2006-01-11 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular Nonverbatim

Home

4. NEW BUSINESS a. Review of Disclosure of Financial Interest of Robert Pleau, Assistant Building Inspector. The Chair noted that the Board had not accepted Mr. Pleau's disclosure at the last meeting because it wanted to know the source of his 2004 income, in case there was a conflict with his current j ob as an Assistant Building Inspector. The Board's secretary had confirmed with Mr. Pleau that his 2004 income was from his prior job in California. Mr. Joseph moved to accept and file the disclosure; Mr. Inouye seconded the motion; and all members voted aye on accepting and filing the disclosure. b. Review of dames Arakaki's Amended Gift Disclosure Statement: Mr. Joseph wanted to know if the parties whose Legal Defense Fund contributions had been returned had also contributed to Mr. Arakaki's campaign fund. He was concerned that if they contributed the returned funds to the campaign fund, they may have exceeded the amount legal to contribute to the campaign fund. Ms. O'Toole said that the campaign fund records are open for inspection, but that the amount contributed would be an issue for the Campaign Spending Commission. The Chair noted that since Mr. Arakaki's legal defense fund issue had already been brought before the Campaign Spending Commission, the issue of what happens to the former legal defense fund monies should have been coordinated with them. He asked if there was a motion to accept and file the gift disclosure. Mr. Joseph so moved; Mr. Inouye seconded the motion; and all members voted aye to accept and file the gift disclosure. c. Discussion on proposed amendment to the County Code regarding financial interest disclosures: The Chair welcomed Lincoln Ashida, who informed the Board that he was not there to advise them on this issue, but to express his concerns regarding potential board and commission members and their requirement to complete financial disclosures. He said the Office of the Corporation Counsel volunteered to help with recruiting people to serve on boards and commissions, and that the financial disclosure requirement was a sticking point for many applicants, especially for business people needing to disclose their private interests. It is not that they have something to hide, but that it is very easy to inadvertently neglect to disclose something and then later something comes up and they get accused of hiding something, when there was no intention to hide anything. He said there was a time in the past when financial disclosures were not required of board and commission members, but now the Code requires them. Mr. Ashida said the issue generated by David Frankel really brings up even more information for applicants to disclose and questioned whether we need to go there. As the law is right now, board and commission members do not have to report the financial interests of their spouse and children. The ambiguity lies in Section 2 -91.1 of the Code, where the information to be disclosed is limited to the person 2