My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2010-03-12 Police Commission Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Police Department
>
Police Commission
>
Minutes
>
2010 - 2015
>
2010
>
2010-03-12 Police Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/29/2011 9:17:27 AM
Creation date
6/16/2011 11:54:44 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Hawaii Police Commission <br />Regular Session Minutes <br />March 12, 2010 <br />Page 5 <br />Rule 9: (a) (1) (C): Addition of acceptance of complaint for any reason — no change. <br />Rule 9 (e) (3) and (4): Addition of referral to the Chief - no change. <br />Rule 9 (f): Addition of Burden of Proof - no change. <br />Commissioner Behenna moved to correct Rule 9 (a) (1) last sentence from sixty -day <br />to ninety -day. Commissioner Ignacio seconded, and it carried unanimously. <br />Rule 11: Subpoena Power: Commissioner Behenna stated that this is a new section <br />and would give them more power to get documents and could be used for people. <br />Corporation Counsel informed them that this could probably not be exercised against <br />police officers. <br />Corporation Counsel Ashida stated that the process of issuing a subpoena and using <br />the service of a police officer or process server could have considerable expense. <br />The commission would have to pay a person according to statute for attending a <br />meeting. For police officers, they would have to pay a minimum of 3 hours and other <br />union benefits. Another issue would be the possibility of a lawsuit because of Garrity <br />Rights. Subpoenaing documents would also have costs. The commission cannot <br />order a person to come to their meeting, but they could file a special court <br />proceeding. That person could assess attorney fees. <br />After some discussion, Chair Whittemore asked for Corporation Counsel's opinion. <br />Corporation Counsel Ashida stated that he would be comfortable if it specifically <br />exempted the police department, its officers, and its records because that totally <br />avoids bargaining issues, overtime issues, and whether they could subpoena <br />themselves. Technically, under the Charter, the commission is part of the police <br />department. <br />Commissioner Ignacio moved that they amend this rule using Corporation Counsel's <br />suggestion to exempt police officers, the department, and their records. <br />Commissioner Sumja seconded. The motion carried with a nay from Commissioner <br />Morimoto. <br />Rule 15: Deletion of the Office of the Chief of Police as a location for obtaining <br />information — no change. <br />Rule 21 (c) (3): A non - police investigator was added to avoid a conflict of interest — <br />no change. <br />Rule 22 (a) (1): The hearing officer is to be appointed by the commission — no <br />change. Commissioner Kaoiwi stated, for the record, that subpoenas will cost them <br />money. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.