Laserfiche WebLink
DE LIMA: Well, I think—we would do anything that the Commission thinks would be <br />appropriate to resolve this thing completely and forthright. The bottom line is, <br />those gift disclosure contributors should have been campaign contributors. <br />That was the objective of the campaign initially. The only reason a legal <br />defense fund was established was purely because they were told no further <br />campaign contributions could be received by the Friends for Arakaki for the <br />campaign expenses. That was incorrect information. So I think this public <br />discussion would bring it to a conclusion. I mean, I don't know why we'd <br />have to do a legal fiction of withdrawing something that was already filed. I <br />think we've basically explained what has occurred in this matter. And I <br />indicated in the beginning of my statement, Mr. Frankel brought this matter to <br />the public's attention, which was what Mr. Arakaki intended from the <br />beginning. He wanted the public to know that he was getting these <br />contributions. Mr. Arakaki's campaign wanted the public to know that these <br />should be considered campaign contributions, not legal defense funds. That <br />was not the purpose of Arakaki's campaign. Arakaki's campaign went to the <br />Campaign Spending Commission and said, we have this campaign debt. We <br />want to raise funds to pay off this campaign debt. They were given incorrect <br />information. Now the Commission is correcting that information and <br />recognizing what Mr. Frankel and Mr. Arakaki both recognized —that this <br />should be campaign contributions. If they were given the correct information, <br />all these would be campaign contributions, it would be listed in the campaign <br />spending report. We wouldn't be here today. So I think Mr. Frankel has done <br />Mr. Arakaki a favor, so to speak, by bringing this matter to the campaign <br />spending commission's attention, so they can correct a mistake. And then as <br />you correctly pointed out, it wouldn't have to be listed on the gift disclosure, <br />but because it wasn't accepted by the Campaign Spending Commission, Mr. <br />Arakaki did what he should be applauded for, which is to make it public, <br />which is what he did. <br />CHAIR KK: Any questions from the Board members? Correct me if I'm wrong, but from <br />what you are saying right now, it seems that this whole matter seems to be <br />moot based upon the fact that the funds eventually will be returned and <br />DE LIMA: And I'm hoping that those people will contribute to the campaign, so the bills <br />that Mr. Arakaki has with our law firm can be paid up, because I cannot by law <br />waive those fees. <br />CHAIR KK: Okay. Now, you also mentioned the fact that—we know that he cannot run for <br />office— <br />DE LIMA: - -he cannot run for <br />CHAIR KK: - -for Council, but yet he can retain that funds, campaign funds? <br />DE LIMA: Actually, if he pays off the debt, if there's any surplus, and if he doesn't run for <br />office, he has to either donate that to a charitable organization or pro rate it to <br />D <br />