notified about the results of your interview? MR. KAYE: Yeah. A few weeks later, I got a call from Assistant Chief Okinaka and he said that I had my choice of any district that I wanted —so I could go to Kona, Punaluu, Puna, or Hilo. And my boys just happened to be in the room with me and I, kind of, looked at them because I love all those districts, but we agreed right there and then —Hilo would be where I'd want to work. MR. HONG: And you would be working as a WSO III? MR. KAYE: Yes, as a WSO III, which is the rank of "Lieutenant" in the Hawaii County Fire Department. MR. HONG: Could you tell us what the difference is between WSO II and WSO III in terms of duties or its classes? MR. KAYE: Yeah. Namely, WSO III is definitely a supervisory role. You're going to be supervising the guys on your patrol —and in Hilo, we have five towers. So, Hilo is kind of the largest area. And the next biggest one would be Hapuna or Kona where Hapuna Beach has three towers. And so, yeah, it was a big deal. MR. HONG: Was it —was there a difference in pay? Page 29 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: Yeah, yeah. There was a significant difference in pay. I believe the time I was before taxes about 58—and the new pay was at 63 or 60 yeah, 63 and some change close to 64. So, about $5,000.00. MR. HONG: Does that include overtime? MR. KAYE: No. MR. HONG: Okay. How long did you serve as a WSO III? MR. KAYE: Well, I startedI believe it was June 1st and I worked all the way till September 1st or September I" I was back as a WSO II. MR. HONG: Could you tell us what those circumstances involved with respect to your going back down to a WSO II? MR. KAYE: Yeah. So, I got a really weird —at a meeting with a union rep. who came by and said, "Hey, I wanted to let you know there was a grievance and you guys might have to step down." I was shook upI didn't I said, "What?" He was my union rep., so I didn't pay too much to it, although I was just so confused on it. It's right at the end of the day. So, I called the next day and he said, "Look, it's not happening, yet. And I'll discuss it with you later." And that was, kind of, all I heard officially, until a few weeks later —not a few weeks latera few days later I received an email from Assistant Chief Okinaka saying, "This is happening, you're getting demoted, and we're going to have a meeting on this." And so, a few days after that, the other people that were promoted along with me —met with Chief Todd and Assistant Chief Okinaka—and they told us the news. But when they said it, they said, "Look, this isn't us. This there was a grievance that came in but we thought we dealt with it appropriately. This decision has come from outside the Fire Department." And I was, kind of, shell-shocked. I kept on saying, "Can that happen?" I didn't really know how the County works. And, you know, they made it clear that it wasn't their decision that Iwe have been doing a good job —and me, in particular. I felt like I had been doing a really good job and that —Chief Todd mentioned, "Hey, you need to call your union immediately. And if your union won't back you up, call a lawyer. This isn't us." And so, I did. MR. HONG: And —was any mention about your going back down to WSO II? MR. KAYE: Yeah. That was weird they said that, at the meeting, that we would be demoted involuntarily —and it was considered an "involuntary demotion" —and I said, "That's going to be really embarrassing to me." And they said, "Look, it's not a voluntary demotion, which does happen in the Fire Department from time to time when someone changes positions but they volunteered to be demoted." But they said, "So, this is an involuntary demotion. This was going Page 30 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 to be the way that it was presented to the whole department." And I saidI, kind of, upset me because it's embarrassing. It doesn't sound right. MR. HONG: Okay. And did you receive a letter on August 29 h, 2024, which was a Personnel Order? MR. KAYE: Yeah. I did see the Personnel Order. MR. HONG: That's our "Exhibit 1" which is the internal complaint. It's the second page. It says, "PERSONNEL ORDER""2024-034 **AMENDED**" MR. HALVORSON: I'm not hearing anybody. MR. KAYE: Sorry. Yes, this MR. HONG: I found it, Jim. Sorry, it's the first tab in the binder that was put together by Glynis the commission. So, you have that "Exhibit 1" Personnel Order 2024-034 amended? MR. KAYE: Yes, I have it. And I remember seeing this and being really happy that they wrote, "reinstated" it, rather than "demoted" because the word "demoted" just seems so unfair. It didn't seem right and but I remember seeing this. MR. HONG: And this was in effect the demotion that you received? MR. KAYE: Yeah, I lost the rank of Lieutenant and, of course, I got a huge pay cut, and — yeah —and I was back on the line in my old uniform. I had to take off my lieutenant's uniform, which is a different color. Yeah. MR. HONG: And how was this particular Personnel Order distributed just to you or was it department -wide? MR. KAYE: Well, that's department -wide. Yeah, that one is on everyone —it's sent to everyone with the Hawaii County email —or Hawaii County Fire Department. MR. HONG: And did anybody talk to you about that or your colleagues or anybody else come up to you and say anything about that? MR. KAYE: Yeah, of course. This wasI was in a role of supervisor up until that moment and there was all kinds of thoughts and ideas on why it happened, that I was presented with —and still to this day. And most of them are prettyI'm not sure how much they're based in reality or not —and one of them is that there's rumors at work that certain employees did this based on who they know, rather than what they know. MR. HONG: Okay. So, turn to the next page. It's a letter September 9 h, 2024 do you see that? Page 31 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: Yes. MR. HONG: And did you receive that letter? MR. KAYE: Yes, I did. MR. HONG: A fair and accurate copy of the letter you received? MR. KAYE: Yes. MR. HONG: I'm looking at the second paragraph. The paragraph starts with, "The reinstatement action" —do you see that? MR. KAYE: "The reinstatement action" —second paragraph yes. MR. HONG: All right. And then, the line next, right below that. On the left, it begins "Human Resources, to cancel the Water Safety Officer III recruitment. "—do you see that? MR. KAYE: Yes, I do. MR. HONG: Was that the first time you found out that in terms of what happened, it was a to you, it was a cancellation of the recruitment? MR. KAYE: Yeah, that's the first time I ever saw that language "cancellation of recruitment" - I'm still not entirely sure what that means, but that was the first time I ever saw we cancelled the recruitment. MR. HONG: When you were hired into the WSO III position, did it state that —did you know that the recruitment was still open? MR. KAYE: No. In fact, it —that's —when I started I thought I got the job. I put on a new uniform, I was given the rank of Lieutenant, I began my supervisory duties, I began all of them —writing letters of commendation —as letteras well as letters of reprimand. I did all the duties of a WSO III. I had started taking all the classes that I needed and finished it. A lot of themI became an instructor in certain things. I (inaudible) —yeah, I expected that was my job. MR HONG: Anybody ever tell you that the recruitment for WSO III was still open? MR. KAYE: No. No, it was closed. I think yeah, I didn't see anyone yeah. MR. HONG: In terms of the cancelled recruitment or your demotion, how has it affected you financially? Page 32 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: Well, it's been pretty awful —and let me explain why it's been awful. A fire well, not fire people are underpaid but Ocean Safety Officers are extremely underpaid. I believe that we are risking our lives often at work —almost daily, if you really think about it. It's a professional job. This was, kind of, really important to me in terms of this was the first time I had an opportunity to, kind of, move up in nine years. And this experience, it just so happened that I have three sons in college and we were filling out lots of stuff —and I agreed to commit I made some decisions about tuitions and loans during this time that really affects me right now, where I'm having difficulty paying the interest on these college loans. Not only that —my budget, I think people in my own family, they hate hearing me talk like this `cause it's kind of upsetting, but it'sI mean, literally, budgeted to give or take 20 bucks that Netflix bill is significant for a beach lifeguard. It'swe all joke about it —you're never going to be a rich man as a beach lifeguard, but you do it because you love it. And it's been just been really hard. MR. HONG: In terms of WSO III -is -there's ais there a WSO IV position? MR. KAYE: Oh, yeah, there is a WSO IV position and it's the Captain's position. MR. HONG: Now, well, let me ask you this, Jonah —in terms of your going from a IWSO I to WSO II, and now III —did you see even being a WSO IV as part of your career path? MR. KAYE: Absolutely. I —every kind of job description we've had in the past for the WSO IV or the history of WO —other CaptainsI have similar backgrounds, so even more qualifications than they do. So, in my brain I was thinking, "Yeah, I got this" that's, definitely, the trajectory I was hoping for. MR. HONG: How has this affected you, this demotion or cancellation of recruitment —how has it affected you professionally? MR. KAYE: I can't exactly tell. I don't know exactly what this will do, but I can tell you this — that —let me see. This —one of the core values of the Hawaii County Fire Department —the first one is integrity. And in my brain, it was the minds of other lifeguards. It's not just personal integrity. It's the structural integrity that matters so much to what we do. We risk our lives. There's been timesa lot of times in my career where I find someplace, myself, and other people —but, usually myself —in a place I would never, ever, ever be had I not had to rescue somebody. In front of the cliffs at Honolii on bombing 20-foot surf is not something anyone would want to beat. And we go into these places. We do it daily sometimes, thanklessly. We do these things with the understanding that there is a structure behind us that is solid, that makes sense, that isn't based on who you know. It's based on the best and qualified people being in these positions and that knowing that they've got your back, Page 33 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 organizationally and emotionally, and they're there —all there to support you on the frontline. And I take that really, really seriously. And as a Lieutenant, I made sure that was my Number one intention, was to appear solid. And, unfortunately, because of the way things went down, there's a new narrative going around that is absolutely detrimental to the solidity and integrity of the organization, which is that these are political jobs that people can get anything taken away at will for no reason —and leave you just hanging out. That there's some kind of squishiness to the people in the (inaudible) structure that they can be lifted out at any time, if somebody doesn't like them or put back for any old reason. And I'm not sure if that's really what happened. In fact, I don't think it is, but the appearance of so —it'll affect me for the rest of my career for sure. MR. HONG: Well, you had talked about professionally your co-workers and I'm just going to be direct. MR. KAYE: Yeah. MR. HONG: Have they been ridiculing you or harassing you? MR. KAYE: Yeah. I —yes, absolutely, on a daily. Unfortunately, the guy sitting in the TA positions, who I was just supervising just a few days ago, who I have written and discussed and tried to use progressive discipline on and (inaudible) something, their extreme behaviors. Yet, now, they're sitting as my boss and they take it up on me —on the daily. It's yeah, it sucks. Just — MR. HONG: Has it affected you in terms of TA? MR. KAYE: Yeah. MR. HONG: Explain. MR. KAYE: Well, the TA system in the Hawaii County Fire Department is based on seniority. And so, the more senior guards were able to TA into the Lieutenant position, and then also there's a vacancy in the Captain's position. So, the way it works is, if I had the Lieutenant, I would have been the TA Captain, but since I'm now not the Lieutenant, I'm not able to TA as the Lieutenant or TA as Captain unless there's someone sick or with higher seniority. And so, yeah, the way it kind of comes out in a wash is I think I've TA'd less than five times or something since this has happened. But yeah —and, believe me, they're checking to make sure my uniform is straight and it's just, kind of, I want to use the word —I don't know if it has any bearing on you, but I get punked out on the daily. I get talked to disrespectfully because of this and there's a narrative going around, and it's pretty open that if you don't know people, you shouldn't —you cannot be a lieutenant or in the command structure —and it's detrimental. Page 34 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: Sure. In your career with the County, has anything liked this happened before, where you go through the recruitment process, you get selected for the position on a probationary basis, and then you get demoted because the Civil Service Director changed her mind about the recruitment? MR. KAYE: No. MR. HONG: And so, what do you want from all of this, Jonah? MR. KAYE: I want my job back. I am qualified for it. I want an absolute improvement to the structural integrity of our department. I think it's been hurt by this. I think there needs to be a safe harbor when you're asking guys to risk their lives of absolute structure and that the Fire Chief and the guys ahead can make a decision based on employment and can say, "This is the right guy for the job" —and that isn't overtured from somewhere else. MR. HONG: In this recruitment, it wasn't just you as a WSO III who got promoted to the WSO III. MR. KAYE: No. MR. HONG: How many people were — MR. KAYE: There were four of us. There was —well, one from Kona Town; one from Puna District; one for the Punaluu District; and one for Hilo Town. MR. HONG: And all four of you got demoted? MR. KAYE: All four of us yeah, got demoted. MR. HONG: Thank you, Jonah. I have no further questions. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Tavares, do you have questions for Mr. Kaye? MS. TAVARES: I do. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Kaye. MR. KAYE: Good morning. MS. TAVARES: First, I want to thank you for your service to the community as you have described this morning, it is invaluable to have individuals like you serving. And so, I personally want to thank you for your service. MR. KAYE: You're welcome. MS. TAVARES: When —how were you notified of the selection of the WSO III position? Page 35 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: I don't —the selectionI don't remember the initial job annou no, I actually do. I remember seeing the initial job announcement for the WSO III but I don't remember where. It seems like it was printed out and left in our office, and I saw it —lot of guys were looking it over —and I remember thinking, "Do I want this?" —and someone else saying, "You should apply." MS. TAVARES: And I'm sorry —my question was how were you notified of the selection to the WSO III position? MR. KAYE: Oh, I got a call from Chief Okinaka and he called me and he said, "The interviews, you did great. We'd selected you and you got your first choice." MS. TAVARES: Did you also receive a letter, a written confirmation of that selection? MR. KAYE: Yes. Yes, I did. I got one from HR saying, "Congratulations and good luck" and I even responded to it, "Thanks" —something like "I'm looking forward to it. I'm nervous" —or something like that. But I got it from the Department of HR saying you've been selected and you start June 1st, I believe it was. MS. TAVARES: I would like to turn your attention to —it is under the very last tab in the binder and what is marked as "Exhibit C." MR. KAYE: Oh, there it is. Yep. MS. TAVARES: Could you please read the first line of "Exhibit CT' MR. KAYE: It says, "Congratulations on your new probationary appointment to the Water Safety Officer III — SR-19 position effective June" —I". "As you enter your new probationary period..." MS. TAVARES: Oh, just the first line was sufficient. MR. KAYE: Oh, sorry. MS. TAVARES: Thank you so much. And CHR. CABANAS: Excuse me, Ms. Tavares, but where are you looking at because — MS. TAVARES: The very last tab of the binder, "Exhibit C." CHR. CABANAS: Glynis has indicated to me that there may be a discrepancy with one of the exhibitsso, this isI'm sorry to interrupt you. MS. TAVARES: No problem. Page 36 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: But this is Communication number 24-14.04—and she wants to know if the Exhibits 1, 2, 3 are listed in all of your binders. So, if you could kindly check, please. MR. HONG: Right, and that's why I was wondering because I didn't see our exhibits in Communication .04. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, (inaudible) —yeah, I don't have mine either. Do you, Ms. Mathews and Bond? Okay, Glynis says the original submittal lists the exhibit numbers, but we don't have it —and she doesn't have it. MS. TAVARES: I didn't receive the actual exhibits either. CHR. CABANAS: So, she can contact your office? MR. HONG: Thank you. I would point out that our exhibits are the same in .04, they're the same as the exhibits attached to the complaint —the internal complaint I mean, the appeal to the Merit Appeals Board. CHR. CABANAS: To the Merit Appeals Board —okay, let's check. Wait now MS. TAVARES: That would be the first tab. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: And then, Mr. Hong— CHR. CABANAS: There's the letter MS. TAVARES: labeled them at the bottom. CHR. CABANAS: Personnel Order —well, my question to this, if I could ask now is there's the "Exhibit 1" internal complaint form. And then, "Exhibit F again, the Personnel Order the amended Personnel Order; and then, the letter to Mr. Kaye from Sommer Tokihiro. But logically, when there's an amendment, you have the original Personnel Order. We don't know what that Personnel Order covers. MR. HONG: That's true. And we —my —we don't have that. We didn't have that, the original order. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. And so, logically, I would want to know what the first one said and what was amended hereon the amended. MR. HONG: We don't —we didn't have access to it. Page 37 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. No, but my question to Ms. Tavares is —isn't it something you would want to give us because, logically, I'm asking in my mind, where is the original 2024-034—all you have here is the amended. I just wanted to make that comment. But logically MS. TAVARES: Well, I didn't provide this document. CHR. CABANAS: Oh. MS. TAVARES: And I wasn't asked, and I didn't ask because that's not part of what I was determining to present to the Board. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: And so, if there was a request or an expectation that I should have provided more documentation, I was never notified of that. And I went off of what Mr. Hong filed on behalf of Mr. Kaye. I was just referencing their materials that they provided `cause it appears that this is the document that they have an issue with. And so, I was just recognizing and honoring their submission and not objecting to it. CHR. CABANAS: I know what you're saying but as a Board member, that's the question I would have. What are you amending here, what did the original state, and what are you amending here? That's the logical flow in an HR appeal. MS. TAVARES: Understood. But at the same time, this is a letter that was drafted by the Hawaii County Fire Department and, essentially, we are here for the decision that was made by the Director of Human Resources. And so, I did not see the relevance CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, I get it. MS. TAVARES: that you're pointing out, but I apologize for that. But I was just honoring what they submitted. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, I get it. But that's something that, when you prepare an appeal, which I have prepared many appeals that's the logical flow of it, `cause that's something I would even ask as a Board member now, what were you amending. But I get it. Okay. Proceed you had your line of questioning. MS. TAVARES: Yes. Okay. I don't remember where I wasI apologize, Mr. Kaye, if I can just have a second. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: Okay. So, we just reviewed what is previously been submitted and marked as "Exhibit C" in Communication number 24-14.06. So, you are acknowledging that you were Page 38 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 notified that you were placed on a new probationary appointment to the Water Safety Officer III position, correct? MR. KAYE: That is correct. MS. TAVARES: And you agree that this letter informs you that you are going to be on a probationary appointment that it wasn't coming without a probationary period, correct? MR. KAYE: Correct. MS. TAVARES: Were you aware of the length of the probationary period for the WSO III position? MR. KAYE: Yes, I was. MS. TAVARES: And what is that amount? MR. KAYE: Six months. MS. TAVARES: Okay. And did you pass or complete that term of probation? MR. KAYE: No, I did not. It —three months is when I stepped down —at the three-month mark —or not stepped down —was demoted. MS. TAVARES: Let's talk about that word "demoted" that is indicated, that you have used today. Do you —were you presented with a document that said that you were being demoted at any time? MR. KAYE: I believe demotion was used twice that I know of oneI'm not exactly sure what documents said it, but I definitely was 100% told, so in the meeting with Chief Todd and Assistant Chief Okinaka, and the other people that had been demoted. MS. TAVARES: So, in the letter that you previously referenced that is marked as "Exhibit F of your complaint form Personnel Order that we were just discussing that is titled, "Water Safety Officer Reinstatements Effective September 1, 2024" you agree that is not a letter indicating a demotion, correct? MR. KAYE: Yeah, the wording on this says, "reinstatements." MS. TAVARES: And do you understand that "reinstatement" essentially means that you are being returned to the previously held position for which you had passed your probation and, ultimately, attained the civil service protections? MR. KAYE: I'm not sure. Could you repeat that question? Page 39 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: Sure. MR. KAYE: That was a little confusing. MS. TAVARES: So, the reinstatement would be to the WSO II position, correct? MR. KAYE: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And that was because that was your previous permanently held position MR. KAYE: Right. MS. TAVARES: for which you attained the civil service protection? MR. KAYE: Right. And I would say this, when I saw this. This was surprising and happily surprising to me that it didn't say "involuntarily demoted" —like they had indicated previously. MS. TAVARES: Because, ultimately, you hadn't been notified that you did anything wrong, correct? MR. KAYE: Oh, right, correct. In fact, I've been told the opposite. MS. TAVARES: But you agree that you hadn't completed the new probationary period for the WSO III position? MR. KAYE: Correct. I was in that probationary period. MS. TAVARES: May I inquire as to you didn't, so you acknowledge you didn't complete the probation, but why do you believe you are entitled to reinstatement in a position that you did not complete probation for? MR. KAYE: Are you're talking about reinstatement from the results of whatever we're doing here and then I'll be reinstated into my WSO III position? MS. TAVARES: Yes. MR. KAYE: And why I would be entitled to that? MS. TAVARES: Yes. In your complaint, the remedy that you are requesting is full reinstatement to the WSO III position. MR. KAYE: Well, to be quite honest is, I definitely would have made, in my mind, the —I would have passed the probationary status every step of the wayI was checking off the boxes, making sure I had all my ducks in order in terms of classes, HR classes, and things like that. I had signed up for all of them, even more so, I've gotten my BLS Instructor Certification and I Page 40 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 was well on my way not to mention, I was meeting with my supervisor, AC Okinaka, and he was indicating that I was making good progress. MS. TAVARES: But you never attained the full position of WSO III because of the cancellation and reinstatement, correct? MR. KAYE: Are you saying that WSO III probationary is not —is different from a WSO III yeah, I understand. Yes, I was in the probationary period, however, it was a WSO IIL I was in the middle of the probationary period when the demotion happened. And MS. TAVARES: I'm just trying to establish that — MR. KAYE: Oh, sorry. MS. TAVARES: —see if you agree that you never completed that probationary period MR. KAYE: Correct. MS. TAVARES: that you said was six months. MR. KAYE: I agree with that. I did not complete that. MS. TAVARES: Okay. Since you've indicated extensively during your direct testimony that there's word going around, the department —and, quite frankly, it's my understanding that a lot of that goes on in the Fire Department based on the close proximity that you folks have to work together. Unfortunately, it leads to things being said and, perhaps, shared that are inaccurate. But you talked about getting a notification or you had a meeting with your union rep. MR. KAYE: That's right. He came to my office after work andI'm not sure what day it was, but I believe it was Lifeguard Appreciation Day —if anyone has a calendar. And he said, "I want you to be aware there is a grievance that we took and the results will be that you will be demoted." MS. TAVARES: So, your union rep. told you that you would be demoted? MR. KAYE: He did. And I remember thinking —and I even said this, "Well, I'm not wanting toI'm going to wait until my supervisors tell me that I'm going to follow the chain of command and wait until my command lets me know this." MS. TAVARES: And just for clarification, you are in fact a dues -paying member of the HFFA? MR. KAYE: No. I'm a due -paying member of the HGEA. Page 41 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: I apologize for that. And your —you testified that your union rep.HGEA for clarification —informed you that was a grievance that was happening, right? MR. KAYE: Mm-hmm. MS. TAVARES: And you testified that he said you might have to step down — MR. KAYE: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: —and that you would be further contacted. MR. KAYE: He did. MS. TAVARES: Did your union rep. contact you further after that (inaudible) MR. KAYE: No, I contacted him the very next day. And I also wrote lettersor I emailed to him, asking for more information. MS. TAVARES: And so, your union —is it safe to say that you were having a back -and -forth dialogue with your union rep. regarding this claim that you would need to step down? MR. KAYE: I would not characterize it as a back -and -forth. I'd categorize it as me asking and getting no response. MS. TAVARES: So, maybe is it safe to say your union wasn't representing you the best way that you had hoped that they would being that you were paying dues to them? MR. KAYE: Yeah, I didn't feel they were. MS. TAVARES: But you acknowledge that you were aware that there was a grievance happening with regards to this recruitment? MR. KAYE: No. I really do not know the details of this grievance. MS. TAVARES: Okay. But my question is, you acknowledge that you were made aware by your union rep. that there was a grievance that was happening MR. KAYE: Yes. MS. TAVARES: with regards to this recruitment? MR. KAYE: Yes. MS. TAVARES: Not the details of it Page 42 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: No. MS. TAVARES: `cause that's confidential. But you were made aware that they were going through the grievance process the union was, at least, with regards to this recruitment? MR. KAYE: I would say that all I got was that there was a grievance and it will result in my demotion. MS. TAVARES: And you also testified that there was a completely different situation with regards to a meeting that you had with Chief Todd and Assistant Chief Okinakaessentially, that they were telling you that it was not HFD that was agreeing to this situation that it was, basically, the Union and it was from outside that this was happening, correct? MR. KAYE: Correct. MS. TAVARES: Essentially, your rank is telling you that it was not their decision or their choice MR. KAYE: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: for this to happen? MR. KAYE: That's correct. MS. TAVARES: And they encouraged you to get your Union to fight for you? MR. KAYE: They did. MS. TAVARES: I understand the technicality of the word "demotion" `cause when I looked it up, it basically is like a "punishment" —is there anything that you did to deserve a punishment in this situation? MR. KAYE: Not to my knowledge. No. MS. TAVARES: Now, reinstatement essentially is placing you back in the position that you previously held, correct? MR. KAYE: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: And you've been in the WSO II position since September 1", 2024? MR. KAYE: September —I've been back —in September 2024 yeah. I was WSO II. MS. TAVARES: Do you have any reason to believe that when the Water Safety Officer III position gets re -posted, that you will not be qualified to reapply for that position? Page 43 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. KAYE: I don't know. MS. TAVARES: Can you explain? MR. KAYE: Well, I don't know what the criteria will be of the WSO. I'm assuming that I would be more than qualified, however, now that you bring it up I've never seen a new recruitment for the position and I don't know. MS. TAVARES: And just to be completely clear, you did not file a grievance with your union with regards to this recruitment, right? MR. KAYE: No. MS. TAVARES: It's just you're, kind of, dealing with that —the outfall of that grievance? MR. KAYE: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: I have no further questions. CHR. CABANAS: Mr. Hong, do you have any further questions of Mr. Kaye? MR. HONG: Yes, briefly. Has anybody said to you or indicated to you from the department — the Fire Department —when they anticipate re -posting the recruitment for WSO III? MR. KAYE: No, but they have told me is that they believe there will be a posting for WSO V, and then WSO IV, and then finally there will be a posting for WSO III. MR. KAYE: Would you qualify right now for a WSO V? MR. KAYE: There is no way to know. They have not come out with those qualifications. There's been a lot of discussion with the union about it —what those qualifications will be —and, unfortunately, from what the union is arguing, I don't know if I'll be qualified or not. Once one possibility is that they won't make this decision based on how much TA experience you have. MR. HONG: And you said you have only had five opportunities for TA since? MR. KAYE: I can't be exactly sure whether it was five, maybe six but not very many TA opportunities since September 2024. I don't have enough seniority in Hilo and the TA's automatically go by seniority. MR. HONG: Okay. Thank you, Jonah. I have no further questions. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Mr. Hong. Ms. Tavares? Page 44 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: I have no further. CHR. CABANAS: No further? MS. TAVARES: No. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Ms. Mathews, you have any questions of Mr. Kaye? MS. MATHEWS: I don't know if you would know this or not —but there was a total of four of you that received the same letter. Are the other three still employed in the WSO II position? MR. KAYE: Yeah, the other three are all WSO II positions. MS. MATHEWS: And they're in their positions? MR. KAYE: However, they're all TA'ing at WSO III. In Hilo, I was the only one who got, kind of, bumped out. MS. MATHEWS: And that was strictly a seniority issue? MR. KAYE: Yeah. I don't think there's any justification why I wouldn't be TA'ing in those positions other than that. MS. MATHEWS: Okay. Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond, any questions for Mr. Kaye? No? Okay. So, Mr. Kaye, you received the letter from Sommer Tokihiro, dated September 9 h saying that your that you would be returned to your last permanent held position of WSO II and that it was a reinstatement, not a demotion. Did anyone ever explain to you about the Step II grievance just in general? How it a —what was the impact upon you and the others from that grievance? The recruitment was cancelled because of this grievance. But, in general, did anyone explain what the impact was? Why did why were a whole bunch of you, basically, returned to their last permanent held position? MR. KAYE: Yep. So, the way it went down is we got information when we the four of us were called into Chief Todd's and Chief Okinaka—that meeting, they sat us down, and they said, "Here's the news, guys. There was a grievance. We're being told that all of you will be demoted as part of it. The grievance has to do with seniority and our recruitment process. However, we felt they"I think Chief Okinaka said this, he said, "When they initially grieved or that the union brought a grievance on the recruitment process that he felt that he had made the right decision and that they were basing on and had done everything right in terms of the way the recruitment process was." They said, "What had happened" this is what they told us, is that "It Page 45 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 went to a higher level outside the Hawaii County Fire Department, and from then they were surprised to hear that it was the they had to demote us." And that was it. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you. In putting the process together to prepare for today's hearing, in general, for the County, did you —what was the impact? You're representing the Fire Department and Sommer Tokihiro, Ms. Tavares —so what he's alluding to is that it went through arbitration? I don't need to know the details but it's through arbitration? Was it the arbitrator's decision? MS. TAVARES: It was decided at the Step II grievance process. A remedy was reached between the County and the Union. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: And the remedy was to cancel the recruitment and reinstate CHR. CABANAS: That's the decision of the Director to cancel the recruitment? MS. TAVARES: That was the remedy that was reached between the Union and the Director yes. CHR. CABANAS: To cancel the recruitment? MS. TAVARES: Yes. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: Based on a determination that the interview and selection process violated the CBA. CHR. CABANAS: Oh, okay. Okay, I got it now. Okay. I'm trying to put the whole picture together. MS. TAVARES: And so the Union decision was to reinstate the four that was promoted as a part of the recruitment and, essentially, clarified terms that are to be agreed upon, between the Union and the department about the selection process, with what Mr. Kaye just alluded to, which is the issue of seniority being a consideration. CHR. CABANAS: Was that explained to all of the employees that were affected? That's why I asked about the first Personnel Order. Was that explained to the employees in that first Personnel Order —and you're not aware of it I can tell by your expression. Okay. Because that would be important to Mr. Kaye and to the other employees but, okay. MS. TAVARES: And I agree but it's also a decision that was reached with their union. And so, I'm not aware of Page 46 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MS. TAVARES: —who's responsibility it is CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: to explain to them. It seems that the union representative just, kind of, brushed over Mr. Kaye's concerns and that's very unfortunate, but that's not something I have authority or ability to tell them how to run their procedure— CHR. CABANAS: Right. I understand. But as a Board member, we as Board members also want to make sure that our employees are getting the right information and the example is the terminology between "demotion" and "reinstatement" and that —what the meanings are in accordance with the Human Resources Rules. Okay, I got it now. Thank you. I have no other questions for you, Mr. Kaye. Thank you very much. Okay, let's proceed on. Mr. Hong, just to acknowledge, you have no other witnesses —is that correct? MR. HONG: That's correct. We have no other fur —we have no further witnesses or evidence. We rest. I would note that we —my office did send over the exhibit list with the attached exhibits. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you very much. MR. HONG: And I'll just hand it to Glynis. CHR. CABANAS: And we'll —give it to Glynis, please. MR. HONG: Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Did you keep for yourself and for Ms. Tavares? MR. HONG: Yeah, I gave one to Ms. Tavares. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Thank you so much. Okay, Ms. Tavares, it's your turn. Let me see now, where I left off —so you do have witnesses, correct? MS. TAVARES: Yes, I do. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: And before I get started, I will just place on the record that Assistant Chief Darwin Okinaka isI told him he could stay in his office and work until I needed him. Page 47 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Oh, okay. MS. TAVARES: Because he is present and available to testify because Chief Todd, it's the opening of the State Legislature —and so, he is off -island today CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MS. TAVARES: —for those purposes. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, that's fine. So, is Assistant Fire Chief your first witness? MS. TAVARES: Actually, Director Tokihiro is my first witness. CHR. CABANAS: Oh, okay. All right. So, Sommer, if you could take a seat at the counter, and then I'll swear you in. (At this time, Ms. Sommer Tokihiro, Director, Department of Human Resources, came forward.) CHR. CABANAS: Okay, if you could raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes, I do. CHR. CABANAS: You may proceed, Ms. Tavares. MS. TAVARES: Good morning, Ms. Tokihiro. MS. TOKIHIRO: Good morning. MS. TAVARES: I would like to ask you about the recruitment process for this WSO III position. MS. TOKIHIRO: Okay. MS. TAVARES: Who initiated the W the Water Safety Officer III recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the Request to Fill comes from the Fire Department. They actually submit a blanket Request to Fill that covers a one-year period, so that we can run a recruitment as soon as vacancies exist. MS. TAVARES: And was this an internal or external recruitment for the WSO III position? MS. TOKIHIRO: Internal. Page 48 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: Can you explain why? MS. TOKIHIRO: Because it's a promotional opportunity for —as Mr. Kaye said—WSO II's could be promoted to WSO III's. So, the recruitment is run internally to provide that promotional opportunity. MS. TAVARES: And so, it's safe to say there're specific qualifications for the WSO III position and that's why this was an internal recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: Was the recruitment process completed? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: Can you explain what that means? MS. TOKIHIRO: Okay. So because it was an internal recruitment anyone interested in the position needed to submit the DHR Use Only Application online. We received a total of 15 applications for this internal recruitment. We found one that was actually a duplicate application; two applicants did not meet the minimum qualifications; and 12 applicants did meet the qualifications, and they were referred to the department —to the Fire Department for the interview and selection process. MS. TAVARES: As a part of the recruitment process, when candidates are selected for promotion, are there any type of requirements for anyone choosing to accept that promotion? For example, probation. MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. There is a probationary period. MS. TAVARES: And was there a probationary period for the WSO III position? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: And how long was that? MS. TOKIHIRO: Six months. MS. TAVARES: And what is the procedure to place someone on a new probation? MS. TOKIHIRO: We have new probation and conditional probation period procedures. MS. TAVARES: And is this just part of DHR's Rules or is this also in the CBA? Page 49 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TOKIHIRO: The probationary periods are part of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. MS. TAVARES: And so, at some point, this recruitment closed. Is that safe to say? MS. TOKIHIRO: When the selections were madeso, the recruitment closed at 11:59 on —at the end of the 10-day application period. So, that's when the recruitment closes. But for these internal recruitments for, like, this position of WSO III, there were 12 applicants who met the qualifications and they were on a list that was provided to the Fire Department —that list is good for a period of 12-months. So, had additional vacancies for WSO III come up, the Fire Department could have continued to use this same list from this recruitment for a period of one-year. MS. TAVARES: And do you know if promotions were made based on this recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. From what I understand, four individuals were promoted out of this recruitment on June 1st MS. TAVARES: Okay. And all four individuals were placed on a new term of probation as a result of the promotion? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: Now, after all of this happened, what happened next with regards to this recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, following the promotion of the four individuals, a grievance was filed by HGEA. MS. TAVARES: And, without going into any confidential details —was it filed by HGEA on behalf of individuals who participated in the recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: And, without giving confidential details, can you just state what the basis of the grievance was? MS. TOKIHIRO: Non -selection for promotion in violation of the contract. MS. TAVARES: And at what point did DHR become involved with this grievance? MS. TOKIHIRO: At Step II in the grievance process. MS. TAVARES: Just for clarity, can you explain why it was now DHR's authority and no longer HFD? Page 50 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the first step in the grievance process is for the union to address it with the department. So, the department heard the grievance at Step Idid not see any violation of the contract. And so, when the union received the department's decision, their next step in the process, if they disagree, is to file the grievance at Step II, which is with my office. MS. TAVARES: And, again, without going in a confidential details —did DHR and the Union agree to a remedy to this Step II grievance? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: And, finally, without going into confidential details —what was the agreed upon remedy, if you can summarize it. MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the agreed upon remedy was to return all individuals to their last held permanent position and the recruitment was cancelled, so that the department could make the necessary changes to be compliant with the Collective Bargaining Agreement regarding selection for promotion. MS. TAVARES: And had the probationary period for these four individuals expired prior to this remedy? MS. TOKIHIRO: We wouldn't have been able to provide the remedy at Step II. MS. TAVARES: And that is because had they made the six-month mark, they would not be able to be returned to their previous position, am I MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. This was only because they were in the probationary period. MS. TAVARES: Okay. And just because we've been talking a lot about this probationary period, specifically, regarding Mr. Kaye. He was promoted as a part of this recruitment, right? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And it was to a permanent position? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And the WSO III position is a civil service position? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And it is covered by the CBA? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. Page 51 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: And there are requirements for civil service employees who are promoted to a permanent position, right? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And one of the requirements was to complete a new term of probation? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: And that was expressed in the letter that was sent to the four individuals, essentially congratulating them on the WSO III position and indicating that it was for a new probationary appointment? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: Because the other term that we've been discussing this morning is the term "demotion" was Mr. Kaye ever demoted? MS. TOKIHIRO: I couldn't comment on that. So, not to my knowledge. But in this particular instance, his return to the WSO II position from WSO III that was that's not a demotion. A demotion has a very specific definition. I could provide it to you if you'd like it? MS. TAVARES: Please. MS. TOKIHIRO: Okay. So, according to the Collective Bargaining Agreement, a "demotion" means the movement of a regular employee from the position in which the employee last held a permanent appointment to a vacant civil service position assigned to a class with a lower pay range in the salary schedule. So, in order to be demoted, you would be removed from your last held permanent position, which would be a position in which you had passed probation. And MS. TAVARES: So, kind of, to illustrate it in my brain, it would be like to go back down to the WSO I position? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. If Mr. Kaye were —yeah —demoted from WSO II it would be to WSO I. MS. TAVARES: Now, going forward the remedy that is being sought by Mr. Kaye is to be reinstated to the WSO III position as a remedy for this appeal. Is Mr. Kaye entitled to reinstatement to the WSO III permanent position? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. Page 52 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: And why would that be? MS. TOKIHIRO: He did not complete the probationary period and this action was taken as a result of a grievance remedy that was agreed to with HGEA, which is also Mr. Kaye's union. MS. TAVARES: And to your knowledge, when the department and the union come to some kind of agreement with regards to re -posting this much needed position, will Mr. Kaye and all the other individuals who previously applied be able to apply at that point? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MS. TAVARES: So, there's nothing that happened negatively that would affect their ability to re -apply, should it become available? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: There isn't something in his personnel file that would indicate he did anything wrong? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. MS. TAVARES: Because, ultimately, he didn't do anything wrong? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: Do you know if the department is going to re -post this position? MS. TOKIHIRO: From what I understand, the Fire Department continues to work with the Union to correct their process and procedure to be compliant with the Collective Bargaining Agreement. So, I think they're working towards that and I'm hopeful that they can complete their process sooner rather than later. MS. TAVARES: Thank you. I have no further questions. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you, Ms. Tavares. Mr. Hong, do you have further questions? MR. HONG: Yes. So, it's fair to say you don't know when the WSO III recruitment will be posted or even requested by the Fire Department, correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MR. HONG: You would agree with me that the recruitment process is not subject to collective bargaining, under Chapter 89, right? You're familiar with Chapter 89, right? Page 53 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes, but there's terms in the contract — MR. HONG: Wait, let me finish my question. And my question is, you're familiar that there are certain areas with that cannot be negotiated as part of a Collective Bargaining Agreement, right? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: And one of those areas that cannot be negotiated is recruitment. Would you agree? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. There are areas related to recruitment and probation that are all covered in the Collective Bargaining Agreement to make sure that employees are treated fairly. MR. HONG: Okay. You were present for the Turner Lyndon case, correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: You were present at the HLRB the Hawaii Labor Relations Board when MS. TOKIHIRO: I was not. MR. HONG: Well, you were aware it had —my question was, were you aware of the decision of the Hawaii Labor Relations Board? MS. TAVARES: I'm going to object to this line of questioning. It's not related to this case and Ms. Tokihiro indicated she was not at the HLRB hearing, and I don't understand how a decision in the Turner Case, which is very different factually, has to do with this. And so, I'm objecting as it's irrelevant and it's improper. It goes beyond the scope of my direct. MR. HONG: The legal basis for the Turner Lyndon decision by the HLRB was that recruitment is not an issue for collective bargaining, so that he could file a grievance regarding recruitment. It's not an issue of a Prohibit Practice Complaint or the individual could file a complaint against the union for not defending him, even though he's paying dues. And which is precisely what the County is saying here again. We've already taken this issue up to HLRB and the HLRB has said, clearly, that issues of recruitment are not covered by a collective bargaining agreement and are not covered by Chapter 89 where you can file a Prohibitive Practice Complaint. So, their line of questioning that this had to be dealt with or should have been dealt with by the Union has already been decided by the Hawaii Labor Relations Board and it's disingenuous. Page 54 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: I'm going to ask Mr. Halvorson for his legal guidance. In part, I have to agree with you, Mr. Hong, because it is management's right to decide how they want to fill their vacancy, but because we have our attorney, I want to also ask Mr. Halvorson. So, Jim, could you please interject here for a moment? MR. HALVORSON: Yes, let meI want to make sure I'm not on mute. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, Mr. no, I can hear you. Ms. Tavares is objecting to Mr. Hong's line of questioning. MR. HALVORSON: Yeah, I heard the objection and I hear Mr. Hong's response. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HALVORSON: They're both wrong. MR. HONG: Thanks, Jim. MR. HALVORSON: There are provisions in the Collective Bargaining Agreement with regard to promotion. And that there's, specifically, I believe at least in some of the collective bargaining agreementsa requirement that, if all other factors are equal, seniority prevails. CHR. CABANAS: Yes, that's later down in the recruitment pro that's later that's part of the interview and selection process, but they entered into an agreement about cancelling the recruitment. And the recruitment closedoh, let me look at — MR. HALVORSON: No, I understand that. And I've got some questions of the Director CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HALVORSON: in this regard. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HALVORSON: But, like I say, it's not a blanket you can't have anything in the collective bargaining agreement that has something to do with recruitment or promotion. MR. HONG: Well, that's not my objection. My objection and the point I was trying to make is the Hawaii Labor Relations Board has said that —with respect to a Prohibitive Practice Complaint or it being subject to collective bargaining, the recruitment process is not subject to collective bargaining. That was my MR. HALVORSON: And you're wrong. MR. HONG: Okay. Page 55 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HALVORSON: There are provisions in some of the collective bargaining agreements that refer to —when you're talking —and promotion is a variation on a theme of recruitment. And when you're talking about promotion and all of the factors being equal —seniority takes effect. Now, that varies from department to department as to what relatively equal is. Some it's within 10%, some is within 5%—but that's still in the collective bargaining agreements. MR. HONG: And that's selection, it's not recruitment. We're talking about the recruitment process. He was the grievance that we're not grievance the internal complaint that we're filing is saying that the recruitment process, the cancellation, was not according to law. And that's what our whole MR. HALVORSON: I think the question that needs to be asked of the Director is specifically, what was the grievance alleging was a violation of the contract? I haven't heard that. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, we haven't heard it either. It was based on non-selectionI wrote it down. It was based on non -selection for a promotion and that it violated the seniority provision and each department in the County has procedures on their interview and selection process. So, maybe the question should be redirected to the Director about that —that's my question. MR. HALVORSON: That's exactly that's my question of the Director. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MR. HALVORSON: What specifically was the union alleging was a violation of the contract? MS. TOKIHIRO: The department did not apply relatively equal appropriately in their selection process. MR. HALVORSON: Relatively equal and the tie breaker being seniority? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MR. HALVORSON: Okay. So, the seniority issue was the issue raised by the griev by the union? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HALVORSON: And that they pointed to a specific provision of the Collective Bargaining Agreement where that applies? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MR. HALVORSON: That answers my question. Page 56 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, Ms. Tavares was objecting to Mr. Hong's line of questioning. MS. TAVARES: I feel like all been fleshed out, so CHR. CABANAS: Okay, so we can move on. MS. TAVARES: as a matter at this point. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, Ted, you have more questions? MR. HONG: Yes, please. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HONG: "Exhibit 2"—our "Exhibit 2" and I'm going just show it to the witness —I'll just walk it up —"Exhibit 27 MS. TOKIHIRO: I have it here. MR. HONG: Oh, she has it. That's your September 9 h, 2024, letter, correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: And in the subject line, what does it say? MS. TOKIHIRO: It says, "Internal Complaint — Involuntary Demotion." MR. HONG: Right. And then your letter to Mr. Kaye, which is our, the —I think it's the "Exhibit 1"—and that's our appeal and internal complaint, but it'swhere's the letterI'm sorry, "C." Your letter "CT' SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. HONG: The no, I'm looking for the letter that was sent to Mr. Kaye that he acknowledgedI apologize in terms of our exhibits. I don't know what was going on. MR. HALVORSON: Can't hear you, Ted. MR. HONG: I apologize for our exhibitsI don't know what's going on. Why it wasn't organized correctly. MR. HALVORSON: Well, take you timeI just, just make sure I hear you when you do say something. Page 57 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 SPEAKER: (Inaudible.) MR. HONG: No. Actually, it was the one from Ms. Tokihiro that's cancelling the recruitment. All right, I don't know what happened to our exhibitsI brought it up when you were testifying. Let me ask this question then, since I can't find it —we found it when you were testifying. But, Ms. Tokihiro, you recall sending a letter to my client that stated that they were cancelling the recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: I don't specifically recall that letter. MR. HONG: All right. Then we'll just take a little while. Ah, there it is. Thank you. So, the "Internal Complaint — Involuntary Demotion" the same letter, September 9 h, 2024 do you see that? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: Then it says, second paragraph, "The reinstatement action was a result of a Step 2 Grievance" —right? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: And it says, "...to cancel the Water Safety Officer III recruitment" —correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: So, in other words, you are cancelling this, my client's recruitment, right? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: And you testified earlier under direct examination that the recruitment process was completed. Do you remember that? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: You said that the recruitment process was closed. Remember that? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: All right. And in terms of probation, you would agree that whether or not an employee passes probation is performance -based, correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes and no. Because our employees, regardless of performance, may pass probation by default, if action is not taken by a department to notify them that their probation is being extended. Page 58 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: So, you would agree with me then, in terms of probation, it's the department's decision whether or not an employee the department being, in this case, the Fire Department's decision to determine whether or not an employee passes probation? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: And part of that process is, obviously, providing the probationary employee with a Personnel Evaluation or Performance Appraisal Report —is that what they call it now? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: Yeah. In terms of the grievants was the grievants selected and put into the WSO III position? MS. TAVARES: (Inaudible.) MS. TOKIHIRO: (Inaudible.) MR. HONG: I'm sorry? MS. TAVARES: That's improper. It's confidential as part of the grievance. You can't disclose who filed the grievance. MR. HONG: I'm not asking the names. I'm sorry. I said that were the grievance, the grievants —was there more than one? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: How many were there? MS. TAVARES: Again, I'm going to object as this is improper and asking her to disclose confidential information. MR. HONG: The number of grievants is confidential? I'm not asking for anything that identifies them. MS. TAVARES: You're asking for the specifics of the grievance. MR. HONG: I am not asking for the specifics. I'm asking how many people grieved. MS. TAVARES: And that's a specific question related to the grievance. CHR. CABANAS: Mr. Halvorson. Page 59 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: She said there was more than one. MR. HALVORSON: What he's asking for is not confidential. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you. Proceed, Mr. Hong. MR. HONG: So, how many people were involved in the grievance? MS. TOKIHIRO: Two. MR. HONG: All right. And your testimony is that they were not selected as a result of the grievance to take the WSO III position on a permanent basis? MS. TOKIHIRO: The subject of the grievance was non -selection for a promotion in violation of the contract. MR. HONG: So, then you're telling me that they did get selected as a WSO III? MS. TAVARES: Again, I'm objecting because Mr. Hong is attempting to illicit specific information about the grievance that is confidential. CHR. CABANAS: I think, Mr. Hong, you're going into the selection and interview process. So, you may want to hold that question because we also have another witness and there are other exhibits that are listed in the binder pertaining to the interview process, which might shed light on what you're trying to do. MR. HONG: All right. You would agree that in terms of Chapter 76 that the purpose of civil service is to provide a career path for individuals who meet the MQ's and also pass their personnel evaluations? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. MR. HONG: Well, based on the way this case is rolling out, I'veI'm going to apologize for the next series of questions but is it your understanding, in looking at the grievants the grievance that in terms of what happened, the negative impact fell down on my client more than anyone else. Would you agree with that? MS. TOKIHIRO: I can't comment on that. All of the individuals who were promoted during this process to WSO III were returned to their last held permanent position. As far —so they were all treated the same in addressing this grievance matter. MR. HONG: Let me get to the point. Isn't it true that your department discriminated against my client because he's Caucasian? MS. TAVARES: Objection. That is totally improper and —it's improper and it's irrelevant. Page 60 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: No, it is relevant —(inaudible). MS. TOKIHIRO: Actually, I find it offensive. MR. HONG: I'm glad you find it offensive. I find it offensive, too, because that you would discriminate against my client because he's Caucasian. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, Ted, I think we need to stop there because that's not part of the appeal. MR. HONG: Oh, let me rephr—okay, I understand that. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. MR. HONG: You're right. I agree. I'll withdraw the question. Are you familiar with the term "person of interest?" MS. TAVARES: At this point, I'm going to object to the relevancy of this line of questioning. If he has something that's directly related to the direct testimony that Ms. Tokihiro provided, that's fine. But he's going down another path that I think is very inappropriate. CHR. CABANAS: I'm going to tend to agree, Ted, I think you're going down the rabbit hole, but if you have other questions that are appropriate for Ms. Tokihiro there's more information that we still need to uncover because I don't think we all have the big picture yet. Now the picture is unfolding but stick your line of questioning, both parties, need to stick to the appeal. MR. HONG: So, in your September 9 h, 2024, letter, your subject line says, "Involuntary Demotion" you've provided us a definition of "demotion." Are you —is your testimony today, that he wasn't demoted? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. In my September 9' letter references the language in the internal complaint that was filed. MR. HONG: Then why did you put in the subject line, "Involuntary Demotion?" MS. TOKIHIRO: Because that was what was alleged in the internal complaint. It's not what occurred, but that's what was alleged based on how the internal complaint form was completed. MR. HONG: Did you point out why this was not a demotion in terms of the definition that you provided us as punishment? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. But I did indicate that the action is to return him to his last held permanent position. Page 61 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: Was it to return well, it was to return him but, you would agree, you're saying the basis for him to return to the position was that you are cancelling the recruitment, right? MS .TOKIHIRO: I indicated that the reinstatement action was as a result of a Step II grievance and to cancel the WSO III recruitment. MR. HONG: Thank you. I have no further questions. CHR. CABANAS: We have 15 minutes left before we lose our quorum because one of the Board members has another commitment. So, go ahead. MS. TAVARES: Okay. Just very briefly and for clarification since Mr. Hong just latched on to it at the last second. Can you flip two pages before, in the binder, what is marked as "Exhibit 1" in Mr. Kaye's complaint. And under Paragraph A, Number 2, what is listed as basically what he's alleging occurred? MS. TOKIHIRO: I'm on the Internal Complaint Form? MS. TAVARES: Yes. MS. TOKIHIRO: I'm sorry. Okay. And it was MS. TAVARES: A. 2. MS. TOKIHIRO: A. 2. It says, "Demotion" and "(Involuntary)" in parenthesis. MS. TAVARES: And will that be the reason that you titled your September 9 h, 2024, letter "Internal Complaint — Involuntary Demotion?" MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. TAVARES: And at the very bottom of the first paragraph, can you read what it says after the position number. MS. TOKIHIRO: "Position No. 00-02859 was a reinstatement and not a demotion." MS. TAVARES: Thank you. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you, Ms. Tavares. Board members, any questions for Ms. Tokihiro? Ms. Mathews? MS. MATHEWS: No, not at this time. Page 62 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. MS. BOND: No, not at this time. CHR. CABANAS: I don't have any for you, Ms. Tokihiro. MR. HALVORSON: I have a question, Madam Chair? CHR. CABANAS: Yes, please proceed. MR. HALVORSON: Director, at the end of the day after you cancelled this recruitment for the Water Safety Officer III position, was anybody promoted? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. MR. HALVORSON: Not even the grievants? MS. TOKIHIRO: No. MR. HALVORSON: So, it —you're essentially starting all over? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. All of the positions remain vacant. MR. HALVORSON: Okay, that's all I had. CHR. CABANAS: I have one question for you, Sommer —well, maybe two. You indicated that you have a blanket Request to Fill form for the year, so you have a new one for 2025? MS. TOKIHIRO: No, I don't believe a new one has been submitted, yet. CHR. CABANAS: So, they need to reissue one, right? MS. TOKIHIRO: They will need to do one once they make the changes that are needed to comply with the contract. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. And without going into details, but just generally the changes that the Fire Department needs to make concerns what part of their process? MS. TOKIHIRO: They need to agree with the Union on relatively equal. And if they want to go to a alternate —like E&E evaluation, they would need to make that part of the posting for the WSO III. So, it's to be worked out with the Union how they're going to base their decisions and the interview and selection process. Unless they worked that out with the Union, the contract language stands and that's where the issue is. Page 63 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, from what you've told us is this that previously the WSO III had an agility test, correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: I'm not aware of what the testing is. We screened, in HR, only the application and whether or not the applicants met the minimum qualifications. And so, then, those names after we reviewed the application, there was no other written test administered by Human Resources. So, once we screened the applications for minimum qualifications, we referred the list of qualified applicants to the department for their process. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. I got it. So, basically, the agreement wants changes made by the Fire Department for their selection process — MS TOKIHIRO: Correct. CHR. CABANAS: so that you folks can put it on the job posting. MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. And that's why the recruitment was cancelled? MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. There's a couple of components to the changes that the department is working on, so CHR. CABANAS: So, was that communicated to the employees that applied for this recruitment? MS. TOKIHIRO: I don't know. The Union in approaching the Union in coming to us for a remedy representing all members, the Union should be communicating with their representative members. Because we cannot go back and, as a result of the grievance —go and give these details. CHR. CABANAS: Of course, not. MS. TOKHIRO: And the department could also notify CHR. CABANAS: Yes, they could. MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. CHR. CABANAS: And that's where you come in because you could give advice to the department. Yeah. MS. TOKIHIRO: Yes. So, we did. There was a letter to the department with the recommendation for things that they needed to evaluate and correct. Page 64 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. All right. No further questions. Anyone else? MS. BOND: So —but —the part of the grievance that they had, it was about seniority that it wasn't included? MS. TOKIHIRO: Incorrectly applied. CHR. CABANAS: It's how they applied it. Oh, let me ask one more question, then. In their procedures that exist now, isn't the relatively equal defined in their procedures? MS. TOKIHIRO: We have a definition for it and how that's been applied —and the Fire Department disagrees —and that's where they need to work with the Union on what "relatively equal" means because our understanding of it, is different than their understanding. CHR. CABANAS: And what is your understanding? MS. TOKIHIRO: That it's scores within 5%. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. Thank you very much. MS. MATHEWS: I have one quick question. Why is it taking the Union and the department not your department —but Fire this long to agree on a couple of pieces of terminology. MS. TOKIHIRO: I couldn't answer that, but it'sit can be a complicated process if you want to deviate from past practice. And so, I will defer to the Fire Department as far as where they're at in working with the Union to resolve this. CHR. CABANAS: I mean, some of these questions that the Board members are asking are for us to see the total picture so we can arrive at a accurate decision —and that's why we're asking because when you have an appeal, both sides need to give the Board that big picture. Otherwise, our decision will be flawed and I don't want that as a Chair. We need to see the whole thing. So, that's why we're asking questions —it's like we're not getting it. It's like a little —it's like little pieces of a puzzle we're trying to put together. So, if you could just bear in mind all of our questions. Thank you very much. Yes, go ahead. MS. BOND: What it feels like, to me, is that somebody's cousin didn't get the job he wanted. And so, they're messing around with it until he gets they get to the point where he gets the job. And that's that, kind of, crap, is exactly what we don't want to deal with. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. MS. BOND: What we don't want have happening. And it is this County has been nailed for it time and time and again, that it did happen. So, the fact that this is being held up because somebody didn't get the job and they're grumbling, really goes back to that same thing. Page 65 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TOKIHIRO: Except that's not the case. And, actually, the reason why this is why this action was taken, is to make sure that the interview and the selection process is objective, fair, and impartial, and correctly applies —and complies with the contract. So, I this action was taken to ensure that it —the process is fair and objective and MS. BOND: The process isn't fair to these four people that were hired under this —and all of a sudden told, "No, you don't have this job anymore because somebody out there has a grumble" —and I just —that —this kind of stuff is what just drives me nuts. MS. TOKIHIRO: Well, we've been —have — MS. BOND: And why I got on this Board. MS. TOKIHIRO: And we wouldn't have agreed to remedy the grievance, if the department had not violated the contract. CHR. CABANAS: But the question I have, though, and I don't want to get involved in that grievance process, but couldn't the list still have existed and they still make changes for down the road? Why do it, like, in hindsight? They know the WSO III recruitment, they have a blanket RTFRequest to Fill form —for a whole year, 2024. And if they wanted to make changes, the way changes were made for the firefighters, then have the discussion early on so the changes could be made and incorporate it in this particular posting. So, now they want to make changes as a result of the settlement but it's after the fact. Couldn't that list that you created still have existed and they work on their selection process, `cause it's not listed on the posting? MS. TOKIHIRO: Well, unfortunately, because of inconsistencies in interview scoring as well that it would have affected —it affects the ranking of the applicants. And so, who would be the top four that would be selected for a promotion —and so, that's where because of the inconsistencies and because of the contract violation, that's why this recruitment was cancelled so that the list would not be used because they were concerned that it wasn't compiled appropriately. CHR. CABANAS: It wasn't compiled appropriately? What does that mean? MS. TOKIHIRO: Well, once all the interviews were completed and all of the interviews were scored, because of inconsistencies, the ranking of these individuals that would be selected, was not proper. And so, that list couldn't be used while we —while the department figured out these definitions and how to apply relatively equal because it would change that ranking. CHR. CABANAS: But, Sommer, the department's procedures were developed when I was working and it was reviewed by the unions. Page 66 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MS. TAVARES: And that's the key thing that we don't have is the Union here, who is defending one aspect of this, and fighting tooth and nail to have it changed. And this was the result that happened based on the Unions current perspective of the process and that's why we're here. And so, it's like arguing as to why they're doing this but it's the Union that was fighting for this decision to be made. And they're not here to answer these questions as to why is this being done. Is because they're complaining on behalf of their members that the process was not fair and accurate. And that's why we're here. It is, as I said before, in my questioning —it is at no fault of Mr. Kaye, he is not —it sucks that we're here and this is the situation that happened. But it's because of the Union and their persistence on these terminologies being redefined and changed. And whether that grievance continued on and we were with an arbitrator, the issues that occurred that were brought up in the grievance, still remain. And so, we can't —there's so much things that would be nice to retroactively go back and fix and keep the list and do all this but it was determined by the Union that they were not that was not an acceptable remedy and that they were not going to agree to that because, it's my understanding it was attempted —but, again, the Fire Department is not here testifying. I probably, we've ran out of time and I do have Assistant Chief Okinaka outside. CHR. CABANAS: I know. MS. TAVARES: I have four questions for him, but here we are. MR. HONG: Yeah, I object to that last (inaudible) by Ms. Tavares because if the County really thought that was an issue, they should have filed a Prohibitive Practice Complaint. But, no they want to contest my client's ability to earn a living according to him following all the rules and he's they're penalizing him. And I do have a follow-up question to Ms. Tokihiro based on the Board's questions the Commission's questions. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, we have a few minutes remaining. You want to ask it of her now? MR. HONG: Please? MS. TAVARES: I mean, it —technically, it's improper at this point for him to continue questioning her after we've been given our opportunity. And are we going to get Assistant Chief an opportunity to testify? CHR. CABANAS: No, probably not. No, because we won't have quorum. MS. TAVARES: Okay. Page 67 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 MR. HONG: So, my question is, isn't it true that the grievants are currently serving in the WSO III position on a TA basis? MS. TAVARES: Objection. That is not within the Director of Human Resources capacity to be making a decision on. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah, she can't answer that. Yeah. Okay. So, Mr. Halvorson, do you have anything to advise the Board and our attorneys both parties, at this time? MS. BOND: You're on mute. MR. HALVORSON: Okay. No, at this point, I think we need to just go ahead and adjourn and call (inaudible) and let the employer and Corp. Counsel call their other their last witness. And that next witness may be able to answer Mr. Hong's question. CHR. CABANAS: Yes, I agree. MS. BOND: Unfortunately, I need to leave. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, so yeah, we're going to have to adjourn. But before we do, I just want to announce that our next meeting will be February 25 h oh, no, not February will be well, will be January (sic.) 25 h, but can the Board meet either January 30'h or the 3 1 " to continue our Mr. Kaye appeal hearing? January 30 31't I'm checking with the attorneys and Mr. Halvorson. Can do? MR. HONG: I'm available either date. CHR. CABANAS: Okay. What about you, Ms. Tavares? MS. TAVARES: Likewise, but is it going to be in the morning or in the afternoon? CHR. CABANAS: In the morning. MS. TAVARES: Then, I'm fine. CHR. CABANAS: You're fine MS. TAVARES: Either day. CHR. CABANAS: Mr. Halvorson, are you available? MR. HALVORSON: I will either be available or somebody from my office will be. Page 68 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 CHR. CABANAS: Okay. So, which day should we go —Thursday? Okay, we'll go January 30'h—what time, 9? Nine o'clock. Shall we have other things, too, that day, then? Just this. Okay. MS. TAVARES: Can I go check with CHR. CABANAS: So, I need a motion before you go. MS. TAVARES: I'm just going to check if Assistant Chief Okinaka is available. CHR. CABANAS: Oh, yes. MS. TAVARES: `Cause he's the one person I need to call. CHR. CABANAS: Yeah. But can I have a motion to adjourn today's meeting —I mean, to continueI'm sorry. To continue the appeal hearing for Mr. Kaye to January 30'', 2025, at 9:00 here in the Hilo Council Chambers. MS. BOND: So moved. CHR. CABANAS: Second? MS. MATHEWS: Second. CHR. CABANAS: Thank you. Any discussion? No? Okay, if not, I'll call rollcall vote. Ms. Mathews. MS. MATHEWS: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Ms. Bond. MS. BOND: Aye. CHR. CABANAS: Is he available? Okay. Ms. Cabanas —aye. Three ayes. Motion carried. We will continue this hearing January 30'', 2025, here, Hilo Council Room, at 9:00. And then, we'll have Assistant Fire Chief testify then. Okay. Thank you so much, everyone. (The hearing ended at 11:53 a.m.) MR. HONG: Thank you. MS. TAVARES: Thank you. (At this time, Ms. Suzi Bond, Board member, left the meeting. The meeting ended at 11:53 a.m. due to lack of quorum.) Page 69 Merit Appeals Board January 16, 2025 Announcements (Item 9) (There were none.) Schedule Next Meeting Date (Item 10) The Merit Appeals Board Will Convene Its Next Meeting On Tuesday, February 25, 2025, At 9:00 A.M., At The Hilo Council Chambers, Hawaii County Building, 25 Aupuni Street, First Floor, Room 1401, Hilo, HI 96720 Adjournment (Item 11) The meeting adjourned at 11:53 a.m. Respectfully submitted, / , Glyni'Yama , Secretary-Reporter APPROVED: JtMmLtCu M . Cr('tira.vtu — Gabriella M. Cabanas, Chair Merit Appeals Board Page 70