Laserfiche WebLink
should defer action until after the trial. As it stands currently, the <br /> trial is set for October 10. It's relatively firm as these things get at <br /> this point. We expect it to take quite a while. We expect selecting <br /> a jury to be quite a task and the more media coverage...the more <br /> outside discussion of this in this kind of form. It makes that <br /> process harder and so that is one of our main concerns. My <br /> secondary concern is that my understanding is the court had...I <br /> mean the Board had already decided to defer this and we're talking <br /> about a reconsideration of this. Nothing substantially has changed <br /> since that previous decision was made. So that's my other concern <br /> is the case is proceeding as it is and we have a set date in the <br /> relatively future. This isn't some far away date that we're talking <br /> about. We're talking about October and it's while the Mayor is <br /> still in office and that case will be decided shortly after that. So <br /> it's our position that the deferral is the right move here and that's <br /> what we would ask. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Any further discussion? <br /> Mr. Adams: In the essence of fairness...I'd like to give Mr. Hyland the <br /> opportunity to comment. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Yes. Mr. Hyland go ahead. <br /> Mr. Hyland: Thank you Mr. Adams. Okay. The Mayor's term expires I believe <br /> on the fifth of December. So any trial to postpone this until after <br /> the trial and Mr. Sing has already said it will be a lengthy trial so it <br /> probably run into November. So the Board have to wait until its <br /> November meeting to put it on its December calendar. By then the <br /> Mayor will no longer be employed by the County. And that means <br /> you folks are not gonna hear anything about this petition. It just <br /> die when the Mayor leaves office. Now...we've already heard that <br /> there are....(inaudible)...I only did not include the name because I <br /> didn't know if you were gonna deal with it at all and I didn't see <br /> any point in getting that lady involved if nothing was gonna come <br /> of it. I don't know the lady...I'd never met the lady...I still have <br /> never met the lady...I've only talked to her on the phone, but she <br /> did confirm what she heard and she confirmed that Mr. Goodenow <br /> was anonymous to her before she overheard him in the hall. So I <br /> just wanted to get that into your statement about it being <br /> anonymous and not under oath. But more importantly...the <br /> evidence is as we heard from I think which better judge of what's <br /> appropriate then Mr. Sing. We heard from the Attorney General <br /> himself. The head law enforcement officer for this State that there <br /> is no problem with this Ethics Board determining...question under <br /> its jurisdiction and not waiting for the results of a criminal trial. <br /> 32 <br />