2006-08-09 Board of Ethics Minutes regular

Home

was indeed unusual. He felt he'd seen this sort of thing before from elected representatives and wanted to make sure that Mr. Safarik's letter was indeed unique, rare, or extraordinary. Ms. Sharpless said she wanted to know if Mr. Safarik had made similar mailings regarding the first quarter of 2006 or the four quarters of 2005, as the communication that is the subject of the petitions is labeled the 2nd quarter of 2006. She also would like to know what rights elected officials have to use the County seal, and where that seal may appear. The Chair said he did not want to spend counsel's time on that issue. Ms. Sharpless said she would like to know the legalities of using the County seal on personal letters. She also wanted it clarified whether the enclosure to Mr. Safarik's letter was also sent out in June, since it was dated June 2006. The Chair said he believed the enclosure was sent out with the official July cover letter. The Chair said that the question, however, is the basic charge: whether reporting to constituents on County stationery is legitimate or not. Ms. Sharpless said that the petitions were also not clear on what specific government services were used, and the Chair said that Mr. Olesen could be asked that at the special meeting, in an open format. However, he does want counsel to research the legality of using County stationery to communicate with constituents. Ms. Leithead -Todd clarified what information the Board wanted her to research. She said she will gather State ethics opinions on the issue of similar letters being done before by elected or legislative bodies in the State of Hawaii. Also, she will check into how Mr. Safarik's letter was prepared and mailed, and the cost of the mailing. She said she will check with the Machine Room about who is in charge of County mailings. As well, she is to find out what right elected officials have to send materials out on official letterhead. The Chair said the letterhead is the salient issue, and she may not need to go to the other issues. Ms. Leithead -Todd said she will also provide a print -out of the website referred to in Mr. Safarik's letter. The Chair questioned whether it would be appropriate to ask Mr. Safarik to prepare a written response for the Board to review several days prior to the special meeting. Ms. Leithead- Todd said he has an opportunity to provide a written response, but he can also choose to provide an oral response. However, she will mention in the letter to him that the Board would like a written response. Mr. Joseph said the Board members should receive the response seven days prior to the meeting so they will have time to review Mr. Safarik's position. Ms. Leithead -Todd said she will also ask Mr. Olesen and Ms. Kinimaka - Stocksdale if they could be more specific on their petitions, rather than just referring to the rule. Ms. Sharpless said she went over the rules regarding form and content of petitions, and the petitioners met Nos. 1, 2, and 3. However, Nos. 4, 5, and 6 are not clear and she does not know if they are standard. She asked Ms. Leithead -Todd to check on that. Mr. Joseph disclosed, for the record, that he was one of the recipients of Mr. Safarik's letter, which was the subject of the petitions. Ms. Leithead -Todd told Mr. Joseph that he should 5