Laserfiche WebLink
before the effective date of the contract. So what I'm <br /> trying to say is things that go into effective July 1 are <br /> already being processed now. In a sense, there's some <br /> logic to trying to get things squared away with the Board <br /> ahead of time. What we're doing now, technically <br /> speaking, there in compliance as this Board is having this <br /> discussion right. Come July 1, this new law will take into <br /> effect, but it won't really kick in as far as the bid notice <br /> requirements until the next go around. So I think what's <br /> happening, I'm speculating, I think what's happening is <br /> their trying to make sure their okay in the interim period <br /> between July 1 until the next time the contract comes <br /> around. But if the Board decides to do what it's doing now <br /> I mean we're on solid, legal basis as far as being in <br /> compliance now for the current law. The question pertains <br /> to come July 1. Like Board member Adams said, he's <br /> more comfortable in doing with the here and now which is <br /> of course the safest approach to take. <br /> Mr. Adams: If I might Madame Chair. I don't think it's safe, I think it's <br /> the law. Right and so that's just my, that's how...it's not <br /> just how I feel about it, it's what I think is correct. <br /> Mr. Robinson: Madame Chair if I may. I note that the provision requires <br /> disclosure in the course of the bid process and also seeking <br /> an opinion which she's doing so I mean even with the new <br /> law she would still be in compliance by having informed <br /> this Board ahead of time and then disclosing in the bid <br /> process. So I don't have problem with it currently or in the <br /> future as well provided they disclose it in the bid process. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Alright. Any further discussion in regards to this matter? <br /> Mr. Yoshimoto: I have one point of clarification then. So as part of the new <br /> law, basically it states here"Board opinion shall continue <br /> to satisfy this requirement until a change occurs in the <br /> financial interest or role of the County officer". So is what <br /> this Board saying is that the petition and facts as presented <br /> is okay now?And after July 1 or the petitioner have to <br /> come back after July 1 to get another opinion? I want to <br /> make that clear so we're not wasting their time. <br /> Mr. Adams: The motion I made refers to the law now. If there is a <br /> desire to include things about any future situation or future <br /> law, that's not my motion. That would have to be an <br /> amendment or a separate motion. <br /> 4 <br />