My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2011-03-09 Board of Ethics Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2011-2018
>
2011
>
2011-03-09 Board of Ethics Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/30/2011 2:12:55 PM
Creation date
6/30/2011 1:57:43 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DILL: Due to his past employment. I was provided with further information on that Bill <br />283 and took a closer look at what it entailed, and then also took a closer look at his <br />financial disclosure forms in terms of his employment and whatnot. And although there <br />were some subsidiaries, I couldn't find that he was currently working for <br />CADAOAS: - Malama Market <br />DILL: --yeah, at that time, and furthermore, we're dealing with a subsidiary. And I <br />couldn't find anything definitive that was in violation of the specific sections that are <br />listed in the petition. What I'd like to do is do we have any other further questions from <br />the Board on this, or can we make a motion to resolve this? <br />SCHOEN: Mr. Chair, as you recall, Mr. Balsis had recused himself, so the three <br />members are Henricks, Heaukulani, and yourself. <br />DILL: Yes. <br />HEA UKULANI: What about what did you say about his relationship to subsidiaries? <br />Did he have, or did he have not? <br />DILL: No, there's no direct relationship <br />HEA UKULANI: - -Okay <br />DILL: --Actually at the time he was not employed, but a former employer [sic]. <br />Therefore, the decision - making process is of the subsidiary and direct relation <br />to his former employment. Furthermore, after further review of the Bill 283, I didn't see <br />any unwarranted advantages that would be gained through voting on that particular bill. <br />SCHOEN: Mr. Heaukulani, if I might try to answer what I think your question is. The <br />allegations in the petition was that Petitioner was asking whether or not <br />Councilmember Yagong had violated any financial disclosure requirements by - -when he <br />said that he was not affiliated with Kalama Beach. And I think what Mr. Chair is saying, <br />that pursuant to 2 -91.1, whether or not there's a duty on Mr. Yagong's part to disclose a <br />parent company, holding company, or subsidiary companies. And so 2- 91.1(c)(1) is <br />actually the operative provision that I think Mr. Dill is looking at, which requires that a <br />person list the source of income. There's no other requirement to list. <br />HEA UKULANI: Okay. <br />DILL: Which is included on the financial disclosure forms. <br />HEA UKULANI: I got it, thank you. <br />SCHOEN: Is that accurate? <br />DILL: Yeah, so therefore he's meeting the requirement as specified, I think. AndMr. <br />Cadaoas, we did take extra time to look at this and really consider what you brought up, <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.