2005-11-09 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular mc

Home

recommendations. So I did not meet with the Commission. All I did was I met with the existing executive director, the past executive director, and Mr. Tanimoto of the Campaign Spending Commission staff, so they are recommending that the Commission make a finding of no fine based upon the facts as they found them to be, and acknowledging —and the acknowledgment of Mr. Watada that he indeed had spoken to the campaign treasurer and advised the campaign treasurer as to what's being represented in the letters. So no one expects a fine to be imposed, but neither myself nor anyone on the staff could say exactly what the Commission will be doing. More likely than not, they'll act accordingly. But the bottom line in terms of what the legal defense fund is going to do, and the fact that they're going to file an amended return, and the fact that they can make contributions, is a matter of law and not Commission action. And I think that's what you folks are concerned about— not whether the Campaign Commission is going to issue a fine or not. CHAIR KK: Mr. De Lima, I didn't know some day I would have to call you Mr. De Lima, but be that as it may, do you still feel —and he has heard all of what, and he knows what has transpired in this case—do you still feel that he should be disqualified from voting on this matter? I'm referring to Mr. Reeves. CHAIR RW: Williams. CHAIR KK: I mean Mr. Williams. DE LIMA: Well, in law, if we have a conflict and there's an appearance of impropriety, then when we recuse ourselves and we issue a conflict, we can never come back into a case. We wouldn't want to put Mr. Williams in the position of having to vote on this matter, given the fact that we've already objected. You know, people might think, well is he voting a certain way because he's complained about him, or is he voting a certain way because they complained about him. So I think in all fairness to Mr. Williams, since we've already made the petition and he —from our view, to his credit—he took himself out of any appearance of improprietyI understand the suggestion, but I don't think it would be fair to Mr. Williams to put that onus back on him. CHAIR KK: Thank you. I just wanted to, you know, why and DE LIMA: - -Well, you know, like I think Ms. O'Toole has hit the nail on the head on a couple of points. Number one is, if Mr. Frankel doesn't like the decision he can always ask for a formal advisory opinion, and knowing Mr. Frankel he's probably going to do that anyway. So the truth of the matter is, and if it's not accurately represented, you're probably going to have another bite at the apple anyway. And we should, you know, to me I think we should put this to bed based on the facts as you have them today, and if something changes you can always revisit this matter, and I'm sure Mr. Frankel's not going to disappear. WJ: Being that the legal defense fund is going to be 23