Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-07-16 Board of Ethics Minutes Regular SessionHAWAII COUNTY BOARD OF ETHICS MINUTES — REGULAR SESSION Wednesday, July 16, 2008 - 10:00 a.m. 333 Kilauea Avenue, 2nd Floor Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Present: John Dill, Chair Ann Lum, Vice Chair Marilyn Nicholson, Member Renee N. C. Schoen, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mary E. Crosson, Secretary for the Board Present at times: Donald Ikeda, Council Member (and Petitioner) Kenneth Rowe Cheryl Shitabata Julie Oropallo, via telephone (Petitioner) 1. CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. 2. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS There were no statements from the public. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (June 25, 2008, Regular and Executive Session) Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept and file the Regular Session minutes of June 25, 2008. Ms. Lum seconded the vote, and all members voted aye. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to accept and file the Executive Session minutes of June 25, 2008. Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion, and all members voted aye. 4. COMMUNICATIONS a. Communication No. 2008 -69: Informal Advisory Opinion for Petition No. 2008 -5, regarding Councilmember Bob Jacobson's request to use his photograph on his Council stationery letterhead. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to approve the opinion and have it signed by the Chair. Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion and all members voted aye. The Chair signed off on the opinion. b. Communication No. 2008 -70: Informal Advisory Opinion for Petition No. 2008 -6, regarding Finance Director William Takaba and former Real Property Tax Administrator Wesley Takai on whether they benefited unfairly or had a conflict of interest regarding Ordinance No. 0 7-10 7 relating to the Affordable Rental Housing Classification for properties in the affordable rental housing class as of 111108. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to approve the opinion and have it signed by the Chair. Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion and all members voted aye. The Chair signed off on the opinion. Ms. Schoen informed the Board that she wanted to acknowledge Cheryl Shitabata, who was present and helped in drafting the two informal advisory opinions just approved. The Chair thanked Ms. Shitabata, Ms. Schoen, and the Board secretary for their work. c. Communication No. 2008 -66: Deputy Corporation Counsel Renee Schoen's response to attorney Stanley Roehrig's 5123108 request for discoverable materials relating to the Board's inquiry regarding public officials using their photographs in newspaper ads. Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept and file the communication, Ms. Lum seconded the motion, and all members voted aye. d. Communication No. 2008 -(no number yeo: Farewell and thank you letter from the BOE to former BOE Chair Wayne Joseph. e. Communication No. 2008 -(no number yeo: Farewell and thank you letter from the BOE to former BOE member Tricia Malanka. Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept the above two letters for signature by the remaining Board members and have them sent out. Ms. Lum seconded the motion, and all members voted aye. The Board members passed around and signed the letters. 5. NEW BUSINESS' As Petitioner Donald Ikeda was present, the Board took his petition (No. 2008 -9) before Petition No. 2008 -7. b. Petition No. 2008 -9: from Councilmember Donald Ikeda, on whether he may allow a State agency to fix up, then use his private commercial property, rent -free for a 10- to 20 -year period, with the State agency paying insurance, utilities, etc. and providing maintenance of the property. IKEDA: My name is Donald Ikeda, and I first of all want to thank the Board for giving me the opportunity to come forward. The reason we filed this opinion was that I don't ' Sections in italics are transcribed verbatim. Blanks indicate indecipherable or inaudible word(s). 2 want to read my name in the paper later on for something we've done. We have done nothing so far, and we would just like to have clearance from the Board of Ethics. ROWE: Good morning, I'm Kenneth Rowe. I'm with the Workforce Development Division Office here, the Department of Labor. I've been with them for a number of years and just recently I moved over to the Public Safety Department. I'm also apart of the Going Home Initiative, which was initiated with the Mayor's task force. So we have a combination of agencies, non profits, private sectors, faith -based organizations. I do have some literature can I share it with you guys, for you guys to read? (Mr. Rowe handed around a brochure.) L UM: Now this is the organization that wants to use the property? IKEDA: Yes. That is correct. ROWE: Correct. CHAIR: The Workforce Development? ROWE: Right. I'll give you guys sometime to just review it. L UM: Thank you. ROWE: I just want to add other things, so we can clear it up front. Besides my employment with the Workforce Development Division Office, I also do a lot of different things, and one of them is I'm also the campaign chair for Donald Ikeda. So we want to make sure that we put everything above ground, so that we can talk a lot about these things. A part of our organization's structure as you can tell, if you read our handouts, is that we also have our nonprofit agency that was created, that is called Hawai `i Island Workforce and Economic Development Ohana, which is our nonprofit organization that will help our reintegration for our ex- offenders. Currently we're working on re- integration of them while they're inside the institution. But at the same time, we need to continue with their services on the outside. On our request to Mr. Councilman Ikeda, I asked this, because we do have correctional institutions in his district. And I also talked to Mr. Yoshimoto, because he has a correctional area in his district. They have attended our Going Home meetings, and we've talked about all these little things that we need to take care of. The major initiative that we would want with his help, if we're able to do this, is we need we ask for donation items from businesses in the community, and they donate items to us. And we need a place to store it. So we asked for assistance in doing those. Another thing is, we also want to continue doing after -care things with our offenders that are being released. That means things like continuing their sobriety, substance abuse and whatever else kind of after -care they will need. We want to continue to do workshops so that they can get job retention and get a job and be productive people in our community. Of course, as you know, we don't have a place like that for them right now. With this partnerships that we've created, we're able to do a lot of things internally, but what we want to do is continue to do externally- -that means outside, because not everybody going through the system. People get paroled out, or probationed out, right out of the correctional facility, so they may not have all the job readiness 3 activities that they will need to get or keep a job. So with Mr. Ikeda's help, we'll be able to get a facility that will help us facilitate that to happen. In here we have our goals and all our different committees that we have on this initial Going Home things. You can read them, it talks about all the different avenues that we've done - -right now that's being done. We're in the Kulani facilities, we're at the Hale Nani facilities. Eventually we'll have a program built in the Hale Nani facilities, but that's where our internal offenders again, we still need to have some place to do it externally. Currently the Workforce Development Division is allowing us rooms, but not enough space that we can do things on a daily basis. Once a week is just not going to make it for a lot of these guys. We need to give continuous things. UM So that's what you have now, is just a once a week kind of meeting place? ROWE: It's all over the place. It's like, different agencies, like Big Island Substance Abuse, you have Goodwill Industries of Hawai `i, we have the Alu Like. So we're all doing certain things, but all over the place, you know. The after -care things, like the substance abuse things, is being done. AA meetings are doing at the beaches, and wherever else that you find spaces. With this opportunity, we can kind of centralize our location, and we can monitor them more frequently and assist them more, so that the retention for their jobs or for any of their problems can be you know, we can help them along the way, instead of a reduced recidivism -- instead of have them go back to prison, we have to support them there. You guys have any questions oh, and the second one that says employers, these are just some of the employers that we work with that have that has helped us to hire or come in and do mock interviews and so forth and participate in employer job fairs so that we can increase our employer base so that these guys have the potential to be hired. So we have companies like Walmarts and Ross's and others KTAs, and all these other big corporations helping us to reintegrate and help our people Suisans and smaller companies like MK Construction and so forth. So, anyway L UM: Sounds like a big job and well needed. ROWE: Well, that's why when Mr. Ikeda and Mr. Yoshimoto they bring their at least a staff to come and listen to what we're talking about. Also, we have people that support us like Clifton Tsuji, Dwight Takamine, .Terry Chang. They send representatives. The Governor's Liaison's Office, they show up, and just recently we had the federal Pretrial and Probation attend our meetings, and they want to know what we're doing and they want to try and duplicate this in Oahu. So we're all over the place, but we need to try to sorry, try to consolidate, and with his help, we're hoping that we'll be able to do that. NICHOLSON: I have a question. ROWE: Yes, ma'am. NICHOLSON: Can you define what you mean by fix up the property? Are you building buildings, or what is there now, and what are you going to be doing? 11 IKEDA: I have a rental properties, and this is in the industrial area. And what I think was it was leased to Kanoelehua Association, and somehow, I don't know what happened, but it caught fire. So it's partly damaged. So it's been vacant for the past maybe ten years, so when the State asked me if I would be willing to exchange labor for free rental, and I said since I'm not using it I might just as well go ahead, because I kind of like the idea of having people in there, because it becomes secure. Right now, because it's vacant, there is sometimes homeless people go in the building, parts of the building. I see graffiti on the building, and so I feel that I have to put in some money to buy new materials, but this is where the State comes in, and they're going to provide the labor to bring the thing back up to a useable standard. But right now it's vacant, and I think it would be beneficial for both sides, because it will make the complex a little more secure, because I have about two acres there. ROWE: Let me add and support what he's saying. Part of our initiative here is that we will try to reintegrate the offenders, because some of them have to do community services. So what we want to do is, in kind, bring them in, have them do community service. At the same time it's a facility that they will benefit. So we have already certain construction companies in place that would be willing to come in and help guide the ex- offenders or the offenders that are inside to help us build the thing. So all we need to have is the materials on his side, purchases, and we can make it happen. Again, there's a lot of potential for us. Just imagine the facilities really, we can do a lot of different things, hold workshops continuously, we can have meetings, we can have a storage area for people that may need sofas and stoves and ice boxes, that we get donations from most important, clothing that they need, with shoes and socks and underwears and all that kind of things. We get donations from the hotels that give us shampoos and soaps. You asked me why, I said they don't have these things. Once they're- -upon release, they're on their own. So they don't realize how much it costs to try to help them out by giving them a lot of these needed items that they will need to get a job. LCM: So you visualize this as being like even having staff on site all the time, somebody there all the time. ROWE: We're also working with the faith -based organizations, non-profit agencies, that would be willing to come and put people there to supervise, to watch what's going on. Our thought process is this: that in time we can have mentorships done with the positive guys that are doing really well on the outside, and teach them how to be mentors, and they can in turn, in kind, help us to maintain and facilitate activities. We've already gone to the extent where we're noticed with , which is positive, action alliances in Puna. They do a lot of things that's all, mostly 99% ex- offenders. We have them doing networking with the people, their vendors out there, so we're trying to build this base, but we're all over. We want to try to see if we can make one area. And as you all know, to reduce recidivism, if it gets them in one location, close to the university, that's even better for us, because they can, you know, eventually go to school. With the help of the Hawai `i Community College and the Hilo Community School for Adults, we're creating adult basic ed classes, community and learning centers for computers. That's all part that is being offered now, and we're hoping to expand. 5 L UM: Mr. Ikeda, I think we 're all this is admirable, but I think where we're having to maybe look at is what your gain is from it. IKEDA: Well you know, for me, it's been vacant for a few years, and like I said, I own about two acres of the property, and this particular facility is about 4, 000 square feet. So right now it's not being used, and it would be much more beneficial for me, because it would fix the place up, it'll look better, it will be secure. And I think over all, the rest of the tenants would be happy because then there's no vacant building that they're not sure what might be happening in there. LCM: And as far as the gain on that part of the property, they would fix it up to use it, but you're providing the materials? IKEDA: Yes. LCM.• And they're providing the labor? IKEDA: Yes. LCM: And then you mentioned in the petition they would have it rent-free? IKEDA: Yes, for about LCM.• - -ten or twenty IKEDA: - -ten to twenty years LCM: - -Would that be a contract, then? IKEDA: Yes. Because I have no problem, because we're not using it anyway, right now. And you know, usually when people want to rent a building from me, especially a building that's burned out, you know if they're willing to sign a contract, I'll build it. And so whenever I'd say will you be willing to sign a contract for like ten years, everyone said no. They're not sure what's going to happen in ten years. It's too long. I don't mind putting up the money for the materials. The labor cost is very high. CHAIR: What will determine the actual length of time between ten and twenty years? IKEDA: It's usually the tenants, how long they want it. CHAIR: Mr. Rowe, do you know what that is? If you guys are going to have in terms of contract, what length of time you'll be looking at securing it for? ROWS: Well, we'd like to go long term, like twenty years, but like I told him, depending on how long it takes for us to build it will determine how much longer we can because in time we can envision that we will be self - sufficient where we can eventually pay rent. So that's what we're looking at at least ten years, and we'll see how it rolls and if it's not with the criminal justice system and the federal levels the way it is, a lot of second 31 chance monies are out therefor and if you're able to secure a lot of those monies, that money can be used to what we're doing, then we'll know we can sustain ourselves there. Again, right now the monies are available, we just got to write for it and with our Hawai `i Island, we do-non-profit we can bring that money in and target it there. But everything as you guys know takes time. But we want to make sure that we're above the ground, above the water, and present this in front of you guys so that we don't have to say we're you know, we want to make sure everything's up front. IKEDA: And as I explained, too, it's not unusual for me to loan property I used to loan the Hui Okinawa Club an office space for over ten years. If you were to put it in perspective of what the income I'm getting now, it would be like over $200, 000. So I really don't need the money it's something like we give back to the community, because at one time we were a big business family in Hilo. I used to own the 7 -Up company, my family owned the Hilo Macaroni Factory, all the business, and so even when we were running the business, I used to give ten percent of my profits back to the community in donations or in products, or whatever. LUM: So eventually, when they're able to be self - sufficient, they would just become another tenant, then. IKEDA: It's up to them, because a lot of times these tenants LUM: - -Ten, fifteen years down the line, when they've got it all together ROWE: - -Yeah, we hope. IKEDA: A lot of times they want to move out, because they want to go to another facility. You know, a lot of times they'll outgrow the place, and that's the reason (could not decipher). L UM: - -That would be good, if you outgrew it and had another place. ROWE: Well, that would be bad, too, because in our reintegration, it means get too many people coming out of prison. So that's not good, because too many people going in. With the SB 932, the Reintegration Act that is in State law now, a two-year plan before they exit, they have to all return to their original island. And we're anticipating that a lot of people going be coming out in two years, so we want to be ahead of the game and try and help them. That means they could be coming back from Arizona and Kentucky and wherever else they're at. We need to be ready, and we cannot be ready if we don't have the fundamental things in place. What will happen is they'll get out and we're not helping them to be successful. They going come out and voomp, right back in. So again, we're trying our best, and with your help we'll be able to do a lot of things on the front side so that we're not paying for a lot of these things on the back side, in terms of cost per person, $45, 000 to $65, 000 a year. I don't know about you, but it's higher than minimum wage that we're paying for these guys to be incarcerated. And that's just God's truth. If they were to come out and be productive members and pay their fair share in our community, and pay taxes, that's what we want. 7 NICHOLSON: Mr. Ikeda, you'll get the value of the improvements at the end of this term, although you're actually paying for all the building supplies? IKEDA: That's right. Plus I'll probably get I won't pay property tax, because I think I have to check it out, but I believe my property tax would be free because it's a loan to a government agency. NICHOLSON: And will the building materials you will pay for, will some of those be donated or solicited through IKEDA: - -No, no, I'm paying for it. So what happens when the building burned, I got insurance money. So I do have some money to build, to rebuild the property, but it didn't make sense if you don't have a tenant. It doesn't make sense to put something up and it's vacant. LCM: It'd just be destroyed again. IKEDA: So this way, when we build the thing it's going to be occupied and if they leave and it's already completed, probably for half the cost. CHAIR: Seems like a great thing you guys are trying to do here. L UM: I see this the only thing where I can see that we're looking at is under 2 -83(b) and 2 -83 wait a minute, 2 -83 -3, I think it is. No, that's not it. Why can't I find it. SCHOEN: Ann, I think you're looking at 2 -83, section b. LCM: Subsection b. Wrong page, right. Oh I see, my b is gone. And I don't see that it really applies, because Mr. Ikeda is not using his position in government, that I see. It's his position as a businessman, and the contract is with a State agency. Am I correct here, do you think, in interpretation? CHAIR: I think so. IKEDA: It's just that I wanted to be cautious. LCM.• I know, yeah, it's right, we appreciate that. I really appreciate it, and we are we look at it under our County Code of Ethics, and what I'm reading is no officer or employee shall use or attempt to use the officer's or employee's official position to secure or grant unwarranted privileges, exemptions, advantages, contracts, or treatment, for oneself or others, including but not limited to, and it goes into some other things. Do you have any CHAIR: I have no problems with this. L UM: You door don't? CHAIR: I don't. L (W.• I don 't. I don 't see that there's any CHAIR: If anything, I think that Mr. Ikeda should be commended for trying to help out LCM: - -the cause is I'm sure really needed and I hope it really works well. CHAIR: Okay, can we get a motion L CM• I find that we find Mr. Ikeda in no violation of the Code of Ethics, the Hawai `i County Code of Ethics, and thank him for his appearance. CHAIR: Okay LCM: -- Renee, do you have anything? CHAIR: We just need to incorporate it into an informal advisory opinion, right? SCHOEN: Yeah, I think actually, Mr. Chair, the motion would probably be better phrased that this Board finds that there would be no ethical violation -- LUM• - -Would be no ethical violation SCHOEN: -- should Mr. Ikeda allow this L UAIP Okay. CHAIR: Did you amend your motion L UM: --yeah— CHAIR: - -and withdraw your second? All right. SCHOEN: I'm sorry, Mr. Chair, I just wanted to ask a real quick question to Mr. Rowe. So the agency you work for is the Department of Public Safety, correct? ROWS: Now. SCHOEN: Now. ROWE: Okay, so I was with the Workforce Development Division. As of July 1 sr I moved up to Public Safety. SCHOEN: Okay, so the State agency that would be utilizing the property would be which? ROWE: Actually, it would be a combination of agencies. Workforce Development, Public Safety Department, and a lot of non-profit agencies. Our number one non-profit 9 agency would be the Hawai `i Island Workforce and Economic Development Ohana, and a couple faith -based organizations that would come out and do a lot of services and so forth. But if you're asking me what the lead agency would be, yes, it would be a State agency. CHAIR: Public Safety. ROWE: Public Safety we will take on that burden, that responsibility. SCHOEN: And then Mr. Ikeda, as a Councilmember, you would not take any official action IKEDA: --No- SCHOEN: -- regarding a State agency, correct? IKEDA: That's correct. SCHOEN: Thank you, Mr. Chair. CHAIR: Okay. L UM: Did we have our motion amended? CHAIR: No, you need to amend it. L UM: Okay. I move that we find Mr. Ikeda would not be in violation of the Code of Ethics if he were to contract is that the word with the Department of Public Safety in this matter. NICHOLSON- Is that your final motion? L UM: I wrapped it all up in the last words. NICHOLSON- I will second that. IKEDA: You sound just like us on the Council. ROWE: Oh, is that on the record? CHAIR: Any discussion? All in favor signify by saying aye. L UM and NICHOLSON (simultaneously) : Aye. CHAIR: Aye. Thank you very much, gentlemen. IKEDA: Thank you 10 CHAIR: - -We appreciate your time. L CM.' And thank you for what you're doing. ROWE: Thank you. LCM: I think anything the community can do in that respect is much needed. Mr. Ikeda and Mr. Rowe left the meeting at 10:30 a.m. CHAIR: Okay, so that takes care of item Sb. LUM: What are we going to do about this other one? CHAIR: Are we going to call in the Petitioner? SECRETARY: I need to call her and get it ready. You might want to take like a short recess CHAIR: - -Yeah, why don't we take a five- minute break while or a three- minute break, while you try to get a hold of her. Okay? The meeting recessed from 10:31 a.m. to 10:38 a.m. b. Petition No. 2008 -7: from Julie Oropallo, regarding post - employment restrictions and whether she can perform technical work on two capital improvement projects under contract with the County's Department of Environmental Management, her former employer. CHAIR: I'm sorry, Julie, your last name is Oropallo? OROPALLO: Oropallo, yes. CHAIR: Okay, and you requested a closed meeting, correct a closed hearing? OROPALLO: Yes, but it may not be necessary. I wasn't sure what to expect, so if it's easier for you, then it doesn't need to be. CHAIR: It doesn't matter either way. There's nobody here except for us, anyway. OROPALLO: Okay, well then that's fine. I mean, it can be open, that's okay. CHAIR: Okay. All right. Why don't we get started. Ann, you have some questions? 11 LCM: Yes. Ms. Oropallo, could you describe for us what you did for the County in your engineering capacity? Did you work on those Brown and Caldwell programs? You mentioned something about loan applications, but what other kinds of things did you do? OROPALLO: For those two projects, that was actually the majority of it, as far as loan applications, which was basically general project description is to apply for loans to fund the projects. And then basically those two projects, the Honokaa Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades. Those projects hadn't really started yet in terms of I guess plan preparation, or even planning reports. So I never really had reviewed any of the information for those. They were sort of in their infancy stage, prior to me leaving the County. L U11 : Okay, thank you. OROPALLO: Sure. NICHOLSON: I have a question. This is Marilyn Nicholson L UM: -- Louder, I think. NICHOLSON: Can you hear me? OROPALLO: Hello? No, I NICHOLSON: - -You cannot hear me? OROPALLO: I can hear you if you could speak up maybe a little, tiny bit more. NICHOLSON: Okay. Can you hear me now? Can you hear me all right now? OROPALLO: Yes. NICHOLSON: All right. Now I've forgotten what I was going to ask. OROPALLO: Sorry. LCM: Probably the consultant selection? NICHOLSON: Yes, I want to ask you you said you were a member of the committee that selected the consultants, and was that done through a regular RFP process? OROPALLO: No, I believe that was like a professional services contract. It's done by committee. There wasn't an RFP issued. It's just based on this statement of qualifications. NICHOLSON: So you weren't selecting among various firms who had submitted a proposal? 12 OROPALLO: No, we weren't. We were just selecting from I guess the pool that had qualified Every year they have the SOQs, that statement of qualifications, so submitting from that pool of consultants. CHAIR: Okay, so what would happen was every fiscal year- -the different vendors or contractors would have to submit their statement of qualifications under certain categories, and if approved they would be put on a list of potential vendors for the County, and then as part of this consultant selection committee, you would then choose off that list, right? OROPALLO: Yes. Yes, thank you. Yes. Exactly. CHAIR: How many people sat on this committee? OROPALLO: There's three. CHAIR: Three? OROPALLO: Yes, including me. CHAIR: Okay, who were the other people on the committee? OROPALLO: Dora Beck and Lyle Hirota. CHAIR: And their positions? OROPALLO: Dora Beck at that time was the Technical Services Section chief, and Lyle Hirota was my supervisor, a Mechanical Engineer-- I believe five. CHAIR: And how was this committee selected? OROPALLO: Basically we were the only members of the Technical Services Section, so I guess that was the means way. NICHOLSON: And so what you were doing is, you were reviewing off of this list, you were reviewing companies that had submitted a proposal for these two projects, the Kealakehe and the Honokaa Wastewater Treatment Plants, is that correct? OROPALLO: Actually, no, we didn't review any proposals. It was basically we had an idea of what the project's scope would be for projects, and then we selected the appropriate consultant based on the project's scope, out of that statement of qualifications list. So there wasn't any proposal that was reviewed. It was just based on the wed chosen three vendors, three consultants, and ranked them based on their qualifications and the project scope, and then tallied up the numbers, everyone together, and then we made a recommendation to the director. The committee makes a recommendation to the director. And then the director of the department would make the final choice. 13 CHAIR: So for these two projects, Brown and Caldwell were picked for or recommended by this committee? OROPALLO: Yes. CHAIR: They were ranked the first out of three? OROPALLO: Yes. SCHOEN: Ms. Oropallo, I was confused by your last answer. You said that there was no project scope when you did the selection? OROPALLO: Oh, I see. Yes, well there was a general project scope of what we needed done, but I didn't yeah, I didn't work on the project at all. It wasn't that was about as far as it had gone. SCHOEN: So what was the project scope? OROPALLO: For the Honokaa Wastewater Treatment Plant, that involved upgrading the treatment plant from the existing capacity in order to serve Honokaa additional properties in Honokaa. The current system is not County- owned, but the County was looking to take it over. And then the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades, that's involving different upgrades to the treatment plant to increase the capacity, as well as sludge removal. So there's I guess a more general project scope. I think because Brown and Caldwell had experience in wastewater treatment, that's why they were selected. CHAIR: When did this selection take place? OROPALLO: Prior to me submitting my resignation letter. I would say in the second half of last year. I don't have the exact dates in front of me, I don't have access to that information right now. I think it may have been October last year, like the second half of the year. NICHOLSON: And what kind of technical work are you proposing that you would do now in your new position on these projects? OROPALLO: Sure. It would probably be helping, assisting the project manager with like reports and research and maybe engineering calculations or I guess plan preparation. I'm not exactly sure. I guess I wanted to see if I was able to work on the projects, so I haven't worked on them at all now, but I have a good relationship with Dora Beck and Lyle Hirota at the County still, and I would enjoy being able to I guess move the projects help, I guess still help contribute. NICHOLSON: At the time that you were hired by Brown and Caldwell, they knew that you had been working with the County and had had some involvement with this previous? 14 ORAPALLO: Yes, yes. So I haven't worked on the projects at all. I haven't worked on a County project at all, either. I've been working on City and County of Honolulu projects, so— L UM: And now your employer wants to put you onto these Big Island projects? OROPALLO: Well, I guess I'm not even sure if I would end up working on them, because I am actually busy with the other projects, but I guess we wanted to find out, because like I said I do have an interest and I enjoy working with Dora and Lyle, and I lived on the Big Island for a little while and enjoyed my time there, so I'd like to help be a part of it still. So I guess it's not the informal opinion I guess that's where I'm just wondering if it would be okay. I'm not sure that I would be assigned to the projects yet, though. CHAIR: I have a question about your role. You said you were copied on various technical emails for your general information. But then you also state that you did not obtain any information which by law is not available to the general public. These emails that you were copied on what were you referring to? Who were they from and what did they contain, generally? OROPALLO: I see. I guess generally it was about the start -up of the some of the information was the status of the treatment plant, like some of the measurements that were taken and water quality results, and that sort of thing. That was and then maybe like some emails that had like the contract and going out, something like that, would be typical. I guess since we were such a small group, there was Dora, Lyle, and I working together on many projects. So I guess they would just to keep everyone in the loop, copy people on those sorts of things. CHAIR: How was this information made to the general public, though? OROPALLO: Okay, I guess I was thinking the intent was that like if the general public was to request, like a freedom of information request, that they could obtain information. But maybe that's not CHAIR: But you're not sure that they could? You're just thinking that they might be able to, if they did request it? OROPALLO: Yeah, that was my thought I don't know, maybe I'm incorrect in my thinking, but that's what I thought the intention was of that freedom of information act, was that you could get that information. CHAIR: But generally speaking, these emails were not OROPALLO: -- that's true CHAIR: --public-- OROPALLO: --yes-- 15 CHAIR: -- general public information. OROPALLO: That's true. LCM: I have one more question. Was Brown and Caldwell first selected for these contracts while you were on the selection committee, or had they been doing work for the County previously? OROPALLO: Yeah, they had been doing work with the County previously. There are other contracts before I even started with the County. I started in January of 2007. So prior to me even being at the County, working for the County, there were many different projects that I think Brown and Caldwell had helped work on, or had contracted with the County on. LCM: And I have another question that's just I don't know if it's even answerable. Information that you would have known to work on the selection procedure those procedures are those procedures confidential information, or are those procedures like published out to contractors, or how does that work? OROPALLO: I believe well, they're posted on the County website, the results of who is selected. LCM: But how about the selection process? OROPALLO: Yeah, I don't know that that is. CHAIR: In other words, the recommendations, the three recommendations when your committee ranked these vendors- -that information wasn't made public, only after you made the recommendation to the department director and he made the decision based on your recommendations, then the final award was made public, right? OROPALLO: The final award, and then I think the other few vendors that were also evaluated I believe that information is also on the website, on the County website. I'm not a hundred percent sure about that, but I'm pretty sure that I could find out, if that would make a difference, but I'm pretty sure not their ranking. Their ranking isn't on the list or on the website. NICHOSON: Ann, did that answer your question? LCM: Well, I think as far as it's answerable. My question I jotted these down last night. Are you privy to information about contract selecting procedures that would be helpful to Brown and Caldwell for any of their future applications for County of Hawai `i contracts ? In other words, in your capacity on a selection committee I'm not in this business at all, and so I don't know how that works. It seems like John knows a little more about that. But is the procedure such that you are sitting on information now that you can say hey, when you apply for a contract, this is what you have to do to be in a better position? That's kind of what I'm worried about, and I don't know about the 16 procedure and it could be no, it doesn't work that way or yes, it does work that way. And I just kind of wondered what you thought about that. OROPALLO: I see. For me, yeah, I don't think that I'm subject to any additional information that would help, because I think it comes down to the consultant, or the selection committee, trying to meet up match the project scope with the appropriate consultant. So I guess it would be it's something that's more case by case, the recommendation. LUM: Okay. So you take a list of requirements and try to match it up am I understanding this correctly? The County takes a list of requirements, and the list of people that show what they can do, and try to match them up? OROPALLO: Yeah LUM: - -Is that basically it? OROPALLO: Yeah, in a way, yeah. And it's based on previous performance on County projects, like there are a couple different criteria that L UM: --And the contractors would know what criteria the County is looking for? Contractors know for a project coming up, they would know the needed criteria? OROPALLO: Well, I think that's part of their statement of qualifications. CHAIR: Yeah. To prove their experience in certain capacities. L UM: Okay, thank you. OROPALLO: Okay. CHAIR: I think more specifically what we're looking at here is whether or not you're in violation of the Code of Ethics with regards to these two projects that you're seeking to work on, or seeking for approval to work on, correct? OROPALLO: Yeah, yeah, that's what I was looking it. LUM: That's the 12 -month thing, right, John? CHAIR: Um hmm. Section NICHOLSON: 2 -91.2, probably b. CHAIR: And from what I'm hearing, is that it sounds like you were in tune to some information that was not generally made open to the public regarding these two projects, prior to you resigning and starting work with Brown and Caldwell. And I have some reservations about you working on these two projects specifically. 17 OROPALLO: Okay. CHAIR: But that's just my opinion. LCM: You're what you're five months with Brown and Caldwell? OROPALLO: Yes. LCM: You left the County five months ago or six months ago? You left in NICHOLSON. January 25`h UW: January 25`h. So February, March, April, May, June, July. So you're six months you've been with them six months. OROPALLO: Yeah, well yeah, I started the end of February, so it's February LCM.• - -Oh February, five months. OROPALLO: Yeah, so five months. LCM: So it'd be like well, no, no. You left the County NICHOLSON: --But the point in counting is 12 months from the County. LCM: Yeah, you left the County six months ago. OROPALLO: Right, yeah, so it'd only be yeah, for another six months. LCM: To be free and clear, it would be six months. NICHOLSON: I have concerns, too, and it just it seems to me that this has the appearances of falling under the 12 -month post- employment regulations, and my feeling is it would be appropriate for us to find that she refrain from working on these contracts until that 12 months has lapsed. LCM: Those two specific ones? NICHOLSON: Yes. CHAIR: Based on Section 2- 91.2(b), and specifically subsection (3). LCM: So it says no former officer or employee shall, within 12 months after termination or whatever, within 12 months, assist for a fee or compensation I'm skipping words here in relation to any contract for which the former employee in the course of the former employee's official duties with the County had been directly concerned, had under active consideration, or had obtained information by which law is not available to the general public. I think there's enough question that it would be safer and wiser to wait out the 12 months. CHAIR: I agree. And I'm sure Ms. Oropallo had, you know you do great work, especially since you do know how the — L UM.• --process CHAIR: --yeah, and the people in the Technical Division work, but just to keep things above board and to try and maintain an absence of conflict of interest, I think it's a better idea to kind of recuse yourself from these two projects. OROPALLO: Okay. CHAIR: Well, we'll need the Board approval for that. That's just my opinion. How do you guys feel? NICHOLSON: I agree. L UM.• Yeah. Just to be just to take the highroad and be just leaving no question. CHAIR: Yeah. OROPALLO: Okay. CHAIR: So — L UM: - -So I move that we oh, dear, how are we going to put this? She has asked let's see what she has asked here. NICHOLSON: Maybe that we find that there could be a potential violation of L U11 : - -You go ahead. NICHOLSON. Thanks. CHAIR: Section 2 NICHOLSON: -­I move that we find on Petition No. 2008 -7 by Julie Oropallo that there could be the appearance of a violation of the post- employment section 2 -91.2, specifically section (b), in her working on the Brown and Caldwell contracts that are named in her petition, and that we find that she should not work on those contracts until her termination from the County has been at least a 12 -month period. LUM: Very good. I second. CHAIR: Okay. Any further discussion? 19 LCM: Yeah, I would like to add that what we were saying, let's see that it's to ensure that there's no appearance - -to be very clear about what she's doing, so that there's no appearance of conflict, real conflict or appearance of conflict. OROPALLO: Okay. CHAIR: Sounds like you have enough to keep you busy. OROPALLO: Yeah. It's been busy. Okay. CHAIR: All in favor, say aye. NICHOLSON and LCM (simultaneously): Aye. CHAIR: Aye. Ms. Oropallo, thank you very much for petitioning us for an opinion, and we wish you the best of luck. OROPALLO: Okay, yeah, thank you for your time and for being so accommodating again. Thanks for taking my call. LCM: And thank you for thinking ethically and questioning it and taking the time and effort to do all this. NICHOLSON: Being proactive. LCM.• Proactive, yes. OROPALLO: Oh, sure. Thank you. CHAIR: Have a nice day. L tW.• Bye. OROPALLO: Okay, bye -bye. Petition No. 2008 -7 ended at 11:02 a.m. 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Report from counsel on the possible pursuit of an amendment to Section 2 -85(b) of the Hawai `i County Code regarding the prohibition of contracting with former employees and retirees. Ms. Schoen explained that the issue of amending Section 2 -85(b) came up when the Board was looking at whether or not it was an ethical violation to hire back a former County employee, on a contract basis, to do the same job he /she did while employed by the County. She noted that it is a common practice for the County to do so, but in researching the issue it was noticed that there was a conflict between Sections 2 -85(b) and 2- 91(c). Section 2 -91.2 deals 20 with post - employment, and Section 2 -85(b) appears to prohibit the rehiring of persons who leave the County. Ms. Schoen explained that the intent of Section 2 -85(b) was probably to avoid having a former County employee disclose information gained from their County employment to a new, private employer, such as in Ms. Oropallo's situation with which they'd just dealt. On the other hand, Section 2- 91.2(c) specifically says that nothing in this section shall prohibit any agency of the County from contracting with the former officer or employee to act on matters on behalf of the County. Ms. Schoen said that the County Ethics Code mirrors the State's code. Section 84 -15 of the State's code is the same as the County's Section 2 -85, except that the word "is" is missing from 2 -85. If 2 -85 had the "is" in it, it would mean the County could not enter into a contract with a person that is currently represented by a former employee. Without the "is," 2 -85 appears to preclude the hiring of a former employee. Ms. Schoen said that Senate Bill 2710, which was recently passed by the legislature, makes it clear that the practice of rehiring retired or former employees does not violate the code of ethics. She said it appeared the missing "is" was an oversight. She asked the Board members if they would support an amendment to the County Code to correct the section. If so, she would set about to amend the Code to be consistent and to reflect the legislature's bill. Ms. Lum stated that the wording of Section 2 -85(b) was a total mess, even if the word "is" were inserted. It was grammatically flawed and confusing. The Chair asked what Ms. Schoen needed from the Board, and she said just their support. If they didn't support the change, she would not proceed with it. Ms. Nicholson asked whether Ms. Schoen would draft the change and present it to the Council, and Ms. Schoen said yes. The Board discussed ways to rephrase Section 2- 85(b), and the Chair said he was worried about straying too far from the State's wording. Ms. Schoen suggested they work on the wording independently and come back to the next meeting with their suggestions. In the meantime, she would research the phrasing of the other jurisdictions and see if they made more sense. After further discussion, the Board agreed with Ms. Schoen that the wording needed to be changed. Ms. Schoen was to research the wording in other jurisdictions and present her findings to the Board so they could discuss them and come up with the right wording. The Chair directed that the matter be placed on next month's agenda. Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved that the Board pursue a possible amendment to Section 2 -85(b) of the Hawaii County Code regarding the prohibition of contracting with former employees and retirees, because the language is not clear. Ms. Lum seconded the motion, stating that the language was also in conflict. All members voted aye. 21 b. Ongoing discussion on the Sunshine Law. Ms. Schoen stated that she had nothing new at this time on the Sunshine Law. Ms. Lum had a question regarding emails and whether they were like other correspondence as far as the Sunshine Law. Ms. Schoen said that the Sunshine Law was designed to ensure that their meetings are as open as possible. However, emails from the Corporation Counsel to the Board are considered confidential. Some emails, however, come from the outside and can be placed on the agenda, open to the public, as communications. She said that the issue of emails has become a big matter, as some have been inadvertently released or sent to the wrong person. People need to be careful with emails. Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to enter into Executive Session to review confidential financial disclosures. Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion, and all members voted aye. Executive Session was entered at 11:20 a.m. (Minutes of Executive Session are separate.) Regular Session was re- entered at 11:25 a.m. a. Review of Confidential Financial Disclosure Forms filed pursuant to Section 2- 91.1(d), Hawai 'i County Code, by County board and commission members, where personal matters will be reviewed. Motion and vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to accept and file the three disclosures reviewed, on David Drury, Joel Gimpel, and Gary Yoshiyama. Ms. Lum seconded the motion and all members voted aye. 8. ANNOUNCEMENTS The Chair announced the next meeting of the Board as being set for August 13, 2008, at 10:00 a.m. at the Department of Liquor Control's conference room at 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 230, Hilo. 9. ADJOURNMENT Motion and vote: Ms. Lum moved to adjourn, Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion, and. all members voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 11:26 a.m. Respectfully submitted: Mary E6trosson, Secretary 22