My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2016-11-09 Regular Session Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2011-2018
>
2016
>
2016-11-09 Regular Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/7/2016 9:34:54 AM
Creation date
12/6/2016 3:52:50 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
73
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mr. Goodenow: This is a personal matter...there may be information about his <br /> personal finances that we don't know. It's could be a...I mean it's <br /> a personnel type of issue. I think any other County employee be <br /> certainly would have no question of having a privacy...all be it <br /> there's been a trial that's a lot out in the public. There may be <br /> some components I mean that other charges that aren't related to <br /> what was in the trial so I'd say it's definitely their privacy issues. <br /> Mr. Adams: I appreciate that I think that on the whole I would have to come <br /> down on the other side of that...that this is sufficiently an issue of <br /> public notoriety that having a discussion about how it's going to be <br /> handled and the issues associated with it need to be on the record. <br /> That would be my view. <br /> Mr. Goodenow: Just add to that I would note that any vote and any decision making <br /> would have to be public and as would be any written decision...I <br /> mean in my opinion I don't know if Mr. Murai would concur with <br /> that. There are two steps here and I'd say the first one involving <br /> perhaps personal finances and employee related matters. It would <br /> fall under category of requiring a closed hearing. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: As far as procedure wise is concerned...generally the practice has <br /> been that the responding request a closed hearing prior to and we <br /> also have the option of asking people when they come here <br /> whether they want to have open or closed hearing. It's generally <br /> been the respondent being present to make that motion. So I am <br /> very, very disappointed that the respondent is not here. The Mayor <br /> is not here because I feel you know that this really warrants his <br /> presence and his request to have a closed hearing. Do we have any <br /> further discussion? I call for the questions...anybody opposed <br /> please say no and anybody... <br /> Mr. Adams: No. <br /> Mr. Goodenow: Yes. <br /> Mr. Robinson: After hearing discussion I'll say no. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: No...so we have three no's and one yes. So the motion is not <br /> carried. <br /> Motion and Vote: Mr. Goodenow moved to go into closed hearing. Mr. Robinson <br /> seconded the motion. Members Kahakalau, Adams and Robinson voted no. Mr. <br /> Goodenow voted yes. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Goodenow? <br /> 17 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.