2007-12-12 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular Session

Home

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to approve the regular session minutes of November 14, 2007. Ms. Malanka seconded the motion, and all members present voted aye. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to accept and file the executive session minutes of November 14, 2007. Ms. Malanka seconded the motion, and all members present voted aye. 4. COMMUNICATIONS Communication No: 2007 -124: Hawaii County Police Department's Annual Report — Fiscal Year 2005 -2006. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to accept and file the report, Ms. Malanka seconded the motion, and all members present voted aye. 5. NEW BUSINESS a. Report and discussion on the possible entry of an informal advisory opinion based on Mr. Ashida's research into whether elected incumbents in the County are able to utilize County funds for mail -outs within six months of an election and whether doing so would constitute an advantage as defined by Section 2 -83 of the Ethics Code. Mr. Ashida said he was surprised that Mr. Hookano had said the issue of the mail -outs was prepared to go to the Council, as he under the impression that just the administrative fine issue was ready. As he indicated in previous discussions with the Board, an amendment to the Code was not needed for the Board to opine that under its existing language on fair treatment, it may constitute a violation for an incumbent County official to do these mail -outs. He was pleased the Council will consider the matter, but is not certain it will be the will of the Council to pass the legislation. Mr. Ashida said that regardless of what the Council decides, the Board could still issue an informal advisory opinion that based on the existing Code of Ethics, its collective belief is that these mail -outs constitute an unfair advantage. The Chair said he agreed with the interpretation that incumbents have an unfair advantage in having these mail -outs. Ms. Nicholson asked whether they could pull the issue back from the Council until the Board could discuss it more, but the Chair said that the Board had voted on submitting the issue to the Council about a year ago, before Ms. Nicholson was a member. Ms. Nicholson asked what the impact would be if the Council did not adopt the bill. Mr. Ashida explained that if the Council failed to act on the matter or voted it down, it was still the Board's responsibility to interpret the Code of Ethics. The Council's opinion on the issue does not matter. However, the Council writes the Code of Ethics and could tinker with its existing language. 2