Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />discussion, I’ll call for a vote for a motion to remove Ms. Baber from the petition. All those in <br />favor. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis, Ms. Kahakalau, Mr. Henricks, Mr. Hisashima, Mr. Adams (simultaneously): Aye. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: All those opposed. Hearing no oppose, the motion is passed. The question I have <br />for discussion here is regarding Ms. Hecht. Does anybody have any questions here on how you <br />would like to proceed? <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: Mr. Chair. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: Yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: There’s an element in our Article 15 Section 2-86(b), 2-86(b) refers to Alleged <br />Conduct of Someone Other than Inquirer. Under the informal advisory opinions and about three <br />lines down in there it refers to the petition shall be filed within six years of the alleged violation. <br />That was the purpose addressing that particular point was my purpose for asking Mr. McNett <br />about the situation, the violation that he was referring to in his petition and the date, the timeline <br />associated with that. And although Mr. McNett identified that this is in his view something <br />that’s an ongoing situation, the petition does not refer to that. The petition refers to a timeline <br />associated with the 2006 election which is 7 to 8 years… <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: Yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: …which would be outside the statute of limitations here, and having heard nor <br />seen that there was any indication cause you go down further, nothing herein shall bar <br />proceedings against a person who, by fraud of other device, prevents the discovery of a violation <br />of the code of ethics. I haven’t heard or seen anything that’s been presented to us that indicated <br />that that discovery of that violation or alleged violation has, that there was anything that <br />prevented that discovery. As a result, I think then we’re back to the statute of limitations on this <br />particular matter being six years and so it would appear to me that this petition is now waning in <br />terms of being presented within the statute of limitations timeline. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: Thank you. Are there any further comments about this? Do you have a motion? <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: I move that we dismiss the petition for not being filed timely. <br /> <br />Mr. Henricks: I second. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: There has been a motion and it’s been seconded to dismiss the petition because it <br />is outside of the, because it’s not filed timely within the six year period, our statute of limitations. <br />Is there any further discussion on this matter? Go ahead. <br /> <br />Ms. Kahakalau: I just wanted a point of clarification because I don’t understand inter alia <br />either. If we could please get a little bit of… <br /> <br />Ms. Schoen: I’m sorry for using it. What it means is “among other things”. So just for the <br />Board’s information, when we received petitions we try to articulate as best as possible what the <br /> <br />11 <br /> <br />