HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-10-26 Regular Session Minutes1
HAWAI‘I COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS MINUTES – REGULAR SESSION Friday, April 10, 2026 10:08 a.m. – 12:02 p.m.
County Council Chambers Hawai‘i County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 Members and Staff Present: Lisa Fukumitsu, Chair Erick Allende, Vice Chair Paul ‘Scotty’ Paiva, Board Member David Bruno, Board Member
Cameron Takamura, Deputy Corporation Counsel Khayla-Lei Peiler, Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER (10:08 a.m.)
Ms. Fukumitsu called the meeting to order at 10:08 a.m. Present in chambers were Lisa Fukumitsu, David Bruno, and Paul ‘Scotty’ Paiva. Present via Zoom was Erick Allende. Also present was Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura and Board Secretary Khayla-Lei Peiler.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Aloha, good morning. Calling to order the Board of Ethics meeting for April 10, 2026. Okay, so good morning. I'm your chair Lisa Fukumitsu, this is our Board of Ethics Meeting. This meeting is being held in person here at our Hilo council chambers as well as
virtually on Zoom. For those of you that are on zoom, please make
sure your cameras are turned on at all times, mute your device if you're not speaking. If you'd like to speak, please raise your hand and wait to be called on by me before talking. One person speaks at a time, no side conversations. And before we all speak, if we
could state our name for the record, to ensure that we make a clean and clear record. Sorry, at this time, if everyone would please turn off their cell phones and other devices and we can do our introductions starting with me. This is Chair Fukumitsu.
Mr. Bruno: Member David Bruno. Mr. Paiva: Member Paul Scotty Paiva.
Mr. Allende: Vice Chair Erick Allende.
2
Ms. Fukumitsu: And Erick, Vice Chair Allende is appearing on Zoom. Erick I need to ask, is anyone over the age of 18 at the location with you?
Mr. Allende: Not currently. Ms. Fukumitsu: Thank you. Sufficient? Okay, great. So for the record we have 4 members in attendance which means we meet quorum for our
meeting today. I'd like to also acknowledge the presence of our
Deputy Corporation Council DCC Takamura as well as the board's secretary, Khayla-Lei Peiler. 2. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON AGENDA ITEMS
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so at this time moving on to agenda item 2, is there any
public testimony on the agenda items today? Okay, and also I will be calling for public testimony as agenda items are called. Nothing? Okay.
3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES ( a.m.)
a. Approval of the regular session minutes of March 11, 2026 Ms. Fukumitsu: Seeing none moving on to agenda item 3, which is approval of the
minutes.
Ms. Peiler: I just wanted to apologize that there are no minutes for today.
Cameron explained to me that I will have an opportunity to post a
draft of the minutes within 40 days of the March meeting which
the minutes are for. I've had a lot of technical difficulties with the
program that I use to transcribe the minutes, not working.
Yesterday IT came out and fixed that for me so I’ll get that as soon
as possible. Thank you. Oh, I also wanted to hand out an example
of a summary of minutes instead of the way that I transcribe them
currently verbatim transcription, it was brought to my attention that
I might be able to start doing them just as a summarized. And I just
wanted to see what you guys thought and how you guys felt about
having them this way versus how we normally do them. And, I will
do it however you guys prefer. Thank you.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so just for the record noting that the board secretary handed
out a draft sample summary of March of the March 11th meeting
and that is… this for discussion at this point or?
3
Mr. Takamura: Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura. I think you can
have a discussion. Based on it being a draft sample, it can fall
under the agenda item 3.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay. Okay, so if we could take a moment to review the draft
sample of the March 11 minutes and vice chair Allende you have a
copy as well?
*Vice Chair Allende acknowledges he does not have a copy*
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, we're gonna go ahead and email that to you. Okay, so,
actually can we just defer... Okay, can we defer this review to the
end of our agenda? Do I need a motion and a vote? Okay, so we're
just gonna move it. Okay, we're gonna just move this to the end of
the agenda for today. Sound good? We can review it later. Okay.
Then we move on, yeah?
4. COMMUNICATIONS (10:06 a.m.) a. None
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so moving on to agenda item 4, communication. The board
received a communication from Paul Yang providing feedback on the County of Hawaii police commission’s chief selection process. Is there any public testimony on that agenda item? And then address if the board's reviewed it.
Mr. Takamura: Yeah, and I can do a, I can do a brief overview of why it's this as a communication. Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so have all of you, on the board have a chance to review it.
Okay, so if we can ask DCC Takamura to provide us with some
information. Mr. Takamura: Okay, this item is listed as a communication as it was not clear from the contents whether or not they wanted to assert this as a 3rd
party petition or if they were just sending it to the board for the
board's information and consideration. So at this point it would be up to you guys as a board to determine whether or not you guys would like to just treat it as a communication or if you would like to interpret it as a 3rd party petition pursuant to the rules of the
board rule 4.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Discussion?
4
Mr. Bruno: Member Bruno, in reviewing it and even from the introduction that you know, it's you know, it's an independent submission and it was
used you know it was intended to inform and educate so the future
process may be improved. So while they are broadly tied, including conversation about, you know, the ethical breaches and where the standards are I think I take it as a personal opinion and a general request, but I think it's directed to the police commission,
would be the one, you know, to change their process as they, you
know, for future selection. And unless they're until it were more formalized, It's interesting reading, certainly from a, you know, from the sighting of, of ethical, person's ethical, opinions of the ethics process as it pertains to the Police Chief's selection process,
but I don't think it rises to level of something that we would we
would except in and you know proceed and provide our opinion on it. Thank you. Mr. Paiva: This member of Paiva. So what he just said, I think it is for
information only also.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Chair Fukumitsu, I agree. So would I then call for a motion? Mr. Takamura: Oh, you can offer a motion to just treat it as a communication.
Ms. Fukumitsu: I can see that specifically. Okay, yes, do I have a motion to receive it as an information-only communication? Mr. Bruno: Member Bruno, I make a motion that we accept the, submission,
from Dr. Paul Yang, as a communication to the board of ethics.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Do I have a second? Mr. Paiva: Member Paiva. Second.
Ms. Fukumitsu: All those in favor?
*All members say aye in unison*
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so motion approved and for the record, that's just going to be
received as a Communication.
Motion and Vote: Board member Bruno moved to receive the submission by Dr. Paul Yang
in regards to the Police Chief selection process as a communication only. Board member
Paiva seconded; All Members voted aye. Motion Passes. (10:16 a.m.)
5
5. OPEN PROCEEDINGS FOR INFORMAL ADVISORY OPINION PETITION(S)
a. New and Continued Review of Petitions:
None for open proceedings.
b. Consideration of Draft Informal Advisory Opinions:
None for open proceedings.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, moving on to agenda item 5. Proceedings, open proceedings
relating to informal advisory opinions. We don’t have any agenda
items correct? Under 5a New and Continued review of petitions we
have none, 5b consideration of draft informal advisory opinions for
approval we have none.
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION
Ms. Fukumitsu: Moving on to agenda item 6. The Board anticipates going into
executive session for the following petitions pursuant to HRS 92-4
and HRS 92-5 to consider whether the conduct presented by a
county employee may constitute a probable violation of the code of
ethics and may result in disciplinary action and to consider matters
affecting an individual's privacy pursuant to HRS 92-5(a)(4) and to
consult with the board's attorney on boards powers, duties and
liabilities. And then I should state these petitions? It’s Petition
2026-08 as stated in the agenda and petition 2026-09 as stated in
the agenda. Also for the informal advisor opinions for approval,
the board anticipates going into executive session for Petition
2026-07, member of the public petition for informal advisory
opinion, 2026-05 animal control and protection are as stated on the
agenda. Do I have a motion?
Mr. Bruno: Member Bruno, I make a motion to move into executive session.
Mr. Takamura: Okay, and just to clarify, the purpose of the executive session
would be pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5(a)(2) and HRS 92-5(a)(4)
for the petitions that the chair just listed.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Thank you. Do I have a second?
Mr. Paiva: Member Paiva second.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, all those in favor?
6
*All members say aye in unison*
Ms. Fukumitsu: Ok so it’s 10:19 and we will be going into executive session so
we’ll call for the Petitioner for 2026-08 when we’re ready.
Motion and Vote: Board member Bruno moved to go into Executive Session for agenda
item 6(a)(i) 1 and 2 and agenda item 6(a)(ii) 1 and 2, pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5a(2), and
92-5(a)(4); Board Member Paiva seconded; All Members voted aye. Motion Passes.
(10:19 a.m.)
Board enters Executive Session (10:19 a.m.)
Board enters Open Session (11:44 a.m.)
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, reconvening. We're in open session. It is 11:44 and I would
like to ask DCC Takamura to give the executive session report. We
are on a agenda item 7.
Mr. Takamura: This is Deputy Corporation Counsel Takamura, Petition 2026-08
was held in executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5
(a)(2) and 92-5 (a)(4) for the purposes stated on the agenda item
the discussion held there and is not subject to disclosure as
disclosure attend to frustrate the purpose of the executive session.
The board decided to seek further information from other entities.
Petition 2026-09 was held in executive session for the purposes
stated in the agenda pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5 (a)(2) and 92-5
(a)(4) the discussions held there in or not subject to disclosure, so
tend to frustrate the purpose of the executive session. The board
declined to receive the petition. For the next set of executive
session items and items 6 A roman numeral 2. Petition 2026 dash
or informal advisory opinion for petition 2026-07 was held in
executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5 (a)(2) and 92-5
(a)(4) for the purposes stated or as stated in the agenda. The
discussion is not subject to disclosure as a tend to frustrate the
purpose of the executive session. The board voted to approve the
informal advisory opinion. For petition, 2026-05 that was held in
executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5 (a)(2) and 92-5
(a)(4) as stated on the agenda item. The discussion held in
executive session is not subject to disclosure as it tends to frustrate
the purpose of the executive session. And the board voted to
approve the informal advisory opinion. And that is all for the
executive session report.
7
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, so, that's it. We are at announcements. Okay, agenda item 8.
The next monthly meeting of the Board of Ethics is scheduled for
Wednesday, May 13th 2026 at 10 o'clock am at the Hawaii County
Building Council Chambers, 25, Aupuni Street, Hilo Hawaii 9 6 7
2 0 and can I get a motion? Oh I'm so sorry oh yes we're circling
back to the minutes. Thank you, Member Bruno. So, the board
secretary, provided a summary, yes, of the...
Mr. Takamura: It’s a draft… Sorry that's a draft sample for the March 11 minutes
to see if you guys are okay with her doing Summary style minutes
instead of verbatim. Summaries do comply with HRS 92-9 to the
extent that it still meets all the requirements which are has to have
the date, time and it has to have a accurate depiction of the views
of the parties, etc. So, it's just for you guys to kind of look over to
determine whether or not you're okay with that instead of verbatim.
Ms. Fukumitsu: So can I ask a question of the board secretary? I understand the
undertaking of what it is to do all the minutes and I would like to
know from you what is more efficient and helpful for you. I don't
want to make a decision on your workload that makes it harder.
Ms. Peiler: Being that I don't normally summarize, it's, it's a little bit… It's just
getting used to. I do believe that it might be more efficient and
quicker. But also I don't have preference to either way. That's why
I brought it to your guys attention, whichever way you guys
preferred. But being that summarizing is so new to me it is a little
bit more difficult just cause I don't want to not include something
that should be included. I do have, Cameron to help me and catch
things for me sometimes so that is okay as well. The transcribing
verbatim is a lot more accurate, I think. It's just a lot more time
consuming. So I actually do not have a preference right now.
Either way. Thank you.
Mr. Bruno: Member Bruno, I mean, I appreciate the clarification, you know, to
immediately assume the shorter version condensed version is
“easier” but I appreciate knowing that the thought process the work
has to stuff to go through everything that was there and then
condense it down. I think in reading in before I was on the board,
but looking through our minutes. You know, having that transcript
is again in the broader sense of visibility and transparency it's all
there but at the same time it's so there's so much and being able to
thinking about having somebody look at it or looking back at it
having the summary is to me gets to the heart of the matter of what
we're doing and really cuts to providing the information if someone
were to again for us to refer back to or someone in the community
8
in the public wanted to look at it than it really cuts to the chase.
And, so my thoughts are that I would prefer the summary. And I
guess, but also understanding the work involved in it that, you
know I would ask that, Secretary, feel free to advise us as we go
through this if we decide if the consensus is to do that that you
know feel free to provide your input when you get used to it to say,
now that I'm used to it. This or that, you know, type of thing to
come back. And so, that's my opinion on what we should do and
how I think I would like to approach it.
Mr. Pavia: Member Paiva, my 2 cents is kind of following what she said that
it's you think it's easier for you to do the verbatim. And I can see
that trying to summarize it takes heavy thought process into
included what to include and what, what to leave out. And for
record keeping I would think the verbatim is a better indicator of
what actually transpired during the meeting. So I'm kind of torn. I
think I prefer the verbatim. As I'm as of right now.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Vice Chair Allende you have any comments?
Mr. Allende: I'm with member Paiva, I think on this just, I think the
communication back and forth and knowing, you know, what was
actually said is can be beneficial down the road, I think for people
looking back on it and seeing how the meeting played out and what
where stances were so we can see how things are moving forward.
But then again, I don't want to… I think we should give this
summaries, maybe a chance that maybe we have an input on what
may be included in the summary if we feel like it needs to, but you
know, like I, but for the most part, I think I stand with member
Paiva about enjoying and appreciating the work that Secretary puts
in to give us the verbatim method.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Mahalo, this is Chair Fukumitsu DCC Takamura, I have a
question, so if the board says, OK, we want to try this out for a
little while and see how it goes are we stuck with one? Can we
switch back and forth?
Mr. Takamura: Nope, it's up to you guys. How you guys would like to proceed so
long as we comply with the sunshine laws requirements in 92-9.
Ms. Fukumitsu: So I guess, I think for me and just adding on to what my colleagues
have said, I can look at it both ways, I do like the idea of having a
full transcript because it's transparency, it's accountability, right? If
anyone in the, I mean, executive session minutes, though, are never
gonna be?
9
Mr. Takamura: So it's not never, it's to the extent that disclosure would not defeat
the purpose of the executive session. I mean once I guess the
purpose that justified the executive session kind of extinguish then
at that point the sunshine law would require us to disclose.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay and so, regarding how meetings are transcribed if we move
into form summary format, would you still keep record of the full
transcript. In case?
Mr. Takamura: We would not have a full transcript in that case we would have…
Ms. Fukumitsu: The summary stands as the only piece of documented information?
Mr. Takamura: We also have the recordings as well though for the period that it's
required.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay, that's just my only kind of concern is that if we ever needed
to get in to a detailed record of a meeting for whatever reason that
we would have something to go back to you know, in case
someone in the community had a question. I mean I’m just
hypothetically thinking out loud.
Mr. Allende: What is the timeframe that we have to keep it? The required.
Mr. Takamura: So that would be governed by I believe the county record retention
policy. I would have to double check it as it pertains to recordings
that are only used to help transcribe the minutes. Cause it's a little
bit different, I think where if you're using the recording as the
minutes itself. Then sunshine requires a different standard, but if
you're only using the recording to assist you in drafting the minutes
then it's a different type. So I'd have to probably go back and verify
what the county’s retention policy is on the latter situation.
Mr. Allende: Is it possible to say we try the summary but then we don't officially
change so then that way the recordings stay on file for as long as
the sunshine law says and then that way until we have made a
decision that way it doesn't impede any of that possible
transcription in the future?
Mr. Takamura: Yes, we can. We can keep the recordings for all the minutes that
we do summary.
Mr. Bruno: Yeah. I mean, maybe that just suffices. I was gonna say at the same
time if being able to find out what the document, you know, what
the retention policy is for the purposes if it's being kept for
transcription if it changes it. You know, trying to envision when
someone would want to look back at it, you know, is it we're
looking, wanna refer back to our minutes for the work we're doing
10
or reconsideration, is it someone in the public looking into it? And
just making sure that you know that there's the availability
information and for a reasonable amount of time, you know, in
either of those situations.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Yeah agreed. This is Chair Fukumitsu. I mean, for our review,
right, with the summary, but my question was more about being
transparent to the community to the public if there were ever a
question going back right for a detailed set of minutes that would
be my only concern just from the public's but for me as far as our
review summaries are okay summaries are okay so I'm just I'm
open to anything you know whatever the board wants to do I'm
fine.
Mr. Paiva: Member Paiva on second thought I have used the verbatim minutes
to go back to see what was said, what I said, what the petitioner
said or what somebody else said to refresh my memory for the
upcoming meeting that we're addressing that petition.
Ms. Fukumitsu: So it sounds like board member Paiva has a motion.
Mr. Paiva: Member Paiva I make a motion to keep the verbatim minutes as is.
Mr. Allende: Second.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Sufficient DCC Takamura? And Vice Chair Allende, did I hear a
second from you?
Mr. Allende: You did. I second.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye.
*All members say aye in unison*
Ms. Fukumitsu: All those opposed? Okay, so motion passes, we are going to retain
the current format of minutes and a verbatim transcript style. Ok,
mahalo. I did read the announcements, but you know what? Let's
do it again. So, just as we end our meeting a reminder that our next
board meeting is scheduled for May 13, 2026 10am here at the
Hawaii County Building and a Zoom option will also be available
for that meeting as well. Okay, and can I get a motion to adjourn?
Motion and Vote: Board member Paiva motioned to keep the current verbatim minute
transcription style for the Board Minutes; Vice Chair Allende seconded; All Members
voted aye. Motion Passes. (11:59 a.m.)
11
Mr. Bruno: Sorry to interrupt. I don't mean to go back twice. I'm really not
trying to extend the meeting. Maybe this is needed to be discussed,
we were talking about planning on future meetings based on when
this chamber is not available to us. Can we finalize that or is that
you know again for future planning or maybe we just do it month
to month?
Ms. Peiler: So I did reach out to each of you to check if you preferred to stay
on this side of the island for the meetings and everyone, all four of
you have agreed that going to the Kona Council Chambers was
fine with you and your preference. If that's not anymore, let me
know. But we are confirmed to have the counsel reserved for July
15th That's Wednesday, Wednesday, August 12th, Wednesday,
October 14th, and then Tuesday, November 10th. I’m going to pass
out a highlighted meeting schedule.
Mr. Bruno: Thank you very much. I'm done now.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Thank you so much. Okay, got it. Any other questions or
comments? No, it's good. Anything, because would this also be a
time where we like if we have like things we want to move to
another agenda or we pau is pau?
Mr. Takamura: So it can be an announcement, that's all we agendize it for. But if
anybody has something that they would like to put on a future
agenda, they can email the board secretary. And then it will be up
to the Chair to decide whether or not to include it on the agenda.
It’s just no substantive discussion can be included with your
request to put it on the agenda. Like back and forth
communications.
Ms. Fukumitsu: So just question about the agenda, would it be prudent then to
build… as we build agendas to be like announcements A… like.
Mr. Takamura: Yep, so if, if you know the announcements in advance, let us know
and we'll put it on there. So you guys can specifically more...
Ms. Fukumitsu: Give us time to have like the discussion at the end like you know
how it's like next meetings or you know just matters of business for
the board.
Mr. Takamura: Yes, if you want a more substantive discussion other than this is
my announcement and nobody discussing the substance of it then
we have to agendize it, pursuant to sunshine law we have to
agendize it.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Okay. Sound good? Okay. Do I dare ask?
12
Mr. Bruno: Member Bruno, I make a motion that we adjourn the meeting.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Thank you, do we have a second?
Mr. Paiva: Member Paiva, second.
Ms. Fukumitsu: Can I get a vote? All those in favor? Aye.
*All members say aye in unison*
Ms. Fukumitsu: Opposed? Okay, motion passes, it is 12:02 and this meeting is
adjourned.
Motion and Vote: Board member Bruno motioned to adjourn; Board member Paiva
seconded; All Members voted aye. Motion Passes. (12:02 p.m.)
Respectfully submitted: Khayla-Lei, Secretary