Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-09-18 Regular Session Minutes1. HAWAII COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS MINUTES —REGULAR SESSION Tuesday, January 9, 2018 10:02 a.m. to 11:50 a.m. Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street County Council Chambers Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Members and Staff Present: Ku Kahakalau, Chair Kenneth Goodenow, Vice -Chair Shay Bintliff, Member Rick Robinson, Member Nan Sumner -Mack. Member J Yoshimoto, Deputy Corporation Counsel Emily Hirayama, Secretary CALL TO ORDER (10:02 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: Aloha Kakahiaka... Good morning and Hau`oli Makahiki Hou ... Happy New Year's ... I hear by call the meeting of the Board of Ethics of the County of Hawaii for January 9 to order. My name is Ku Kahakalau and before we get started and introduce our board members I do want to express my sincere gratitude to Doug Adams who was a member until this last ... well meeting and his term has expired but I really wanted to go on record and -thank him for his contributions over the last five years to this Board of Ethics ... he did a fabulous job and I just wanted to have the records reflect that... as I mentioned my name is Dr. Ku Kahakalau and I'd like the rest of our members to introduce themselves as well. Mr. Robinson: George R. "Rick" Robinson. Ms. Kahakalau: Alright. Mr. Goodenow: Wow I never knew. Ms: Kahakalau: I never knew that ... and please turn on your microphones when you speak so that... Mr. Goodenow: Ken Goodenow. Ms. Bintliff: Dr. Shay Bintliff. 1 Ms. Sumner -Mack: I'm Nan Sumner -Mack and I'm brand new on the board so I probably will be quiet today ... thank you. Ms. Kahakalau: And we wanted to express a special welcome to Nan and we're excited that you have joined us and just for those in case you didn't notice the women are in the majority now... compared to when I first started it was an all-male board so we've come a long way ladies.... I'm just kidding... thank you again. Of course we also have our Corporate Counsel and Emily with us this morning and as well as members of the public... 2. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS (10:03 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: However, I don't see any... statement from the public on agenda items is that correct? Ms. Hirayama: Yes. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay. 3. APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR SESSION MINUTES OF DECEMBER 12, 2017. (10:03 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: Then we shall move on to the approval of the regular session minutes of December 12, 2017. Mr. Goodenow: I move that we adopt the minutes. Mr. Robinson: Second. Ms. Kahakalau: Any discussion. in regards to the minutes ... hearing none I call for the question ... all in favor say aye ... any opposed ... that motion is carried ... thank you Mr. Goodenow. Motion and Vote: Mr. Goodenow moved to adopt the minutes. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 4. NEW BUSINESS (10:04 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: And there is no new business as well so we will move right to agenda item 5 ... unfinished business. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (10:04 a.m.) 2 10:04 a.m. a. Discussion with Petitioner regarding past Petition 2016-16 alleging that County officers or employees are in violation of Section 2-83(a)(3) and 2-83- (b) of the Hawaii County Code. b. Discussion with Petitioner regarding past Petition 2016-17 alleging that County officers or employees are in violation of Section 2-83(a) (3) and 2-83 (b) of the Hawaii County Code. Ms. Kahakalau: Is the petitioner present? Could you please come up sir... Aloha ... ifyou could please turn on the microphone and then for the record state your name and what agenda item that you're _.here to speak about? Mr. Tucker: My name is Robert Tucker ... I'm here for agenda items 5a and 5b. Ms. Kahakalau: Thank you so much sir. Just for clarification and especially for oux newest members... could corporate counsel please explain what the word discussion means in terms of the procedures and the parameters that we're here for today. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay. Thank you Madame Chair ... first of all ... we may want to ask the petitioner if he wants to have both items 5a and 5b be addressed at the same time if that's. okay with you... Mr. Tucker: Concurrently would be... Mr. Yoshimoto: Concurrently ... okay...so for the record Madame Chair if the record can reflect that we're also discussing petition 2016-17 as well ... that's the first ... if the board's okay with that ... yes. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes... alright... are all the members okay with that? Alright ... so we will take a and b together. Mr. Yoshimoto: Together... Ms. Kahakalau: Yes thank you. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay. So..., I'll briefly explain my understanding as to why these items are agendized and then Mr. Tucker you can fill in where ever you know I may overlook or ... okay so basically Mr. Tucker had these petitions back. in 2016 ... the board heard those, petitions and then ... I would say sometime in October of 2017 ... Mr. Tucker sent me an email ... regarding concerns that he had about the procedures that were utilized by the board during the past petitions and so then he ... expressed ... an intent to file a complaint and at the same time 3 he ... suggested mediation... when I say complaint as a complaint against the board and myself as its attorney ... so because the communication was directed to the board ... I felt it was necessary to bring this matter before the board because the board can directly communicate with Mr. Tucker and then move forward from there ... so that's where we are ... Mr. Tucker if you care to add or elaborate anything further or you can just.... Mr. Tucker: (inaudible — microphone not on) Mr. Yoshimoto: That does... okay ... I didn't miss anything... Mr. Tucker: Did you want to provide explanation or shall I pick up the thread from there? Mr. Yoshimoto: That's my understanding as to what brought us here ... there's other details that you can ... so yeah you can elaborate from that point further unless there's anything else you wanted me to address but that brings us to where we are today. Ms. Kahakalau: One moment ... just for clarification because we have new members ... so this is a little bit different from our usual way we have a petition ... and then we look at the merit of the petition etc .... so at this point ... this is a discussion and we're here to hear Mr. Tucker and your concerns sir. Mr. Tucker: Thank you very much. Mr. Goodenow: If I could add one thing..:just... you probably know this but I want to thank the staff for providing all the materials from the original petition, copies of the letters submitted and the minutes that we have... and... so we have reviewed that. Mr. Tucker: Thank you. The merits of the petitions from 2016 ... I'm not here really to discuss ... both of those petitions... were dismissed by the commission at the time and they had been resolved in other ways subsequently so ... what I was concerned with was the procedural errors that were committed by in my opinion by counsel and by the commission itself... now... to get to the point ... I had filed two separate petitions of complaint and those as my understanding perhaps J can correct me as we proceed... those petitions once I filed them were forwarded to the respondents or the people against whom I had complained and in that process normal process they 4 were given two weeks to prepare a written response to my complaint ... I received notice J's secretary that they had received you know ... the response and this is prior to the hearing date and I said well that's great ... I'd like to get a copy of the response ... now I was told that I couldn't get a copy of the written response because it was confidential ... and now I'm not a lawyer but I have ... my family's had some legal history ... I've attended lots of trials but discovery is a pretty basic function in preparing for a hearing... civil or ethics or whatever hearing it may be ... and I was rather shocked that I couldn't have preparation knowing the response from the people I. complained about so that when I appeared at this table ... I would be prepared to fully move forward with my case ... but the hearing was held ... I showed up and I was handed several pages of the response and had about two and half seconds to read them which meant I set them aside ... I couldn't even look at them ... now this ... receiving these documents prior to a hearing is the processes understood as discovery... and discovery is one of the most basic of procedural formats to efficiently prepare for a trial ... so that both parties are relatively well informed about where we're going ... and so the commissioner such as yourself do not have your time misused as we try to unearth the facts of a case ... be they right be they wrong and... and so that lack of discovery really left me ... poorly prepared to proceed however ... I was asked to present my case and I presented my case ... you know without the benefit of discovery... following my presentation of my case ... I rested ... the respondents came up to the table and they presented their case ... now you can understand that in this there is two points of view in a story ... and I presented my point of view and without any awareness of what was coming ... they presented their point of view ... and their opinion and statements and I had strong questions about some of the statements they made which I felt were not factual ... now at that moment ... the Chair asked are there any questions... and I raised my hand and I said yes I have questions... and I was told you're time to ask questions is in your presentation ... so I was denied cross-examination... now while discovery is rather primary to procedural in a hearing ... cross- examination is equally important in trying to uncover the facts of a case .... and being denied cross-examination... this commission as it was constituted at that time proceeded to take a vote and dismiss my case ... now these two procedural errors both covered under our procedural code HRS 91-10 and pretty well documented in state procedure... you know left me kind of you know bound and tied and tossed to the sidelines so I felt extremely disadvantaged and that my rights had been infringed ... and I wasn't happy about it ... and I walked out the door ... I proceeded in working other corporation counsel to bring some resolution to the issues that we had had at the time ... you know so those ... the issues of the complaint in ultimately ended up being settled out despite the dismissal of my complaint and I ended up with those resolved to my satisfaction ... but what was not to my satisfaction was being denied due process and discovery and you being denied due process in cross-examination because you were not able to hear questions so when Rob Tucker says so and so did something that was wrong ... and the County employees go ... come up and say no we didn't do ... we didn't do anything wrong ... and then the commission goes well they said they didn't do anything wrong case dismissed... that's not an examination of facts ... so what I was faced with was the ethics commission violating its own rules... procedurally in this hearing ... now I had somebody say why did you take so long to get back ... bring it to the subject ... and the fact of life is I have other things going on in my day to day you know I'm not trying to make a career out of things but what brought me to thinking about filing a complaint was... approximately October of last year ... in the tribune herald ... I read that the ethics commission was considering making amendments to the Ethics Code ... I believe that is under way... Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Mr. Tucker: Well ... that constituted good timing from my point of view ... that if there are lapses in the ethics commissions procedures and performances ... while Ethics Code is being considered for a revision is a good time to bring up the subject of being denied my rights in a hearing ... now I approached J asking him in October ... what is the procedure for an ethics complaint filed against the ethics commission? And he response ... he's responsive - attorney ... it took him a day or so but he said well there really no precedent ... we have never had this happen before ... now I don't live my life running around looking for little cracks and wedges where I can inject myself... this is a unique moment but ... sol talked to him I said well under your Rules 6.5 you know there's a pre -conference stuff I think we could do well to get together and discuss this you know and find out what the best course of action would be ... and we met ... and we discussed it ... now the two issues themselves... the discovery issue I feel falls upon J ... perhaps rightly or wrongly ... J would probably offer your guys opinion on the subject and I might ask to cross-examine ... but the denial of cross-examination falls on the commission... now with no known procedure for complaining for filing a complaint against the ethics commission I don't know how many of you would have to recuse yourself from a complaint... and I don't know if you would have a quorum left over when it was done ... when the recusals were complete ... so I... contacted J and said well you know J perhaps we could consider mediation as a way to solve this ... and I never got a firm response from J back about moving forward or a way from mediation as a subject ... what I got was ... we'd like to invite you to a hearing on January 9 for discussion... it was that simply explained.... Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes ... thank you very much we appreciate that ... Mr. Goodenow ... I have.. . Mr. Goodenow: For discussion I do have a question for you ... first I would like to thank you for coming forward ... it's good timing with us looking at the rules and procedures so I do appreciate that ... you know I should know the answer to this but I'm sorry to say I don't but ... when you fill out the actual petition ... and you submitted ... do you get any kind of letter back from ... saying that oh we've received your petition and here are some of the guidelines of the Board of Ethics? Mr. Tucker: I recall that I did. Mr. Goodenow: I don't know if there was anything in there about an informal verses a formal hearing ... a formal hearing which has to comply with all of the statutory procedural requirements and the requirements in our rules... right... that's what would get say appealed or ... but the informal hearings quite different I don't know if you had any ... what I'm ... understanding of that ... you know what notice did you have regarding your right to a formal hearing ... after the informal hearing you can say hey I don't like 7 what you did ... I want a formal hearing... meaning witnesses... courtroom type procedures... but I'm not sure ... if you understood... you know what kind of notice you got about that or did you consider asking for a formal hearing? Or you just didn't know to do that ... or that's what I'm curious about... Mr. Tucker: I understood it to be ... I understood it to be a formal hearing and that there are transcripts kept and the hearing was filmed and is on YouTube or somewhere up online to be viewed if you want ... but ... I was not ... it was not my desire ... not too long after the dismissal of my cases ... to appeal ... and it was not my desire here now to reargue these two 2016 complaints. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay ... I also want to echo you know thank you for ... bringing it up so that we can talk about it because we do take our task very seriously here and if there are things that we can improve and if we can make... communication more transparent and if we can meet the needs of the people that come to us in a better way that we're currently doing that ... you know we're definitely open in terms of amending the code etc .... so maybe I'd like to start with ... kind of dissecting a little bit and just starting with the "a" part to me which is a discovery piece and just for ... J to go over the procedure and we do have it in our minutes but because not everybody is familiar with it I think it would be a good thing for us all to know anyway... Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Ms. Kahakalau: What the specific procedure is in terms of the discovery aspect. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay ... thank you Madame Chair so I'll point the members and Mr. Tucker to board rule 4.13 (Confidentiality) and I'll read that into the record... subsection a states...."All records, reports, documents, exhibits, and other evidence received by the board shall be held in confidence, and no information as to the contents thereof shall be disclosed unless such items are presented and received by the board at a hearing or meeting that is open to the public." So as I recall ... I think I explained this at hearing that we had during the first petition because Mr. Tucker did raise you know the same concerns back then as he did today and I explained in that—the records need to be confidential and that's why the board received those records into evidence to properly consider 0 them ... I think the board members... those that were here... actually going through that process of reviewing them and then... accepting them into evidence so that the board could consider those things right so ... so that's the rule that we've had in place since I don't know when these... 1990 when these rules were drafted ... as to the rule amendment issue ... you know I think these points are good points because the board and let me clarify ... the board is in the process of considering rules changes not changes to the code but the rules basically support the code and it can be consistent with the code as well as the charter so I think the points are always good for discussion to make our rules better ... this is a rule ... basically it says what it says and that's been our interpretation of the rule to keep those records confidential until presented to the board ... Mr.... Mr. Goodenow: So ... but ... that would be before the informal hearing ... if there were a formal hearing ... right I mean then we of course ... how does this discovery work with a formal hearing.... Mr. Yoshimoto:. Right so the standard rules of discovery would apply to a formal hearing so in looking back at the minutes ... I believe we talked about the board's procedure in the initial review which we had for this petition ... and then there's other steps that we can take as far as an informal hearing or a formal hearing... Mr. Goodenow: How... well... what do we have to do to have a formal hearing? Mr. Yoshimoto: So there ... the board can initiate a formal hearing or one of the parties can request a hearing but the board needs to make a finding and to find it necessary you know to do so. Mr. Goodenow: So we would say we need the formal hearing and then it's like a contested hearing you have a... Mr. Yoshimoto: Right. Mr. Goodenow: Witnesses and... Mr. Yoshimoto: So you know as the rules point out I think it's our rules 6.2 I think you know ... board member Goodenow you mentioned that right ... 6.2 for formal hearings ... it talks about formal hearings ... it talks about ... subpoenaing witnesses... production of any books, 0 paper, represented by counsel, the right of cross-examination, notice to all parties... that's in our rules as well. Mr. Goodenow: I'll wait ... you continue I gonna start going into discussion so better be quiet ... thank you. Mr. Yoshimoto: A couple of points of clarifications ... Mr. Tucker please feel free to interject if I'm saying something not accurate... okay so ... we talked about the confidentiality rules ... we talked about the board in the process of amending its rules and in terms of...you asked me a question as far as whether there was any precedent in filing a petition against the entire ethics board and I said not to my knowledge... there has been in the past a petition... ethics petition filed against some members of the board right and it's legal counsel ... so basically what happened in that situation is ... once there was enough of a board seated that did not have a conflict of interest in hearing the matter ... then the board could address it at that point but in terms of you know your question about whether the entire board ... I'm not aware of anything being filed against the entire board because I think your question was well what happens then and I said well the board can't hear it if then entire board is named right ... I think that was our conversation but anyway ... so that's.... Ms. Kahakalau: Kenny? Mr. Goodenow: Well about the mediation... short of a public ... whole thing with you know ... how could ... well what is your thoughts on that.... Mr. Yoshimoto: Oh no so on the issue of mediation I said because he concern was addressed to the board and myself ... I said that ... the board needed to address the mediation issue you know directly with you because they're also a party to this ... it's not my call ... it's the board's call to decide on you know ... I don't know what your thoughts are on mediation so now is your opportunity to talk to the board about you know what your thoughts are as far as mediation ... that was my response as far as how to address it right because I can't respond but the board can. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay ... I'd like to take it a step back if it's okay and go back to the issue of discovery... you heard what our counsel said...does that make sense or does it not make sense or do we need to talk further about it...do we ... do you have any suggestions etc. 10 Mr. Tucker: I have a couple questions to J ... under 4.13 (Confidentiality)... by what manner did you maintain confidentiality as you transmitted my complaint to the individuals I was complaining against. Mr. Yoshimoto: Your name was redacted... that's the standard procedure all petitions that we receive to maintain confidentiality ... and your address as well. Mr. Tucker: So the next question would be ... on that basis ... why couldn't you redact their names from the response and provide it to me ... hearing. Mr. Yoshimoto: Because those documents are confidential until presented to the board so that's why you got those documents at the hearing because the rules say that they're confidential until presented to the board in a public meeting and so we went over this you know the first time we had this and this is just you know the rule ... I mean so this is a concern the board can address to as well I mean you're you know it's a valid question but that's basically what the rules say I don't... Mr. Tucker: So question three ... it's a common practice of this commission... on complaints similar to this that the complainant would have no knowledge of the respondent's response until they sit down to the hearing... Mr. Yoshimoto: If it:..yes... if the response it sent to the board which is normally is then that's the time that they would get it when it's presented to the board... now... the exception is nothing that prevents the parties from communicating directly because that wouldn't go through the board but that's assuming that they know each other and because of the confidentiality provisions in here we maintain confidentiality again until these documents are presented to the board so that is our standard procedure yes. Ms. Kahakalau: And this is for the informal hearing though ... we're not talking about a formal hearing. Mr. Yoshimoto: Correct... right. Mr. Tucker: So procedurally ... how does confidentiality apply to pre -conference meetings between the parties? Mr. Yoshimoto: You're referencing our pre -conference rules that normally happens when there is a prehearing conference ... so ... the standard rules of confidentiality would apply in pre -hearing conferences if we did have one and this particular case there were no pre -hearing conferences right so... Mr. Tucker: Right but how do you maintain confidentiality in a pre -hearing conference? Mr. Yoshimoto: Well when you have a pre -hearing conference you would have the parties there so in terms of confidentiality you would already know who the parties are so I'm not sure what your question is because ... this rule that we're ... that you're asking about pertains to records, reports and documents right ... and it basically says that they're confidential until presented to the board in an open public hearing so the context of the pre -hearing conference you need to elaborate because a pre -hearing conference suggest that the parties are known to each other and you know who the parties are and you're gonna present documents like you would in a regular case ... like in a formal hearing ... so I don't understand your question because.... Mr. Tucker: Well I'm trying to understand how in this situation the parties were not known to each other... Mr. Yoshimoto: That's not a legal question I mean that's between you and the department and I know you were working with the department so obviously you had knowledge of them and they had knowledge of you right? I mean you're ... yeah so I don't have any knowledge of that ... I don't have any first-hand knowledge ... I'm just assuming based on what you're telling me right so... Mr. Tucker: Well if their written response... they had two weeks or more to prepare a response to my complaint and I had two and half seconds to digest that information prior to the hearing ... now that's a structural disadvantage now maybe you're relying on ... some procedural code that in my mind is might be in conflict with State code ... but ... in your processes here and examining how you guys are looking to amend your business... this might be an area in which you want to amend your business. Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Goodenow. 12 Mr. Goodenow: I just kind of one related question... following up on it ... so the petition ... who has access to the redacted petition prior to the hearing before it comes before the board ... how's that distributed? Mr. Yoshimoto: The petition is sent to the respondent... redacted. Mr. Goodenow: Right and ... only to the respondent pretty much.. Mr. Yoshimoto: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: I guess and then of course us. Mr. Yoshimoto: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: The first one we get is redacted. Mr. Yoshimoto: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: So ... well that's ... I mean the point of that I assume is because ... so they can come and you know respond ... but would there be anything if we put it in the rules to say ... that the respondent... their response would be provided to the petitioner as soon as it's received ... I mean we could do that don't we... Mr. Yoshimoto: That would be a rule clarification that could clear up that area if the board decides to do so... Mr. Goodenow: That does seem to be a really good point on that part ... I'd agree with that. Ms. Kahakalau: I'm also in agreement with that I mean again transparency you know the more that the various parties know about the issue and the better everybody's informed ... I think that's always a plus so that's my personal opinion and do we have any other opinions from board members in regards to that particular issue which would be ... as we're looking at amending the rule change ... or amending our rules that we consider and that we at least put it on our agenda to look at this ... that aspect of discovery in terms of a petition and the response to the petition also going to the petitioner rather than you know ... only being available at the date of the hearing. Mr. Robinson: Madame Chair if I could just ... instead of the broader issue I'd like to ask specifically Mr. Tucker ... I remember your hearing and the information you presented... was in the course of that were you 13 giving the opportunity to ask for a continuance so that you could review the information or did you bring up the fact that you'd only recently received this information like right at the start of the meeting and you did not have a chance to review it fully? Mr. Tucker: I recall making some calm complaint about my lack of access to this to the response... and... that was all I could is make that statement and move on. Mr. Robinson: Did you think about asking for a continuance so you would have a chance to review this and come back? Mr. Tucker: Well ... did I think about that...I can't respond to whether I did or not at the time. Mr. Robinson: Okay I'm just ... I thought maybe you might have brought it up... Mr. Tucker: I will have to say though that as I sit here I have my own resources available to me and when we ... when I'm up against County employees they have the resources of the County... Mr. Robinson: Right. Mr. Tucker: You know available to them ... now this is a rather... unequal assembly of forces and when you're at a disadvantage by not knowing what's coming at you ... it's a big disadvantage now I go ... might make one other suggestion as far as 4.13 (Confidentiality) you could consider and that would be to allow for claimant or respondent to waive confidentiality....with my high school degree that's the best suggestion I can make to you. Mr. Robinson: You've made some good suggestions as you've ... your high school must be very good ... I'm kidding when I say that but you know you've ... I think the points you've made have great validity.... Mr. Goodenow: Yeah. Mr. Tucker: Well I feel that I'm here on legitimate purpose and I feel that I'm here on a public purpose ... I'm not trying to sharpen my own ax ... I'm not running for public office ... I'm just trying to see that we can get a better "MO" for ethics complaints with a tax payer into the future. Ms. Kahakalau: And we do appreciate it and I think none of us were around when these rules were created I mean as far as being on the Board of 14 Ethics and so we did have Mr. Adams you know working on changes to the rules and I am in the process of communicating with him in regards to that effort ... so we do recognize the need to review and to update and to change if things aren't working for the public you. know because this is not about us ... this is obviously about the public so as I said'we appreciate that ... and so I think as far as the first part ... were ... it has been noted in terms of us discussing that matter further ... and figuring out how we can either waive confidentiality or change the rules to allow for that response to go to the petitioner as well ... so that will be on a future agenda when we specifically address the rule changes ... so we're good ... are we good on that as far as you're concerned? Mr. Tucker: As far as discussion goes... Ms. Kahakalau: Yeah. Mr. Tucker: Yes. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay... alright... and then the second I guess kind of an issue was the whole cross-examination piece ... that's my opinion ... and so ... we want to talk about that a little bit for clarification ... Mr. Goodenow. Mr. Goodenow: I have a question:..you know I asked Mr. Tucker what kind of notice he received ... I mean ... you know I know in a court room people are expected to know the rules and the laws but you know we're different ... we're really a board here that's setup right I mean to serve the public and you know the confidence and ethics and you know I want to make sure that even if legally we.. -.may be alright ... it was an informal hearing ... you know it was completely different setup if you weren't really aware of that and what you're options were ... that's concerning to me ... I'm wondering for J what do ... do we send the petitioners any -kind of little letter about what you know the ... refer to the rules you know and you look up the rules and this is our procedure ... it's an informal hearing ... the board first decides what they can do ... they can either do this ... this or that ... right I mean ... do we send anything out? Mr. Yoshimoto: No ... they would just basically receive the letter acknowledging receipt of their petition and notifying them of the hearing date. 15 Mr. Goodenow: The petition itself ...I'm sorry I don't ... I know I have your original one here but ... I don't know if it says much about you know the rules right ... it's very brief actually... just this one page thing is that that's the form? Mr. Yoshimoto: You're looking at the 2016-16? Mr. Goodenow: 17 Mr. Yoshimoto: 17 Ms. Kahakalau: It's the same. Mr. Yoshimoto: Right so he has an attachment where he elaborates. Mr. Goodenow: Yeah but it doesn't really say well our process is we have an informal hearing... or you know you have a right to request to continue ... it doesn't even say you can ... please refer to our rules which can be found wherever ... I mean ... hopefully online... Mr. Tucker: Well the rules ... if I may. Mr. Goodenow: Yes please. Mr. Tucker: A layman like myself to sit there and say you can refer to the rules ... you start opening it up the rules ... and the process of reading those seventeen pages of rules ... they refer to another thirty-four different sections of code off to the left and the right. Mr. Goodenow: Alright... point well taken and like I said in a court and even here ... there's an assumption but you know we're really here to serve the public I think we should ... work with that. Mr. Tucker: I would like to point out that while... neither yourselves nor I can hold each and everyone one of you to be intimately memorized with every idiosyncrasy of the rules ... you have an attorney here for that purpose. Mr. Goodenow: Alright. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes ... and we do understand that and I think we actually especially myself not being a lawyer ... do ask for assistance quite frequently ... so I think the point that Mr. Goodenow is making and correct me if I'm wrong is that perhaps again as we look at the rule changes that we could entertain an effort to look at the 16 communication that happens when a petitioner files a petition in terms of being more explicit as to the procedure and process you know and it's a one-time thing that we would have to create... a one pager... something like that or summary that says thank you for filing your petition ... the next step is an informal hearing where x, y and z happens ... in the case of "a" meaning the informal hearing becomes a formal hearing ... this and this happens ... in the case of "b" this and this is going to happen ... I think definitely I know for myself to be perfectly frank I had no idea of this Board of Ethics prior to you know coming on in terms of the function and the purpose and the rules as a normal citizen ... I would not have any idea filing a petition what would happen next so you know I think for us to create just the simple addendum to the current response that outlines the basic steps you know just so that the petitioners are clear as to you know what's going to happen next so that's something that I think personally I think I can support in terms of us looking at that as we entertain the rule changes. Ms. Bintliff: There is a ... on the second page of the petition ... the Board of Ethics asked you to state the nature of your interest including -- reason for the submission of the petition and then to provide the specifics section of code of ethics in question ... So ... we preempt to get information from you...is that inadequate? Was that inadequate? Mr. Tucker: I thought it was perfectly appropriate to ask me what violations of the code I'm charging instead of waving my hands in the air and saying he pissed me off ... so you know quite frankly on that subject of citing the code ... you know the ethics code is very weak tea for a citizen to base a complaint on ... and one of the basics of my complaint in 2016 was being over a period of months in writing having the County code missed represented to me as fact ... that was not fact ... I was lied to and the only code on which I could rely on was that one of the person I was complaining against was I believe the language was assuming privileges that they were not due and what I was saying was only the County Council... Ms. Bintliff: Unwarranted privileges. Mr. Tucker: Right unwarranted privileges... only the County Council has the right to invent code and if you're gonna in writing over a period of months tell me stuffs code that's not code then you're taking on the 17 role of a County Council which is not in that pay grade ... I mean that all basically all I could hang it on. Ms. Kahakalau: I think as far as the documentation to create a petition you know I think that has been very specific... Ms. Bintliff: Very specific. Ms. Kahakalau: It's understandable ... it's complicated not saying it's easy you know for lay person let's say with say with no college education to file a petition already ... I think it's rather complicated you know but it's definitely explicit... what I think is not explicit is what happens after that and so the communication that we sent out maybe something that we can improve by also creating something similar to what we have here which is how to read the petition would be to have something similar that says how ... where do we go from now that the petition has been filed ... that's kind of I think what we're looking at. Mr. Robinson: Madame Chair if may just ... this is ... I think Mr. Tucker makes a valid point about when he files a petition ... the respondents give their responses prior to this meeting to review the petition that you filed and you don't have a chance to review those ahead of time I think is a valid point.... something we should consider as to how we would like to be able to share that information with the petitioner so that they can prepare themselves when we get to the hearing stage ... they can have a clear response to the petition that's been filed and the responses that's been received as well. Mr. Tucker: It would serve your time better. Mr. Robinson: Yes serve our time better. Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Mr. Robinson: I agree. Mr. Tucker: It would serve your time ... all of your time better if our parties here at this table are both equally prepared. Ms. Kahakalau: J. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay ... so ... those are good points right ... in hearings when the board receives petitions right there's an initial hearing that happens... that's what happened with Mr. Tucker's case right and 18' the board has the options and we did this in this particular case as well right ... there's the option of referring it for an informal hearing or someone making a request to do a formal hearing right so ... so all those options are on the table and you know hindsight is always 20/20... Ms. Kahakalau: Yeah. Mr. Yoshimoto: I mean at the time I do recall Mr. Tucker mentioning these concerns about it right ... he did not ask for continuance... that is true ... then again the board didn't offer it to him but then whose to decide who's supposed to make the ask right ... he did express dissatisfaction with the fact that he was getting it just then and there that information I mean that much is very clear so these suggestions are good suggestions we can certainly improve on the process... again we're not trying to make things difficult... it's just the rules that we have are what they are and so that's why we're in the process of amending them. Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Goodenow... are you volunteering to take on these amendments.... Mr. Goodenow: No ... I turn my light off ... no...well yes I mean I'd be happy to work on that and with the other rules proposals that we have ... I'm wondering though Mr. Tucker how satisfied you are with this I mean with ... just for me personally and we're not allowed to talk before hand of course ... but when I looked at it I went well legally ... I think we're okay ... but there's you know wasn't the forinal hearing and all this ... but it really rubbed me the wrong way and my thought was you know what ... if you still have the issue ... file a new petition and let's ... you want to cross-examine these people ... let's have it ... now you've said that you've kind of resolved everything and maybe it's best we don't go there...I don't even if these people still work there but I want to know if you're satisfied if we do these things ... I mean we're not committed ... I'm not trying to ask you to waive any rights or anything but ... what's your feeling as to where we're at... Mr. Tucker: Well I said what I said when I first sat down that it's not my intention to reargue these issues from these two petitions... and it was the procedurals you know that were of concern to me at this point... as far as my satisfaction with the results ... that have come 19 subsequent to the dismissal my case ... there are some changes effected... without having to well I mean ... I guess I had some leverage with the Public Works department... and they wanted me to not ask certain questions... and if I would back off of asking certain questions... they were willing to make some changes ... now I had to give up asking some interesting questions but I got the changes that I wanted in writing on a County letterhead and that was sufficient to my purpose now at this moment in time I'm not convinced that those changes is affected by a County letterhead are still actually being implemented at the building counter ... and ongoing for me and many many others problem that we're trying to wrestle with and part of it involves this ... is the County department becoming a consistent source of bad information ... now property owners out here as far as planning and building go ... we have investments in land ... some large some small but how we handle our properties or investments effectively depends on accurate information... so when Counties making up stuff ...false stuff and basically saying ... oh this person just gets waived right thru and this person gets forty-seven hurdles to jump over ... I mean you know it's not an equal treatment under the law situation that we have in this County... some of you may feel differently about that but from the user end ... in the last several years things have really gotten bad ... now when Nani Misaki was at the building department... life was beautiful... very helpful... straight forward... public servant ... was there to help you effect your goals ... it's no longer the case ... now the goal is to ... well ... they act like the code is some medieval Latin bible that needs to be interpreted... and people like myself who can read English... don't appreciate that... Ms. Kahakalau: So I understand the ongoing dissatisfaction with in case what I'm hearing specifically ... the building and ... that's not anything for us to.... Mr. Tucker: Right... right... so I'll cut it short. Ms. Kahakalau: You know to agree on or disagree on but we hear you on that part ... I think the question that Mr. Goodenow asked was in regards to what was discussed this morning and your specific two main points which had to do with... discovery issue and then as well the cross-examination issue ... and our proposed efforts to review those two very good points that you brought up ... as we continue to work 20 on changing the rules... how... what is your feelings in regards to that ... do we need to do ... would you like us to continue to discuss this or is this our current plan which is basically to put it on the agenda when we discuss rule change the next time and see how we can be more transparent and how we can increase communication between the petitioner and us in case because you know this is the Board of Ethics issue ... if you're satisfied with what has transpired this morning. Mr. Tucker: As far as discovery goes ... I think we've given it a rather through airing ... and from my point of view I can reserve the right to file a complaint... Mr. Goodenow: Absolutely. Mr. Tucker: Pending the results... Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Tucker: As they proceed ... I'm not in a hurry ... you know I know things take time ... but the end result be of clear interest to me ... as far as the subject of cross-examination... it's so absolutely clear in the code to cross-examination is allowed unless somebody has some thought to put against it ... I can't come up with an explanation as why I was denied cross-examination. Mr. Goodenow: It wasn't a formal hearing ... but I know that seems legalistic and you wouldn't know that and we hear you on that and I think it really needs to be clear to everyone what and maybe we should look at the whole hearing process... streamline it and do something... so but that's a lot of work... Mr. Tucker: I'm still in the dark ... I consider this an informal hearing... Mr. Goodenow: It's not even that. Ms. Kahakalau: No this is just a discussion... Mr. Goodenow: Discussion. Ms. Kahakalau: So that's the hard part for us sir ... we are bound you know by this code and sometimes restricted by this code and confined by this code that was created you know a long time ago but for us specifically and that's why I asked right at the very beginning of this meeting for our counsel to define this word discussion you 21 know which since I've been on here ... we've never had a discussion agendized before so it's you know and how we would say it's Manini you know on some level and on another level it's absolutely not because they're very specific parameters as to what can happen and cannot happen during at this discussion versus an informal hearing which is form of hearing etc .... Nan? Ms. Sumner -Mack: I'm sorry because to ask a question like this but I'm still unclear about the difference between an informal hearing and formal hearing and I'm wondering if Mr. Tucker understood that at the time of the first ... I remember his protesting that he hadn't gotten the response you know before the hearing ... but I don't recall any clarification as to whether this ... that was a formal as opposed to an informal hearing and I'm wondering whether it's ... would have been possible for someone on the board to have asked for clarification to give him a chance to say well I would like a formal hearing. Ms. Kahakalau: So I think that was... thank you very much ... that was sort of indicated by J a little bit earlier you know that who's prerogative is it to request the hearing you know ... is it that we have kind of solicit that request or is it that the requestor knows ... I think either way the requestor... the petitioner should be informed that that is something that they can do as we communicate with them and hence we wanted to create that one pager that kind of you know clarifies these communications but for the record I would like our counsel to maybe clarify those two informal hearing... formal hearing if nothing else for our new board member please. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay ... let me take a step back ... okay so you know we've been referring to what happened in 2016-16 ... I'm looking at those minutes as an informal hearing ... the minutes reflect that that was the initial hearing right and I'm reading through the minutes rights so I mentioned the board can of course hear the initial statements from the parties and can refer this for another hearing ... for an informal hearing or it can schedule a formal hearing or it can do other things such as dismiss the petition ... so the board if free to ask questions with the petitioner... and we shall also hear from the respondent as well so that hearing as far as what I recall and I see in front of me ... that was the initial hearing right and then so normal process is and I think Ku you've done this before when you explained the process to the petitioner's at the beginning as you tell 22 Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: ** Someone from Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Yoshimoto: Ms. Kahakalau: them this is an initial hearing and it can be referred for another day for an informal hearing...that gives them time to process any type of information...discovery issues and what not right...the rules basically provide that the board can move forward right at the initial hearing if it believes it has enough evidence to do so...so my understanding is the board did that... Right. So that's why it didn't rise to the level of an informal advisory opinion were you have findings of fact, conclusion of law and things like that...it was just an order dismissing it so that was the initial part right so...when I did that explanation...there wasn't as I recall very many questions far as the process right... but the board members you know are asking are good questions because you know the whole process is...it's legal I mean that's what it is right although we're an administrative body...is the initial hearing like board member Nan is asking...the informal hearing and the formal hearing right...basically the difference between the informal hearing and the formal hearing is the rules of evidence are you know strictly adhered to on a formal setting like you're in a courtroom right where you do have and our rules specify the right to cross-examination...the right to discovery you know things of that nature right...so in improving the process...we can...be more informative right because the difficulty lies in any board or commission in its rules and the public's understanding of those rules... so if the process here is to better able the public to understand the rules and get through the process without difficulty then I think this is a good process so...you know the suggestions are good ones...we can certainly improve the process and with the board's approval...make changes to the rules. the audience spoke ** I'm not too sure if we can.... It's your call...up to you. Well in the interest of this being you know an effort to improve our communications...I entertain you coming but you need to come up and state your name and...sorry but otherwise you know we have minutes here and we need to know if anything is coming so I will offer you that opportunity. 23 Ms. ----: I just had an information questions... Ms. Kahakalau: Could you please state your name for us. Ms. Aste: Virginia Ace ... I'm a friend of Rob Tucker and I was following this because I'm interested in procedural stuff. Ms. Kahakalau: Thank you. Ms. Aste: That helps people understand better what you do and so forth... is the initial hearing an informal hearing? Mr. Yoshimoto: No. Ms. Kahakalau: Those are two different things. Ms. Aste: So we're talking three types of hearings? Ms. Goodenow: Yes but the initial hearing can move into an informal hearing if the board feels that... Mr. Yoshimoto: If it decides to do so. Mr. Goodenow: Yeah. Ms. Aste So we have three types of hearing... initial... informal... formal. Mr. Goodenow: Right ... the practice though is usually the initial hearing unless there's some defect or something... usually moves forward to an informal hearing. Ms. Aste So even more time would go by ... I'm just saying. Mr. Goodenow: Well... Ms. Aste: But the person... Mr. Goodenow: I should let Corp. Counsel ... but from what I understood what he said is we say this is the initial hearing ... if you want to request an informal hearing or ... to come back ... you can do that cause you want to read the documents or for whatever reason. Ms. Aste: So an informal hearing would function as a continuance... Mr. Goodenow: Well ... yes in a way it's like saying okay I want ... I want to have the informal hearing or ... but what usually happens is no ... everyone just wants to move forward right... usually the 24 people are here ... we just move to an informal hearing ... but I think it should be very clear to the petitioner as to what's you know ... the procedure is...what's going on... Ms. Aste: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: You have a right to request a formal hearing from the start and... couldn't he at the initial hearing say I don't want anything else ... I want a formal hearing ... is that correct .... I should know this but... Ms. Aste: One other question... just an information question... with the hierarchy of it ... the initial hearing ... the informal hearing and the formal hearing... absent rules for the informal hearing... wouldn't the rules for a formal hearing prevail such as discovery and cross- examination... Ms. Kahakalau: Well I think first of all I don't think it's a hierarchical... Ms. Aste: And how are they.... Ms. Kahakalau: Hierarchical .... there's an informal hearing and then you can go formal or you can go informal. Ms. Aste: You mean an initial hearing... Ms. Kahakalau: Sorry ... yeah there's the initial hearing and then you could go either way or be dismissed and because it is an initial hearing... there are different rules that guide the initial hearing that guide an informal or formal... that's my understanding. Ms. Aste: But if it is subservient to ... wrong word ... the formal hearing... wouldn't the formal hearing rules prevail ... I'm just trying.. . Mr. Goodenow: The purpose of the informal hearing is not to have all the rules to try and quickly see what can be ... you know... resolved... Ms. Aste: But if that... Mr. Goodenow: The informal hearing is so we don't have the very court like procedures that would take a lot of time and we have other... a lot of ... you know ethics matters to deal with but ... corp. counsel I was going to ask you before I had to comment... regarding the rules regarding... what it says about the informal hearing ... but I think 25 26 clearly... you can't just ... say oh because this is and this is provision we do it here ... no ... that's not.... Ms. Aste: I'm sorry ... I'm not understanding you. Mr. Goodenow: To say that you ... you do of course can read rules together so they make sense together but it's not ... just because it says informal hearing ... this is the process... that's the process in an informal hearing if the rules are silent ... I think you know you can hire a lawyer and look into all that... Ms. Aste: I'm just...that was the point I meant... Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Ms. Aste: If the informal rules are silent then would not you move to... Mr. Goodenow: No. Ms. Aste: The rules of a regular court room which is close to your formal hearing. Mr. Goodenow: No. Ms. Aste: Why not? Mr. Goodenow: Because.... Ms. Aste If that protects the rights of the petitioner. Mr. Goodenow: The formal hearing ... we don't want a legal argument hear for our hearing.... Ms. Aste: Okay. Mr. Goodenow: But you know you can... Ms. Aste: Why not? Mr. Goodenow: Because the whole point of the informal hearing is to have it to run differently from the formal hearing. Ms. Aste: Shortcuts? Mr. Goodenow: In a way yes knowing.... Ms. Aste: Abdication of the petitioner's rights... 26 Mr. Goodenow: That the petitioner... and he has the right to say you know what you're gonna dismiss this ... I want a formal hearing... Ms. Ace: Okay. Mr. Goodenow: That's how the process works.... Ms. Ace: Okay ... so then back your point that that should be clearly stated or clearly offered ... okay thank you ... and you say it was ... okay I got it ... thank you. Mr. Tucker: The only brief contribution I might make to that was in my research prior to this ... to me it was a hearing approaching... was the ... looking at the code and finding reference through the procedural rules based on HRS 91-10. Mr. Goodenow: Which applied to the formal hearing. Mr. Tucker: Well ... the rules don't say that ... it just says HRS 91-10. Mr. Goodenow: But you know I really think this is great that ... just the appropriate time is now... Mr. Tucker: Well... Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Tucker: That's why watching the newspaper ... I felt that this was the time... Ms. Kahakalau: Yes. Mr. Tucker: Now if I may... appreciating your time today ... there would be one further point I might like to engage in... Ms. Kahakalau: Sir. Mr. Tucker: Considering the opportunity to amend procedural rules and clarify them and improve them to the purposes ... I am curious about how to effect one additional change in the code itself ... and if that can be done with the support of the commission... or the commission remove itself from code issues and it has to be proceeded to with council ... my suggestion would be and I would be looking for this in the future ... I would... there's nothing anywhere in the Ethics Code that requires County employees to be factual or truthful to anybody at any time ... and that was just a jaw dropping omission 27 from an Ethics Code ... now they want to cover who contributes to whose campaign and whose got a little side business on the side ... all that makes well good and sense from an employer/employee point of ethics board but when you're talking about ethics itself ...and as a former eagle scout ... I just find the lack of anything in Ethics Code that requires....a County official to be truthful to a citizen ... to just be a glaring omission ... now it's my intention to hope that you all can help move that theory forward into this ... these amendments as they come either thru Council amendment because I will be talking with Council about this and I would like all support of all several of you ... even you ... can write a letter of support... and... but if you think about it for a moment ... you know the opportunity for citizens ... the code says this and somebody else says ... the code says red and somebody else says black—you know I mean and in writing I mean when you're told stuff verbally at the counter ... later on somebody... well you didn't understand what I said ... I didn't really mean it ... blah blah blah ... but when we're communicating in writing and somebody says you cannot do that on your property unless there's a minimum of two acres and there's no such thing in the code anywhere to exist ... you're being denied your rights on your property ... and that's what led me to write a letter to the Director of Public Works saying I have a complaint and before I file an ethics complaint... I'd like to discuss it ... and then your Public Works office refuses to even respond to you ... so you have to file the complaint... and just trying to get over a simple hump of what the heck is ... a fact has taken me a year and a half and we're here sitting talking about a nickel ... so ... I'm not bitter ... I just think from a public purpose ... the Ethics Code needs to include ... a dose of truthfulness in it ... and I'm not asking you to comment or agree with me but you're nodding your heads and I take that as a positive sign and unless you have more to ask me ... I want to thank you for your time ... I'd like to stand at the sidelines... work with my Council and watch what happens as you proceed to amend your procedurals and hopefully support a new number in the code that says....with appropriate language ... the County officials in communicating with each other or the public need to be factual... Ms. Kahakalau: Thank you very much ... we really appreciate that ... just want to reiterate that for us we're talking about rule changes and I think in your last statement now you reiterated a procedural changes that 28 we can make and we will work on the ones that we have expressed today in regards to the code as you also stated it is a responsibility of the Council but 1 think it would certainly again I appreciate your suggestion here ... behoove us to be...at least informed as this is happening and not just you know by chance we saw it in the newspaper or something but that there could be some kind of a communication from you know Counsel and Emily to us saying the board is working on the code or you know something something and if there are issues that came up at the Council meeting that refer to the codes specifically that we can be kept in the loop and if there is that opportunity to weigh in on adding you know something to the code and I don't think anybody would disagree with you that County. Council... any government employees or any person period should be factual and honest and truthful you know I mean that's the whole point of why we are here ... that and if such a thing will be coming up in the code that you know if there's a way for us to support it etc....I think I don't see any reason why we would not want to do that so basically my suggestion to both our Counsel and Emily would be to if that's alright to just kind of keep us in the loop as Counsel is working on the code and as I said I don't see any reason why we -would not be supportive of your suggestion. Mr. Tucker: It seems obvious... Ms. Kahakalau: Yeah. Mr. Tucker: Well I want to thank you each individually and for your time ... I reserve the right to see how things proceed... and possibly will be in a formal hearing someday ... hopefully not. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Ms. Kahakalau: Thank you very much. Mr. Tucker: Dismissed? Ms. Kahakalau: Yes ... thanks. Mr. Yoshimoto: .So we have the respondent here ... I don't know if the board wanted to ask the respondent if he had anything to say if not just to make sure they have their right too. 29 Ms. Kahakalau: I'm sorry. Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Erickson is here. Mr. Goodenow: Procedurally. Mr. Yoshimoto: Right so just to make sure for the record that if the board wants to ask him any question or he wants to provide input ... we should allow him that if not ... I think we're okay so... Ms. Kahakalau: Is there anybody here that would like to make a statement in any way? Alright sir please come up and state your name... excuse me.... Mr. Tucker: I thought we were done. Mr. Erickson: Aloha Kakou... I' in Neil Erickson from the Public Works building division and the only thing that really came up from this is I've interviewed a lot of people to be part of our staff and the first thing we say is you know any statements of...that we find un -factual or un -truthful will result in termination of the County employment and so I don't know if that's part of our code or just rules and procedures but yeah I think it's really important and I'm really proud that most of...I would say all the people I'd like to believe have never represented or miss -directed somebody from the truth ... so despite the ... maybe some of the experiences that Rob's had at the counter or others that you've talked to ... I'd like to believe that we're not trying to deceive people ... we're just trying to get the truth out of them so that we can help them the best we can... Mr. Tucker: Well I'll tell you I've walked in.... Ms. Kahakalau: Can you please turn on your microphone. Mr. Tucker: I mean I've walked into Planning Department and in my hands I had a letter signed by Chris Yuen saying we received your application on April 10 and I handed it to them and they look at me and go that's not the date that we received your application ... I ended up having to get a lawyer ... you know I mean it's you know ... it's just weird. Ms. Kahakalau: I think you know probably first thing that all of us have had unsatisfactory experiences over the years with one thing or another at and I do appreciate it and it do'appteciate you also sir ... you know for making every effort possible to assure that your department you know ... acts in an ethical and in a truthful responsible manner and you know basically at this point we can only move forward and so we hope that you know when any kind of complaint is submitted to your division... that there is a response you know even if the response isn't necessarily satisfactory at that point at least there is a response because sitting on the other side you know just not knowing what's happening to any kind of communication that we send to government is a very ... you know ... is a very poor kind of a... Mr. Erickson: I understand completely ... I mean I don't know about you but ... we receive hundreds of emails and I try to respond to as many as I possibly can. Ms. Kahakalau: Very good ... alright thank you we appreciate that and we will move on to the next agenda item ... thank you very much....you okay? Ms. Bintliff: Oh yeah'...but can I say something off the record... Ms. Kahakalau: Off the record ... we'll be going into executive session if there's something you want to discuss there or is it just off the record stuff ..go ahead ... we're moving now into executive session. Mr. Yoshimoto: You need a motion. Ms. Kahakalau: And we need a motion to do that. Mr. Robinson: Motion to go into executive session for the usual purposes. Ms. Kahakalau: So we can consult with our board attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the board powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities and also to approve some ... review some confidential financial disclosures. Mr. Goodenow: I'll second that. Mr. Yoshimoto: And we need a vote. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes ... so we have a Pt and 2nd ... any discussion... all in favor say aye... Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to go into executive session. Mr. Goodenow seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 31 11:16 to 11:24 a.m. The Board took a recess. 11:24 a.m. The Board moved into executive session. 11:38 a.m. The Board returned into regular session. 6. VOTING ON EXECUTIVE SESSION MATTERS 11:39 a.m. a. Review of the executive session minutes of December 12, 2017. Ms. Kahakalau: We are just coming out of executive session and I wonder if we have a motion in regards to the minutes. Mr. Robinson: Madame Chair I make a motion to approve the minutes of the executive board dated December 12, 2017. Mr. Goodenow: Second. Ms. Kahakalau: Any discussion... all in favor say aye ... any opposed ... so that motion is carried. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to approve the executive session minutes. Mr. Goodenow seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 10:40 a.m. b. Review of Confidential Financial Disclosure Forms filed pursuant to Section 2-91.1(d), I3awai`i County Code, by County board and commission members and designated County employees, where personal matters will be reviewed. Ms. Kahakalau: And that brings us to agenda item 7..... Mr. Yoshimoto: Madame Chair we need to do the confidential financial disclosure first yeah. Ms. Kahakalau: Yes ... we also... okay... during our executive session we also reviewed confidential financial disclosure for six individuals.... four of them got approved and two got returned for further information... and that was 1 and 6... Mr. Yoshimoto: Were returned for further information... Ms. Kahakalau: Returned for further information. Mr. Yoshimoto: Note for the record that number six ... board member Sumner -Mack recused herself from reviewing her own financial disclosure.... 32 Ms. Kahakalau: That's correct... thank you... 7. DISCUSSION REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE BOARD OF ETHICS OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII. (11:41 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: As we mentioned earlier....Mr. Doug Adams had that responsibility until his was over in December and so we truly thank our Vice -Chair Kenneth Goodenow for volunteering to take on that responsibility ... we really appreciated it because it think it needs to be looked very much from legal prospective and ... that's definitely you know as areas of expertise is concerned... that doesn't mean that the rest of us are not interested in willing to support you and assist you so ... my first action will be to contact Mr. Adams and thank him for his service and then ask him to forward any information that he has of things even if it's in very draft form that he has prepared already to you ... and then may be by the next meeting you can just give us a brief update of what Mr. Adams has shared with you and kind of a little plan as to where you would like to go ... we definitely heard of two issues... whatever you want to call it ... that we should entertain and at least you know discuss in this ... as part of this discussion regarding the amendments and ... I'm looking at the past procedures which was basically one person saying they're gonna work on it and gonna give us an update and then that was from one month to the next ... not to criticize in any way but just looking at as a...how we moved forward up to now ... my suggestion would be to if it's not every meeting maybe every other meeting really have at least one or two items ... that we can specifically spend five or ten minutes you know I'm not talking about hours but a few minutes to give you some feedback from us ... and to you know just get our reactions as a board to a specific rule or specific you know section in the rules etc.....or a new item that we may want to add to the rules... something like that but making it a little more specific ... not necessarily have to agendized specifically but for you to be prepared to say you know ... from the last time I looked at the section so and so ... there's this and this ... these are some ideas ... can we talk about the next time and then we will have some time to think about it ... but I would just like it to be a little more active and... everybody working together and supporting you rather than just giving it to you and saying sink or swim kind of thing... Mr. Goodenow: Okay ... taken that's a good idea... Ms. Kahakalau: Do we have any other comments in regards to agenda item number seven... 33 Mr. Yoshimoto: Madame Chair ... so based on what I've ... what I know ... my suggestion is that the board have a draft set of rules to review... something to go by right and it can be a working draft... something that we can continue to refine but I agree with your sentiment that we need to get going on this because this has been kind of being worked on for a long time and especially the points that we talked about earlier today I think those are good points that are ... pretty easy to implement ... we just gotta make sure that we have the proper language and you know go to public hearing for approval ... for public comment and approval... there other older issues that are a little bit more complex and I don't know if we want to get into those issues now or further refine that and we can discuss that as we move forward ... when we look at the rules and basically I'm talking about ... the administrative fines provision that's a little bit more complex than just the rules that we're talking about today ... but those are my thoughts ... if we can get something in draft form to at least look at and then work off of ... that would be good. Ms. Kahakalau: I appreciate that.. just for a formality question ... are there any restrictions as to ... Mr. Goodenow and you having discussions in regards to the rules prior to next meeting say for example... Mr. Yoshimoto: No ... we can talk. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay ... so I would ... put that on you to kind of to keep that communication so that you know what he's talking about and we can move forward. Mr. Goodenow: Yeah ... the only thing I would say ... at least right we'll come up a plan and identify ... I mean there may be looking at larger... structural things as far as the hearing process that you know may not ... I don't know if we'll have a draft set of the rules next time but at least we would have a time line and we can talk about how we're gonna proceed. Ms. Bintliff: Question... will we receive any communication as you ... before our next meeting. Mr. Goodenow: Yes ... I plan to do it ... we'll have something... Ms. Bintliff: Will it be emailed or... Mr. Goodenow: Thru the normal process.... 34 Ms. Bintliff: Normal process. Mr. Goodenow: Because of the Sunshine Law... Ms. Bintlif£ Yeah. Mr. Goodenow: I can talk to J all I want but it wouldn't be right for example if you sent me a suggestion and then if Ku calls me ... I'd say Ku I've already talked ... even though they're two separate rules were talking about this agenda item ... you know so we have to be careful. Ms. Kahakalau: Ms. Bintliff: Yeah. Yes ... thank you. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay ... I'm very good with all of that ... thank you very much and if there's no further discussion... I'd like to move on to agenda item number 8. Motion and Vote: Mr. Adams moved to go into executive session. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 8. DISCUSSION REGARDING CHANGES TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS MONTHLY MEETING SCHEDULE. (11:47 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: Just again for information for our new board member ... our standard per rules meeting was scheduled for... Mr. Goodenow: February 14. Ms. Kahakalau: It's always the... Mr. Goodenow: Second Wednesday. Ms. Kahakalau: Second Wednesday of each month... however... one of our members here has a conflict with being on another board so we....by default every time we need to make that formal motion to change it...okay and so we have it scheduled right now ... Emily for.... Ms. Hirayama: Ms. Kahakalau February 13"' February 13tH 35 Ms. Hirayama: 10:00 a.m. Ms. Kahakalau: February 14th ... my favorite day of the year ... instead of the 14th we have it scheduled for the 13th at 10:00 a.m. Mr. Goodenow: Madame Chair I would move that we suspend the rules and set the date of the next hearing for February 13th at 10:00 a.m. Ms. Bintliff: Second. Ms. Kahakalau: Alright ... any discussion... all in favor say aye ... alright so we will be seeing each other again on the 131h Motion and Vote: Mr. Goodenow moved to suspend the rules and change the proposed regular scheduled meeting date to February 13. Ms. Bintliff seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS (11:48 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: Any other announcements.... at this point ... no—thank you ... and so the next monthly meeting is scheduled for the 13th at 10:00 a.m. here and if there are no further issues... Mr. Yoshimoto: Madame Chair did you want to set the March meeting as well... Ms. Kahakalau: Okay ... sure. Mr. Yoshimoto: So we can plan. Ms. Kahakalau: Sure. March meeting... Ms. Hirayama: We have ... there's two dates available... there's March 9th which is a Friday and then ... March 19th which is a Monday ... the only reason why is that ... our normal scheduled... this... that whole week is booked for this room and there's no other location that has the recording ... so it would be the ... March 9th which is a Friday or March 19th which is a Monday. Ms. Kahakalau: I will be in Saskatoon on the 9th so—but that doesn't mean you guys can't have the meeting but I'm just saying I won't be able to attend ... I am available on the I9th... but that shouldn't... Ms. Bintliff: That's a Monday... 36 Mr. Goodenow: I will be Washington D.0 on the I9th... some conference for the health center... Ms. Kahakalau: Mr. Robinson is either one... Mr. Robinson: Either day is acceptable. Ms. Kahakalau: It's fine. Mr. Goodenow: I'd say the 9th I have court so we might as well go with the 19th...I may have to miss that meeting. Mr. Yoshimoto: You're not going to be here for the... Mr. Goodenow: The rules ... well I'll be here for February... Mr. Yoshimoto: Oh okay. Ms. Kahakalau: Okay... alright... Ms. Sumner -Mack: I prefer the 19tH Ms. Kahakalau: Great... okay... do we need to make an official motion here? Mr. Robinson: I make a motion that the March meeting be held on March 19th at 10:00 a.m. Ms. Kahakalau: Seconded? Do I hear a second? Ms. Sumner -Mack: Second. Ms. Kahakalau: Any discussion... all in favor say aye ... alright so we have set the March meeting for March 19th at 10:00 a.m. also here. 10. ADJOURNMENT (11:50 a.m.) Ms. Kahakalau: So at 11:50 a.m. I call the meeting adjourned... thank you very much. Respectfully submitted: ulv__, E Emily Hira t Secret ry 37