Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0634.002 1996-1998 d ` Mtv,or N~ `P,•.t',~ ~ Vim,' Stephen K. Yamashiro Richard Wurdeman Mayor Corporation Counsel ~~Or Nr~+ s ~OLtI'C~~1 xI~ C~11'tC~' + . ! 1 ~ ~ ; OFFICE OF THE CORPO LION COUNSEL 101 Aupuni S[reet~ Suite 325 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720.426 VAba)961.8251 • Ftlx t808)~ 961.8622 „ .ri January 22, 1998 The Honorable James Y. Arakaki Chairperson Hawaii County Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 RE: Written Submission in Support of Bill 178. Dear Chairperson Arakaki: The Office of the Corporation Counsel respectfully requests the support of the County Council in adopting Bill 178 as submitted. Specifically, the Office of the Corporation Counsel supports the transfer of $750,000 from the Fund Balance to Account No. 010-131-5131.10-115 Special Counsel & Settlements. This unusual request for a supplemental appropriation is necessary because of two cases, the Konno, et al., n. County of Hmvaii, et al., privatization case and the William Silva, et al., v. County of Hawaii, et al., police promotion case. There is a substantial need for this supplemental appropriation. In the present fiscal year, the Office of the Corporation Counsel budgeted a total of $221,358 for Special Counsel. The Konno, privatization cast has been a long and drawn out case, with both sides appealing decisions to the Hawaii State Supreme Court. The Silva, case, quickly siphoned off available funds. The Department of Public Works, under a similar agreement with our office set aside an approximate total of $210,000 to continue to pay litigation costs. As with the Police Department, our office will repay the Department of Public Works for any litigations funds advanced. Similarly, the Silva case was a substantial and rapid expenditure of available funds. When the budget was drawn up in 1995, the Silva case had not been filed with the United States District Court nor was it anticipated. The complaint was filed on May 17, 1996. A year and a half later, the case ended on November 19, 1997, with the County winning a motion for summary judgment hl the current fiscal year, a total of approximately $521,358.00 has been spent. The Hawaii County Police Department, under an agreement with our office has set aside approximately $320,000. Our office is responsible for repaying the Police Department if this supplemental appropriation is adopted. . -_-(0 4.03, • ut _ w~ MI_ The Honorable James Y. Arakaki Page 2 January 22, 1998 As you know, our office was disqualified from providing legal services in both cases. In the Kovno case, Mr. Richard Wurdeman was a named defendant which created a conflict of interest. In the Silva case, our office received two (2) opinion letters disqualifying our office from representing the County. Our office was of the opinion that based on the record of the previous "Guy Paul" lawsuits, it was in the County's best interest to pursue him as an adverse party. The Office of the Disciplinary Counsel advised our office in two (2) separate letters that because of our office's representation in the prior "Guy Paul" cases in which the County indemnified and represented former Chief Guy Paul, the County could not take an adverse position against him. The County's legal obligations and anticipated costs in this and the next fiscal year creates a need for this supplemental appropriation. Our office is in the process of making the last payments to legal counsel in the Silva case. Based on allegations about over billing, our office has nearly completed a review of all bills for legal services by all attorneys in this case. The initial review of the billings indicates that negotiations will be held for reductions in fees and costs. For example, Mr. Brian DeLima has graciously volunteered to reduce his fees by $5,000. The police officers in the Silva case have now refiled their common law claims in the Third Circuit Court. The County was served with the complaint on January 14, 1998. The attorneys for all defendants anticipate filing a motion to dismiss the complaint for violating the applicable statute of limitations. This argument was raised in the federal district court, but the court chose not to rule on this particular issue. The work on this motion has already been done in substantial part. Based on some of the concerns raised by the Council and the Accounts Division, our office intends to proceed in a different manner concerning the anticipated costs of this case. All counsel for defendants have been requested to submit an estimated budget for litigating the Silva, case. The estimates will be based on two (2) different scenarios: (1) Full trial, which includes an abbreviated discovery schedule, since a substantial amount of discovery has already been conducted and preserved in the federal case; and (2) The cost of litigating the present case only on the motions and appeal. Additionally, the office will ask the Council to set higher ceilings concerning the amount appropriated for the individual attorneys. It should be noted that the United States District Court, will hear the County's motion for reimbursement of fees and costs on February 26, 1998 at 10:00 a.m.. The Office of the Corporation Counsel respecU~ully requests the Hawaii County Council to pass the supplemental budget request for $750,000 for Account No. 010-131-5131.10-115 Special Counsel & Settlements. The Office of Corporation Counsel is confident that either by motion or as a result of trial, there will be no liability on the part of the County. Moreover, the County's willingness to continue to fight this case will finally end a long string of settlements arising from former Chief Paul's administration. The Honorable .lames Y. Arakaki Page 3 January 22, 1998 Thank you for this opportunity to comment on this important matter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Respectfully yours, ed H. S. Hong' Assistant Corporation Counsel I