My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
12-12-18 Regular Session Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Corporation Counsel
>
Board of Ethics
>
Minutes
>
2011-2018
>
2018
>
12-12-18 Regular Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/12/2019 3:18:34 PM
Creation date
2/12/2019 3:18:24 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
• <br /> • <br /> Mr. Colima: Good morning and it's not actually not an agenda item. It's a <br /> comment that I wanted to make at the last meeting but counsel <br /> advised against it because you were in recess at the time. <br /> Ms. Kahakalau: Can you please state your name for the record please...thank you. <br /> Mr. Collman: Yes...Armon Collman. My comment is...is that I'm very <br /> appreciative that you're going through this review process for the <br /> ethics commission. As I can tell from Mr. Goodenow's work at <br /> trying to make this very simple for most people to be able to <br /> understand the legalese that's involved with it as well. I only have <br /> one question for you though is...is that in all of the ethics rules that <br /> are available worldwide and nationwide...I'm curious as to why <br /> you limited your vision to the islands? <br /> Mr. Goodenow: That's a very good question...and I think there's two points <br /> regarding that. One is that...we are confined by our charter and <br /> our code. And at least as far as the charters are concerned our <br /> counties are similar in that respect. I can't just come out with rules <br /> and that's why I said we have to stop if you...you know my memo <br /> I sent out. Because wait the code doesn't give...we'll get into that <br /> later right but that's one reason cause it has be in those confines. <br /> But the other reason too is that there is a body of case law or <br /> published opinions is better to say...not case law but their <br /> published opinions from the other counties and because a lot of the <br /> language is similar. Especially is to the fair treatment and that <br /> those provisions right. It kind of makes...you know we have that <br /> to look at. But I hear what you're saying. To be honest...our goal <br /> for revising the rules...there are two goals really. One is to allow <br /> us to do civil fines as ordered by the County Council and 08-57 the <br /> ordinance right? So...it wasn't our goal to come up the...maybe <br /> the very best...that's really the policy of the County <br /> Council...right and the members of the charter commission. <br /> We're really just trying to fashion our rules to follow the code. <br /> But at the same time our other goal was Mr. Tucker came in he <br /> felt, he didn't have a fair shake at this thing. And to be <br /> honest...because under our current system in the code...it's like <br /> we have an informal hearing right...then you have a formal <br /> hearing and then the employee has a chapter 91 hearing in the <br /> department which is closed and there's no mechanism for someone <br /> who felt a grieve to take it to the next level. So that is our other <br /> goal, is to at least have a process where both the respondent who's <br /> being accused and the complainant who is making the complaint <br /> have equal due process...a hearing where there can be a decision <br /> that at least comports with due process and chapter 91. So that's <br /> my long and convoluted answer. But I think it's a good one and I <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.