2013-08-01 Windward Planning Commission Minutes

Home

session would have been different had he known he could not participate in the executive session. Ms. Masunaga said she felt Commissioner Henkel could vote on whether there should be an executive session but it was up to the Commission to decide whether Commissioner Henkel could participate in the matter. Chair Ishibashi noted that Commissioner Henkel has not been involved in the proceedings thus far regarding the application. Mr. Arai suggested Commissioner Henkel recuse himself now regarding holding an executive session if he feels he will recuse himself when the special permit comes back before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ono felt it didn’t matter whether Commissioner Henkel recused himself or not for the executive session as the executive session was just to clarify the role of the Planning Commission with regard to the contested case hearing, adding that he would like Mr. Arai’s presence during the executive session since he did need some clarification on several matters. Chair Ishibashi noted that he recused himself from the Hu Honua contested case proceedings because of a labor issue and his involvement with energy in the community, even though he was not employed by the applicant. He noted Commissioner Henkel’s future participation may or may jeopardize the proceedings done thus far. In response to inquiry posed by Commissioner Moses, Mr. Arai said the Commission felt Chair Ishibashi could be fair and impartial because although he is employed by the University his official capacity has to do with the Mauna Kea Management Office and nothing to do with the university campus. He then said what needs to be considered is whether there will be a direct financial benefit to Commissioner Henkel from the action on the special permit to establish the campus in Kaumana. He stated for the record he was just pointing out things the Commission should consider, and that he was not leading the Commission in any way. Commissioner Moses said after listening to the discussion she felt Commissioner Henkel should recuse himself. She later noted that when she first came on the Commission she recused herself from participation when the company she was just employed by came before the Commission for a permit. She said regardless whether she felt she could be impartial, in light of public perception and possibly opening up the Commission to liability or anything else that could result in her participation, she recused herself. Ms. Masunaga commented that she felt there was more of a nexus between Commissioner Henkel’s position and the school than Commissioner Ishibashi’s disclosure for the University Rezoning, noting the comment by Commissioner Moses. Commissioner Henkel said he will recuse himself based on the Deputy Corporation Counsel’s opinion. It was then moved by Commissioner Ono and seconded by Commission Moses that the Commission enter into an executive session. A roll call vote was taken and motion did not carry with three ayes (Ono, Moses, and Ishibashi) and three noes (Gonzales, Heaukulani, and Miyasato). 6