Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-18 Merit Appeals Board MinutesHilo, Hawaii Tuesday, January 18, 2011 The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was held in the conference room of the Department of Human Resources, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaii, on Tuesday, January 18, 2011. Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Vice Chair Mr. Kenneth Rowe, Member Mr. Ronald K. Takahashi, Director of Human Resources Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Excused: Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Henry "Hank" Silva, Member Chair Robinson called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 16, 2010 MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved that the minutes of November 16, 2010 be approved as circulated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. NEW BUSINESS A) Communication No. 10 -06, Motion for Reconsideration of Decision Denying Appeal filed by Teri J. Botelho. 3-fawai`i County is an EauaCopportunity Provider and Employer. la"L B) Communication No. 11 -011 County of Hawai`i's Opposition to Appellant's Motion for Reconsideration of Decision Denying Appeal Filed December 8, 2010. Communication Nos. 10 -06 and 11 -01 were considered simultaneously as they pertained to the same matter. Ms. Botelho was present and stated the following in support of her motion for reconsideration: In asking for the Board's reconsideration on the termination from the Prosecutor's Office in October 2009, she stated that on May 29, 2009, the Honorable Judge Hara did uphold that this Board has the jurisdiction to hear and decide matters regarding probationary terminations. The statements of Ms. Joyce Seelen in the September 2010 hearing regarding Ms. Botelho upending witnesses in State v. McDonald in July of 2009 is not a credible statement. Ms. Botelho has submitted to the Board for reconsideration the statements of three individuals that were at the meeting in July of 2009. They state that they were not offended by anyone, and they were treated by respect by the Prosecutor's Office. At the hearings, Mr. Dean Sumida stated that he weighed Ms. Botleho's evaluations heavily on Ms. Seelen's statements. Ms. Seelen stated in the September 2009 meeting with the Merit Appeals Board that Ms. Botelho had offended these witnesses so badly that Ms. Seelen had to stop the meeting. This is not true. Ms. Botelho's evaluation process never included these allegations by Ms. Seelen throughout the evaluation process preceding July through October. This was never brought to Ms. Botelho's attention and therefore she doesn't feel that the evaluation process was just. Now with the statements from the Fosters and Mr. Perez, it shows that Ms. Seelen rewrote history and that she was not a credible witness. Ms. Botelho asked the Board to reconsider this because justice hasn't been served in her evaluation process. Ms. Noda stated the following in response: There is no rule for reconsideration in either the Merit Appeals Board rules, nor is there a state statute that addresses it. The proper recourse, V pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 91, is for any person, who is aggrieved or dissatisfied with this Board's decision, appeal this Board's decision to the circuit court. That's the mechanism that Ms. Botelho should have used. Further, Ms. Botelho sets forth that there was newly discovered evidence of this child witness interview that occurred with Joyce Seelen; however, it is not newly discovered evidence that she was unable to rebut or defend during the actual appeal hearing before this Board. Prosecuting Attorney Jay Kimura's letter informing Ms. Botelho that her probation was terminated already put her on notice that one of the bases was inappropriate actions during a child interview. Joyce Seelen testified during two days before this Board. The two hearing dates before this Board were a month apart and Ms. Seelen already testified to the child interview during day one and started cross examination on day two. During that interim period, Ms. Botelho and her attorney could have produced any rebuttal or contradicting evidence at the time of the second day of the hearing. Because there's no rule, and the proper recourse for Ms. Botelho was to have filed an appeal of the MAB's decision with circuit court, the County asks that this Board either 1) take no action on Ms. Botelho's motion for reconsideration, as this Board does not have jurisdiction over her current motion; or 2) in the alternative to deny her motion. Ms. Botelho stated that she was unable to locate these witnesses in time. It was very difficult to find them. She had brought with her, at that time, Mr. de Silva whose statements indicated that Ms. Seelen was not credible in his case and now she's been able to find these people who also state that Ms. Seelen was not credible regarding their meeting, so she humbly asks for the Board's reconsideration. MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved to convene into an executive session to consult with the Board's counsel. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. The Board convened into an executive session at 10:12 a.m. and reconvened into its regular meeting at 10:15 a.m. 3 no MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved that Communication Nos. 10 -06 and 11 -01 be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. -Mr. White noted that with regards to the motion for reconsideration itself, it is the Board's opinion that it does not have the jurisdiction to entertain a motion for reconsideration. This is based on the fact that the rules of the Merit Appeals Board do not specifically permit a motion for reconsideration; and also as the County pointed out, the HRS does not specifically give the Board the legal authority to entertain a motion for reconsideration. MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved to deny Ms. Botelho's motion for reconsideration. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe. Chair Robinson stated that it would best be filed with the court instead of this body. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. C) Selection of Chair and Vice Chair for Calendar Year 2011 Vice Chair Yoshiyama stated that Chair Robinson has done an excellent job, and he thanked the Chair. He asked that the Board hold off on this item, as two members were absent from the meeting. The matter was deferred to the next meeting. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1) Mr. Takahashi introduced HR manager, Joney Nitahara, who briefed the Board on matters of classification and pay (see attached). Mr. Takahashi also mentioned that Ms. Nitahara had been selected the County's Manager of the Year for outstanding work for the department and the County. 2) Mr. Takahashi regretfully reported that he lost two employees recently, one to retirement, Daniel Santos, the department's Safety and Driver Improvement Supervisor, who retired at the end of last year, and Noel Ah Choy, the department's Clerk III assigned to recruitment, who took a promotion to the Fire Department. She left in mid - December. Mr. Takahashi is leaving the 4 r•.. positions vacant pending evaluation of their operational needs; and as Ms. Nitahara mentioned, given these tough economic times, they're looking at how to rearrange the duties to existing staff while also awaiting instruction from the Mayor and the Finance Department on their upcoming budget and how those positions will tie in. 3) They're still awaiting the Governor's position on numerous items before they can proceed with collective bargaining. NEXT MEETING DATE The Board scheduled its next meeting for February 15, 2011 at 10:00 a.m., followed by the continuation of Mr. Ignacio's appeal hearing at 10:30 a.m. The Board recessed at 10:34 a.m. 5 Hilo, Hawaii Tuesday, January 18, 2011 HEARING -10:30 A.M. — TERENCE S. IGNACIO — WERE ANY CIVIL SERVICE LAWS, RULES, OR REGULATIONS VIOLATED IN THE APPELLANT'S TERMINATION AS A PROBATIONARY POLICE OFFICER WITH THE HAWAII COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT? Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Member Mr. Kenneth M. Rowe, Member Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Others Present: Mr. Terence S. Ignacio, Appellant Mr. Robert J. Crudele, Attorney for Appellant Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mr. Robert Pike, Legal Assistant The following witnesses testified: Mr. Harry Kubojiri, Police Chief Mr. Gabriel Malani, Business Agent, SHOPO The following exhibits were entered into the record: Appellant's Exhibit No. 1 - SHOPO Agreement, Article 21 Appellant's Exhibit No. 2- Hawai`i Revised Statutes §76 -14 Appellant's Exhibit No. 3- Definition of "Examination" Appellant's Exhibit No. 4- Section 3- 38(b), Probationary Appointment Appellant's Exhibit No. 5- Section 104 -1 Appellant's Exhibit No. 6- Police Chiefs letter to Terence Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 7- HPD /Form GO 302B R ri Appellant's Exhibit No. 8 - SHOPO Agreement, Article 2 Appellant's Exhibit No. 9 - SHOPO Agreement, Article 13 Appellant's Exhibit No. 10 - HCPD's Internal Complaint Procedure Appellant's Exhibit No. 11 - Stipulation and Order for Dismissal with Prejudice filed May 25, 2010 Appellant's Exhibit No. 12 - Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting County of Hawaii, Hawaii Police Department's Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice dated August 9, 2010 Appellant's Exhibit No. 13 - Acknowledgment of Service of Step III Appeal to the Chief of Police Appellant's Exhibit No. 14 - Email from Amy Bautista to Robert J. Crudele Appellant's Exhibit No. 15 - Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 16 - Intentionally left blank Appellant's Exhibit No. 17 - Acknowledgement of Ignacio's Step IV appeal Appellant's Exhibit No. 18 - Step IV appeal of Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 19 - Email between Hunter Bishop and Ignacio's counsel's office Appellant's Exhibit No. 20 - Letter from Terence Ignacio to Police Chief Appellant's Exhibit No. 28 - Receipts & Checks for shopping purchases Appellant's Exhibit No. 29 - Verizon Wireless Agreement for (808) 987 -4071 Appellant's Exhibit No. 30 - HCPD Employee Performance Appraisals 7 Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 21- Intentionally left blank Appellant's Exhibit No. 22 - SHOPO Agreement Appellant's Exhibit No. 23 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 24 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 25 - Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 26 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 27 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Robert J. Crudele Appellant's Exhibit No. 28 - Receipts & Checks for shopping purchases Appellant's Exhibit No. 29 - Verizon Wireless Agreement for (808) 987 -4071 Appellant's Exhibit No. 30 - HCPD Employee Performance Appraisals 7 n Appellant's Exhibit No. 31 - Memo from Jason Shinoda to Duane Rapoza Appellant's Exhibit No. 32 - Memo from Lucille Melemai to Police Chief Harry Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 33 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 34 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 35 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 36 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 37 - to Terence Ignacio Commendation Letter General Order 300 General Order 302 Linda B. Shoppe v. Gucci America, Inc., et al. 94 Haw. 368; 14 P.3d 1049; 200 Haw. Lexis 454 Appellant's Exhibit No. 38 - Acknowledgment of Service Appellant's Exhibit No. 39 - Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Mayor William P. Kenoi and Police Chief Harry S. Appellant's Exhibit No. 40 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 41 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 42 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 43 - Kubojiri Hawaii Revised Statutes §76 -46 Hawaii Revised Statutes §76 -30 Hawaii Revised Statutes §89 -10 Supplemental Agreement for 18 Month Initial Probationary Period Appellant's Exhibit No. 44 - Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92F -22 Appellant's Exhibit No. 45 - Hawai`i Revised Statutes, §92F -13 Chair Robinson called the hearing to order at 10:45 a.m. The Appellant requested a closed hearing. :, � -41'.. OPEN SESSION: The Board recessed at 5:00 p.m. The hearing will be continued on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, at 10:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Ronald K. Takahashi Secretary APPROVED: G. Rick Robinson Chair vym 22 Hilo, Hawaii Tuesday, January 18, 2011 The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaii, was held in the conference room of the Department of Human Resources, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaii, on Tuesday, January 18, 2011. Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Vice Chair Mr. Kenneth Rowe, Member Mr. Ronald K. Takahashi, Director of Human Resources Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Excused: Mr. Brian De Lima, Member Mr. Henry "Hank" Silva, Member Chair Robinson called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 16, 2010 MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved that the minutes of November 16, 2010 be approved as circulated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. NEW BUSINESS A) Communication No. 10 -06, Motion for Reconsideration of Decision Denying Appeal filed by Teri J. Botelho. 3$awai`i bounty is an Eaual ®pporturaity provider arad plover. B) Communication No. 11 -01, County of Hawai`i's Opposition to Appellant's Motion for Reconsideration of Decision Denying Appeal Filed December 8, 2010. Communication Nos. 10 -06 and 11 -01 were considered simultaneously as they pertained to the same matter. Ms. Botelho was present and stated the following in support of her motion for reconsideration: In asking for the Board's reconsideration on the termination from the Prosecutor's Office in October 2009, she stated that on May 29, 2009, the Honorable Judge Hara did uphold that this Board has the jurisdiction to hear and decide matters regarding probationary terminations. The statements of Ms. Joyce Seelen in the September 2010 hearing regarding Ms. Botelho upending witnesses in State v. McDonald in July of 2009 is not a credible statement. Ms. Botelho has submitted to the Board for reconsideration the statements of three individuals that were at the meeting in July of 2009. They state that they were not offended by anyone, and they were treated by respect by the Prosecutor's Office. At the hearings, Mr. Dean Sumida stated that he weighed Ms. Botleho's evaluations heavily on Ms. Seelen's statements. Ms. Seelen stated in the September 2009 meeting with the Merit Appeals Board that Ms. Botelho had offended these witnesses so badly that Ms. Seelen had to stop the meeting. This is not true. Ms. Botelho's evaluation process never included these allegations by Ms. Seelen throughout the evaluation process preceding July through October. This was never brought to Ms. Botelho's attention and therefore she doesn't feel that the evaluation process was just. Now with the statements from the Fosters and Mr. Perez, it shows that Ms. Seelen rewrote history and that she was not a credible witness. Ms. Botelho asked the Board to reconsider this because justice hasn't been served in her evaluation process. Ms. Noda stated the following in response: There is no rule for reconsideration in either the Merit Appeals Board rules, nor is there a state statute that addresses it. The proper recourse, V pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 91, is for any person, who is aggrieved or dissatisfied with this Board's decision, appeal this Board's decision to the circuit court. That's the mechanism that Ms. Botelho should have used. Further, Ms. Botelho sets forth that there was newly discovered evidence of this child witness interview that occurred with Joyce Seelen; however, it is not newly discovered evidence that she was unable to rebut or defend during the actual appeal hearing before this Board. Prosecuting Attorney Jay Kimura's letter informing Ms. Botelho that her probation was terminated already put her on notice that one of the bases was inappropriate actions during a child interview. Joyce Seelen testified during two days before this Board. The two hearing dates before this Board were a month apart and Ms. Seelen already testified to the child interview during day one and started cross examination on day two. During that interim period, Ms. Botelho and her attorney could have produced any rebuttal or contradicting evidence at the time of the second day of the hearing. Because there's no rule, and the proper recourse for Ms. Botelho was to have filed an appeal of the MAB's decision with circuit court, the County asks that this Board either 1) take no action on Ms. Botelho's motion for reconsideration, as this Board does not have jurisdiction over her current motion; or 2) in the alternative to deny her motion. Ms. Botelho stated that she was unable to locate these witnesses in time. It was very difficult to find them. She had brought with her, at that time, Mr. de Silva whose statements indicated that Ms. Seelen was not credible in his case and now she's been able to find these people who also state that Ms. Seelen was not credible regarding their meeting, so she humbly asks for the Board's reconsideration. MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved to convene into an executive session to consult with the Board's counsel. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. The Board convened into an executive session at 10:12 a.m. and reconvened into its regular meeting at 10:15 a.m. 3 MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved that Communication Nos. 10 -06 and 11 -01 be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe and unanimously carried. Mr. White noted that with regards to the motion for reconsideration itself, it is the Board's opinion that it does not have the jurisdiction to entertain a motion for reconsideration. This is based on the fact that the rules of the Merit Appeals Board do not specifically permit a motion for reconsideration; and also as the County pointed out, the HRS does not specifically give the Board the legal authority to entertain a motion for reconsideration. MOTION: Vice Chair Yoshiyama moved to deny Ms. Botelho's motion for reconsideration. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rowe. Chair Robinson stated that it would best be filed with the court instead of this body. The motion was voted on and carried unanimously. C) Selection of Chair and Vice Chair for Calendar Year 2011 Vice Chair Yoshiyama stated that Chair Robinson has done an excellent job, and he thanked the Chair. He asked that the Board hold off on this item, as two members were absent from the meeting. The matter was deferred to the next meeting. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 1) Mr. Takahashi introduced HR manager, Joney Nitahara, who briefed the Board on matters of classification and pay (see attached). Mr. Takahashi also mentioned that Ms. Nitahara had been selected the County's Manager of the Year for outstanding work for the department and the County. 2) Mr. Takahashi regretfully reported that he lost two employees recently, one to retirement, Daniel Santos, the department's Safety and Driver Improvement Supervisor, who retired at the end of last year, and Noel Ah Choy, the department's Clerk III assigned to recruitment, who took a promotion to the Fire Department. She left in mid - December. Mr. Takahashi is leaving the positions vacant pending evaluation of their operational needs; and as Ms. Nitahara mentioned, given these tough economic times, they're looking at how to rearrange the duties to existing staff while also awaiting instruction from the Mayor and the Finance Department on their upcoming budget and how those positions will tie in. 3) They're still awaiting the Governor's position on numerous items before they can proceed with collective bargaining. NEXT MEETING DATE The Board scheduled its next meeting for February 15, 2011 at 10:00 a.m., followed by the continuation of Mr. Ignacio's appeal hearing at 10:30 a.m. The Board recessed at 10:34 a.m. 5 Hilo, Hawaii Tuesday, January 18, 2011 HEARING - 10:30 A.M. — TERENCE S. IGNACIO — WERE ANY CIVIL SERVICE LAWS, RULES, OR REGULATIONS VIOLATED IN THE APPELLANT'S TERMINATION AS A PROBATIONARY POLICE OFFICER WITH THE HAWAII COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT? Present: Mr. G. Rick Robinson, Chair Mr. Gary Yoshiyama, Member Mr. Kenneth M. Rowe, Member Mr. Julian White, Deputy Attorney General Ms. Yumi Nakamura, Clerk III Ms. Velma Y. Menezes, Secretary- Reporter Others Present: Mr. Terence S. Ignacio, Appellant Mr. Robert J. Crudele, Attorney for Appellant Ms. Diane Noda, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mr. Robert Pike, Legal Assistant The following witnesses testified: Mr. Harry Kubojiri, Police Chief Mr. Gabriel Malani, Business Agent, SHOPO The following exhibits were entered into the record: Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. Appellant's Exhibit No. 1- 2- 3- 4- 5- 6- 7- SHOPO Agreement, Article 21 Hawaii Revised Statutes §76 -14 Definition of "Examination" Section 3- 38(b), Probationary Appointment Section 104 -1 Police Chiefs letter to Terence Ignacio HPD /Form GO 302B r. Appellant's Exhibit No. 8 - SHOPO Agreement, Article 2 Appellant's Exhibit No. 9 - SHOPO Agreement, Article 13 Appellant's Exhibit No. 10 - HCPD's Internal Complaint Procedure Appellant's Exhibit No. 11 - Stipulation and Order for Dismissal with Prejudice filed May 25, 2010 Appellant's Exhibit No. 12 - Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Granting County of Hawaii, Hawaii Police Department's Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice dated August 9, 2010 Appellant's Exhibit No. 13 - Acknowledgment of Service of Step III Appeal to the Chief of Police Appellant's Exhibit No. 14 - Email from Amy Bautista to Robert J. Crudele Appellant's Exhibit No. 15 - Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 16 - Intentionally left blank Appellant's Exhibit No. 17 - Acknowledgement of Ignacio's Step IV appeal Appellant's Exhibit No. 18 - Step IV appeal of Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 19 - Email between Hunter Bishop and Ignacio's counsel's office Appellant's Exhibit No. 20 - Letter from Terence Ignacio to Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 21 - Intentionally left blank Appellant's Exhibit No. 22 - SHOPO Agreement Appellant's Exhibit No. 23 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 24 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 25 - Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Appellant's Exhibit No. 26 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence S. Ignacio Appellant's Exhibit No. 27 - Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Robert J. Crudele Appellant's Exhibit No. 28 - Receipts & Checks for shopping purchases Appellant's Exhibit No. 29 - Verizon Wireless Agreement for (808) 987 -4071 Appellant's Exhibit No. 30 - HCPD Employee Performance Appraisals 7 Appellant's Exhibit No. 31- Appellant's Exhibit No. 32 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 33 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 34 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 35 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 36 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 37 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 38 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 39 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 40 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 41 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 42 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 43 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 44 - Appellant's Exhibit No. 45 - Memo from Jason Shinoda to Duane Rapoza Memo from Lucille Melemai to Police Chief Harry Kubojiri Letter from Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri to Terence Ignacio Commendation Letter General Order 300 General Order 302 Linda B. Shoppe v. Gucci America, Inc., et al. 94 Haw. 368; 14 P.3d 1049; 200 Haw. Lexis 454 Acknowledgment of Service Letter from Robert J. Crudele to Mayor William P. Kenoi and Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Hawaii Revised Statutes §76 -46 Hawaii Revised Statutes §76 -30 Hawaii Revised Statutes §89 -10 Supplemental Agreement for 18 Month Initial Probationary Period Hawaii Revised Statutes, §92F -22 Hawaii Revised Statutes, §92F -13 Chair Robinson called the hearing to order at 10:45 a.m. The Appellant requested a closed hearing. The Board recessed at 5:00 p.m. The hearing will be continued on Tuesday, February 15, 2011, at 10:30 a.m. APPROVED: Respectfully submitted, Ronald K. Takahashi Secretary G. Rick Robinson Chair vym