Laserfiche WebLink
part of the conversation. The idea of threating repercussions, <br />holding in contempt for lying, repeating again and again those are <br />the things that I’d have to go back to and see is, are there any, is <br />there anything there in the impartial records that we have that’s <br />why I ask the question about the minutes and how they’re taken. <br />There is no indication that there’s any reason for the taker of the <br />minutes the one that’s transcribing the audio to have any particular, <br />what’s the phrase I’m looking for, to have any particular belief one <br />way or the other in the situation, they’re just going to transcribe the <br />minutes. So what we have is, a representation of what was said as <br />we’re able to get. And when I take a look at that I don’t find, I <br />find again a frustration with a situation that has since been resolved <br />and is not actually part of the conversation here, but I don’t find <br />where individuals were treated in a, in an incourteous and unfair or <br />like a partial manner non-impartial manner. So I don’t, I don’t <br />think I would find that the (a)(3) has necessarily been broken. Can <br />Mr. Henkel be loud? Can Mr. Henkel be forceful? I think we can, <br />I think he’s demonstrated that that’s the case here. Are, is the <br />Windward Planning Commission as most planning commissions <br />are dealing with issues where emotions can run high? Certainly <br />and so I would, I’m sure Mr. Henkel will take this under <br />advisement you have to be cautious when you’re dealing with <br />matters of public concern and dealing with members of the public. <br />We’re also going to have their own emotions perhaps running high <br />in terms of specific things and their opportunity to be heard and I <br />don’t necessarily find a violation here. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: Mr. Henricks do you have anything further to say? <br /> <br />Mr. Henricks: Nothing else. <br /> <br />Mr. Balsis: At this point in time we’ve had discussion. Is there, is there any <br />motions or as to what we would like to do with the petition at this <br />point in time? <br /> <br />Mr. Adams: If I could ask Counsel what are our options again in dealing with <br />the petition? <br /> <br />Ms. Schoen: You may at this point dismiss the petition or may make a finding <br />of no violation. I’m sorry, in the past where you have entertained <br />an informal hearing, have taken testimony, and I have seen you <br />styled it more as a finding of no violation and then the informal <br />advisory opinion will articulate in more detail what was discussed <br />versus a dismissal, it’s you know, usually not after you have taken <br />testimony and documentary evidence, but your rules allow you to <br />do either one. <br />17 <br /> <br /> <br />