Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Robinson: I'd second that motion. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Any discussion? <br /> Mr. Adams: I would make the following comments. Federal <br /> Government in 2002 passed public law 107107 that <br /> specifically discuss the issue of federal employees and their <br /> ability to have for their personal benefit frequent flyer <br /> miles and other types of travel benefits that might come <br /> their way through no fault of their own. The State of <br /> Hawaii back in 1992 through the Department of <br /> Accounting and General Services actually after a ruling by <br /> the State Ethics Commission on this matter discussed this <br /> and tried to parse this in such a way that took into account <br /> what the current state of the art was in terms of frequent <br /> flyer benefits at the airlines were doing and the cost benefit <br /> analysis of the State being able to administratively manage <br /> following all that. Ultimately, the phrasing that they used <br /> was while the current frequent flyer programs have added <br /> numerous complications to the administration of travel <br /> benefits, never the less travel benefits accrued on State <br /> travel must were all possible be used for State business. <br /> That's their starting point. Employees should unless not <br /> permitted by the airlines establish and maintain separate <br /> State and personnel travel accounts. Where separate <br /> accounts are not allowed, and State and personnel travel <br /> credits are commingled in a single account, State credits <br /> must still be used for State travel to the extent that it is <br /> possible. If the benefits cannot be used for future State <br /> purpose, the employee may use State travel benefits for <br /> personal travel. I think that's where we stand, twenty-two, <br /> twenty-four years later. I think that the idea that and when <br /> I picked this up, this appeared to be something that was <br /> supposedly for both State and County governments. Now I <br /> have been able replicate that in my views since I don't <br /> know that the County actually has some type of view on <br /> travel benefits relating to frequent flyer type programs for <br /> County employees specifically. Which makes this actually <br /> a little troublesome for me because it's not our job to <br /> making policy. It's our job to follow the policy that is <br /> made. However, I think that the reason for my discussion <br /> is that when you take a look at the Federal government and <br /> you take a look at what the State government has done. <br /> They are taking in account the fact that these benefits are <br /> de minimis in large part that they are...it's not something <br /> 7 <br />