2003-08-14 Further Clarification of OIP Opinion Re Executive Meetings

Home

NtY•OS h, Lincoln S.T. Ashida o�• •ham Harry Kim `.•' Corporation Counsel �'i'''4'• Mayor Gerald Takase •+ -N�o�;:�; Assistant Corporation 'TE b.'M►�' Counsel COUNTY OF HAWAII OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4262 • (808)961-8251 • Fax(808)961-8622 August 14, 2003 MEMORANDUM 2003-4 TO: HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL ALL COUNTY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS FROM: LINCOLN S. T. ASHIDA Corporation Counsel RE: Further Clarification of Opinion from Office of Information Practices regarding Executive Meetings A board member recently raised a question regarding our advisory dated July 17, 2003, based upon an opinion received from the Office of Information Practices (hereinafter"OIP") concerning executive meetings. A copy of our earlier memorandum is attached for your reference. Specifically, the board member asked whether it was permissible for an attorney from our office to remain for the entire duration of the executive meeting. In our July 17th memorandum, the Corporation Counsel stated: Thus, the OIP has stated that our attorneys, as a general practice, should remain in the executive meeting so long as their presence (i.e., legal assistance) is required, and no longer. Therefore, the continued presence of our attorneys for the duration of an executive meeting would only occur in situations where their counsel is required throughout. (Emphasis supplied). Thus, assuming the board or commission requests at the beginning of the executive meeting that our attorney remain, for the purpose of addressing legal issues or questions which may arise during the course of the executive meeting, the continued presence of our attorney for the duration of the executive meeting is permitted. We contacted the OIP to verify whether this was an acceptable practice. We stressed the fact that the majority of board and commission members are lay people with limited practical knowledge of our State Sunshine Law. Historically, our attorneys remained in executive meetings to ensure compliance with the law, and to guard against inadvertent error which may lead to invalidation of board action, or even litigation. The OIP has agreed with our earlier stated recommendation that so long as the board requests the presence of our attorneys during the executive meeting, notwithstanding the fact legal questions may only be anticipated, the continued presence of our attorneys throughout the duration of the meeting is permissible.