Laserfiche WebLink
this petition. I would ask my remaining Board members who —one of Wayne 's points is <br />Mr. Joseph's points is that the Mr. Henricks was appointed by the Mayor. And we have <br />two more Board members that were appointed by the Mayor. <br />BALSIS: Yes. <br />LUM: Do you feel any conflict in hearing this? <br />HEAUKULANI: No. <br />HENRICKS: I think the word should be nominated <br />L UM.• - -Oh, nominated, that's right, not appointed. That's right, we're nominated and <br />then you're confirmed by thank you. Nominated by the Mayor and confirmed by the <br />Council. <br />BALSIS: I see no conflict of interest. While I was nominated by the Mayor, I was also <br />confirmed by the Council in a mutually exclusive action, executive and legislative branch <br />acting exclusively and separately. I see no conflict. <br />L UM: Thank you. <br />HEAUKULANI.• Madame Chair, for the record, I was nominate d by Amy Miwa, who <br />works for my councilman. By letter, yes, the Mayor has to appoint to the Council, but I <br />have no relationship to the Mayor in that respect, of my appointment. <br />L UM: Thank you. In the petition there are several points, but the first one I think that <br />needs to come out is the timeliness of the petition. And I refer to our rule, which is Rule <br />No 1.5. And in Rule No. 1. 51 it talks about our Board members, as we just did, may file <br />our own affidavit if we feel that we have conflict or personal bias or any of those things. <br />So we are in a position to decide whether we feel that we have any conflicts. And then <br />another part of that, that if we if somebody else files an affidavit, every affidavit shall <br />state the facts and reasons for the belief that bias or prejudice exists, and it shall be filed <br />at least ten working days before the date on which the matter will be considered by the <br />Board, or good cause shall be shown for the failure to do so. This was filed this <br />petition was filed after we acted on the previous petition, so in that respect it is not <br />timely. Mr. Joseph is not here to give us any information about why he failed to bring <br />this up before the petition. I would like to have us not assume that he had good cause, <br />but just bring a little bit more discussion to it, because he's not here to answer anything <br />or to tell us anything. And so we could go a little bit more deeply into this if that's okay <br />with the remaining Board members? <br />BALSIS: Yes. Actually, I would like to move that based on timeliness as dictated in our <br />rules, which governs us, that we dismiss the petition. In addition to that, I'd like to make <br />a comment that in considering the rule of necessity, that I saw or see no problem in my <br />review of the situation with all the members of the Board at that time participating in the <br />decision - making process. If we were to look at another entity to take over or to review it <br />on behalf of this Board, there is none. For example, the Maui Board of Ethics, in their <br />in <br />