HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-10-14 Board of Ethics Public Inspection PacketHAWAI‘I COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS
MINUTES – REGULAR SESSION Wednesday May 13, 2026 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. County Council Chambers Hawai‘i County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 Members and Staff Present: Lisa Fukumitsu, Chair Paul ‘Scotty’ Paiva, Board Member David Bruno, Board Member Robert Yagi, Board Member Cameron Takamura, Deputy Corporation Counsel Khayla-Lei Peiler, Secretary Meeting Called to order at 10:01am Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:06:05] Okay, good morning. Calling this meeting to order. This is the Board of Ethics meeting for May 13, 2026. And our meeting is called to order at 10.01. I am your chair, Lisa Fukumitsu. The meeting is being held here in person as well as virtually on Zoom. For those on Zoom, your cameras must be turned on at all times and please mute your device if you're not speaking. If you would like to speak, please raise your hand and wait to be called on. One person should speak at a time, no side conversations. Before speaking, everyone please make sure to state your name so that all parties know who is speaking, speak slowly, clearly, and close to the microphone to ensure we make a clean and clear record. At this time, please limit distractions by turning off your cell phones. I'll like to start with introductions for our board. If we can go down the line, starting with me, this is your chair, Lisa Fukumitsu.
Member David Bruno [00:07:05] Member David Bruno. Member Robert Yagi [00:07:08] Member Robert Yagi. Member Scotty Paiva [00:07:11] Scotty Paiva, member. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:07:17] Okay, so for the record, we do have a quorum. Moving on to... Oh, sorry, I'd also like to acknowledge the presence of our Deputy Corporation Counsel, DCC Takamura, as well as the board secretary, Khayla- Lei Peiler. Moving on agenda item two, public testimony. At this time, we'll take statements from the public on agenda items. Public testifiers can testify now or just before the agenda item that they wish to testify on. Do we have any public testifiers at this time in person or on Zoom? No, okay. Sorry, just trying to get my pen here. Okay. Moving on to agenda item three, approval of the minutes. Khayla, do we have our minutes this week? Secretary Khayla-Lei Peiler [00:08:07] Um, so the March minutes are still incomplete. I wanted to just apologize that it's taking me a little bit because of the technical difficulties I experienced earlier. Um, but I want to acknowledge that it was... A draft of the minutes was
posted per the sunshine law to our, um, website in accordance to the sunshine law. So we are in accordance. Um, But it should be done by next one. So I ask if we can continue that. Thank you. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:08:38] For the record Cameron, do we need to do anything to move it to the next thing or just for the record, we're going to move this agenda item to our next meeting.
Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:08:44] We'll just put it on the next agenda.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:08:47] Okay. Okay, so moving on, agenda item four, communications. We have no items. Moving on to agenda item five, open proceedings related to informal advisory opinions, new and continued review of petitions. Go ahead, Cameron. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:09:07] You can call the item. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:09:09] Okay, calling Petition 2026-04. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:09:15] Okay, did you guys need to refresh take a recess to refresh or do you have any legal questions? If not, we can just go straight into discussion and decision making on the item.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:09:33] This was continued from our last meeting correct?
Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:09:36] Yeah, to seek additional information from the petitioner's appointing authority and in your packets is the appointing authorities responses to your questions.
Member David Bruno [00:09:50] Member Bruno just a question then Cameron so based on the fact that we're most of it is considering the information that's been provided by the director of finance that would be separate from the legal analysis that we went through before so it's something we could continue in public session to have that discussion about this information, is that right? Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:10:10] Yeah, it would have to generally be in public. If you have a legal question though, then that can be in executive session.
Member David Bruno [00:10:16] Okay, thank you. And I have no questions as far as the legal authority ahead of time.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:10:49] Okay, any discussion? Motions? Member David Bruno [00:10:57] Member Bruno, we should have a motion before we have a discussion? Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:11:02] Yes, that's typically how it should proceed under Robert's Rules of Order.
Member David Bruno [00:11:09] The issue is not sure of the motion based on the sort of the clarifications and analysis because of... Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:11:16] You can just do a generic motion just for the purposes of discussion, like you can say "The motion is to find either it is a probable violation or not a probable violation, and then we can discuss and then change it. Yeah, it's just a generic motion just for the purpose of discussion.
Member David Bruno [00:11:40] So based on that, Member Bruno, I'll make a motion that we consider a finding of no probable violation of ethics based on the petition, but subject to the further discussion based on the submission from the director of finance.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:11:58] Can I get a second? Member Robert Yagi [00:12:02] Member Yagi, I'll second that. Member David Bruno [00:12:16] Yeah, so as I recall, the question outstanding was, you know, what was this vendor list and would, you, know, is it something that's official and I'm still uncertain in reading the Director of Finance's responses, how this fits with the petitioner's submission and then how they conduct business and because part of what we were discussing, if I recall correctly, please correct me if those were there, that it. It's sort of on an ad hoc basis. This isn't services like the examples we're given in here of services for ongoing things, as opposed to this being cottage industry goods that might be consumables that might be sought on a sort of ad hoc basis and so i'm a little uncertain as to...
Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:13:04] So based on what finance's response is, it appears that people can apply to be on the vendor's list, but it still needs to go through procurement based on, it just creates a list of who is available and what the product is, and then they'll still go through procurements. So... Even if you're on the vendor list, the county code at 2-83C and then 2-85 would still govern the actual contracting process. We can do a legal discussion if you'd like, and then we'll go into executive session. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:14:02] Sorry, this is Chair Fukumitsu. Since Rob is new, I thought, would it be advantageous for us to maybe go into executive session to have a legal discussion with the board's attorney so we can bring, we can kind of provide an update to our new board member? Does that sound okay? So, do I have a motion, or yeah, or no, or do I have a motion?
Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:14:27] So you'd have to have a motion. So the motion would be to enter into executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5(a)(4) for the purpose of this legal discussion. And then you would just identify the agenda item. So it would be for agenda item 5A Roman numeral 1.
Member David Bruno [00:14:55] Member Bruno I appreciate that suggestion chair. So member Bruno, I would make a motion that we go into executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5(a)(2) oh (a)(4) sorry to consider petition or agenda item 5a 1 for the purposes of seeking legal counsel. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:15:20] Can I get a second? Member Scotty Paiva [00:15:23] Member Paiva, second.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:15:26] Any discussion or I have to ask any public testimony on that motion? Okay, I'm seeing none then. Okay, yes. All those in favor? Aye. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:15:39] Opposed? Okay, so motion passes to 10:10. We're gonna go into executive session. Oh yeah, sorry, can you folks step outside while we just discuss this petition and we'll call you back when we're done. Mahalo. The Board enters Executive Session. (10:10am)
The Board returns to Open Session. (10:31am)
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:36:06] Okay, calling the meeting back to order. We are in open session. It's 10:31 and we are discussing petition 2026-04, yes? Member David Bruno [00:36:21] Member Bruno, one question the information that we received from the director of finance was a request from us and was just sent to us? Correct? It was not shared with the petitioner? Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:36:32] I'm not sure. Okay, but it would be public. So right now the motion on the table was a motion to just simply find no problem violation. If you would like to amend that you can. Since it was your own motion.
Member David Bruno [00:37:04] Yeah, member Bruno, I'd like to amend my initial motion. So restating I make a motion that is a finding of no probable violation of the rules of Board of Ethics. So long as the petitioner continues to comply with the rules in seeking to get on the vendor list, and as well as soliciting any business from the county. And then, I'm not sure if it's now the time to put in the stipulations and directives as well, as part of the motion. And continuing the motion that following the safeguards that the directive to, if the petitioner is actually entering into a contract with the county, to ensure that there's compliance with both sections 2-83C and 2-85. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:38:05] Okay, can I get a second? Member Scotty Paiva [00:38:08] Member Paiva second. Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:38:10] Is there any public testimony on petition 2026-04 in the chambers or on Zoom, Khayla? No, but it's public, but the petitioners in the room. Yeah. Can we go ahead with the vote? Okay. So all those in favor? Aye.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:38:36] All those opposed? Okay, so motion passes. Do we want the petitioner to come up?
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:38:46] DCC Takamura will explain to you what that all meant. Petitioner Kaycie Saiki [00:38:53] Good morning. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:38:56] Hi Ms. Saiki, so I'm going to explain to you orally what the board's vote was, and then you will be receiving a formal opinion later on this month, and the formal opinion is the actual binding opinion. Right now, this is just the oral disposition. So what happened is, based on the response the board received from the Department of finance, who explained that the vendor list is mainly just a
compilation of information of what goods and services particular people have and then from there they may proceed through procurement to create a contract with that person. So what the board voted today was that they found no problem violation of the code of ethics for you to get onto the vendor list but if you are going to actually contract with a county agency, you must comply with Hawaii County Code 2-83C, which requires that you notify the board and get a ethics opinion separately finding that the contract does not contain any kind of conflict of interest. As well as you also have to comply, you have to notify the county agency of your position. So if somebody wants to contract with you, you have notify them that you are a county employee. And then separately, under Hawaii County Code 2-85, the only way that you can get a county contract as a county employee is if the procurement goes through competitive procurement. So the county agency will not be able to use small purchase or a procurement exemption to enter into a contract with you, it has to be either by IFB or RFP. Okay, do you have any questions? Okay, if any other questions come up, you can always contact the Board of Ethics again. Member David Bruno [00:41:01] Member Bruno, timing wise, we will get the our opinion and a month from now and sign it and then that's what it was. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:41:13] So yeah, but you would still need a separate opinion pertaining to the specific contract that you're trying to get. Because it would depend, right? Then who you're contracting with and what the circumstances are. And the board would have to evaluate that to find separately whether or not there's a conflict of interest. Yep, finance should be able to answer the procurement side and then if you have an ethics question, you can contact the board.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:41:50] Thank you so much. Okay. Okay, calling agenda item five B, consideration of draft and formal advisory opinions and other orders for approval. None for open proceedings. Yes. So moving on to agenda item six, executive session. So six A relating to confidential informal advisor opinions. This is new and continued review of petitions. The board anticipates going into executive session for the following petitions, pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-582 to consider charges brought against the county officer or employee as specified below and where matters affecting the individual's privacy will be considered pursuance to HRS 92-5(A)(4) to consult with the board's attorney on the board powers, duties, and liabilities. Sorry, go ahead. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:42:54] So for that ones, you don't have to read the entire thing. You could just read the petition number and say as described in the agenda.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:43:01] Petitions 2026-06, 2026-12, 2026-13. As described in the agenda. Okay. Yeah, the board anticipates going into executive session for the following petitions pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5, to consider whether the conduct presented by a county officer or employee, may constitute a probable violation. Yes? Read the whole thing? Oh, okay. And may constitute a probable violation of the code of ethics and may result in disciplinary action and where matters affecting that individual's privacy will be considered and pursuant to HRS 92-5(A)(4) to consult with the board's attorney on the board powers, duties, and liabilities. Petition 2026-10. And 2026-11. As described in the agenda, yes? And also the board anticipates going into executive session to consider the following draft informal advisory opinions or orders pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5(A)(2). To consider whether the conduct presented by a county officer employee as specified below may constitute a probable violation of the code of ethics and may result in a disciplinary action and
where matters affecting that individual's privacy will be considered. And pursuant to HRS 92-5(A)(4) to consult with the board's attorney on board the board powers, duties, and liabilities. That's petition 2026-09 as described in the agenda and then also calling for the review of confidential financial disclosures. The board anticipates going into executive session to review confidential financial disclosurs pursuant to 92-4 and 92-5(A)(2) which requires consideration of financial and personal information to which they have a legitimate expectation of privacy. HRS 92-5(A)(8) as article 14 of the Constitution of the State of Hawaii provides financial disclosures made by public officials that are not required by law to be public shall be confidential and HRS 92-5(A)(4) to consult with the board's attorneys on the board powers, duties, and liabilities as they relate to reviewing the confidential financial disclosures for compliance with the code of ethics. And the disclosures that are listed on the agenda.
Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [00:46:11] Okay, so for the ease of the motion, the motion can just be to enter into executive session for the purposes and for the items read by the chair. Member David Bruno [00:46:27] Member Bruno I make a motion we enter into executive session for the reasons and the items stated by the chair. Member Robert Yagi [00:46:37] Member Yagi, second.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [00:46:38] Any public any public testimony on the petitions that were just referenced? Any discussion? Okay so we're voting yes? Okay all those in favor aye. Opposed? Okay so motion passes we are going to move into executive session and it's 10:42 a.m.
The Board enters Executive Session. (10:42am)
The Board returns to Open Session. (12:58pm) Deputy Corporation Counsel Cameron Takamura [03:04:26] Okay, so we are back in open session and this is the Executive Session Report pursuant to HRS 92-4B. Uh, so the board entered into an unanticipated executive session on item five, roman numeral one for petition 2026-04, um, the executive session was held pursuant to HRS 92-4 and 92-5a4 for the purpose of consulting the board's attorney regarding its, uh, powers, duties, privileges, and immunities. The discussion is not subject to disclosure as it would tend to frustrate the purpose of the executive session. The board voted to find no probable violation and to form the oral opinion or the oral ruling for a written inform advisory opinion. Um, the board entered into executive session for petition 2026-06, 2026-12, 2026-13, uh, as described in the agenda and for the purposes stated in the agenda, which was HRS 92-4, 92-5A2, and 92-5A4. For petition 2026-06, the discussion is not subject to disclosure as disclourse would tend to frustrate the purpose of the executive session. The board voted to stay the petition and forward for a written order of the board. For petition, 2026-12, the discussion's not subject disclosure as it will tend to defeat the purpose of the executor session. The board vote not to eceive the petition and forward for an order, a written order by the board. Petition 2026-13, the discussion is not subject to disclosure as it would tend to defeat the purpose of the executive session. The board voted to continue the item to get additional information. For Petition 2026-03 and 2026-10, as well as, yep, that's it. That was held pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5A2, and 92- 5A4 for the purposes as described in the agenda. For Petition 2026-03, the discussion is not subject to disclosure that tend to defeat the purpose of the Executive Session.
Sorry, I think I read the wrong one. So for 2026-13, the board voted to not receive the petition and to forward for a written order. For 2026-03, that's the one that the board voted to continue to get additional information. For petition 2026-10, the discussion is not subject to disclosure, as it tends to defeat the purpose of the executive session. The board voted no probable violation and issue safeguards and forwarded for a written informal opinion. The rest of the agenda was not completed and will be continued to the next meeting as we lost quorum. That's it.
Chair Lisa Fukumitsu [03:08:20] Okay, so it's 1:03 and meeting is adjourned. Here's a summary of all motions made during this Board of Ethics meeting on May 13, 2026:
Motion 1: Executive Session for Petition 2026-04
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Scotty Paiva
• Motion: To go into executive session pursuant to HRS 92-4, 92-5(a)(4) to consider petition 2026-04 for the purposes of seeking legal counsel.
• Vote: Passed unanimously Motion 2: Finding on Petition 2026-04 (Amended)
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: Finding of no probable violation of the rules of Board of Ethics, so long as the petitioner continues to comply with the rules in seeking to get on the vendor list and soliciting any business from the county. Additionally, if the petitioner is entering into a contract with the county, ensure compliance with sections 2-83C and 2-85
• Vote: Passed unanimously
Motion 3: Return to Open Session (Petition 2026-04)
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To go back to open session
• Vote: Passed unanimously Motion 4: Executive Session for Petitions 2026-06, 2026-12, 2026-13, 2026-10, 2026-11, and Financial Disclosures
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To enter into executive session for the reasons and items stated by the chair
• Vote: Passed unanimously
Motion 5: Stay Petition 2026-06
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To stay petition 2026-06 pending resolution of a parallel petition
• Vote: Passed unanimously Motion 6: Reject Petition 2026-12
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To reject petition 2026-12 based on failure to sign the petition and failure to substantially comply with HCC 2-86C and BOE Rule 4.2
• Vote: Passed unanimously Motion 7: Reject Petition 2026-13
• Maker: Member Scotty Paiva
• Seconder: Member David Bruno
• Motion: To reject petition 2026-13 without prejudice pursuant to BOE rule 4.5 for failure to sign the petition and to substantially comply with HCC 2-86C and BOE Rule 4.2B. Additionally, refer the petitioner to the Hawaii Police Department and Prosecuting Attorney for further action
• Vote: Passed unanimously
Motion 8: Receive and Continue Petition 2026-03
• Maker: Member Scotty Paiva
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To receive petition 2026-03 and continue it as it complies with HCC 2-86C and BOE rule 4.1C. Request verification of the spouse's county employment status and issue RFIs to county personnel and DEM for additional information
• Vote: Passed unanimously Motion 9: Continue Petition 2026-03 Pending Information
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: To continue petition 2026-03 pending receipt of the information sought in the prior motion
• Vote: Passed unanimously
Motion 10: Finding on Petition 2026-10 (Failed)
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: Finding of no probable violation of HCC 2-84A1 and A3, or HCC 14-2C but we also provide guidance for the advisory opinion also will provide guidance and recommend that the petitioner in his position avoids any action going in future for impact grants where he would be executing or exhibiting an independent discretionary judgment, which would include any commentary on grant applications for organizations that his spouse is involved and file written disclosure of spouse's officerships pursuant to HCC 2-91.1g
• Vote: 3 Aye 1 Opposed Vote fails.
Motion 11: Finding on Petition 2026-10 (Withdrawn)
• Maker: Member Scotty Paiva
• Seconder: Member David Bruno
• Motion: Finding a possible violation for this current Petition and add the requirements for processing, re-processing the grant if the petitioner wants to and then for future grants moving forward.
• Vote: Motion withdrawn after discussion Motion 12: Finding on Petition 2026-10 (Final)
• Maker: Member David Bruno
• Seconder: Member Robert Yagi
• Motion: Finding of no probable violation of HCC 2-84A1 and A3, or HCC 14-2C. However, based on red flags, the board provides guidance that the petitioner shall recuse himself from any official action involving discretionary authority affecting organizations where his spouse has a financial interest, and file written disclosure of spouse's officerships pursuant to HCC 2-91.1g
• Vote: Passed 4-0
Supplemental Statement to Petition
Chris Sloman, HFD Safety Specialist
June 24, 2026
1. State the nature of your interest, including reason(s) for the submission of this
Petition:
a. I am the Hawaiʻi Fire Department Safety Specialist seeking an advisory
opinion on whether it is permissible under the Hawaiʻi County Code of Ethics
for the Fire Department (or me in my official capacity) to solicit financial
support or sponsorship from HMSA and Kaiser Permanente for a voluntary
pilot cancer screening program using the Cancerguard® multi-cancer blood
test for approximately 380–400 Big Island firefighters (and potentially
spouses).
The purpose is to address the well-documented elevated occupational
cancer risk faced by firefighters. Exact Sciences has offered a reduced rate
($649 vs. standard $689) plus logistical support. We are also exploring grants
through the University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center and Hawaiʻi Department of
Health. This petition is submitted proactively following advice from Deputy
Corporation Counsel.
2. Provide the specific section(s) of the Code of ethics in question:
a. Hawaiʻi County Code § 2-83(b)(2) — prohibition on using official position to
solicit additional compensation or other consideration. I request the Board’s
review of all relevant sections of Chapter 2, Article 15.
3. Provide a complete statement of the facts:
a. The Hawaiʻi County Fire Department is exploring a one-time pilot cancer
screening event.
b. Draft letters were prepared to HMSA and Kaiser Permanente (the two health
plans covering HFD personnel) requesting sponsorship to cover or subsidize
testing costs.
c. No solicitations have been sent yet.
d. Corporation Counsel reviewed the drafts and recommended consulting the
Board of Ethics prior to any action.
e. This is a department-wide wellness initiative, not for personal gain.
f. For reference, Resolution No. 588-26 (accepting a donation of specialized
medical examination services from 1582 Medical Group in honor of the late
Fire Chief Kazuo Todd) was unanimously approved by the County Council
last week.
4. Provide a statement of your position or contention:
a. I respectfully request an advisory opinion clarifying whether this solicitation
activity is permissible and, if so, what procedural steps are required for
compliance (e.g., Council approval via resolution before acceptance of any
donations). The Fire Department is committed to full transparency and
adherence to all ethics requirements while pursuing proactive occupational
health measures for our personnel.
to review de-identified results and potentially track outcomes as part of broader research
efforts—creating further value for public health in Hawaiʻi.
In recent years, our department has strengthened prevention efforts, including installation of gear
extractors at stations, implementation of on-scene post-fire decontamination procedures, and
development of clean CAB standard operating procedures. This screening pilot represents the
next logical step in our commitment to proactive occupational health and safety.
We would be grateful for any level of support you can provide—whether full coverage for the
pilot, a per-test subsidy, or assistance with event logistics. Your partnership would not only
demonstrate HMSA’s leadership in preventive care but also create meaningful public recognition
of your commitment to the first responders who serve our islands.
I have attached a tri-fold pamphlet from Exact Sciences describing the Cancerguard test for your
review. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this proposal in more detail and answer any
questions. Please feel free to contact me directly at or
Mahalo nui loa for your leadership and for the vital coverage HMSA provides to our firefighters
and their families. I look forward to the possibility of working together to catch cancer early and
protect those who protect us.
Sincerely,
Chirs Sloman
Safety Specialist
to review de-identified results and potentially track outcomes as part of broader research
efforts—creating further value for public health in Hawaiʻi.
In recent years, our department has strengthened prevention efforts, including installation of gear
extractors at stations, implementation of on-scene post-fire decontamination procedures, and
development of clean CAB standard operating procedures. This screening pilot represents the
next logical step in our commitment to proactive occupational health and safety.
We would be grateful for any level of support you can provide—whether full coverage for the
pilot, a per-test subsidy, or assistance with event logistics. Your partnership would not only
demonstrate Kaiser’s leadership in preventive care but also create meaningful public recognition
of your commitment to the first responders who serve our islands.
I have attached a tri-fold pamphlet from Exact Sciences describing the Cancerguard test for your
review. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this proposal in more detail and answer any
questions. Please feel free to contact me directly at or
.
Mahalo nui loa for your leadership and for the vital coverage Kaiser provides to our firefighters
and their families. I look forward to the possibility of working together to catch cancer early and
protect those who protect us.
Sincerely,
Chirs Sloman
Safety Specialist