Laserfiche WebLink
contention was the benefit to the County and to the people of the County for the <br />transaction going through. Are there any further questions? <br /> <br />MR. HISASHIMA: No. <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: Is there any discussion on this matter? <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS: No further discussion. <br /> <br />MR. COLE: May I make some more comments? <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: If they're brief, yes. <br /> <br />MR. COLE: They're brief and they'll counter the actual information presented in <br />the letter. It's erroneous. <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: Okay. The benefit to the County was very specific in the letter. <br />The benefit the County received from the issuance of the short -term bond in this <br />case was continued progress on capital improvement projects, with the assurance <br />of adequate funding to meet expenditures in a timely manner. And as Ms. <br />Crawford had mentioned, it allowed the County to have the availability of those <br />funds if they were short on funds at any point in time prior to the issuance of the <br />full bond. Am I correct? <br /> <br />MS. CRAWFORD: That's correct. And the money in the note coincidentally, <br />these periods were the same, but that isn't necessarily true. The notes are rolled <br />over and carried forward until the time at which we have expended those funds <br />and it's time that we're actually going to do a bond issue to take those out. <br /> <br />MR. BALSIS: There appears to be a difference in the perception of the benefit or <br />non - benefit to the people of the County of Hawai `i. Is there a desire from any <br />members of the Board to dismiss the petition, continue with an informal <br />investigation, or go with a formal investigation or ask more questions? <br /> <br />MR. HENRICKS: At this time I move to dismiss, since the evidence put forward <br />does not constitute a violation under the Code of Ethics. <br /> <br />MR. COLE: May I make some more comments on this, clarification, because the <br />letter sent to the mayor is in error, and the statements that Ms. Crawford has <br />made is in violation of the very issuance of the certificates of the master <br />certificate and of the tax certificate issued the bonds. There was no benefit to the <br />County of Hawai `i. There was no intended benefit to the County of Hawai `i, and <br />the actions of the mayor were a pattern and history of purchasing bond <br />anticipation notes and placing the money into a time deposit certificate for the <br />apparent use to launder money. This is a pattern in history that has not benefited <br />the people of Hawai `i. There are four other instances of this. To purchase a <br />bond-- <br /> <br />