2009-10-14 Board of Ethics Minutes

Home

these proposals encourage a meaningful debate in our community about both ethics and accountability. Our current Code has served all of us well, but we understand that it's a living and breathing document, and it evolves with the times. As community expectations change, so must our codes to keep up. Behavior that was commonplace and thought to be meritorious a generation ago may no longer be considered acceptable. And after carefully considering all of the amendments to the Ethics Code, we are asking you today to look at and begin the process of looking at our amendments that we've submitted look at both the cost and benefits, some of the positives and negatives of proposed changes, and that you then forward your suggestions and recommendations to the County Council. We appreciate your input. I look forward to a healthy discussion on these proposed changes. I'd like to go over a short summary of our proposals. The first proposal would amend the Hawai `i County Code of Ethics, Fair Treatment, Section 2 -83, to prohibit County employees and companies in which County employees or their spouses or dependent children own a controlling interest from engaging in business arrangements with any County agency. While I am aware that enterprising County workers have a long history of providing goods and services to the County through their private companies, I believe the larger community no longer considers this practice to be acceptable. This proposal is not meant as a commentary on any past arrangement. It is simply an acknowledgment that today, our community expects that we will either be County employees or County contractors, but not both. The second proposal is a technical change deleting Hawai `i County Code of Ethics, Contracts, Section 2- 85(a), because the conduct described and specifically authorized in Section 2 -85(a) would be prohibited under our first proposal above. The existing section 2 -85(b) would be renumbered as 2- 85(a), and this proposal makes a technical correction by including the word "is" in anew section where the word was apparently excluded in error. Our third proposal adopts the Hawai `i County Code of Ethics Conflicts of Interest section language, prohibiting any elected myself, practicing law or any appointed officer or employee from appearing on behalf of any private interest before any County agency except as specifically provided for bylaw. The narrow exceptions to this prohibition assure that employees will continue to enjoy the right to appear before County agencies to petition for redress of grievances. This proposed language is virtually identical to language already in place in the Honolulu City Charter and Honolulu Code of Ethics. Again, this proposal is acknowledgment that today, the public believes our roles as County employees make it inappropriate that we engage in certain outside activities. The public expects, again, that we'll be County employees, or we will be representatives of private interests before County agencies, but not both. The fourth proposal redefines the use of the term "agency" in the Ethics Code to make it more encompassing and to make the use of the term more clear. Finally, we hope to join forces with the Board of Ethics in supporting changes to State law that would empower the Board of Ethics to levy administrative fines for infractions of the County Ethics Code. As all of you well know, the County Council in 2008 adopted Ordinance No. 08 -57, authorizing the Board to impose administrative fines, but the intent of this language has been stymied by two provisions in State law. The first problem is that HRS, Hawai `i Revised Statutes, Section 46 -1.5, subsection 24(A), has been interpreted by some to mean that a County agency may impose a civil fine only when a violator has been found in violation, two, when the violator continues this violation without modifying their offending conduct. We agree with Honolulu Board of Ethics Executive Director Charles Totto that this interpretation rd