Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-06-10 Regular Session MinutesHAWAII COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS MINUTES — REGULAR SESSION Monday, June 10, 2019 10:02 a.m. to 12:40 p.m. Hawai`i County Building 25 Aupuni Street County Council Chambers Hilo, Hawai`i 96720 Members and Staff Present: Kenneth Goodenow, Vice Chair Rick Robinson, Member Nan Sumner -Mack, Member David Wiseman, Member Lawrence L. Heintz, Member J Yoshimoto, Deputy Corporation Counsel Maria Pagala, Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER (10:02 a.m.) Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Heintz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Robinson: Now I'm calling to order the meeting. Thank you for your patience. My name is Ken Goodenow, I'm the Vice Chair. Other Board Members if you'd please introduce yourself for the record. Dr. Larry Heintz. David Wiseman. Nan Sumner -Mack. I'm Rick Robinson. 2. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS (10:04 a.m.) Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay. We are now on statements from the public. Is there anyone wishing to testify on item on the agenda? I don't believe I received any...oh sorry. We have a lot of administrative things going on this morning. Thank you for your patience. Okay if you could please try to limit your testimony to three minutes. The first person testifying would be Sylvia Dolena. Testifying on Petition 2019-01. Mr. Chairman, as a preliminary matter, we have a request from one of the petitioners to participate by telephone. So I'm not sure at what point you wanted... 1 Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Is the petitioner on the phone now or? No, we were... I'm sorry, another matter. Does anyone have any objection for us to allow a petitioner to appear...I guess testify and listen to the proceedings...? Mr. Yoshimoto: And participate... Mr. Goodenow: And participate in the proceedings by phone? Mr. Yoshimoto: That's Koohan Paik-Mander is the one who made the request so. It's up to the Board. Mr. Goodenow: Chair's supposed to speak last. So I don't know if anyone has a comment. Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Point of order on the...with respect to public testimony on the petition. I'm unclear whether we closed public testimony at the last hearing or not. Well that's very astute of you. As Chair, I just was going to allow to err on the side of caution to allow it. But technically, it could be argued right that we close the public testimony. But as it is on the agenda...I think the Sunshine Law...we should go ahead and... Mr. Wiseman: I'll defer to the Chair. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. But thank you for raising that. Any other comments though? Ms. Sumner -Mack: Regarding testimony...by telephone? I think there's a matter of fairness and also of identity verification. So I hesitate to set her precedent. That's my only comment. Mr. Wiseman: I have with respect to telephone testimony, I've handled many requests as a Judge in my career. However, testimony by telephone 1. There has to be a designated place...a reliable place where that person is testifying. For example...just yesterday I heard testimony in a case I'm still handling. And they go into the court...or they go into an office. So they cannot be...how do we know someone's not in a mental institution or a prison for example. You know which has happened. Alright this is my concern that the person be in a place that can be relied upon as 2 Mr. Robinson: having some credibility, verification. My other concern is...we are here to judge credibility of witness' testimony and part of that is observing a witness. Their mannerisms, personality, everything flows into judging that credibility which cannot be done on a telephone. And we also don't know if that person has anyone prompting her or advising her or consulting her or giving her answers...him or her. So I have problems. So I'm against telephone testimony. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to reiterate as well as...as David did. Previously we've had testimony from many of the County buildings throughout the County that have the facilities for not only hearing, but also seeing the person testifying. Without that I mean there's no reason that we can't have testimony from... We had from Kohala for many times...from Ka'u, Hamakua, from Kona. So if we're gonna do that, we should do it that way. Not to just to have it...as David pointed out. We can't really verify. So I'm not in favor of that either. Maybe we'd make a motion that we not allow it. Ms. Sumner -Mack: I'll second that. Mr. Goodenow: One quick question from our secretary. When was the request made to appear by telephone? Ms. Pagala: She called this morning about 8:15. Mr. Goodenow: Alright. Okay so there's a motion and second. Any further discussion. Mr. Yoshimoto: I would also...just so the records clear...she did indicate that she had a reason why she's making the request right? It was yeah. If you could state to the Board what the reason was. Ms. Pagala: Just because of health issues. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Heintz: She didn't request that we continue the matter. She just requested to appear by phone. Alright. Well we have a motion on the floor. Is there any further discussion? Seeing none. If I recall correctly... As a novice member... As I recall Ms. Paik-Mander was the representative of the group last time. I think that is relevant if she was representing the group as a spokesman for the group. Second thing I'd like to raise is a general point. This is the Ethics commission and I have some question as to whether or not we should be using judicial model as our model for 3 rules and procedure. I believe we should be more flexible and more broad in how we look at things. So I somewhat wonder whether or not David's suggestion and other remarks are persuasive. I just want to share that. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Chairman. Mr. Goodenow: Yes? Mr. Yoshimoto: As we continue with the discussion, are you going to be asking the parties their positions, just so the record is clear. You gonna allow the parties to... It's up to you. Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumer -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Well. That's a good thought but... Well let me... I think if they wanted to ask for a continuance when we call the matter that would appropriate. However the request was made by the one person and my feeling is you know. I agree with you. What you've just said. I think that very true. But just logistically, if you had someone on a phone...we have 19 petitioners...and they'll be talking, discussion, they'll have to interrupt if they want to ask a question. I have logistical concerns. And keeping a good record that's recorded because we transcribe everything. I mean if we had set up a facility where someone could go through the Council chambers technology. You know I'd feel more comfortable so... At this point is there any other discussion? Okay so there is a motion and a second. The motion is that we not allow phone in testimony. All those in favor...please say aye. Any opposed? The vote will be one opposed and four in favor. The next item is statement from the public on agenda items. Thank you. Excuse me. Could I just comment that my vote was predicating on the idea that this would not be a general policy...forever and ever but just on this one case...when it was asked for all at once. But just to clarify cause I agree with Larry generally but... Just to point an order on that and I wanna be flexible but under Robert's Rules...this was a big deal with the Council...you're not allowed to explain votes. Discussion only happens before the vote. Ms. Sumner -Mack: Alright. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Alright. Sylvia Dolena. Ms. Dolena: Yes. Aloha. 4 Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Ms. Dolena: Yes. That was perfect. Thank you. Aloha Commissioners. I represent Aloha Lokahi Association and the President is Kumu Mahealani Kuamo'o Henry. We sent in email testimony so now that this discussion ensued, I'm wondering if email testimony is appropriate since you don't know exactly who's sending it. Mr. Goodenow: Well, I don't want to interrupt your testimony right. But no, the rules provide for written. Ms. Dolena: Okay. And email is included. Mr. Goodenow: That's right. Ms. Dolena: Okay. Great. Then... Mr. Yoshimoto: Sorry to interrupt. When did you send that email? Ms. Dolena: Yesterday. Mr. Yoshimoto: Did you get that? Yeah we didn't receive it then so. Ms. Dolena: Well it...I was told to send to the corporate counsel email address cause we couldn't find one specifically for this board. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay. But you are also going to provide verbal testimony then? Ms. Dolena: I will provide...I'm not going to provide the entire testimony...but I'm going to provide just main points of what we sent in email and hoping it will be found because there's lots of detail in there. Mr. Wiseman: Excuse me. Yeah, I would suggest if you want to incorporate your email subsequently retrieved and then highlight what you feel necessary in that email that may be acceptable. Mr. Goodenow: Yeah. I don't know if you have a copy with you? Ms. Dolena: I don't. Mr. Goodenow: Well you can resend it if you don't have it. We'll... Ms. Dolena: I will resend it. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. 5 Ms. Dolena: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Basically, the essence of the email is that, the County Council is voted in and they are to uphold the public trust in many, many areas. In the environment...in residents...you know doing the legislature...in many areas. And that public trust is sacred. And when there is any...question...as to the motives or the integrity of a Councilmember and how they conduct business of the Council...appearing to favor certain clients...former clients...certain clients...certain corporations. That is a big frust factor. It's a trust issue that a Councilmember would do that. Additionally, the public trust is... Sorry I'm just a little bit...I'm just a little bit nervous because I didn't bring anything with me. The letter that Ms. Kierkiewicz provided at the last session said that she believed she did not do anything wrong. And for a Councilmember not to know right from wrong, conflict of interest, based upon the aspects of her job. We find that very alarming. Thank you. The next testifier is Nora Kino? Or thanks, could you say that for me? Nawahine. Oh. Nawahine. Oh, it's just one word. I thought it was two words. Sony Nawahine...speaking on the same matter. So you'll hear a lot of testimony today and I'm...so I'm not going to repeat that what Cory and Claudia will be going over. But I wanted to just add a few things of my own concerns. And I wanted first of all...thank you for even having this assembly and for having an ethics commission we can come to. I consider your body to be foundational to the delivery of justice and to how things are taken care of...particularly our public trust which is...as you know probably not only in Hawai'i but probably across the world is becoming increasingly critical. And so one of the things that I find disturbing about even having to be here is...for me it feels like...our County Council just as a assembly of policy makers seem to be almost going against the public trust. And so, in all of the years that I've been participating in our democracy, this is the first time that I find myself here and I'm sad about that. When I vote for someone or I go to a Council hearing and things of that nature. I expect to be represented and I expect...that not only I represented personally but that the public trust and the good of our community is ultimately what makes the decisions. So when we have to come here and we have issues of lack with transparency. And things happening behind the scenes that we don't know about 6 Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Thal: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Thal: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Thal: and us having to actually police our Council...to me...alarms go off with that. Again my expectation is that there be a single minded service that our County Council and our legislative bodies deliver on our behalf. And that again goes back to the protection of the public trust. So I had to clarify this out for myself today when I came here was that actually the Ethics Board not only as another layer of protection but is really the foundation for us when we don't have anywhere to go. And this is an absolutely perfect example of how we depend on you to make decisions for us when everything else has fallen through the cracks and our trust lands and waters on access and all of those things are at risk. And they as you know...maybe you don't know but it was a kanaka in the native Hawaiian. Those things have been disappearing rapidly. Just in my 20 years places that I've been able to go, waters that we've had access to. Lands, pristine aquifers and all of those kinds of things are disappearing quickly so it really will rests now in your hands to direct the County Council and direct the public on how we can continue to protect these things for the future so. Thank you. Thank you. Okay the next testifier is Sheri Thal. Hello. Thank you for meeting today. I just have one point just about the phone thing. Koohan Paik really just wants to listen in on the meeting and she was hoping that she could be patched in just to listen without testimony. Is that possible to do that. That's really why she called this morning. We might take that up in another part of the agenda. Okay. We just continue with the testimony but that's a suggestion. Thank you. Sure, sure. I'm sorry. Okay. So I'm here because I'm a constituent of Ms. Kierkiewicz. I'm in District 4 and I...I just have a basic principle. The basic principle is of representative democracy for me that Ms. Kierkiewicz is my voice. And she is here to serve the people in District 4 and the whole kind of issue for me is that I really want to make sure that Ms. Kierkiewicz is serving the people of Puna and not a client or a former client or a corporate interest. And that she's really being our voice and that I'm here because I wanna know what procedurally should happen in instances when you cross over with business into the County Council proceedings. What happens? This is really what I wanna 7 Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Fergerstrom: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Fergerstrom: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Fergerstrom: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Harden: know and the whole question to pose and this is not even just Ms. Kierkiewicz, this is anybody on the County Council that I feel like we're having a crossover here. And I would like to know, what is the best way to handle this kind of crossover in the future moving forward? So thank you very much. Next testifier is Hanalei Fergerstrom. Testifying on the same matter. Good morning. Good morning. I'm Hanalei Fergerstrom. I'm the spokesperson for Na Kupuna Moku 0 Keawe. I'm just here to support the petitioners. And would like to see Ms. Kierkiewicz...I said her name correctly...be reminded of her ethics when conducting business. Thank you. Sir, can I ask the organization you mentioned. What is it again? Yes, it's Na Kupuna Moku 0 Keawe. It's group from all six districts of the island. I see. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Cory Harden. Testifying on the same matter. Oh here she is. Yeah. Good morning and thank you for your service. First, I think, Koohan should've been allowed to...she should be at least dialed to listen. It's a disability accommodation. She has Epstein Bar. She woke up not feeling good this morning. I have a similar condition. And you don't know how you're gonna feel from hour to hour. She's been putting her heart and soul into working for the community. Trying to get the right thing in and I hope that you will vote to have her at least listen in. Okay. Today I urge that you resolve today's issue by writing a letter to the County Council clarifying disclosure requirements. I am hoping for guidance, not for penalties and not a ruling that would hamper Councilmembers ability to carry out their duties. I think...cause we need something for the whole County Council...because no one on the Council objected to what happened. Still I do wanna give Ms. Kierkiewicz credit for quickly addressing some concerns by resigning from Hastings & Pleadwell and verbally disclosing a possible conflicts of interest. To review, Ms. Kierkiewicz introduced Bill 16, she chaired a committee considering the bill and voted in favor of it without disclosing possible conflicts of interest. At this time she 8 was on leave, but not had resigned from Hastings & Pleadwell which listed Suisan as a client. About six months before introducing Bill 16 while still working at Hastings & Pleadwell, Ms. Kierkiewicz helped Suisan develop at message clarifying that Suisan was not developing the Pi'ilani Partners bottling plant on the land...the subject of Bill 16. Ms. Kierkiewicz had worked closely on several other matters with Steve Ueda and he is president of Suisan. Also president of Matsuno Enterprises, owner of the land affected by Bill 16. At the March 28, County Council meeting, Ms. Kierkiewicz asked Council Chair Aaron Chung whether she should vote on Bill 16. And unfortunately, Mr. Chung's reply did not address the ethics conflict existing while Ms. Kierkiewicz was on leave from Hastings & Pleadwell. But had now resigned. And he implied that ethics petition called her recusal in the case of a passing relationship. The petition didn't say this, it said personal interest. And to my surprise. No other Councilmember said anything about the ethics question. So to provide guidance for the future, please advise Ms. Kierkiewicz should have refrained from introducing Bill 16... should have recused herself from chairing a meeting on Bill 16 and voting on the bill. And should have disclosed her connections with Ueda. This is all in my written submission. And I hope you'll also recommend then that Ms. Kierkiewicz refrain from introducing bills that benefit clients she worked with at Hastings & Pleadwell. And that she makes disclosures when taking official actions involving her past clients at Hastings & Pleadwell. Again I hope we'll end up with a letter from you the County Council, clarifying what should have happened on this issue. And also clarifying disclosure requirements to avoid confusion in the future. Thank you. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. The next testifier is Deron Akiona. Mr. Akiona: Aloha everyone. My name is Deron Akiona. Aloha Chair. My name is Deron Akiona. I am a citizen. I belong in District 5. I'm 61 years old. I've lived on this island most of my life...went away for a while...came back. Things is changing dramatically here and I think this case is a classic example of how in the interpretation of politics and life of on this island is changed. We have a situation here and let's be frank about the County Council. They're part timers. They are not full time County members. So the all have jobs or occupations or deal in the community outside of the Council. Therefore the chances of conflict...what an alleged conflict becomes...is something that's... I sympathize with you cause I don't know how you guys gonna interpret a situation where a person is no longer with the entity on leave...drafts a press 9 release...a year before this issue comes up and allege there's a conflict of interest. Relationships in Hawai'i goes on for years. Okay, I mean decades. I looked at this and I questioned. If a union member got elected to the Council and they voted on a project that the union would benefit for. Is that Council member in conflict? Because they were a former union member or a retired union member. And the union's gonna benefit. I doubt it. I doubt if you going stretch the interpretation of transparency and conflict. And the question is how far are you gonna stretch? Or how far are you gonna say that there is a conflict after a person leaves. Also with part time Council member...especially if you get elected attorneys on that Council. The amount of interaction they have with the community is immense. Therefore, at what point do you say, the conflict exists or the conflict doesn't. I agree with the previous testifier, that you need maybe to come up with some clearer rules that has maybe timelines in it. And transparency issues. I don't envy this situation because I don't think Ms. Kierkiewicz had did any violation of the public trust. And really there should be an interpretation of what is the public trust. What does the public expect from elected part time officials or what should they expect? I mean I can tell you that...Hilo...especially in Puna has changed dramatically in the last ten, fifteen years on how people respond to each other. And how they believe a relationship is an existence or is not. Or is there a conspiracy within government to do A or B or C. I'm native Hawaiian. Okay. If anybody can testify about how people get overrun by government is native Hawaiians. Okay. So I ask you to come up with some clear guidelines for part time elected officials because that is a very difficult situation to sit in when you're an elected official and you're also have occupations or relationships. I even read about you know sitting on boards of the chamber of commerce. I mean are we gonna extend this kind of situation to where...oh my son or daughter played with his son or daughter on the same team and we had a fundraiser therefore he's my friend or she's my friend so I should disclose he's my friend because his company has actioned before the committee. I mean how far are you going to extend it? That's my question. I think the clarification you need to do is not enviable because what you decide on what a relationship is and how that interacts with the policy...is gonna...possibly change a lot. I personally do not mind a Council member introducing legislation that they had an interest in...in a regards to their worked on and a new people on. Because the idea is to get it in front of the Council and have public discussion. Get it in front of the public and have public discussion. Disclosing that I may or may not have a conflict. Yeah, you should do that. But at what point do you eliminate the timeline to 10 Mr. Goodenow: say...well there's no longer that relationship. I thank you for your time. Thank you. All right, is there anyone else wanting to testify at this time? Okay. Seeing no one else we're going to move on with the agenda items. 3. APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR SESSION MINUTES OF APRIL 22, 2019. (10:31 a.m.) Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Item number 3 approval of the regular session minutes of April 22, 2019. May I have a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. Any discussion? Oh how unusual. I just wanted to make a recommendation that the minutes on page 11, 19, and 20 reflect who voted yes and who voted no. Just so it's clear because as it stands now it says...Aye and 1 recusal. Sometimes it might be self-evident... Oh no we should, we should. I agree completely. Can the secretary amend that? Yes, as long as it's okay with the Board and the Board is okay with those changes. Seeing we have consensus here okay. Anything else? Seeing no further discussion. All in favor say aye...any opposed? Motion carries. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to approve the April 22, 2019 minutes. Ms. Sumner -Mack seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 4. NEW BUSINESS (10:32 a.m.) a. Election of officers (Chair and Vice Chair) Mr. Goodenow: Next matter is new business election of officers (Chair and Vice Chair). 11 Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: 10:32 a.m. 12:06 p.m. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask...I'd like to make a motion that we move the election of the officers till the end of the agenda so we can go ahead and conduct our business today. I'll second that. Okay, any discussion. Seeing none...all in favor please say aye...any opposed...motion carries five to zero. The Board moved to item 5 of the agenda * k k The Board returned to regular agenda item 4.a. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Shall we just move right into the election or...? You guys are interested...we'll move it out of order come back in...if you're interested. Hey, we gotta take whatever interest from the public we can get. Okay so I'm gonna...without any objection then...I'm going to take up item 4.a. election of new officers (Chair and Vice Chair). Mr. Wiseman. Yeah. I would nominate Rick Robinson as Chair. I second. Okay. So any further nominations? It's been moved and seconded that Rick Robinson be Chair. Any discussion? Would it be possible...this is coming up under the next item of business but regarding the letter to the County Councilman regarding our proposed code amendment. The staff told me after our last meeting...oh the budget is on the floor...don't send it now can you wait. So I didn't actually send the letter, plus I wanted to see what was the Charter commission did. And if you all saw in the newspaper right, our proposed changes have made it to the ballot. Good. So would it be possible to make it maybe effective June 30th so I can...unless you wanna write the letter to the Council chair. No you write the letter to the Council chair. So would it. Could I make a...amend the motion by saying effective July 1st? Yes, that's fine with me 12 Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Heintz: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Yes. All in favor say aye? Any opposed? Thank you...gotta hang on to my last days of glory. Alright so it's been moved and seconded. Rick is Chair. Any further discussion on Rick? Yes. Rick's has lots of experience on County boards and so on. And I don't know the details but I think he'd make an excellent Chair. He's a senior, he's had the longest time on the committee on the commission so...I just don't want him to be a shoe in but he's... He really had lots of experience so. Nine years on the Civil Service Commission. I took notes on that but I didn't bring them so. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All in favor, please say aye...any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Rick Robinson will assume duties as Chair effective July 1st. Can I have a motion regarding the Vice Chairmanship? I move that Mr. Wiseman be the Vice Chair. Second? I'll second that. Okay. It's been moved and seconded that Mr. Wiseman be the Vice Chair. Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor please say aye...any opposed? Motion carries unanimously, effective July 1. Thank you. Thank you. Motion and Vote: Mr. Wiseman moved to appoint Mr. Robinson as Chair. Ms. Sumner - Mack seconded the motion. All members voted aye. Mr. Heintz moved to appoint Mr. Wiseman as Vice Chair. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All members voted aye. Mr. Goodenow: Alright so now... May I have a motion to go into executive session? Mr. Robinson: Motion for executive session. 13 Mr. Goodenow: **Board moved to item 7** Sorry. Mr. Yoshimoto I think is suggesting that we take another item out of order...which I agree if there are not objections. Could we please take item 7 out of order? Discussion regarding amendments to the rules and practice of procedure. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (10:32 a.m.) a. Petition No. 2019-01 Mr. Goodenow: I'm sorry. We were having trouble with some of the documents. I'm gonna take a very brief five minute recess thank you. 10:33 to 10:35 a.m. The Board took a recess. Mr. Goodenow: Calling the meeting back to order. And I want to thank the staff and... There was a confusion over paperwork...it was not the staffs fault...our secretary is very good. It was my fault...I had misplaced it so...thank you for your patience. Okay so we are now on unfinished business. And at this point and time I would like to call all the petitioners present who actually signed the petition. I'm sorry there's...that's a factor. So if those who actually signed the petition could come to the table for me I'd appreciate it. Well...not all signed though. Five I believe signed right? Oh no, no more than five. So could you...oh yeah...could you please have a seat. Oh I see your signature...Nawahine and I see your signature where. I think your signature is here. Alright. Ms. Ward: I'm Deborah Ward. Mr. Goodenow: Deborah Ward yes. David Hunt. Daniel Hunt. I'm not sure. I see you definitely. I don't see Deborah Ward though. Ms. Ward: I sent my signature. Mr. Goodenow: Oh you did. You sent it. Oh Ms. Secretary, thank you. Ms. Ward: I sent a electronic signature. Mr. Goodenow: An electronic signature. Ms. Thal: I believe I signed it as well. Sherri Thal. Mr. Goodenow: Let's see. I don't see that. And the reason I'm asking about who signed is because under...you know... The rules...right...we're supposed to...it's supposed to be signed. The person has to sign 14 the petition. It can't just be an email. But we have at least one person present who signed. So I think we're all right. At the last meeting and I beg the indulgence of everyone here. The last meeting, the petitioners met among themselves, right? Of the 39 that were listed and decided that to have a person be a spokesman for thein. And that is the person that is not here. Ms. Paik. Right so I really don't want to delay things but I would like the petitioners to at least have a position. I'm not saying we're going to agree with your position. But as a group can you come to some kind of position regarding one...whether you feel Ms. Paik is still your leader and you would like to continue...move to continue. Right? Or two...and who's going to be kind of your spokesman for today. You know anyone can speak. But have at least someone kind of as the spokesperson. Could we take a two minute recess for you to do that? Thank you. I apologize for the delay in time. Recess. 10:42 to 10:47 a.m. The Board took a recess. Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Mr. Goodenow: Okay calling the meeting to order. As whoever wants to come forward for the petitioners if you could come forward please. So we could have Cory restate her testimony as part of representing our group. Well no. I wanna know do the petitioners present take a position on the following. One...do you want to proceed today? Two...I assume you're gonna request maybe that Mr. Paik be allowed to participate...at least listen on the phone right? So someone has to make a request. We're the neutral body so I'm trying to see what requests the petitioners would like to make at this time. Requesting a continuation? Is that... If you want to... So that our committee...our group can regroup and come back with a position...is that what you're asking us? No. I think the issue came up because Ms. Paik was selected to be kind of the spokesman for you, right? She's called in. She said she has a health issue. She didn't request a continuance. But now we're bringing that forward to you as a group. You can...we can just proceed and have the hearing right now without any issue. I think I would ask my board members if anyone would have an objection to having her phone in. I think it's unusual but if we're 15 willing to... It depends on what the board members feel. But you have to ask us. Do you want us... Ms. Kaho'opi`i: I think Cory has presented our... Mr. Goodenow: Okay. Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Our requests to the board. Mr. Goodenow: Well that's Cory. Ms. Kaho`opi`i: On our behalf. Mr. Goodenow: As your group? Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Yes of the signatores. Yes. Mr. Goodenow: The signatores so are requesting that we...? Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Follow through with the recommendations that Cory presented in her testimony. Mr. Goodenow: Anything else? Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Did you have anything else to add to that? Ms. Harden: Well from my position... Mr. Yoshimoto: If you can please state your name for the record? Ms. Ward: Sorry, my name is Deborah Ward. And I was one of the signatories even though my signature didn't apparently make it onto the letter. I feel that it's incumbent on the ethics commission to make it very clear to the Council because obviously...the code itself is written so vaguely that it was hard for us to figure out how to define the disclosure that needed that needed to come. And when the County Council Chair advised the person who's new on the Council...not to bother to disclose...that indicates that the whole Council needs to educated and perhaps a code needs to be clarified. But I think guidance in this regard would be very useful at this time. Mr. Goodenow: Okay so we've gotten a request. We have what the petition says. Now I'd like to call the respondent forward. 16 Mr. Wiseman: Just one point of order. Signatories...I prefer they are the petitioners. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Ms. Kaho`opi`i: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Alright... The fact that they signed. It doesn't alter the petition. Would the Corp. Counsel please show us right? It's in the rules that say form of petition. Petition must be signed. Right. So what is the question? The reference is...that we're hearing...is signatories. But actually they are petitioners. Right. So. Then we just refer to them as petitioners rather than signatory Could we waive the rules? No he's just asking to refer to them as petitioners' right. So just so it's clear and anybody correct me if I'm wrong. Ms. Kaho`opii is present and she's signed the petition. She's a... Petitioner. A petitioner right. And then she's designated... She said a couple of things right. One...is that they're okay and they want to proceed today. Right? I didn't hear anything about the request that Ms. Paik-Mander be able to listen in on the hearing. That's still pending. But that they want to have Ms. Harden again represent the boards, I mean represent the petitioners' position. Correct? Yeah. And that's good. Okay. So I think we're. So what about the telephone. I was trying to make sure... Well...I wasn't gonna move on it unless they wanted to request that now. But my feeling on that is if she's not gonna participate. I mean she can read the transcript. I know that may sound cold but we can have a vote on it. If there's no objections, I'm not gonna change anything about the phone. And if anyone objects, we can have a discussion. Hearing no objections...we're gonna proceed then. So if now the respondent can come forward please and thank 17 you. Thank you Corp. Counsel for that. So as the respondent you may request a closed hearing. I don't know if you want to do so at this time. Ms. Kierkiewicz: No Vice Chair. I'm happy to proceed as we are. I believe it's on. Mr. Goodenow: So we will proceed with. Ms. Kierkiewicz: Is that better? Mr. Goodenow: Yeah that's all we had to ask you. Now I'm sorry... Now you can Ms. Kierkiewicz: Okay. Mr. Goodenow: Now you can sit down again. Ms. Kierkiewicz: No worries. It's procedure. Mr. Goodenow: Alright will the petitioner... Actually you could stay there. The spokesperson for the petitioner who will be making the opening statement, Ms. Harden I believe is doing that if you could please come forward... You may waive an opening statement if you prefer...but. It's up to you. Ms. Harden: Sorry. Slowest testifier on earth. So just repeat...the request as in my testimony and written statements. You know...we're concerned that the entire County Council and the chair and so forth didn't seem bothered by what happened with Bill 16. So we're just looking for guidance for the future and we'd like your advice as to whether Ms. Kierkiewicz should have refrained from introducing Bill 16. Should have recused herself from carrying the meeting on Bill 16. From voting on the Bill. And should she have disclosed her connections with Mr. Ueda. We're hoping you'll recommend that Ms. Kierkiewicz refrain from introducing bills that benefit clients she worked with at Hastings & Pleadwell. That she make disclosures when taking official actions involving her past clients at Hastings & Pleadwell. So that's guidance on what happened. To say what should have happened in a letter. And also a letter to County Council clarifying for the future so don't get confusion in the future. And a reminder what was at stake with Bill 16 was this bottling plant that was gonna produce plastic which the world does not need more of. It was going to tap into the Mauna Kea aquifer. Native Hawaiians had issues. It might have set a precedent for changing zoning on land when there was no project attached being that there would have been a lot of consequences if the bill had gone forward. So thank you. 18 Mr. Goodenow: Now the respondent if you'd care to make an opening statement. Ms. Kierkiewicz: Sure. Thank you Vice Chair Goodenow, Members of the Ethics Board. For the record, my name is Ashley Kierkiewicz, Council Member representing District 4. If you have any questions regarding the response that I submitted related to this petition, I am happy to answer any of those questions. I do want to share that since then, I have resigned from Hastings & Pleadwell, a communication company, unrelated to the matter at hand. As Mr. Akiona stated, being a Councilmember is a part time job and I quickly realized in the first few months of being a Councilmember that it was gonna require my full time attention. And so I wanted to give it a few months because I had this idea that potentially I could juggle being a Councilmember and working on projects statewide. But being very real about the fact that I have small children and still want to be able to be an active mother, I resigned so that I could fully focus on my family and the very real challenges that District 4 and our Hawai`i island faces. There are a few things that I want to clarify in response to some of the testimony that was offered up by folks today. The matter that came before Council actually came before planning committee. And our role in committee is simply to make a recommendation to the full Council. And so as chair of planning committee, the protocol is when there are bills that come from the administration, we introduce them. Whether or not we like the bill or not. Whether or not we know anyone that is involved in the application before us. We introduce them as chairs. And there are...there's a code next to our signature. B/R meaning by request. It is by the request of the administration that we are putting these bills forward. And so that's what I've done with every single item that has come before planning committee which I chair. At the March 28th Council meeting, I shared my non-interest in the bill in which I have elaborated for you in the letter. And I put it to the call of the chair, Chair Aaron Chung as to whether or not I should recuse from the vote. He made very clear that he did not want this to be a mechanism in which could be abused in which Councilmembers not vote on things that are controversial. He encouraged me to vote. But that matter has been tabled and deferred given the action that has happened...with regards to the project. You know I'd just like to state that we live in a very small community. I was born and raised here. I've done work statewide. My family has owned businesses. We've been very active in the community. And so to say that I know some people is an understatement. I know a lot, a lot of people. And I'd like to think that I operate with honor and integrity. And so in reviewing the Charter section 14-3 disclosure 19 of interest with regard to the ethics code. It says that when there is a substantial personal interest that Council members make disclosures before voting. They're not told to be recused. They're told to simply make a disclosure before voting. In taking a look at the Council rules number 11, it asks Councilmembers to submit a disclosure and recuse themselves with personal... substantial personal interest. And to be very clear and to delineate this. There was a matter that came before the Council with regard to an arbitration agreement for the Hawai`i Firefighters Association. My partner is firefighter. And so I issued a written disclosure before the finance committee and verbally disclosed for the record at committee and at Council that my partner was a firefighter. Even at that point, Council Chair Aaron Chung noted that he wished that I voted. But in checking with corporation counsel, they asked me to err on side of caution to issue the written disclosure and to recuse myself just to be on the safe side. Chair Chung did not seem to think that there was a substantial personal interest but allowed me to recuse myself from the vote anyway. Again here to answer any questions and I thank you for your deliberation today. Mr. Wiseman: Chair? Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Harden: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Goodenow: Okay the next step and then there will be questions. I'm just following our procedure here. And you don't have to do this right. We're at an informal hearing. So actually at the end of the day if you don't like how we rule at the informal hearing you can request a fon-nal hearing. So but at this point we don't have all the stringent rules. But we do and I'll read that from our rule 4.8. It says upon a receipt of request, the board may render its opinion on the basis of the information available or may request additional information or follow the hearing process. You don't need to submit evidence but at this point I'm going to ask the petitioner if they have any witnesses or evidence they wish to present to us at this time. We submitted I think everything we have...enough paper already. And now same. I'll ask the respondent the same question. Do you have any witnesses or evidence you wish to present? No Vice Chair. Just the letter I submitted in response to the petition. Okay. At this time...we have the pending letters that were new on the agenda. Could I have a motion that we... 20 Mr. Robinson: I'll make a motion we accept these into evidence as part of the petition. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. For the record, that's the letter dated May 10t, 2019. Alright. Any... I'll second the motion. All in favor please say aye. Okay motion carries unanimously. At this time could we have a motion? We don't need a motion. We can go forward thank you. It's easier that way. So at this time before we make a formal motion, would any members like to start the questions of the parties? Mr. Wiseman. Yeah. I have a question. Councilwoman...do we have a copy of the written disclosure that you made. I submitted the written disclosure to our Council chair and copied the County clerk. Alright. Do we know if we have a copy? We can get a copy. It's right back here. I'm sorry. Just to clarify, Mr. Wiseman, the written disclosure regarding my recusal on the arbitration agreement vote? The disclosure of any potential conflict... That's the only disclosure that I made. And that was regarding the firefighter arbitration agreement. Okay so there wasn't any on this issue on the Bill 16. No because I did not see any personal substantial interest. I see. Okay thank you. Any more questions? Our newest member, I'm sorry, I'm forgetting your name. Leonard, thank you. Oh Larry. Larry. 21 Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Would you tell us a little bit about what it means you're described as a senior account executive at Hastings & Pleadwell. Could you tell us a little bit about what that means and what that... What that entailed? What that position is in that company. I was senior account executive at Hastings & Pleadwell. My primarily responsibilities were to help clients, architect communication strategies and outreach plans. Okay and... Often times that involved interfacing with media. If it, if it called for that. And one of those companies was Suisan. One of the companies was Suisan, yes. And from the testimony that has been submitted. This may be from the newspaper article that you were involved in discussions about the Pi'ilani bottling company with regard to Suisan. If my memory serves me correct and about September of last year having combed through the Tribune Heralds, there was an article about the water bottling plant. And it noted that Suisan was the owner of that project and so that caught me off guard because I was representing Suisan as one of the clients as part of Hastings & Pleadwell. So I called Mr. Ueda and asked for clarification and he noted that the project was not in fact theirs. That it was a project being pushed by Pi'ilani Partners on a parcel that they owned and had rezoned a number of years ago when they were looking to do a fish processing facility. So the parcel in question was not actually owned by Suisan. It's owned by Matsuno Enterprises. Okay and Mr. Ueda is president of both those companies. That's correct. Matsuno enterprises was created by his grandfather, Rex Matsuno. And then another question I have is...if I understand your answer to Member Wiseman. You just said when Bill 16 was introduced before your committee, you did not disclose to that committee your connection with Suisan, Matsuno Enterprises, or your knowledge 22 Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: or awareness of the Pi'ilani bottling company connections. None of those things were disclosed. Suisan was not the applicant for the bill that was before us. But Matsuno Enterprises was... Matsuno was the landowner. The applicant was Pi'ilani Partners who was looking to develop the project. Okay and then you are involved in discussions with all those...involving those three parties. We were involved in discussions regarding land use. Thank you. I have one more. At what point did the chair...the Council chairperson inform you...discuss with you...that you...there was no problem. It was at a Council meeting after we as the planning committee had met to discuss Bill 16. And at which point I shared my non- interest in the application. I see. So you didn't... It was at a Council meeting. So you did make a disclosure at that meeting? I made a disclosure at a Council meeting...after the committee had deliberated and provided a recommendation on the bill. I see. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, if I may? Yes please. Ms. Kierkiewicz, I'm just looking at this County Council Rule 11. But you said that references disclosure. And then it says if you have a disclosure and then you see there's a clear conflict of a personal stand point then you recuse yourself. Correct? Ms. Kierkiewicz: If there is substantial personal interest. Yes. 23 Mr. Robinson: Substantial personal interest. So to me it comes down to a difference between disclosure and recusal. Disclosure is the initial up front submitted this legislation. I'm asking for consideration by all parties. As a matter of fact I'd like to disclose that I have this relationship with that relationship. The same as I would assume, Harry Kim when he gets up and testifies before the County Council about budgetary items and he is a retired County employee. He discloses that he's a recipient or could be a County Council retirement or county retirement so he would disclose that up front in testimony about the county budget. Ms. Kierkiewicz: It hasn't happened before me as a Councilmember. Mr. Robinson: Okay. So but for you as a County Councilmember, if you have a personal relationship, a business relationship I should say with someone...even if there's like the layers you talked about...Rex Matsuno...you know owning this company but then also owning this other company that owns the land who's difference clearly in my mind, there should be a disclosure made initially...initially. As far as the vote goes on a recusal. If the disclosure doesn't create an alarm, there would be no reason for a recusal. But if a disclosure does demonstrate an alarm by your fellow Council members...there would be. That never...like...was something you thought about or just felt that there was no need to disclose initially? Ms. Kierkiewicz: I didn't feel that I had a substantial interest in what was before me. Mr. Robinson: I don't sit on the board. I wasn't doing any work for Matsuno Enterprises and so I felt I was operating with integrity. Had your employer ever been paid by either entity? Or received money from either entity for work that they had done? Ms. Kierkiewicz: My employer represented Suisan. Mr. Robinson: Okay, thank you. Mr. Goodenow: Okay. Anyone else? Ms. Sumner -Mack? Ms. Sumner -Mack: No. That's alright. Well I'm just curious about this...the term...substantial personal interest. I'm not an attorney and I'm not familiar with Council rules. But in your mind, does that term necessarily mean a financial interest or can it be some other interest...would you say your partner was...is it in the fire department. And you considered that a personal interest. That 24 Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: Ms. Kierkiewicz: Mr. Heintz: might have to be disclosed but...so it's not just a financial interest is that right? That is correct and maybe this is where Deputy Corporation Counsel J Yoshimoto can expand further on...the interpretation of that. Yeah. Ms. Sumner -Mack though you do have the floor. Would you care to ask Mr. Yoshimoto? Oh yes. If he can or will or give it some time....give us a clarification of what the term is meant to imply to the office holder. Thank you. Yes. Assuming the Board goes into executive session, then we can have that discussion. Thank you for that. For the record though. Outside Mr. Wiseman. So we have a Council Rule 11. We're going to pass it out to all the Board Members so the record can reflect that the Board is also reviewing this rule. Just to add the code section which is stated in their petition. Does state it's the...personal financial or other interest. It's other financial or otherwise direct or indirect. So it's not just financial. And right so Board Member Wiseman is correct. When you look at the Council rule...you look at the Charter...you look at the code. Yeah there's different provisions that could be applicable. So I'll advise the Board when we go into executive session. Alright. Any other questions before we go into executive session? If you can help me a little bit more and understanding your position at Hastings & Pleadwell. As a senior account executive, are you an officer in the company of Hastings & Pleadwell? Define officer? Were you an officer or a board member? No. Did part of you enumeration involved ownership in the company. 25 Ms. Kierkiewicz: No ownership. Mr. Heintz: So you have no ownership. Ms. Kierkiewicz: I was simply an employee. Mr. Heintz: Just an employee. Okay. And finally if you could help me a little bit. Are there a lot of these senior account executives it sounds like it? Ms. Kierkiewicz: I was the only one. Mr. Heintz: You're the only? Ms. Kierkiewicz: Yes. Mr. Heintz: Oh so that's very... Ms. Kierkiewicz: On the island and I did some work statewide. Mr. Heintz: Okay thank you. Ms. Kierkiewicz: You're welcome. Mr. Goodenow: Any other questions? I do have one question for the petitioner. I notice on the petition, you cite the conflict of interest provision. And that provision does talk about the substantial financial interest. I didn't see anything regarding fair treatment. So no one's alleging that Ms. Kierkiewicz was trying to get unwarranted privileges for herself or her employer. No one's putting that forward right. We're just on this conflict of interest. Should there have been a...introducing the bill maybe and second the disclosure. Is that correct. I wanna make sure we're clear on that. Ms. Harden: Since I don't hear well, could you repeat that? Mr. Goodenow: I didn't say it very well either. So you guys are bringing forward the conflict of interest provisions saying that they were violated. You're not though bringing up, fair treatment provisions in the ethics code. Saying that Ms. Kierkiewicz was not being impartial or she was trying to secure unwarranted privileges, advantages for herself or her employer right. You're not...that's not in the petition. The petition is only should she have introduced the bill and should she have disclosed this and recused. That's really the only thing in the petition. Do I have that correct? 26 Ms. Harden: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: I'm not a lawyer but you know if Ms. Kierkiewicz at the time she introduced the bill was on leave from Hastings & Pleadwell, and she kind of knows in the back of her mind if she's doing things counter to the interest of some clients at Hastings & Pleadwell that might lead to some trouble with her being rehired. And the other thing is...she was very knowledgeable about Suisan. From having you know worked closely with Steve Ueda...so there's a lot of connections beforehand. So it's possible for someone to make a lot of connections in the community or business and then go to Council and have a greater interest in pursuing that rather than interest of the people as a whole. And I don't think he was trying to do anything nefarious. But I think we need to have some guidance. Things do get complicated with someone coming for business. Suddenly into government and trying to adjust to that and also the close connections in this small community. Alright. Thank you for that. Any other questions before we...I will entertain a motion that we go into executive session. No more discussion? Okay, at this point, I'd like someone to move that we go into executive session for the purposes of consulting with our attorney regarding the rights, duties and privileges of the board of ethics. I so move. I'll second. Alright. It's been moved and seconded...all in favor please say aye. Unanimous...we'll recess to go into executive session. Thank you. Motion and Vote: Ms. Sumner -Mack moved to go into executive session. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 11:17 a.m. The Board moved into executive session. 11:45 a.m. The Board returned into regular session. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: We will call the meeting back to order. Okay. Where we left off...we had finished the testimony...the sides I guess have finished their presentations. I'm open to a motion by any member. Sorry one more thing. I wanna make sure Ms. Kierkiewicz...Council Member Kierkiewicz has a copy of that May loth letter that we had accepted earlier. 27 Mr. Goodenow: Oh thank you. Mr. Yoshimoto: So I want to make sure the record is clear. I'm gonna present it to her now so she has a copy and then you may want to ask her if she has anything else to add upon receipt of this. Cause we couldn't disclose this until it was presented in a public meeting. Mr. Goodenow: Right. Ok. Okay good. You got it. Great. Okay. So may I have a motion? Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion...and help me with the wording here but...that there's a violation of the County Charter 14-3 is regards...this disclosure that the disclosure should have been made up front as soon there was an introduction of this legislation. And that...that should have occurred. Alright so...I guess so that we'll make a motion that we issue an advisory opinion. Mr. Robinson: An advisory opinion. Mr. Goodenow: Stating that disclosure should have occurred... Mr. Robinson: At the point of...at the point of submission of this...item. Mr. Goodenow: Right. Okay. Ms. Sumner -Mack: I'll second that. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: And that's only on disclosure...is the motion at this time...and that can be amended as the discussion goes on. This is to start discussion. Okay. Discussion. Chair is supposed to go last. Although I have trouble with that rule but... If there's no discussion... Are we going forward...so this is a motion making a decision with respect to an issue here. Yes. The motion on the floor is to issue an advisory opinion, advising that Ms. Kierkiewicz, should have disclosed... Her relationship with... 28 Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: We should detract the language here...that should have disclosed...the business transaction or... Her financial interest direct or indirect which might reasonably have tended to be incompatible with the proper discharge of her official duties. Does that sound correct? I didn't see any direct or indirect financial interests...at least from what we've heard. Let me just take a... So my understanding is...the motion is based upon the reading and interpretation of Hawaii County Charter Section 14-3, disclosure of interest. Okay. Right? Is that correct? So basically I read into the record...it shall incumbent upon all the employees or officers of the County to: (a) Make full disclosure in writing to the appointing authority or to the Council in the case of an elected officer, the possession or acquisition of any interests, financial or otherwise as might reasonably tend to create a conflict of interest with the public interest. Any member of the Council who knows of a personal interest, direct or indirect, in any action proposed or pending before the Council shall disclose such interest prior to taking any action of any vote thereon. Thank you. That's a well worded motion. Right? That's really what the motion is. That's what I meant to say. Yeah...me too. Can that language be inserted in your motion. Or I mean is that... You're the second. You're okay with that? Yes. Alright. We have a motion on the floor. Discussion. Seeing none. 29 Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Robinson: Yeah...it's a very general wording. Financial or other interest that may reasonably lead to a conflict. So that's what we're adopting here...that's on the floor for adoption. I think we were concerned about the appearance or the possible appearance of impropriety and not just you know, not specifically not you know...a court case...but an appearance of conflict of interest that people are concerned about. Correct. I'd just like to add...I was moved by the discussion regarding public trust. I can understand someone you play baseball with or somebody that's a next door neighbor or a friend. Those are all things just to disclose...disclosure is really the key...because that speaks to the public trust. Whereas recusal...would if...you know your colleagues then said...of that's too close...that would be the test. But their disclosure upfront is really the key for me and the establishment of the public trust so. Sometimes disclosure can be overboard. People can disclose way too much...but that also is good for the soul because in disclosing it...then it's known...it's above board and it's always there. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman. Oh I'm sorry Larry. Mr. Heintz: Mr. Wiseman: Yes. The connections here strike me. There's an important distinction in that is...the connections that you have with Suisan and Matsumoto and the fact that...and your employment with Hastings & Pleadwell which involve discussions of the...partners who were involved with the bottling plant. Those connections are all there and it strikes me as transparent. That...those all should have been disclosed at the initial introduction of Bill 16 and any discussion involvement with that topic. Thank you. And with respect to the term public trust, I'd like to add to that. It's a confidence of the public. Public confidence in the systems and our democratic institutions, that is important. And that's where that appearance of impropriety comes in. If something doesn't look kosher or just doesn't look right up there...there's an appearance. An appearance has to be...of everybody has to be...from a reasonable base. There has to be some connection. A. She went to school with so and so 20 years ago...well...oh...okay. But still, the public disclosure...any interest of the public interest a disclosure is necessary to me. I don't know, I've done it a hundred of times myself. And here's a public disclosure, I represented this person about 28 years ago...does anyone have a problem with that? And if someone did, it wouldn't be reasonable... so. Usually no one has an interest. But that's very important I think. That 30 Mr. Heintz: Mr. Goodenow: appearance of impropriety has to be avoided when it has a reasonable and strong base...a connection. I don't mean to be repeating myself but to take David's point. If what I'm disclosing is...that I'm currently on a leave of absence from a company that represented the party that's trying to sell a piece of property and that this Bill is involved with the status of that property. Whether it's commercial or residential or industrial...the connection there is very direct and the appearance of impropriety seems to me...be a major concern. Thank you. Alright. Any other discussion? I would add here just for the record here so when they draft this thing right...section 14-1 of the code of ethics and the Charter subsection or (b) says elected and appointed officials and employees shall demonstrate the highest standard of ethical conduct so that the public may have trust and confidence in the integrity of the government. Section 14-3 disclosure of interest was read as part of the motion by Mr. Yoshimoto. And it does say it's incumbent upon employees or officers of the County to make full disclosure in writing...in the case of a Council member to the Council...the possession or acquisition of any interests, financial or otherwise as might reasonably tend to create a conflict with the public interest. Any member of the Council who knows of a personal interest, direct or indirect, in any action proposed or pending before the Council shall disclose said interest prior to the taking of any vote thereon. And I do note that in the code...we're dealing with the Charter but I think there is guidance in the code is for what the definition of what constitutes a financial interest in the definition section 2- 81...oh sorry wrong section...2-82 does say that "financial interest" means an interest held by an individual, the individual's spouse, or dependent children which is...and one of them is...an employment, or prospective employment for which negotiations have begun. You stated you are on leave...but I think we'd make a finding that...in our opinion...that still would constitute employment and that you know you...by resigning showed that there was something that you know you were giving up. Right? I mean...not to try and complain about corrective action which you we're grateful for but I think to me that also brings into the definition that...that...does constitute maybe indirect but there is a financial component. Any other discussion on the motion? If not I...we haven't really addressed the other issue. We're just dealing with disclosure and we can leave it at that and end it. Does anyone want to talk about...or make another motion? Ms. Sumner -Mack: Well let's vote on this one. 31 Mr. Goodenow: Alright we'll vote on this one then we can move to the other topic. Good suggestion. Okay. The motion again is that there was a violation of Charter, section 14-3, as stated in the Charter. No further discussion? Seeing none...all in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries five to zero. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to issue an informal advisory opinion. Ms. Sumner -Mack seconded the motion. All members voted aye. Mr. Goodenow: As far as the other issue now regarding... Any other motions or shall we consider this matter over? Mr. Heintz: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Chair, I'm not ready to make another motion but the petitioners have raised at least five different issues in my mind. Including...was it appropriate...or is it appropriate in the future of...for a Councilmember and just using this case...to introduce a bill...like Bill 16... in case of a representative or Councilmember Kierkiewicz. I want to say that on that particular point, it seems that Councilmember Kierkiewicz was following procedure and so I see no problem with the fact that she introduced the Bill. That was part of her role. But then there's the question of whether or not she should recuse herself or not. And then there's a further two questions...I think in Ms. Hardens petition in particular about the...they're asking that beyond this particular case...that more general advice and discussion and recommendation by the Ethics Committee to the Council as a whole on these questions of disclosure and voting on issues where there's our need for recusal. I think such a general policy statement or letter would require us to do some work. I'm not prepared to make a motion. But I just want to point out that I think there are at least four other issues that we have not addressed. Yes. I would concur with Larry with respect to...to that issue. I'm concerned with perhaps in a suggested language that we could include and it would just be a suggestion...what they call...the legal opinion which would be to the effect that the Councilmembers should or the chair should refresh themselves on the Charter provision. As we know...you go into these meetings...no one has the Charter in front of them. You know it's not...intentional avoidance...it's just not there to preoccupy with other important issues. So perhaps it will be fresher on this code section part of...the Charter section that we mentioned. Mr. Goodenow: Alright. Further discussion? I would move. Alright we don't have to move I think it's included in the fact that we're drafting an 32 Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: opinion. I think we could put in the opinion that we you know send the copy of the opinion to the Council chair and... Well maybe all the Council members. Or Councilmembers. And maybe we could include language stating that you know...we did not look at...not pass judgement... Rule 11 is a Council rule, that's their internal procedure. However, we note that of course, any rule of the Council would have to be compliant with the County Charter which provides... And again we're going now to the other section now, right? Conflict of interest. Are we gonna make a ruling on conflict of interest. Section 14-2 standard says it shall constitute a conflict of interest for employees or officers of the County to and then it...there's (b) use their official position to secure special privileges, consideration, treatment or exemption to themselves or any persons beyond that which is available to every other person. I don't think that applies. Someone might think it does but in my opinion, no. But then there's (c) engage in any business, transaction or activity or have a financial interest, direct or indirect, which might reasonably tend to be incompatible with the proper discharge of their official duties or to impair their independence of judgment in the performance of their official duties. I'm not...I don't feel we need to make a ruling or findings that this is what happened. But maybe we could as Mr. Wiseman suggests, include that that maybe we don't have a finding but we note... I mean the issue is she divested herself, right, she's resigned. So it doesn't exist anymore. Would the Charter still allow her to vote? And do we wanna go there or should we leave that for the Council to decide. I don't think we ought to go there. I think we should leave that to the Council to decide. In other words we're asking the County Council to abide by some rules. I think that's fine. And the petitioners... Okay. Any other discussion? So we won't really make another motion then. We'll just leave it with the disclosure. And to be clear then so in the informal advisory opinion, you want to state that there's... We're not gonna go into this. You should vote or not vote. Right. 33 Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Right we're gonna say...well we note this...when you make your decision about recusal but let's not even go there. Let's keep it clean. I would like to include the appearance of impropriety. I can write a statement for...be considered for...to include in decision. That in itself should raise anyone's normal awareness of what's going on. And if there was an appearance of impropriety before, and this issue is now a public record, of course that appearance has elevated quite a bit. Okay. In my opinion. I just want to make sure that, that opinion is helpful to the public in its explanation in providing guidance. Cause I think that's something the Board wants to do. Correct? Yeah. Right. Because when we talk about you know reasonably...might reasonably tend to be incompatible. Right? With the proper discharge of the official duties or impair...I mean...people are gonna say...so what does that mean? Right? So we're going to say that we're concerned about the appearance of impropriety and I mean, it's up to the Board. I think we're on the same page here. We're not going into whether you should vote or not. That we're just saying...hey there should have been disclosure. We'll put in the impropriety language. Reasonable implication can be taken from that language. Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? Corp. Counsel, are you satisfied that we have provided enough information for you? So let me make sure we have a record, then yeah, anyone have anything else to add? That they want... Anything you'd like us to add? I'd like to reserve my right to see the draft. 34 Mr. Yoshimoto: Oh yeah. You will. You will. Mr. Wiseman: To perhaps suggest any modification I see desirable. Mr. Yoshimoto: Okay. Yes. Mr. Goodenow: Of course I won't be here so. Mr. Robinson: What was your name again? Mr. Goodenow: All right. Then are we done with this agenda item? We'll move on to the next item thank you. 6. VOTING ON EXECUTIVE SESSION MATTERS (12:38 p.m.) a. Review of the executive session minutes of April 22, 2019. Mr. Goodenow: Minutes April 22nd Mr. Robinson: Motion to approve. Mr. Goodenow: Any discussion? Seeing none...all in favor please say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries five to zero. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to approve executive session minutes. All members voted aye. b. Review of Confidential Financial Disclosure Forms filed pursuant to Section 2-91.1(d), Hawaii County Code, by County board and commission members and designated County employees, where personal matters will be reviewed. Mr. Goodenow: Regarding review of confidential financial forms. We have reviewed all seven forms submitted and have completed our review. What's the appropriate motion? Mr. Yoshimoto: Motion to accept and file. Mr. Goodenow: Okay motion to accept and file...may I have one? Mr. Heintz: Yeah. Motion to accept and file. Mr. Goodenow: May I have a second? Mr. Robinson: Second. 35 Mr. Goodenow: All those in favor please say aye. Any opposed? Motion passed unanimously. Motion and Vote: Mr. Heintz moved to approve and file financial disclosure forms. Mr. Robinson seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 7. DISCUSSION REGARDING AMENDMENTS TO THE RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE OF THE BOARD OF ETHICS OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII. (12:10 p.m.) Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Wiseman: Discussion regarding amendments to the rules and practice of procedure and I'll just note that...Charter amendment has made it to the Charter so quite some time from now it'll be voted on. I guess it's going to the County Council and they may make comments or propose alternatives. What's something in the newspaper about the, you know, Board of Ethics as one of the things that they're gonna be put on the ballot... Mr. Goodenow: Yes. Mr. Heintz: Yes. Mr. Goodenow: So as far as the letter to the Chair, as I explained, or the Chair of Council. I'm sorry, I kinda just had that discussion and just put it off. But I'll do it right away before July 1'. And you have the proposed rules, the final version. I believe we're attached to the minutes. I believe it's dated. I looked it up here. What did I do with it? Mr. Robinson: Are we setting next meeting date? Mr. Goodenow: We'll do that next. Sorry. Ms. Sumner -Mack: We already have. Mr. Goodenow: We're still on the rules though...agenda...just saying that you have my final rules. You can take it up, it's on the record. It's dated December, I believe. Okay. Moving on to the next item. 8. DISCUSSION REGARDING CHANGES TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS MONTHLY MEETING SCHEDULE. (12:14 p.m.) Mr. Goodenow: We're not changing it. Is there any discussion. 36 Ms. Sumner -Mack: I do have a comment about that and I think that we should determine the dates now or confirm the dates for the rest of the year at least. And also that we explore the idea of finding alternative meeting space. So that if the Council elects to use this space on one of our preannounced dates, that we should have an alternative in place. That we can go somewhere else to have a meeting. Even if we have to go to another part of the island. But I don't think it's fair for the public to not be able to count on our having a set meeting schedule. It looks like we have this second Tuesday of every month for the rest of the year. And that I think we should at least try to find an alternative in case the Council wants to use this space. Cause we seem to be low man on the totem pole right now. We get kicked out if anybody else wants to use this space. Mr. Robinson: Mr. Heintz: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: I agree wholeheartedly with what you're saying and it's just wrong that we change our dates. There's a conference room right over there right. We could move other there if this room gets taken. So rather than change the date, let's change the location. That way people are scheduled in. Hopefully more public will appear but you know...that's consistency. I would note though right...that the rules that say that the meeting shall be on the second Wednesday of every month. We suspend the rules every meeting because I'm never available on the second Wednesday because the Campaign Spending Commission was meeting on that day. Unfortunately the next meeting is after July 1 st Yeah, I'm gone. So you can go back to Wednesdays right? No. Ms. Sumner -Mack: Wait. We can go back to Wednesdays. Mr. Yoshimoto: No. Yeah. That's what's in our rules so. Mr. Goodenow: We should stick to the rules. Mr. Robinson: But we've already set the dates. Ms. Sumner -Mack: Let's go back. Mr. Goodenow: Oh we already suspended. You're right. 37 Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Ms. Pagala: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Pagala: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Pagala: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Pagala: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Yeah for the rest of the year. So let's just. We talked about that. Well let's... But like the next one is on a Monday. The next one we had chosen is Monday, July 15th. So why don't we just say adjust it now so we're following our rules. And say it's the second Wednesday or 1St whatever. We had tried July 10th, but then we changed it to July 15th for some reason. I guess because we couldn't get the room. But if we set it for the second Wednesday or whatever date...I don't care if it's Sunday. But we should have an alternative so that we can...instead of changing the date. And having to notify everybody that we just fix it according to our rules and go on with that. The July 10th date was changed to the 15th because Immigration had already reserved this chambers. Let me ask you Maria, there's other facilities in this building that have recording system...that's a key requirement. That's the thing. The others don't have the recording. We would have to bring our recording and it's really a great deal of effort to... Yeah, that's not... I'm just saying that there's another conference room that would have recording system. There isn't any. I've checked with Emily. I will double check again but... One thought you know a lot of these services now days...that you know you do...videoconferencing and part of the service is, they record it for you. So it might be simpler than having the mics and everything. Videoconferencing. Videoconferencing system, it's just a thought. But currently we're set for the balance of the year for this room so we have the recording, correct. 38 Ms. Pagala: There's some conflict dates that we gotta discuss. But for December and November is set. November 13 and December 11 is confirmed. Mr. Robinson: How about August and September. Ms. Pagala: There's some conflicts in the dates so. Mr. Yoshimoto: What I wanted to mention was that for... as I understand then Maria, you correct me if I'm wrong. August 14th is the next, I mean is the August date, that's at Wednesday. And then there will be September 1 lt1'? Ms. Pagala: Yes. Mr. Yoshimoto: And then it'll be October 9. Ms. Pagala: Yes. Mr. Yoshimoto: So Board Members just so you know, I'm not available on all of those dates. But that's okay because if the Board wants have the meetings then we'll find someone from our office to cover for me. Cause I have work conflicts for those dates and the other one, I'm out of the office so. Just so you know where I am. Ms. Sumner -Mack: What I have on my calendar is July 15 is the next one. And then the next one is August 14th, you can't be there? Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Yoshimoto: Right, yeah I have another assignment. We'll have somebody... You'll have somebody here. Yeah. So what I'm just saying is...it'll be okay. It's just I don't want to disrupt the Board's schedule. Ms. Sumner -Mack: And then there's September 11. Mr. Yoshimoto: And I'm not here either right. Mr. Robinson: But there'll be somebody? Mr. Yoshimoto: Somebody here yeah. There will always be someone. Ms. Sumner -Mack: And then October 9? 39 Mr. Yoshimoto: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Ms. Pagala: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Goodenow: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: I'm not here either. Yeah. Well we don't have to do that. No, no we can. Just so you know if you're wondering. Even though it doesn't concern me. I'm gonna move that we keep the current dates...but have Corp. Counsel for the next meeting come up for a year in advance. So we don't get bumped. And we set it for the second Wednesday starting next year. And do a whole year...maybe two years of second Wednesdays. Fine with me. I see. You're puzzled. That won't work for you. No, it's just these hearings are already scheduled from long ago. So I don't have a choice. We keep the dates we have now. Well we just find alternative places and we come up with a recording system that will work. But how often do we meet in other places on the island. They have the same facilities don't they. Kona does. Kona...must have. So that's an option. In the past, that has been discussed. So if you wanted to meet say at the West Hawaii Civic Center, we can do that. And you know they have a recording system, so that...you know if wanted to alternate it or do it quarterly or whatever you wanna do. Our new Chairman can guide us on that. I suggest our new Chairman take it up...work with Corp. Counsel to come up with a calendar. We'll do that for next year. We've got the balance of our year set already. Yeah. We do. 40 Mr. Robinson: So we'll stay with that. And if there's conflicts, I'm pretty sure we'll find an alternative. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Robinson: Okay. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Alright. So that being done we...now we'll into executive session. May I have... Did you wanna talk about the... Oh yeah. You guys should hear about this. This is exciting. So we'll do announcements now. 9. ANNOUNCEMENTS (12:19 p.m.) a. The Hawai'i State Ethics Commission and the Honolulu Ethics Commission are tentatively planning to host a Hawaii Ethics Conference in Honolulu on Thursday, September 5, 2019 or Friday, September 6, 2019. Discussion regarding whether any Board members would be interested/available to attend this ethics conference. Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Wiseman: Ms. Sumner -Mack: Would anybody be interested? I'll elaborate a little. So I was contacted by Dan Gluck. He's with the Hawai'i State Ethics Commission and they're planning this event and wanted to...and they're inviting us as well as the other ethics boards from Maui and Kauai and Oahu and so... You say they're inviting us. Is there a budget for us? So there's a budget currently for two members and one staff person. But that's subject to interest so. If the Board decides that it wants to send more. Then we will look for additional funding. So that's... Would there be problems though with sending more if say three people went and they were discussing... We address that with the OIP and so long as there's no Board business talked about then we should... I'm out. I'm off island. I'll be in New York during that time. I might be interested. 41 Mr. Heintz: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Yoshimoto: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: Mr. Robinson: Mr. Goodenow: I think I would be interested. Should we say that three are interested or two? Three or two. Sorry two. No. Larry, Nan... I'll relay that message and then I'll get the specific information for the Board members. And you have enough time...I mean...if we have to book tickets and all. Oh yeah. Once I get back to them after today's meeting, then... Is there any preference for the date? Oh yeah. Do you have a preference for the date? I had suggested Thursday actually because it's just easier to travel on a Thursday to Oahu than on a Friday. Is Thursday okay? We'd prefer Thursday. Alright. If there's only budget for the two though...should we authorize you to draw by lots between the three of them. So you can just actually get their names. We'll find them. Alright. Next item is just the next announcement is our next Board meeting is July 15, 2019, 10:00 a.m., this building. Now may I have a motion to... Motion for executive session. Gotta say for... For purpose of ...all of it...yeah. Thank you. 42 Mr. Robinson: The financial disclosure forms presented and also the executive session minutes of April 22, 2019. Mr. Goodenow: May I have a second please? Ms. Sumner -Mack: Second. Mr. Goodenow: Okay. All those in favor please say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. We'll recess to go into executive session. Thank you. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to go into executive session. Ms. Sumner -Mack seconded the motion. All members voted aye. 10. ADJOURNMENT (12:40 p.m.) Mr. Goodenow: We are at the end of the meeting. Does any have any other announcement they'd like to make before we close. Seeing none. Sorry. Mr. Wiseman: I'd like to express the...on my behalf and behalf of my spatian as a Councilmember...appreciation and gratitude for the Chair, acting Chair Ken Goodenow who's leaving us. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Robinson: Especially as regards to the Charter amendments that you worked so hard on. Mr. Goodenow: Thank you. Mr. Robinson: You did an excellent job organizing all that. I was amazed you were able to get all the other counties. Mr. Goodenow: Well thank you. Ms. Sumner -Mack: So what are you going to be doing? Mr. Goodenow: I will be working at the Attorney General's office so I can't really be here but I look forward to watching your progress and one day amending the rules...hopefully as that goes forward. Any other comments before we adjourn but thank you very much for your nice comments. It's been a pleasure. Mr. Robinson: Motion to adjourn. 43 Mr. Goodenow: Any second? Ms. Sumner -Mack: Second. Mr. Goodenow: All in favor say aye. Meeting is adjourned. Motion and Vote: Mr. Robinson moved to adjourn. Ms. Sumner -Mack seconded the motion. All members voted aye. Respectfully submitted: Maria Pagala, Secretary 44