2007-02-14 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular Session

Home

Board of Ethics Minutes of Regular Session February 14, 2007 JW: Thank you. Motion and Vote: Mr. Williams made a motion to accept and defer this matter to the next agenda; Ms. Lum seconded the motion; all members voted aye. Motion carried. b. Review Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Board of Ethics. WJ: Review Rules of Practice and Procedures. I think Kendall this is yours. KS: I don't have anything to report, because as I said the last time, the only other document on the county website is the Planning Department. It is very large, and I didn't download and xerox it for everyone. I was thinking along the lines of the HRS 487R issue that we talked about, standardization and practices. I was going to ask if Corporation Counsel would consider having a format for all boards and commissions to use. Certain boards and commissions have more definitions in their definition section. I don't know if they need that or if it could be standardized so that every board and commission has their needs meet. If there was a standardized format to work from then we would at least have a skeleton of all the points we have to cover. What else? I also had gone on the internet and I had downloaded some.... No that is not correct, I rescind that. I haven't done any actual word - for -word comparison, because having to get the different documents from the different boards is too cumbersome. You are sitting with hundreds of pages. BLT: If I understand you correctly, what you would like me to do is review them then do a report on what types of provisions are carried in them and provide a basic skeleton to be addressed by the Board of Ethics. KS: I think the last time I talked to you or Lincoln about it he said that they should be written in the format of common sense so the average person or citizen is able to work with them and understand them. Some of this language is not clear to me. Because some of them, like Rules of Evidence -1.7, it says something and I don't know why it says that. There is a lot of legalize, in my brain I don't know what to do. AL: I don't think we have determined what needs to be revised. I mean some of it may be just fine, it just looks weird. KS: Right. It needs to be digitized, and Karen did that. She has done that and has sent that to me. AL: I don't think we have all looked at it. What parts are not understandable, like the rules of evidence, and what parts are good the way it is. I'm kind of stirring around here without knowing where to go. WJ: Well, maybe it is something we can table and look at intermittently, piece -by- piece. 0