2013-12-11 Board of Ethics minutes

Home

MR. HENRICKS: And if you need any help, you can go to the other counties and see what they’re doing and ask them what they’re doing and how they’re getting around it. Maybe that would help us, if you could bring some of that forward to us at that time. MS. CRAWFORD: Thank you, that’s a good suggestion. MR. BALSIS: And then with regards to substantial interest, we would want to know the appraisers in those areas, if there is a substantial interest or not. If their equity is like you said, a hundred dollars, it’s not a substantial interest. But if there are substantial interests of magnitude – so that’s something that’s important. MS. CRAWFORD: Thank you. MS. SCHOEN: Mr. Chair, if I may just— MR. BALSIS: --Yes— MS. SCHOEN: --for purposes of clarification, and everyone’s present here. Actually you mentioned two issues, but really if you look at 2-84(a)(1), I think there are three issues that everyone should look at. And that would be official action is one, directly affecting is two, and then number three would be substantial financial interest. The second thing I wanted to mention is that if the Board is moving this into a formal hearing, then that would require the--what would be now, according to your rules—call the complainant coming back, bringing forward the case under Chapter 91, HRS Chapter 91. So he would be responsible for the burden of proof and the burden of persuasion. So what I hear from you all, though, is that you have specific questions that the department needs to respond to. So I’m just kind of throwing out whether or not it’s—what you’re asking for is more of an informal hearing, where the parties come forward and provide information to the Board. MR. HENRICKS: If we went back to an informal hearing, then what we’re hearing now—we could not make a finding as to the guilt or innocence at that point. It would have to go to a formal hearing to do it, so we’d have to go one more step further. I don’t see that that’s necessary. I’m saying let’s go to a formal hearing now. I’m saying at this point, as far as I’ve read everything, he’s had enough of a prima facie case for me to find there is a violation, unless I’m giving the Board [sic] a chance to come forward. If they want to knock that off, they can, all right? Is that what we understand at this point? MR. BALSIS: Yes, and I’ll ask legal counsel. If you do get into an informal hearing, is Mr. Henricks correct in that we cannot find guilt or non-guilt? MS. SCHOEN: Actually, my understanding is you could. The Board could find a violation of the Code of Ethics even after informal. But in the past, you have conducted formal