Laserfiche WebLink
said —but I'm just saying that the possible perception was there. And I think you know <br />that because of your apology. You stated that, and I just want to point that out. <br />ASHIDA: That is- <br />LUM: - -1 think the apology politicized it. 1 think when you look at this letter, read <br />paragraph (inaudible), three people in this letter whose opinions are reiterated, Mr. <br />Joseph's, Ms. Naeole's, and Mr. Safarik's. The other two people aren't mentioned. As it <br />stands in this little eddy that's going on here, it happens that you felt that in these three <br />people, in these statements, that the one that was correct was Mr. Safarik's. You felt in <br />this letter that the other two were incorrect in their — whatever they were saying. If a <br />person, a voter, chooses to think that you are the person they're going to follow, then <br />maybe that influenced them, but if they choose to feel that you're not the person, it's <br />like— <br />CHAIR: Well, he stated it. He says, "the Corporation Counsel should not make any <br />statement or provide any inference that may be construed that a particular candidate "— <br />LUM: -- Construed, yeah. That's true, yeah. <br />ASHIDA: That's exactly why I submitted that unequivocal apology the next day, because <br />when Hunter raised it as an issue, then- <br />LUM: - -It's Hunter that raised it as an issue. <br />ASHIDA: Right, but that's exactly what John is talking about — excuse me, Chairman <br />Dill is talking about —is that we should be aware of even the appearance of impropriety <br />So when Hunter says hey, what about this, then 1 thought I'd better make clear to <br />everybody so it's— there's no ambiguity out there. <br />LUM: But the situation here is —when I look at it, in my linear mind, Hunter Bishop is <br />the person that politicized it. You wrote the letter, but it's Bishop's blog that raised the <br />political —and you responded to that, I think Wayne is probably responding to that by <br />sending Bishop the petition, if that's who did it. <br />CHAIR: Well, I think he's done this in the past, where he's been the catalyst for <br />certain— <br />L UM: - -Well I don't read his blog, 1 don't— <br />CHAIR: - -But regardless of how it got to our agenda here, we do have to rule on <br />whether or not these are violations of the Code of Ethics, and I'd like to try and move to <br />that. <br />L UM: Does anybody else have anything to say? Just you and 1? <br />CHAIR: Marilyn? <br />24 <br />