2005-11-09 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular mc

Home

CHAIR: Yeah, I think— you're welcome to come to the table. I didn't realize who you are. KAMELAMELA: So he wants the hearing to be open, and I think before we proceed, there's some procedure issues that should be decided, because from what Ganigan's saying, for one thing, I don't think this Board has the jurisdiction to hear his complaint, the way that he's framed it, because actually it's a grievance issue that, to me —that the collective bargaining agreement is what kind of binds the court procedures. Because right now, what I hear, it has nothing to do with an ethics violation, so I'm going to first move to dismiss this complaint because it's in the wrong forum, from here. It has nothing to do with Hiram and Mr. Harry Jose in terms of ethics. It has everything to do with him as being the chief steward for LTW trying to air an issue, to me, which belongs in like an arbitration or grievance procedure. This court should not be saddled with this kind of employment issue that clearly falls potentially under the collective bargaining agreement. GANIGAN: Excuse me, there is a grievance about this. It's on its way to arbitration already. KAMELAMELA: Right, so there we have it. So since there is a procedure in place, and he is using that procedure, to avoid any kind of inconsistency or potential inconsistency, we move that this Board—unless we can just leave it to whatever he in the position stated. If it's narrow enough that it doesn't relate to anything with collective bargaining, fine. But right now I don't hear him saying that it's really an issue totally within the jurisdiction and power of this Board. CHAIR: Well I for one respectfully disagree, Mr. Kamelamela. I thoroughly, fully believe that though this is certainly you're addressing an arbitration in house, it's the public's right to know if we do have something that smacks of like a nepotism arrangement, and soon. I don't think we should just sweep that under the rug and say jeez, that's the negotiation business. KAMELAMELA: Okay, Chair, just to set the record straight, there is no nepotism going on here— CHAIR: KAMELAMELA: You know, it's —let's just get the facts out. Because all we have is his characterization of certain things which are happening, which is not true which is not true. Let's go to the arbitration proceedings to resolve it. We cannot resolve this kind of issue here. It has no basis here. For example, just looking at his position, whatever resources is being used, it's only County- non-County resources. It's his own business. So why is he bringing a complaint here? It has to deal with County resources—dealing with County resources, so what I'm moving is to dismiss it. Now Chair, if you don't want W