Government Relations, Ethics, and Transparency Committee - Regular Meeting

Well, the government relations, ethics, and transparency committee meeting on 03/17/2026 come to order. It is 01:34PM. I am your chair, Kalanar Batungen. Members, in accordance with the Sunshine Law, please identify by name who, if anyone, is in the room via co workspace with you today. Minors do not need to be identified. Committee vice chair, Nohilani U'uhajans.

Aloha, chair. Aloha, everyone.

Councilmember Tom Cook is going to be joining us in a little bit, so we'll say he's excused for now. Councilmember Gabe Johnson.

Aloha, Chair, Council members, community members, there's no testifiers at the Lanai District Office. And I am home in my workspace and ready to work. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. Council Chair Alice Lee.

Good afternoon Chair and Anzo from New Mexico and the Apache Indian Nation.

Thank you. Councilmember Tamara Palton.

Aloha, Owina La and Anzo Kako streaming live and direct from the PD. I have one adult male, George Viera, here with me in the house and three minors who shall remain unnamed, two of the human variety and one of the canine variety.

Thank you. I see member, Rollins Fernandez just logged in, so we'll give her a minute. Councilmember Shane Senensi.

Aloha, chair and the Anso. Here at my home private residence, I'm here by myself and there's no testifiers in Harajuk.

Thank you, member Senensi. Councilmember Yuki Lei Suyumura.

Good afternoon and is it Dalonzo? Dalonzo. Dalonzo. And looking forward to a productive meeting.

Thank you. From Corporation Counsel, we have with us Deputy Corporation Counsel Colby, Deputy Corporation Counsel Gors, and Deputy Corporation Counsel Tarnstrom. We also have with us representatives from the Board of Ethics, ESNA Inc, a law corporation, and Morcorsten Miller Mukhai McKinnon LLP. We also have with us our great committee staff, and I now see member Rollins Fernandez.

I I am alone in my vehicle. There are currently no testifiers at the Molokai district office. And, chair, I'm I'm gonna have to step out for a little bit for a meeting that I could only schedule during this time. So my apologies. It looks like you have quorum, though. So you should be okay?

Yes. Thank you, member Rollins Fernandez. To to to that going make make to to we're islands. We've seen homes destroyed, roads washed out, and families taking on the mental burden of wondering if they would lose everything to the elements. For many in our community, this weekend wasn't just about the rain.

It was about the sound of sirens and the sight of rising water triggering the deep seated trauma of past natural disasters, especially previous floods and the wildfires of twenty twenty three. We know that our residents, especially those still displaced or rebuilding from the wildfires, every emergency alert carries the weight that is hard to describe. Whether it is fire or water, the anxiety of losing everything is a burden our people carry daily. In the face of these challenges, we saw the best of Maui County once again. And I wanna extend the profound mahalo to our first responders, especially the crews from fire and police departments, public works, and others who work through the night in dangerous the And world.

We are resilient people, but resilience We're of does not mean we don't feel the pain. As we move through today's business, especially on the item related to Trey Evans, Dumaran, let us keep those affected by think the world.

Do

Okay. And Members, I first up, today we can have representatives from the Board of Ethics with us to share the Board of Ethics vision, priorities, and opportunities for our council collaboration. Director, may I please ask that you introduce yourself and your team?

All right. Good afternoon Chair, Vice Chair and committee members. I am Lauren Akitake. I am the Executive Director and Legal Counsel to the Maui County Board of Ethics. I do have my team here with me.

I have our new attorney, Christine Tsukiyama. She started yesterday. I have our investigator here, Gail Rakes, and our assistant, Risa Tamho. I want to thank you for the opportunity to share where the board stands today, our vision for ethical governance, and our priorities for 2026, and opportunities to collaborate with council in strengthening transparency, fairness, and public trust. I also want to thank Chair Batanggan, the Great Committee, and the Office of Council Services for your proactive engagement with our office to strengthen the county's ethics framework.

Let's see our slides up.

While they get settled, members, if there are no objections, I will be designating these individuals as resource persons under rule 18A of the rules of the council due to their expertise on the matter.

No objections.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you. The Maui County Board of Ethics has served the county for more than forty years. It's an all volunteer board tasked with adjudicating complaints against county employees or Boarding Commission's members, reviewing financial disclosure statements, and issuing advisory opinions. In 2024, the public approved a board initiated charter amendment establishing full time staff, significantly expanding the board's ability to carry out its mission.

Our office officially launched in August 2025. In the first one hundred days, we built the office from the ground up, hiring staff, establishing systems, and revising 44 administrative rules to make the office operational. I met with each council member, the mayor, and several department directors, deputies, and key staff. And I shadowed the state ethics commission and met with the Honolulu Ethics Commission, drawing on their more than fifty years of experience. With your support, we quickly staffed our office with three employees.

But soon it became clear the workload required additional capacity. And again, with your support, we now have four staff and we're looking to hire a paralegal. We also implemented an attorney of the day system, which I handle daily for seven months. But as I mentioned as of yesterday, I'm very pleased that our second attorney Christine Tsukiyama is now with our office. She's a Maui girl, valedictorian.

She's also a Regent scholar and she has extensive civil litigation experience on both Maui and Oahu. Looking ahead, the board has identified several priorities where our ethics framework can be strengthened and where we are anticipating working closely with the council. These priorities include adopting a countywide nepotism policy, modernizing our lobbyist rules, updating our GIF rules, extending board jurisdiction over former employees and board and commissions members to six years, which would be consistent with the state. Several of these initiatives will require council partnership through an ordinance amendment, charter amendment, or policy support. I'll briefly walk through each of these priorities.

The purpose of a nepotism law is to ensure that hiring, supervising, and employment decisions are based on merit, qualifications, ability, and equal opportunity, not on favoritism or family relationships. This promotes fairness, transparency, and public confidence in government. Currently, Maui County does not have an anti nepotism countywide rule. Since the council last considered this issue in 2013 and 2014, several developments have occurred. The state enacted a nepotism law in 2023, Hawaii County adopted one in 2025, and the Maui County Fire Department issued an internal nepotism guidance in 2025.

These recent examples suggest implementation is feasible. During our February board meeting, we spoke with Key Campbell, enforcement director of the State Ethics Commission, who researched and drafted the state's law. It was discussed that anti nepotism policies are widely considered best practice across public, private, and nonprofit sectors, and roughly half of U. S. States have such laws.

Mr. Campbell explained that the state rolled out their law covering roughly 95% of state employees, about 55,000 to 60,000 people, with a six month transition for good cause exemption requests, which were decided publicly by the ethics commission. They received approximately 15 such requests, one-five. He also noted that in the majority of cases, hiring or supervision structures can be adjusted to comply with the rule. Our Board has asked me to present a draft rule modeled on the state's law at our April meeting, after which it would be transmitted to the council for discussion and potential adoption following budget season.

Our current lobbyist rules are very limited. While we define lobbyists and require registration, that's about it. We lack clear standards such as when registration is required, reporting of lobbying expenditures, and restrictions on gifts from lobbyists. Currently, Maui County is the only county in Hawaii without comprehensive lobbyist rules. Comprehensive rules would allow the public to see who is lobbying county government and how much is being spent on which initiative.

The state also requires lobbyists to complete ethics training before registering and to repeat that training every two years. I want to thank Chair Batanggan and Peter Hanano for their support in developing draft rules modeled after the state and Hawaii County frameworks. In April, a state ethics commission attorney will join our board meeting for discussion and in May, the board plans to review rules before transmitting them to counsel for consideration and feedback. Next we have gifts. Our current gift rules are also minimal.

Charter section ten-four prohibits gifts that are solicited, accepted, or received under circumstances in which it can be reasonably inferred that the gift is intended to influence official duties or to reward to to

be

a

our

$5 Gifts part of Aloha. But that language is not part of our rules and has since been removed from our website. Our board formed a permitted interaction group which is considering new rules based on the our government

positioned

We are are working the customers. Administrative rules, accompanied by training during implementation, and we will continue consulting with the council as these updates are developed. As I've heard at the state level regarding this framework, you don't have to bring me Manapua to meet with me. Our goal is to ensure that county decisions are guided by ethics and fairness and to avoid influence and the appearance of influence, which erodes public trust. Our additional priorities include a charter amendment allowing two consecutive terms for board members, extending jurisdiction to six years.

Right now, if a respondent resigns today, the board immediately loses jurisdiction, even when probable cause of an ethics violation has been found by the board. We had a contested case scheduled for this month and probable cause was found by our board. And we immediately lost jurisdiction when the respondent resigned. And this so we had one this month and in the recent in the past few years, this is the third such instance where this has occurred. Lastly, establishing a comprehensive ethics training program is on our priority list.

Currently, Maui County ethics training occurs only at onboarding. While City and County of Honolulu employees, they complete training at onboarding and every two years and the state, they do it at onboarding and every four years. A few statistics. In the last seven months, I've issued 101 informal advisory opinions. Formal advisory opinions have increased significantly.

We have had 23 formal advisory requests in the first two and a half months of 2026 compared to 15 in all of 2025 and '19 in 2024. I am happy to report that most of the 23 this year were addressed informally by the attorney of the day, avoiding the need to wait for a council, a board meeting. Complaints more than doubled in 2025 compared with 2024. And in 2026, we are on track to exceed last year's level. We also reviewed two zero four financial disclosure statements annually and our investigator now assists in reviewing them more thoroughly, including requests for clarification and amendments when needed.

Finally, Maui County currently has 143 registered lobbyists, representing two zero three organizations. In closing, I want to thank you for your continued support and collaboration. At its core, our work is about upholding the public's trust and we look forward to partnering with the council to advance our shared responsibility in the year ahead. Thank you.

Thank you, Director Akitake. Before moving on to discussion, I'll receive testimony for grade five five. Note members that this is only for our first agenda item. We'll be taking up testimony on each item as it comes up. I also wanna note that I recognize not everybody who may wanna testify today is able to do so. And so I'll plan to defer grade item eleven twenty seven and not take any legislative action on any item for today. Staff, is there anybody wishing to testify at this time?

Yes, chair. The first individual who would like to testify is Chivo Ching Johnson, who be followed by Johan Lal.

Thank you, Chivo. You have three minutes. Oh, I Kalamai, I need to read the testifying rules. Testifiers wanting to provide testimony should sign up in the lobby, join the online meeting via the Teams link, or call into the phone number noted on today's agenda. Written testimony is encouraged and can be submitted via the e comment link at mauicounty.us/agendas as well.

Under the Sunshine Law, the chair will receive oral testimony for agenda items as the item is called up. For individuals wishing to testify via Teams, please raise your hand by clicking on the raise your hand button. If calling in, please follow the prompts via phone, which are star five to raise or lower your hand and star six to mute and unmute. Staff will add names to the testifier list in the order testifiers sign up or raise their hands. For those on Teams, staff will lower your hand once your name is added.

Staff will then call the name you're logged in under or the last four digits of your phone number when it is your time to testify. At that time, staff will also enable your microphone and video. Please ensure your name appears in Microsoft Teams as the name you prefer to be referred to or as anonymous if you wish to testify anonymously. If you're in person, please notify staff that you would like to testify anonymously. Otherwise, please state your name for the record at the beginning of your testimony. Our testimony is limited to three minutes per item. If you're still testifying beyond that time, I will kindly ask you to complete your testimony. Once you're done testifying or if you do not wish to testify, you can also view the meeting on Akaku Channel fifty three, Facebook Live, or mauicounty.us/agendas. We will do our best to take each person up in an orderly fashion. Alright.

Chivo, you have three minutes.

Oh, sure. Oh, could I get a point of clarification? He said that we're not taking action. The only item I mean, we don't take action on a seven b. The only the third item was action related. I didn't see any e comment testimony, just the one written testimony on this. Like, are you saying we're not taking action on the third item?

Yes, Member Palatin. My plan was to defer the item and bring it back.

Okay. There, because my understanding is this is our last meeting before budget. Is there any time sensitivity to that last item?

Not to my knowledge. Oh, okay. Thank you. Thanks. Yep. Steph, was think and team.

I

Thank you. Question. Chivo, floor is yours. Sorry, you're still muted. Steph, is he enabled on our side?

Yes, chair.

You need to just hit the unmute mic button on your end.

To

We can be hear you now. Thank you. You. All right. Staff, can you set take the timer now?

Aloha, we know that. On to you all. I hope everybody's doing well. It's nice to be here today. Thank you.

I really wanted to thank the great committee and all of the council members for for the support you have offered the board of ethics. And I've I really enjoyed being on that board, and I am particularly happy since Lauren has has taken the helm. And now we have Christine Tsukiyama, Gail, and Risa, and some very, very good staff. It has surprised me that there are so many incidents of of ethics violations from minor and small type things all the way up. And it really heartenes me to to know that we're trying very hard to bring our rules up to snuff, and Lauren has been working on that diligently.

You know, for example, the the fact that when someone is caught doing something unethical they can just resign and then they're free. You know and that that just doesn't work there are a lot of these rules that she had brought up that we really ask you for your support on. I basically wanted to thank you for all you have done for our board.

Thank you.

Thank you. Members, any clarifying questions for the testifier? Seeing none, thank you. Can I ask that you hold the next testifier, please?

Yes, chair. The next testifier is Johan Lal to be followed by Christopher Salem.

Aloha. Johan Lal. I'm testifying on behalf of myself. I was surprised by that presentation because I thought the gifts of aloha was a thing, but I apparently it's like an unspoken rule. I do think that should be a rule because it's kind of a standard thing to bring like donuts or like balasadas or or whatever if you have a meeting.

And I've actually been in a meeting with a state person where I brought doughnuts, and he was, like, afraid to eat the doughnuts. He was like, it's against the rules. Like, it might be a bribe or whatever. So I basically had to force the guy to to eat a doughnut. And and it wasn't a situation

where

I was being regulated or or or anything. So there's no opportunity for it to be abrived. I do think there is such a thing as like too much ethics rules. I did want to address their new rules. A while back, I don't know if this actually went through, but there's discussion about having hearings all be private even if a person wanted their matter to be addressed publicly.

And I actually filed an appeal with the Office of Information Practices in August 2024. And I don't know what the status is, but the reason I filed that is because state sunshine law says that if a person wants to have something heard publicly, they actually have that right. So I would, if possible, ask the ethics folks about that if they know anything about the status of that appeal and if that's still a rule. The other thing is they I believe they have a rule now that if you file a complaint, you can't discuss it publicly. And I do understand the reason for that, but that seems like a free speech violation.

I would also ask about the status of that and whether that's a legal thing at all. And then, also going back to the gifts of aloha, I wonder if there could be some discussion about the matter where two council members asked about the gifts they received, the, sticks. Because, to me, that seems like kind of that. It's not a it's not a bribe. It's like a symbolic thing.

So maybe there's an opportunity where you could accept gifts like that and have them become like county property or like property of your office rather than like a personal thing. Maybe there's some opportunity to kind of loosen certain rules, but also be more in favor of like, openness and also have strong rules and strong enforcement when it's something important. And

that's my comments, Mahalo. Thank you. Members, any clarifying questions for the testifier? Seeing none, thank you very much. Staff, can you call up the next testifier, please? Doctor.

Yes, Chair. The next and currently final person signed up to testify is Christopher Salem.

Doctor. Good afternoon council members and council chair, our committee chair, excuse me for that. I really enjoyed that. That's not my point today, but I enjoyed that testifiers statements on that. I'm really happy that these rules don't apply to use for its because. When we travel in our island if I didn't bring gifts of crispy cream and etcetera. To the other administrators of. Whatever sport it may be I think that it would be considered almost be rude. So I think there's way too much focus on that poll instead of the donut by the board of ethics. Mean to me if you're going to consume something that's not a bribery but irregardless of that.

Director just mentioned the appearance of influence. And she also meant for map reference six years I would hope we get some clarification six years on what. That was just a that was a power point reference but I'm not sure what it's about and it wasn't part of my testimony. So but my testimony today addresses the item that being at its core this proposal appears to conflict with the intent of the charter. This collaboration board of ethics was established to serve as an independent check on county government.

Not as collaborative partner with the very bodies that may be required to investigate. Or assist in investigation. I think that's what the charter amendment speaks to. And I think the council should of of ethics specifically. We've had multiple cases here recently brought to the board of ethics that are very serious as Chivo just said.

One involves the county auditor. And one involves his legal representation and non disclosures of his involvement of the matters which the auditor is auditing. And also his disclosure the corporation counsel interfered with the auditors. Duties while I was a staff member of the office of the mayor trying to adopt legislation to collect on the infamous developer deferral agreements. So there's real ethics and the out card they use, which we just received the letter, similar to what court counsel does, they speak to that's outside their authority.

How is that possible? That the county auditor brings in a private attorney who was involved in the very action that is suspended. Audit. He drafted the warranty deeds to alter a government contract from three lots to five. Any council member could spend ten minutes. And review that action was completely in violation of law. There's no such thing as a five lot deferral agreement. However, which is now we've exhausted our administrative remedies and that's the game they play. We've gotten a letter saying, that's not an ethical violation that's within our jurisdiction. So what happens next?

Thank you, mister. Here we go. Can you please conclude?

I will. The conclusion is because of that out card they use, which is not supported by the rules they've adopted, we now go to court again. That's the game. You force citizens to file lawsuits. So there'll be another one against the county auditor on this matter. It's something that you folks could resolve in about fifteen minutes. Thank you, mister Salem. Don't agree. I'll I'll finish it with that. I don't agree with the power point and all of the flowery discussion of the great things they're doing. I do not agree. Not on the high levels of transparency and accountability. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Members, any clarifying questions for the testifier? Seeing none, staff, is there anybody else wishing to testify?

Chair, there's no one else signed up but I see someone approaching the podium.

Hey, Mr. Batanggan. I was just wondering if you were running for election.

Mr. Law, you have three minutes. Nope. That was it. Members, any clarifying questions for the testifier? Sure. Member Palton.

I just wanted to let you know that we didn't hear, the ringer in virtual.

Okay. That's helpful.

Thank you.

You guys heard something, but we didn't.

Thank you. Staff, can we look into that before we take up the next item?

Yes, Chair. We'll work on that.

Okay. Is there anybody else wishing to testify?

There is no one else who signed up to testify. I do see Mr. Salon's hand is up again, but he's testified for this item.

Thank you.

Would you like me to do a last call?

Yes.

If somebody would like to testify in the chamber, please let staff know, or Microsoft Teams, please raise your hand. This is final call. Three, two, one. Chair, it appears that no

going I'm I'm be a make little bit I'm to we're we're going able to do And we're to that. Senensi, and then we'll work our way down. And member Senensi.

I'll be chair. And, beside the gifts, I mean, like a lot of the testifiers had said, it's almost like a cultural thing. As Mr. Law had mentioned, and Mr. Salem, if you do kind of show up to a meeting without, I guess, maybe it's just more of a cultural tradition to bring some kinds of gifts.

We always do that, omiyagi, whenever we're visiting our conferences, we often bring omiyagi to the other counselors and councilmans when we visit, especially at the Mainland. But I guess my question was for the Omiyagi's, is that something that we can address with you?

Doctor. Akitake.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councilmember Senensi for that question. That. That. Able able we're

And And

able to be do And way

to

do do it. So there's a lot that needs to be discussed in that regard. So we can't just exempt food in general. So the three part test is who is it from, what is the county purpose, and what's the value. So if it's from a lobbyist, dollars 50 something from a lobbyist versus a $15 tray of donuts from a school group showing up.

That's so there are no bright lines in that regard. But the state's experience is that when there are bright lines, like a $25 gift for Aloha or a $50 there are abuses. There could be quite a few 24.99 steak dinners from Ruth Chris dinners from Ruth Chris, which is not $24.99 we will discuss that at our board when our permanent interaction group comes back with their report. And we will roll out any new rules very deliberately so that the community knows why we are going in a certain direction and to make sure people understand that direction. So no that.

That. And to

And address the I guess the O'Os that are more of a traditional. And if we keep it in the office, you know, most times it's it kind of just decorates and shows what we've participated in.

Thank you, Director.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Councilmember for that question. Before I started, there are two opinions, published opinions about the OO sticks. And please take a look at that. Thank you for asking to the council members who asked.

The decision did mention that it is a very high cost item and there are these types of items that can be maintained for county purposes. There's actually a specific rule on it. And one of the things though is if when people know what our ethics rules are and how they're going to be interpreted, then on the front end they could make different choices on what they use for those groundbreakings instead of a several $100 stick. Is there something else that's symbolic that could be used? That sort of thing. So please take a look at those advisory opinions. Thank you.

Yeah, will do. Thank you. Thank you. Members, were you able to hear the timer this time around? No. So we have to try again. They're working on that, I will recognize member O'Hodgins.

Thank you, chair. The O'O thing was a fun conversation to have because it was with an expensive piece of wood. And then there's other times where you go to some and they use, like, invasive wood that they don't have a high value. But nonetheless, okay. I do have a question picking up on omiyage. What do we do about lei? Because there are times and this is one where I'm gonna argue that we cannot, let our culture, or let our ethics, our version of ethics get involved in our culture because that is a cultural thing. And lay can be very expensive.

Director.

Thank you. Thank you, chair, and thank you, Council Member. Absolutely, lei is carved out. Okay. Specific carve

out of

the state's rule. This is

not like a lei of gift cards. Yes. Okay. That's fine.

No money leis. The idea is you cannot re sell the lay. Okay. Okay. Great. Thank No you so worry about lay.

Okay. Good. I hear you on that one. And then we should expect some language and some policy changes to our nepotism law, lack thereof, we're going to have some as well as our lobbyists. Are we going to be kind of mirroring what the state does?

I I

question.

And then yes. Sorry. Only have three minutes. Can you tell me a good cause request? Like, what is a good, example of a good cause request to be discussed in public?

Thank you. Thank you for that question. You can look at the state's opinions. Those are publicly done. One in particular was one in Hana. There was an emergency hire situation I believe it was father son. I'm not totally sure, but that was an exemption that was made.

Okay. I hear you on that. I don't disagree. We do need rules and laws, but this is a small island. Related to the other half of us. Okay. And then my next question, I'm gonna actually ask on behalf of Tom because he went through this a lot. But how are you folks gonna help protect employees and elected officials from unfounded and malicious complaints? I know we heard from somebody earlier that you're gonna attempt to bar people from talking about them. But what happens when the attacks are quite constant and completely unfounded? What are you folks going to do on our behalf? Everybody else's behalf as well?

Thank you, councilmember. I feel that one. And I see that one. And we have an adjudicatory function that is recognized statewide. There are other boards in the county that have an adjudicatory function for the purpose of anyone can file an ethics complaint, valid or not. So if there is something valid to it, the board will find that and we will move forward with it. If there is not, it gets dealt with in an adjudicatory meeting. There are other remedies. I was a per diem district court judge, so there are other avenues if, elected officials are being harassed.

Okay. Thank you. I won't need a second round, but if I could say, Member Johnson posted a really good article the other day about corruptomania, and we're kinda dealing with that on every, aspect right now. But thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, member Uhu Hajins, member Johnson, and I look forward to seeing that article. And members who are tuning in online, were you able to hear the timer this time? Still no. Okay. I was

I was involved in it in the conversation. I might have missed it. I don't know. Can't I recall.

I guess part of the point is that it be loud. It should be loud enough where you you hear it, though. You shouldn't have to be paying close enough attention. Mhmm. Okay. Well Roofing conversation. We're getting reports from staff, in the side offices that they can hear it, but, I don't think everybody's able to. So we will persevere. Next up, member Cook. Thank you, chair.

Go and get opinions from the ethics Board of Ethics before they either participate or continue to participate in things. Thank

you. We covered our priorities for 2026 And question. We're that's to other do we're thing the the

Thank you. So I'll ask my question. I think it fits within the criteria. When we interview people to serve on boards and commissions, and sometimes if they are industry related, they'll be asked to go before the Board of Ethics for a determination after they're placed. I look at that mostly of education, what is appropriate and inappropriate so people know when they need to recuse themselves or not.

I have a challenge with this. If someone has anything to do with industry, it's real clear cut about money or influence being somewhat determinable and quantifiable. We also have people who are put on for cultural or environmental priorities, who may be extremely biased, but they're not necessarily scrutinized or they're not subject to the same scrutiny because it's really difficult because they're not necessarily servicing a company or their pockets or this or that, but they may not be objective in their assessment of a rule, an ordinance, a project. So do you have any I don't know if I'm conveying my concern, but do you have any perspective on how we can hold everybody accountable that if they're on a border commission and they have a responsibility to hear and respond? I'm going to be flat out.

I think the Planning Commission's determination on the recent ruling and it's going to come back to the council I'm just like, I don't get it. So anyway, thank you. Director?

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that And we're that. I know there are people who would like to expand our role that they believe a certain way, this or that. And if we don't go to those, items, then we are we have a lane that we stay in.

Comment. Just one quick comment. I totally respect that. And that would be that's crazy. You can't start you shouldn't shouldn't be picking winners and losers and right and wrong. I say that not so much because I'd like that to happen. I say that because I think we need to be conscious of having the rules work for everybody and everything. Thank you, Chair. Thank

progress

pleased

we've the progress if they're a volunteer. Lot We look at what kind of contracts they have with the county, if they are a registered lobbyist or they should be a registered lobbyist. What I found is that because we don't have lobbyist rules really, the concept of being lobbyist is not that well understood. And so I think a little of what you're saying, some of those forces could come into play. As we develop our rules and the understanding of these concepts, then I hope that can touch some of your concerns.

Thank you for that answer very much. And thank you for

your patience with me, Chair. Thank you, Member Cook. Member Palton, can I ask, did you hear the timer or did you hear me say time? Okay. So everybody heard the timer. Just making sure. You, members. Member Rollins Fernandez is excused. So moving on, member Johnson.

Thank you, chair. And thank you councilmember Hodgins for reminding me of that article. And I'm gonna reference it today. So it's, in civil beat called, Corruptomania is a Dangerous Thing, and it's by Neil Milner. And basically, his thesis is if you go out on the street, everybody's talking about corruption, corruption.

But his argument is it's more incompetence than competence, which is an interesting way to take take it on. But I think what he was saying that really kinda rung through to me is, like, everybody blames the mismanagement of of our government on corruption, but a lot of times, it's just it's not that. It's more like, you know, incompetence. But I'd like to hear the the definition, the legal definition of, corruption because I'll read this little quote that really kinda nails it on the head. He says, studies show that public has a very wide definition of corruption that goes far beyond the legal meaning and includes things like ordinary legislative bargaining, policies you disagree with, and incompetence as well.

So, you know, you said, any file or anyone can file an ethics complaint, And that sounds to me just like you can indite a ham sandwich. So, really, you know, a lot of these things can be boundless, and I'd like to maybe hear your definition of what you can see what the legal definition is of corruption.

Director.

Thank you. Thank you, chair. Thank you, councilmember Johnson. There's a lot to unpack there. So, I'm sure

there is.

Do not move forward on corruption. We move forward on ethics violations, which can cover corruption. So I unfortunately can't give you a definition of corruption, but I can tell you that we uphold the ethics rules and we will hold people accountable for violating those. Going back to the article, thank you for raising that. The incompetence issue, I do have to be very clear about this.

We do not if there there are frequently complaints about how county employees did their job. And we do we're not subject matter experts in the different departments. So we're not going to go in and tell someone they should have or should not have issued a building permit or something of that nature. And there are people out there who really want us to do that. And that is not our lane. And so going a little bit to what we do and also councilmember Cook, we look at the ethics rules and that is our lane. People want it to be expanded, but to the extent there is an allegation of incompetence, that goes someplace else.

Okay. So if you're looking at ethics rules, is it up on the portal? Is it up on your website? You can clearly say to the public this.

Make Doctor. Sure

Can you say it for the record where it is? Doctor.

Yes. It is at the very bottom of our website. There are three sets of rules that we are governed by, so please go and look at them at the very bottom of our website.

You heard it here first, folks. Thank you. That's my time.

Thank you, Member Johnson. Member Palton.

Thank you, chair. I got three minutes. If I cut you off, don't mean to be rude. I think I did hear you clarify that the state passed an anti nepotism policy in 2023. Is that and that they intended for it to be applied to all the counties? Is that what you said or?

Thank you, chair. Thank you, councilmember. No. The state's nepotism policy only applies to state employees and board and commissions members of the state. That's 55,000 to 60,000 people. 95% the judiciary and the legislature are exempt.

And at one time, didn't you say, though, that the directive was for the state to adopt for the counties to adopt the state policy? Did you say that in talking to one of the members? Was there a deadline on that? No. Oh, okay.

I I worked with, in my former job, brothers, and one was the captain of the other, and I'd say this is very sorely needed. The next one I have question about is the I think I heard you say a lobbyist statistic, something like 95% or something. I was wondering, have you had an opportunity to clean up the lobbyist list? Because the last time I looked at it, it looked very out of date.

Thank you chair. Thank you so much for that. No, we need to clean up the list. There are some lobbyists from 2007 still on the list. That number is likely not accurate. However, it is definitely on the to do list. We want to update the rules though, the substance of it. We have an eye. We will clean up the list.

Oh, okay. I guess going back to the countywide nepotism rule about this the counties adopting the state's policy, like, is that a cut and paste kind of thing where the state has a written policy and we're just adopting the policy? Or are we like putting it into legislation as well? Or is a rule for the Board of Ethics sufficient?

Director.

Thank you, chair. Thank you, councilmember. It is not we are not going to be able to do a nepotism rule through our admin rules. This is going to come through the council. It needs to be a Maui County code, and it needs to be discussed at length. The Hawaii County's policy is virtually identical to the states. Definition of family and household member is a little different, but it covers the same substance. So

we will

have a larger discussion about that.

Okay, I heard the bell. Thank you.

Thank you Member Balton. Member Sugimura.

Congratulations. Every time you appear, appear, you give us more and more of what you're doing and welcome to your staff. Nice to see you hiring good people. In the auditor's February 2026 fraud report, in there he does thanks. He does say that we need to have exactly what you're doing. So I look forward to seeing what you come up with. What is your process? You're just going to pass it by your board and then you'll come up with what your board agrees to and then propose a nepotism ordinance?

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that question. It was noted in the audit that we do not have one, and it is best practice to have one. We had a very thorough discussion with Key Campbell in our February meeting. We actually went through every concern the council raised in 2013 and 2014, and we discussed those at length.

I want to say about 80% of those concerns are not actually do not pan out as concerns in the way the rule is now written. So ten years on they've been able to address some of those concerns and the common needs are concerns that have meant that this has not moved forward. So we have taken a deep dive at the board level for nepotism. I highly recommend everyone watch that discussion because we touched every concern from the council in 2013, 2014, and Key Campbell talked about the process, researching other states and how they decided on what they decided on. Also showing that jurisdictional over 55,000 to 60,000 employees resulted in approximately 15 good cause exemption requests.

So the numbers show that this is doable. Can I ask a question?

Go ahead. So what about existing employees? So If you have departments that hire that has nepotism, what does your policy recommend? There are

two options. One Key Campbell explained that it's not correct to use the we're And we're do do of their policy and after six months, everyone had to be in compliance. And so if they couldn't get into compliance, then they would ask for a good cause exemption, which there were 15 of those. But he said the vast, vast majority of situations, you can quote shuffle the deck in hiring or supervising, mostly supervising and it would be in line with the rule.

Also the auditor's report. The action must appropriate, funds for the establishment of a county wide fraud, county wide fraud hotline and a centralized intake system. So if I could just finish that one sentence. So what you're doing, would it kind of encompass some of this or is it two separate thoughts?

Thank you. The county auditor, it's my understanding they're going to start a fraud, waste and abuse hotline. I don't know what their timeline is, but we do expect to get referrals from that. I see. So that's how it would interplay. Yes. Okay. Thank you.

You, Member Sugimura. Chair Lee?

Chair, I have no questions, primarily because in nine months and nine minutes this will not apply to me. Thank you.

Not that you're counting down the minutes. Okay. So thank you, director. Thank you, members. So I wanted to have this seven b so that you all in the public would understand what is being contemplated by the Board of Ethics and what our role will be in shaping that.

As she mentioned, some charter amendments, those will be taken up when we take up any proposed charter amendments later this summer. There will be some code amendments. She mentioned three, I think. The county wide nepotism rule, the lobbyist rule, and then the jurisdiction over former employees. Drafts of those are being worked on now by committee staff and Board of Ethics staff.

The first draft will go to the Board of Ethics for review and comment before it comes back to us, and then we'll take those up over the summer. And then the last one is admin roles. So those we will not have a formal role in reviewing and approving before it goes out to the public for their thumbs up or thumbs down. But if you want to get involved in that process, it would be through the Board of Ethics internal administrative rulemaking process. I did have one question.

Are you planning to create like a one pager or a guidebook on some of the proposed changes? I think, you know, we heard from members a lot of been able that. And

to

we're going do

going to to materials, in person training materials, online training materials. I understand the concern if we make a big rule change and just drop it on you and you don't know what it means, that doesn't help. That doesn't help. Change is difficult and we want to help make that easier. So we're going to do our very best to and certainly with the gift rules rolling those out with enough information that people can go to to ask questions and knowing that our office is going to be flooded with questions as well, people calling.

We're hoping now that we have additional staff and another attorney, we can have a lot of training materials available.

Thank you. And so these are the priorities that we're, the committee staff is working with you and your staff on. If members have additional legislation that they would like to introduce ir get a

to we're going able get we're we're make sure we're going

that

going to questions? Member that Palton.

Thank you, chair. Thank you, director Akitaque. I just was wondering, you know, if you have a calendar set for the various political cycles in this morning's BFED, we were kind of informed that some of the spur of midterm changes was due to, you know, whatever staffing changes or whatever of appointed people. And I think that highlights the importance of immediate training when there's a new, elected official administration, anything like that? And have you worked that into your calendar?

Because I mean, it's a predictable cycle and it's important enough to happen, like, right away. I know that with the, boards and commissions, we couldn't, issue any advisory opinions or ask for any advisory positions until they've been put on the boards and commissions in an election year. We should know the winner by mid November. Could you start doing some, training prior to swearing in so that whoever the choices are or whatever can hit the ground running?

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for that question. Absolutely. I know Office of Counselor Services, before our office started, did ethics training for each council member. And so with Chair, they communicated with my office, how do we want to handle this? And so I did meet with Chair Batongaan to do an ethics training with him. So that is definitely on the radar and I'm sure that the people who are elected are going to want that training early as well. So we're available for that.

Elected and appointed, right? And appointed, yes. Okay. Thank you. Just wanted to, make sure it's on your radar because it's so predictable. I mean, it's like a it's scheduled already. Thank you.

Thank you, member Palatin. Is there anybody else who has follow-up questions? K. Seeing none. Members, this item was posted for no legislative action. So if there were no objections, I will defer this item. Alright. That concludes the first item of business. If you guys don't mind, can I ask for a five minute recess before we start the next one? K.

So the time is 02:37. We'll come back at 02:45. Thank you. Alright. Members, it is 02:46.

Can the great committee meeting of March 17 please come back to order? Second on the agenda is a case update regarding the Chelsea Evans regarding Chelsea Evans individually as a personal representative of the estate of Trey Evans Demaran. Deceased v Scott Martin, Civil two c c v dash two four dash zero zero zero four. Item is grade 56. Along with Deputy Corporation Counsel Gors, we have with us today representatives of ESNA Inc, a law corporation, to provide us an update on this case.

May I please ask that you introduce yourselves.

John Gors, Deputy Corporation Counsel.

Anna Elentosnid. I'm the President and Attorney with, ESNA Inc.

Thank you. Members, if there are no objections, I will be designating these individuals as resource persons under rule 18A of the rules of the council due to their expertise on the matter.

I see

no objections. May I now, request opening comments from Deputy Corporation Counsel Gors and Special Counsel.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a case stemming from an incident that occurred in January 2023. A lawsuit was commenced, initially was filed against Captain Scott Martin of the fire department here at the County Of Maui. The plaintiff subsequently filed a first amended complaint to name of the county. The county brought a motion to dismiss which was granted against the county by the second circuit court. The second circuit court actually issued

Thank you. Please continue. Thank you.

The Second Circuit Court actually entered two orders dismissing the case against the county with prejudice. One was filed 01/07/2025, and the other was filed 02/05/2025, with the basis being this claim is other the other team. The

point.

And I And she's probably going to discuss will implicate the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities of the county, the council and this committee may and much may have to be discussed in executive session.

Good afternoon, everyone. I'm here today because the Malloy Corporation Counsel's office asked me to answer any questions you might have regarding the status of the lawsuit. And because the county is funding Captain Martin's defense, it's entitled to limited disclosures within the terms of a stipulated protective order which the plaintiff and defendant have entered into in this lawsuit. I can answer any questions you may have pertaining to the case provided the information you seek is part of the public record. But under the rules of professional conduct for lawyers in Hawaii, I'm prohibited from revealing any confidential information relating to the representation of my client in the lawsuit.

So please ask the questions And if I explain that I have to decline to answer, it is because the information you seek is either covered because it's confidential, covered by the attorney client privilege, or covered by what we call the work product doctrine. So with that

Thank you. Before we move on with testimony, I'd like to apologize to for butchering his middle name and would like to take a second stab this time with my glasses on. I was caught off guard a little bit earlier, but I was not expecting that. But it's the estate of Okay. So before moving on to discussion, I'll receive public testimony in grade five, six. Staff, is there anybody wishing to testify on this item?

Chair, there's nobody Nobody signed up, but I do see somebody approaching the podium.

Aloha Abakia. It's JC Law from Kula O Ka. Thank you, county. And thank you, Scott Martin. I never met the never met Trey or did I meet Scott Martin.

But I'm not I'm not much of a speech guy for words and stuff on occasions like this. I'm more leaning on towards, Trey's side. And, yeah, appreciate that I'm I'm even able to participate in this in this conversation. The Hawaiian word for Trey is me, hero. And I other than him being a firefighter and then going out and and helping people and saving lives and stuff, it didn't occur to me until this big storm here this weekend that he might have actually saved the life of someone else that would have put yourselves into harm's way.

And the Jesus guy said there's you can do nothing better for in this world than to give up your life for someone else. So I feel like that's what he did.

Thank you. Members, any clarifying questions? Member Palton. Mr. Law, we have a question from Councilmember Palton.

Ready?

I just wanted to clarify. Mister Tanner Mosher, credited Trey for, his work in saving the firefighters in, the Lahaina fire. So it it's my understanding he saved more than one life.

Mr. Law. We never know what the future holds, Counselor Paulton.

I I would say at least six,

if not more. Thank you, Member Bolton. Any other questions for the testifier? Seeing none, staff, is there anybody else wishing to testify on this item?

Chair, there is no one else who has signed up to testify. Would you like me to do a last call? If somebody would like to testify in the chamber, please let staff know. On Microsoft Teams, please raise your hand. This is final call. Three, two, one. Chair, it appears that nobody wishes to testify.

Thank you. Members, seeing as there are no more individuals wishing to testify, without objection, I will now close oral testimony for this item. As a reminder, written testimony will continue to be accepted. Members, Chair will be implementing a three minute questioning period per member and we can see if we need a follow-up round. I can start on Chair Lee's side of the chamber and my work my way down towards members and entity. Chair Lee, you have any questions?

No questions. Thank

you. Member Sugimura.

So basically the special counsel, you're representing the county or you're representing No, I represent solely Captain Martin. Oh, only Captain Martin. So I just wanna say that I met with Trey's mom, not the grandma who I know by she used to work with us and, I guess, her husband. But I'm really grateful that you're bringing this up because the day that I met with her, the family had the whole front lawn with signs of, I guess, sentiments that the family received from the community. It was very sad.

And the thought that it left you with was, okay. What are we doing with the county? And the hard part is I'm a mother and just trying to imagine what the family must be going through, you know, living this day by day and the heartbreak and what is the delay. So these are probably statements during if you would take us into executive session, I have more questions that may be related to this, but I guess I will wait.

Thank you, Member Sugimura. Member Palton.

Thank you. I'm not sure the whole things of what we're allowed to ask, but is is there any possibility that, some of the settling on the, nonmonetary items being requested could happen?

Corporation counsel.

That would be a question that could only be answered in executive session as it would implicate the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities of the county.

Okay. Another question. So you cannot meet with the family?

Corporation counsel.

I believe the family did meet in our office once and had a discussion and a presentation with us.

Do you know the date?

It was on the day the judge in the circuit court dismissed this lawsuit with prejudice against the county.

Oh, so there's no pending lawsuit right now?

As to the county, the lawsuit has been dismissed with prejudice. The county has no liability as to that claim. The only claim left is the claim that's being brought against Captain Martin.

Is there a timeline for him?

Trial is scheduled for one second. Let me look. 06/07/2027.

If, Kathy Martin retires or separates before then, we're still gonna be with him? I mean, stand next to him.

The county has an obligation to provide Captain Martin with a defense. And that is why Ms. Alento Snead is representing Captain Martin.

And that's regardless of his employment status with the county? Yes. And, do we know a range of what he's on the hook for?

As far as I can tell, based on statements by the plaintiff's attorney, They do not want money from Captain Martin. They believe that if they get a judgment against Captain Martin, the county will have to pay for it.

Okay. But what is the dollar amount?

It's I think you're going to have to go into executive session because that concerns the liabilities of the county and its confidential information.

Thank you.

Thank you, Member Paul Ting.

So

members, we can finish this round of questioning. And if there's a desire to go into executive session, we can take up that motion after, we complete this round. Okay? And if you're on the fence as to whether or not it's a question for opener, executive, my recommendation would be to ask and corporation counsel or special counsel can tell us whether or not they can answer it on the floor at this time. Okay. Next up, Member Johnson.

Thank you. I have no questions to open centers session at

this time. Thank you, member Johnson. Is member Rollins Fernandez back? Nope. So, Cook? I don't have any current questions. Thank you, that's that's

case.

Member Senetti?

Thank you, Chair. My apologies. The neighbors are working on in their garage. Can the Corporate Counsel repeat the verdict

Board the

Directors

recommendation? Of The judge's decision was the lawsuit against the county is dismissed with prejudice. The county is not responsible. The exclusive remedy for an employee is to bring a workers' compensation claim under the Hawaii Workers' Compensation Act, not to bring a circuit court action. First

concludes our first round of question. Would anybody like to, make a motion to go into executive session? Okay. I see a motion by member Sugimura. I'll take the second from member Cook. Let me find my notes related to executive session.

Roll call, please.

Oh, roll call. Okay. Okay. So the chair wants to take a motion to convene an executive meeting in accordance with

Do you wanna take the vote before you read the rules just in case there's not enough votes to go into executive session? Then you don't have to waste your time reading the rules.

Okay. Okay. I'm being advised I need to read the beginning portion before we take the motion before we take the vote. So the we would convene executive an executive meeting in accordance with section ninety two five a four Hawaii Revise Statutes to consult with legal counsel on questions and issues pertaining to the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities of the county, council, and the committee, and section ninety two five a eight Hawaii Revise Statutes to deliberate or make a decision upon a matter requiring the consideration of information that must be kept confidential person pursuant to a state or federal law or a court order. Okay.

I have a motion made by member Sugimura, seconded by member Cook to enter into executive session for resolution. It's item grade five six. Any further discussion? Seeing none, we'll ask for roll call.

Proceeding with roll call, council member Cook? Aye. Councilmember Johnson?

Yes.

Council Chair Lee? Aye. Councilmember Paltin? No. Councilmember Rollins Fernandez? Excused. Excused. Councilmember Senensi? No. Councilmember Sugimura? Aye. Committee Vice Chair O'Hoo Hodgins? Aye. Lot

I I

So, people session. Think That's all council members in attendance, myself, committee chair, Conor Batunga, vice chair, Nohilani Uhajans, council member Tom Cook, council member Gabe Johnson, council member Alice Lee, council member Tamara Palton, council member Shane Senensi, council member Yuki Sugimura. Office of the council services staff, Peter Hananal, legislative attorney, and Maria Leon, committee secretary. Corporation counsel, can I state can I ask you to state who from the department of corporation counsel or the of the Thank you, chair? Thomas Colby.

I will be the other attorney sitting in and advising from a counseling drafting perspective. Also present will be John Gors if there are any legal questions related to the lawsuit against the county, and our special counsel, Ms. Alento Snead, will be present to answer questions related

to Scott Martin's defense. Thank you. Deputy corporation counsel, Can I ask whether or not special counsel is entitled to remain in executive session since she's technically representing, Captain Martin rather than the county?

I think she needs to be present here. I think you need to hear from the legal representatives who are handling the litigation and trial, which is scheduled for July 2027 or June. So I I think she needs to be here. I anticipate that the majority of questions will really be related to the remaining claims, which are against Captain Martin, who is we have a duty to defend, which means that you guys as the people who authorize special counsel would need to hear directly from her about the status of that and anticipated costs moving forward. Okay. Thank you.

Peter, is there anything else I'm supposed to ask before we move on to executive session?

Not that I can think of but I would request a recess. Okay.

So at this time chair would like to call for a five minute recess to 03:12 p. M. We will reconvene an executive meeting. To to and going able And director has informed me that we cannot do bring special counsel into executive session since she does not represent, the counsel. The executive session is for us to be able to confer with our attorneys.

And since she stated on the record that she does not represent this body or the county at large, we cannot bring her in with us. K? So we might have a very short executive session depending on how much of the answers we're able to get from the council. K. That being the case, I will take a two minute recess now, and we will reconvene in executive session. This meeting of the government relations ethics and transparency committee is now in recess.

With its attorney, county's powers, duties, privileges, immunities and liabilities, and also sought legal advice and questions from its attorney on issues related to the matter. Thank you, chair.

Thank you. Members, is there any further discussion before the chair's recommendation? Seeing none, this item was posted for no legislative action. So if there very we're with team. Team.

McCorsten Miller Mukai McKinnon LLP as special counsel in Todd p Lyman et al v County of Maui et al civil case two c c v dash 25Dash0003780 and in any future litigations challenging ordinance five nine zero nine twenty twenty five. Resolution 26 dash fifteen's purpose is to authorize the employment of, of course, Dan Miller McKay, McKinnon, LLP as special counsel to assist and represent as co counsel the County of Maui Department of Planning and Kate Blistone in her official capacity or her successor as director of planning. With the class action complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief in Todd p Lyman et al v County of Maui et al civil two c c v dash 25 dash zero zero zero three seven eight zero and in any future litigations challenging ordinance fifty nine zero nine twenty twenty five for a total compensation not to exceed $250,000 May I ask that you please introduce yourself, Corporation Counsel and Proposal Special counsel.

Thank you, chair. I'm Kristen Tarnstrom, deputy corporation counsel. I'm here with Katherine Hall. She's my co lead on these litigations. She's also a deputy corporation counsel. We do have online, David Hankin of, sorry, of, McCorrison, Miller McCrae, and McKinnon.

Thank you. Members, if there are no objections, I will be designating these individuals road. Point. Point. And and Special Counsel.

Thank you, Chair. And again, I apologize for getting David's name wrong. It is David Minken, not David Hinken. I often get them confused for no good reason. As this council is aware, on 12/15/2025, the body passed, bill nine, ordinance five nine zero nine. And, on 12/24/2025, we received service of, first complaint in the matter, and that is a class action complaint. There are currently only five individuals at that time. Sorry. There were five individuals who were named as plaintiffs, and that is Todd Linham versus the County of Maui. That is filed in state court and is before judge Trujer.

On 01/22/2026, we were served with a second action, and that, is approximately 45 owners within Hanapali Royal that initiated a case, challenging bill nine. And that is also in state court, but it is before judge Hammond. The actions made very similar challenges to the ordinance. They argued that bill nine was unlawful under 46 HRS 46 dash four, that it affected a regulatory taking, that it is a violation of due process and, equitable sorry, equal protection. And they also made, zoning estoppel claims in those complaints and a violation of the contracts clause.

Ultimately, intention is to keep the work related to this litigation in house as much as possible. That's why I have Catherine Hall and I are co leads on this matter, And we've already successfully prosecuted a motion to dismiss on several of the claims that were brought in at least the first the Linum lawsuit. But since we don't know what to expect in this case and there is a class action pending, we wanted to employ, David Minken's firm, as they have an expertise in class action cases. And, we don't know what shape these litigations will take, as I noted. So, we have requested special counsel be identified as co counsel in this case because it is our intention for, Kathy and I to take on these cases, for the most part as lead counsel.

But Mr. Minkin will be, I don't want to say backup, but he'll be there to assist us should, the cases become, more numerous and needing more management.

This is David Minken. I've met most of you previously. One of the people that used to work with me after thirteen years has left and gone over to a small plaintiff's firm. That's Jordan Inafuku. But I have real as I've indicated, I have really brilliant young lawyers with me, such as mister Inafuku and Michael Miyasato and Sabrina Govea.

I have handled class actions both as plaintiff's counsel as as well as defense counsel. I also have handled planning issues and these types of things. I defended the county of Kauai when they did the pesticide ordinance. I also defended the county of Kauai and got dismissed lawsuits in federal court when they had the landslides towards Hanalei, and they restricted people And then in law school, actually liked real property land use matters. I spent eleven and a half years as the chick as on the zoning board of appeals in Honolulu, a chair for nine and a half years, and have done cases all the way up to the Supreme Court involving government regulations, laws, and everything else.

In this particular these cases, I've already provided and spoke with corporation deputy corporation counsels on the pleadings that they've done, and we'll just sit in the weeds until asked to do something.

Any other remarks from the administration at this time?

No, chair. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. So for the public's information, I plan to recommend the deferral on this item today. Following the recent Kona low storms, members of our community were impacted in ways that may inhibit their ability to traverse to the county building or join this meeting online. To promote transparency that will allow the public to observe the meeting or provide testimony before we consider action on this item, my plan is to bring this back up at a later point. That being said, I will now receive testimony for grade eleven twenty seven. Staff, is there anybody wishing to testify on this item?

Sure. Can we clarify with the, lawyer folks that this is not time sensitive?

Corporation counsel.

Thank you, chair. Thank you, Member Palton for the question. That's a hard question to answer. We had hoped to line up Mr. Minken's firm to assist us as soon as possible on the case when we submitted this in January. There is presently a bit of a lull in activity in the litigations. That could always change. So at present, there isn't a desperate need to line it up, but we'd hope to do it as soon as possible.

And you understand that we're going into budget, so we're not gonna be taking this up for another at least couple months.

Yes. And

the Doctor. Councilperson David Minken, I will continue to support the corporation counsel as necessary even if this isn't passed at this point in time. I am grateful for my fifty one years in Hawaii. I am grateful for the University of Hawaii School of Public Health, which no longer exists. I am grateful for the University of Hawaii Law School, which I am a graduate of, and I will continue to help. And I feel very, very honored to have been a prosecutor, victim advocate, and now assisting counties throughout the state. So I will continue to assist them. Whenever it comes up, it comes up.

Thank you for that clarification and condolences on the loss of mister Inafuku from your firm.

I am feeling it very hard.

You. You, Garrett. You please call up the first testifier?

Yes, Chair. The first individual signed up to testify is Sam Small, to be followed by Christopher Salem.

Mr. Small, you have three minutes.

Chair, after reviewing those in the meeting, I don't believe Sam Small is still in the meeting, but I do see Christopher Salem. We could move to him for now.

Yep. Mr. Salem, you have three minutes. Staff will come back to Mr. Small afterwards. Or at the end of all testimony.

Thank you committee chair. I appreciate it very much. I'm not speaking today necessarily on bill nine. I really don't have a position on that. However, I do think there's a nexus between what just occurred a few hours ago and what we're embarking on right here today.

In this process, all of these processes where we employ outside counsel, what we're seeing today is an opportunity to make change. McCorston firm is, first of all, is an excellent law firm. I have no position on nine, but I do have a position on the McCorston firm, that being what I just said. The issue at hand is, is that I believe there should always be upfront disclosures. As to, for example, in this case, what prior lawsuits and or actions the firm has been involved with.

This would apply to all firms. But specifically here today, the McCorstadt firm was my law firm. My law firm as it relates to the issues with the ones we're still dealing with, they also were the law firm for the Walla Walla homeowners and successfully forced that developer Peter Martin to come back on those millions of dollars of mitigations, many of which were fire mitigations that are not done. McHorstin firm Randy Schmidt was was fantastic in that pursuit. Pursuit.

The McCourson firm also represented Anui Nui housing group, which is a group that I personally formed, bringing in a nationwide affordable housing consultant and expert, and we settled the Paloma Drive litigation. We settled that, not corp counsel. And we brought the number down from 22 to probably $1,213,000,000 dollars by exposing the engineer's role in that. That was a year and a half. My close friend Jay, the attorney developer, he personally spent I'm not going to disclose how much with the McCorson firm or how much I spent with that firm.

But I just think procedurally, just in case there is any potential conflicts Not that I'm saying there is with mccorson you can hear my support of them. But the bottom line is they were our alarm. And I would love to read to you a letter that was referencing what councilmember hodgins said earlier about when people are making accusation, but it's pretty blistering from their firm regarding one of the former public works directors where he specifically said what his actions were illegal and done with a clear intent to benefit a client of the Munich Hill firm. And I could present that letter from the McHorstin law firm taking a position on illegal conduct. So it's very important that when these attorneys come to the floor that they put out there where they've been involved in actions in the county of Maui just so people may know there's conflict.

But I don't think in I don't think I'll finish. I certainly don't believe in this firm's case that there's conflicts related to bill nine, but I'm not one to speak to that. But I can speak to my experience with them as a paying client. So thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

Thank you. Members, any questions for the testifier? No. You, Charlie. I reckon Seth, is there anybody else wishing to testify?

Chair, there's no one else on the list, apart from Sam Small, but I don't see him in the meeting. Okay.

Can you do a last countdown, please?

Yes, Chair. If anybody is in the chamber and would like to testify, please let staff know. Or on Microsoft Teams, please raise your hand. This is final call. Three, two, one. Chair, it appears that nobody wishes to testify.

Thank you. Members, seeing as there are no more individuals wishing to testify without objection, I will now close oral testimony on this item. Thank you. As a reminder, written testimony will continue to be accepted. Members, it is 427. Recognize that chair Lee had to leave for a prior commitment. Is there anybody else who has a hard stop? K. So what is the pleasure of this body? I initially was thinking that we weren't gonna spend that much time in executive session for the second item and that there'd be plenty of time for this one.

But now we're a little tight. So my initial plan was to do a single round of questions and then see if there was an appetite to go into executive session. Since we are planning to defer and take this item up again, we may not need to do that. Would the members like to do a single round of two minutes each? And then we can have the discussion as to whether or not we would wanna go into executive.

Is that is that agreeable to everybody? Yep. So seeing no objections, I think we'll go that route. I'll start on the opposite side of where I had normally been going, and first call on member Sanente. You have two minutes.

No questions, chair. Thank you. Efficient. I like it. Alright. Member, Uhu Hajins.

Thank you, chair. I have a lot of questions, but probably best saved for executive session. So I'm happy to save them for when this item returns. For now, I don't have any questions for open session. Thank you.

Thank you, Member O'Hodgins. Member Cook? Echo my colleague. I don't really have I

have questions, but not that I And I have no problem with deferring it so that we could have a comprehensive conversation about it in the future.

Yep. Thank you. Member Rollins Fernandez is excused. Member Johnson.

No questions at this time, chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Member Johnson. Member Palton.

Thank you. I'd like to thank Mr. Minkin for the things that he said earlier. My question is how will you let us know when we need to take action because we're gonna be, like, you know, in the budget, and we don't really do stuff. I was hoping to go into the South Mide community plan after that and get, like, you know, time as well.

So how would you how would you communicate to us that the the issue is becoming urgent and we need to take action. And then is it that we drop everything during budget or we drop everything, during South Maui community plan and take this up? Because I'm not sure what, what testifiers were waiting for because it still would need first reading at, a full council or just one reading as a resolution. I don't know if it takes two readings. So I'm not really sure what we're waiting for here.

Ms. Farnstrom.

Oh, thank you, member Palton, for the question. It sounds like Mr. Was willing to work with us pending the passage of this resolution, because we cannot pay any bills until this resolution is passed. But, if there were some emergency where we needed to communicate with you, our office could consult, great committee staff as well as the chair and and, inform you that we we believe something immediate needs to happen, more quickly. But but, yeah, you guys have a busy schedule.

Of deferring this because, like, we do know we have a packed schedule. I'm not sure what any testifier would say that would make it be, like, we don't need to hire special counsel, you know, or, like, anybody very important point.

Fernandez.

Yes, thank you. So how many lawsuits have we had or have?

Thank you, Member, for the question. We have two active lawsuits now, the two I mentioned, and that's all that we're aware of now.

And have you done any work with one, the other lawsuit?

Yes. We successfully won a motion to dismiss two of the claims and one of the plaintiffs in the first lawsuit, the Linum lawsuit. The second lawsuit, they have sought to amend their complaint and, have been granted the authority to amend their complaint, but they have not filed the amended complaint yet.

Okay. Okay, I'll wait. I have questions, but I'll wait for exec session.

Thank you. Member Rollins Fernandez, this opportunity to ask questions of corporation counsel and proposed special counsel in open session. You have two minutes.

Hello, chair. Mahalo, chair. And before my time starts for the sunshine law disclaimer, am in, my vehicle with my husband, McKenna Fernandez. Okay. So my question for you, Chair, is, when would you plan to take this up again?

And when you take it up again, would that be the time that we would take go into executive session? And then my, I guess the clarification on this or for I guess this for you too. The question with this is, do we give authorization to court counsel to hire special counsel or not? So if the question that you would like to, have further discussion, and provide more transparency to is just the status of litigation and, you know, where everything is at. That can be done as a different item or, you know, as a seven b or something?

You, member Rollins, for the answer So for the My intent was to bring this item back up after budget. If, you know, corporation counsel had reached out during budget and they needed something sooner, then we could discuss with them. When I had committee staff reach out this morning about deferral, given my, discomfort with taking action without confidence that the public would be able to fully weigh in. I didn't get the sense that it was urgent and that they seemed okay with with that plan. So I didn't think this was time sensitive when I made the, you know, announcement at the beginning of this meeting.

You know, the the options on the table were to either cancel the item from the agenda or to, you know, hear testimony, take around the questions, and then defer. I went with the latter since we did have them come all the way here, and that's kinda how we ended up where we're at. Regarding your question on the seven b, I think that would be taken up as a separate item, not heard under this or maybe, I don't know, I would refer staff. But, since the resolution we have before us is to hire co counsel special counsel as co counsel, I don't know if I would necessarily bring up a status update under this item. I would probably seek a different different legislative vehicle to hear a status update.

Okay, Malha, for the responses. I did hit the timer, but just to, you know, like, finish this this discussion, is it you feel that there would be public testimony that would. Provide information to counsel for us to consider not Mister Minken's law firm for special counsel as co counsel is is that the issue.

It wasn't necessarily on the item I just looked to the items on all of the agendas posted for week and noted that this would be the only one in which this body would take action. And hearing from my constituents, you know, how some of them are still dealing with the after effects, I didn't wanna be the only guy taking action. I figured the happy compromise would be that we would hear public testimony, answer or ask some questions now, defer, and then come back. I also didn't get the sense that this was time urgent when I had made the decision. And so I guess that's that's where my head was at when I I made the call earlier.

I just didn't wanna be taking action.

Point of clarity. I

just I, my position is similar to member Bolton. I don't I don't see, I prefer to take action, I hear Member Palton with a point of information.

Member Palton.

I have never seen this on a council agenda. Was it direct referred? Because direct referred implies that it's time sensitive. Is that not how we're doing it? Otherwise, it would have been placed on a council agenda and then referred to this committee and then so on and so forth. But if we if this was direct referred to you, why are we skipping steps then?

That's a good question. Okay. So staff, can I confirm that it was direct referred to the committee? So the answer from staff is yes, it was direct referred. I personally did not know that that was why. I just thought direct referral was possible because we had an item in the committee list of legislation that allowed for it and thought I was saving time at full council. I didn't realize that it had other implications beyond me trying to, save us time.

Because, I mean, if it's not time sensitive, it could have gone the regular route and been on the council agenda and then get referred here and giving people all kind of other opportunities to test then that.

To to And then At the time, I didn't know. I was just asked if I would prefer to have this direct referred and said yes to save time at full council. But I am now aware of the implications that come with it and might have more discussion with staff in the future.

Thank you.

I guess I was hoping not to spend so much time on process here and more, time dedicated to corporation counsel and the, proposed special counsel or co counsel. Does anybody have any other questions that they would like to ask of them at this time? I know we are a little bit past when we normally would would adjourn, but we do have them here, and I wanna be respectful of their time. Member Palton.

Thank you. I think this firm did a great job for us after the fire, with mister Inofuku. Sorry. Lost him again. My question, I guess, is for miss Tarnstrom. What is it that makes you folks have chosen him? Because it's a little bit different than a fire situation, but he mister Menken did say that, you know, he has worked with county a lot. What was the determining factor for you folks? If you folks were the ones to choose this firm, what was the standout reason? Because I'm not a lawyer.

Thank you, Member Paulson, the question. We went through our procurement process. We have to go through HRS103D process in hiring a special counsel or outside counsel for any matter. There was

a committee

formed of myself, Catherine Hall, and Thomas Colby, based on his experience in previous class actions and the fire. We looked at our, our file and I I won't go into discussions as to the the basis for our decision as it is attorney worked product privilege. But, mister Lincoln's firm, was our top choice.

Oh, I like to hear that. So we didn't get any, like, second string or anything. We we got the top choice, and he's willing to wait for us. Thank you so much. Again, sorry for your loss of mister Inafuku, but I'm pleased to hear that you have other bright young minds working with you, and I can't wait to meet him. Or is it is it you, miss Minkin, that is gonna be the main dude?

I I am the talking head, but I have a brain trust. And the brain trust has been for young associates who have been with us from law school days to being associates. And like mister Inafuku, he came here after his first year of law school. After his second year, became an associate, became a partner in six years, was my partner for a number of years. I I am still working with him on some cases, but he is now off with, Lapa and Otake and wanting to do more plaintiff's type work.

Just and part of it is that he believes, and I don't think it's true from my perspective of knowing him for thirteen years, he thinks with two young children, a second grader and a kindergartner, as well as his volleyball with Spike and Serve and Iolani School that he will have more time, but his DNA is such that I don't think he'll have more time.

Thank you. I have no desire to be a lawyer whatsoever, but if I did, I might consider, working with you, but no desire. Sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Members, noting the time, is there any appetite to go into executive session now, or would you prefer to adjourn and then, whenever we bring this back up? Okay. Alright. So let me find my place in the notes. K. If there are no objections, I will now defer this item for the reasons stated earlier. I think I heard objections. So would you guys prefer a roll call? I think staff I have concerns because I started off the meeting and then started off this item by saying what I would prefer to do. So if there's discussions to the contrary.

Roll call, please.

Is it just the roll call?

Oh, chair? Yes.

The member Rollins Fernandez.

I'm now in a public place, but, for this one. If your question is a procedural one, you know, you're you're just the chair. You're just facilitating. It's still the will of the body decision. So just because you committed to something at the beginning of the meeting doesn't mean you have to follow that. You know, if you would like to hear the concerns of your committee members and move forward with the resolution, you can.

Good to know. Thank you, member Rollins Fernandez. Okay. So that being the case, I would like to, entertain a motion to defer this item. And then staff, if we do get the motion and second, I'd ask for a roll call. So move from member Cook, seconded by member Sugimura. Staff or I guess, any discussion on the matter? Seeing none, staff, can you please do a roll call? Okay. Oh, I apologize. Member Rollins Fernandez.

My apologies. I'll be voting you on this. Bye.

Thank you. I'm Morales Fernandez. Staff.

Chair proceeding with roll call vote. Councilmember Cook?

To defer. Yes.

Consulor Johnson? No. Consul Chair Lee?

Excused.

Consulor Palton?

No.

Councilmember Ron Fernandez? No. Councilmember Senensi? No. Councilmember Sugimura? Yes. Yes. Committee Vice Chair O'Hoo Hajins? Aye. Committee Chair Batanggan? Aye. Chair, that's four ayes, four nos, one excused. Motion fails. Okay.

All right. That being the case, would anybody like to offer a motion to adopt the recommendation? I guess we need a motion on the floor for discussion. So I was either gonna pick adopt or reject and just went with that's I I good question. Make that we then their to And then to do approve of that.

The resolution, to disapprove of the resolution. We could also lose quorum. So if we move to approve and end up deadlocked, if we move to disapprove and end up deadlocked, then I guess the option before the body would be to adjourn, which effectively would be the same as deferral. If we lose quorum and have to end the meeting as a result of lack of quorum, it would effectively be the same as deferral. Just wanted that, on the record for you to consider before we take any further action. I see member Palton's hand up.

Oh, I guess I was checking if the motion and the second was still active.

I don't think so. So you're welcome to make one at this time.

I move to approve the resolution. I move to recommend recommend approval of the resolution to first reading. Is that the right word?

Second.

I think it's recommend adoption. But yes.

I move to recommend adoption of the resolution at first reading.

So we have a motion by member Palton, a second by member Rollins Fernandez. Discussion, member Palton.

Oh, thank you. You know, this, law firm has represented us well throughout the fire. We have a good working relationship as we heard from miss Tarnstrom. This is her first choice, and she would like to get working as soon as possible. I don't think we should monkey around, with our first choice. This isn't the only opportunity to testify. We didn't receive any written testimony last I checked. And, if people feel one way or another, they can always testify, at the full counsel. I see no reason to drag this out. It's a direct referral.

It's it's pretty standard. Like, we're gonna wanna hire a lawyer, I believe. And this is he they did good by us for the fire. You know? I don't think anyone could dispute that, and that's the end of my first discussion.

Thank you, member Palton.

Thank you.

I'll recognize member Rollins Fernandez as the second chair, and then I see member O'Hagins and member Johnson.

Hello, chair. So the comments member Palton, shared in her remarks, we heard the qualifications of, mister Minken and his law search, his experience with Kauai County lawsuits which are specific, to, this lawsuit. And we did receive one testimony, but it was in support of, choosing, mister Lincoln's law firm. There will be another opportunity for folks to I on this recommendation from the committee. And I think I understand and appreciate your concern about folks not being able to make it to the council chambers to get testimony in person or to even provide testimony on the I think if folks, you know, wanted to also they have later time, but also that if we wanted to schedule a specific I think other folks may be more interested in speaking to and not specific to the hiring of special counsel.

That's the resolution that we're taking, not the lawsuits.

Thank you, member Rollins Fernandez. Member U'uhajans followed by member Johnson.

Thank you, chair. If we're gonna vote right now, which I know we do have a motion on the floor, for me, it's gonna be no. I would like more time to discuss this issue. It's nothing against mister, Minken's firm. I know they do great work.

We've worked with them several times. I'm just we had this conversation in HOU committee, and I did ask specifically if you were gonna be requesting special counsel, and you said no. And so now we're here today, and there are a couple of things I would like to discuss before we discuss the hiring of special counsel, which is what I would prefer to do if we're gonna stay in committee. But if we're not gonna stay in committee, then we can vote and be done with it, and we can bring this up again if need be. But I would like to probably go into executive session, and continue to discuss all the things that we were at least told when we were voting on bill nine and how mister Minkin's firm, will fold into that.

I know you folks had that discussion with the committee. I would like to be I I would like us to know how that went. I know it's only 02:50 at this point, which I'm kinda curious how long it's going to last. I'm not I know you have your mic on, and I do wanna hear from you. I just don't are we are we in discussion? Can she answer my questions? Or are we are we am I it's just a one-sided conversation that we're gonna vote? Or what are we doing? Because I would like to hear from corp council. That would be my preference, but I'm not too sure everybody's time.

So we are in discussion, but I think this is a relevant question. So, corporation counsel.

Okay. Thank you, chair, and thank you, member Hodges, for the question. My recollection of that discussion was that it was a bit open ended. We didn't know what sort of shape the, litigations would take and what decisions would be made, going forward once they began in the HLU meetings. I noted that I believed I would be lead on those cases, and I am.

And Catherine thankfully joined our our firm, our office. She is amazing, well respected and, a force to be reckoned with. So, it is our intent again to keep as much as we possibly can, between us and in house. And, the purpose of hiring on Mr. Minken's firm is to assist if that becomes, unworkable, and the volume of cases become too high for us to manage just on our own.

Okay. Can I continue asking questions, or how how is this going to play out? Because I have a lot of questions, and, again, I thought we were gonna go into executive session, and I don't wanna put her or anybody else on the spot right now. Know it's 05:00, but I'm not comfortable.

Remember oh, James. I I'm okay with a friendly amendment. If you wanna amend it to go to executive session, I'm okay with it. It

can oh, I'm not the chair, but I don't know if everybody can stay. I'm not

too sure everybody's gonna ask. Quorum if we keep going. So I would ask for you to wrap up in a minute or two so that we can go to member Johnson, and then we can discuss going into executive session since we have a queue.

Okay. How long do you think, I guess, this $250,000 will last in an active lawsuit? Because I don't think it's quite active yet, right?

Thank you for the question. We have not utilized Mr. Minken, and we have not had need to up until this point. So I can't answer that with certainty as to how long it would last. It is a high number from our expectations. Should things continue as they are now, it would take a very, very long time to reach that number, but we of course don't know, what the future holds.

Okay. I'll let everybody ask their questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Member U'U Hajins. Member Johnson.

Thank you, Chair. So I know executive session is kind of a concern here. Can this is a big question for the lawyers in the room. Can, let's say, for example, councilmember Rouhan just want to have a meeting with you guys? Can she set up a meeting with you guys and you guys just talk? Or do we all have to do it in the executive session because of that? What let's listen to lawyers.

Deputy corporation counsel.

Thank you, chair, and thank you for the question. We'd be happy to meet, with any member individually and discuss the action.

Mister Minken as as well?

Mister Minken would not be able to attend because he would not be covered by attorney client privilege. He not be able to speak with you guys.

That's where I was going to this because maybe, I'm just trying to find maybe a middle ground for Councilman Rouhanjes to, oh yes, and maybe she could come and have a meeting with you guys after and talk about her concerns. You know, members, we're four four, that's where we're at. But I I'm trying to find a way that we could become five three and get this done and still have those questions that you guys have answered. I'm just trying to come up with solutions, guys. That's all I got. Thank you.

Thank you, member Johnson. I'm gonna recognize member Cook first since I know he has to leave, like, in a minute or two, and then, member Sugimura.

Thank you, Chair. My statements to Corp Counsel, the Chair, the body, my colleagues, I'm the representative from South Maui. I am shocked at the the cavalier like, we got this handled. There's gonna be a tsunami of litigation. People of I mean, I've just seen people cheering me on and encouraging the fact that we could get H3 and H4 passed and maybe there was a path forward.

Maybe the administration was sincere, hoping the administration was sincere, that people who are this list and engaged in this now three to five year timeframe are withholding litigation because they're hoping to be able to work with the county accepting what has been proposed during this process that there is a path forward forward. You're not losing your property rights. You're gonna have an opportunity to do this, opportunity to do that. What recently occurred with the planning commission going five-one against what the council's recommendation of eight-one, when the planning commit you know, it's just people that talk to me and reach out to me are scared. They don't have faith.

They're angry. They're frustrated. They don't want to litigate. People are approaching them to litigate. So I don't think this is gonna be a little deal that $250,000 is gonna be enough.

I think you two are gonna be just full time, nothing but this case, the way it's rolling. Also, think that we have public testimony on everything for my district to go like, oh, it's just for people not to be informed of what's occurring and potentially before budget and stuff, how money's potentially gonna be spent and it not it just be sort of open ending and I feel cavalier. So I'm not supportive. Okay. Go on go on executive.

I delayed my meeting if necessary. I told him I'll get there if I can, but, I'm not supportive. I wanna be supportive of the county. I wanna be supportive of you. I wanna be supportive of our local government.

I don't have much confidence in the way this path is going. I definitely think it's appropriate to wait until first reading and then bring this up, not having any public testimony. I mean, talk about doing committee work on the floor. That potentially is a lot. So anyway, thank you for my opportunity to share with my colleagues what I'm thinking. I know I didn't really ask you a question. I'm trying communicate, though, where I'm coming from, what my concerns are respectfully. Thank you.

Thank you, Member Cook. Member Sugimura.

Thank you. I'll be fast because I'm, if Member Cook has two goal, and I think we're way past where we want it to be. But I will tell you that going through, Tashna Kama had three full meetings of Bill nine and she also asked about having to hire a special counsel. There were a number of amendments that we tried to make onto Bill nine but court counsel said no, leave it as is. Then it's more defensible.

And we kept hearing that. And so we have this bill, exactly what you wanted, I think. We maybe changed the dates and made some adjustments to it. But we did it with your recommendation. And we did it thinking that you're going to handle this by yourself.

So I don't support hiring special counsel because you made us well, me, I cannot speak for the other council members, but you made me feel that by not doing the amendments, it is exactly going to be a defensible case in case we get sued. So it's almost insulting to member Kama, who's not here, who handled the three heavy, heavy committee meetings before she passed. And then to sit here and for us having to hear that we need to hire special counsel and we couldn't add the amendments because we wanted to have this defensible, you know, whatever we were told. And so we didn't. We followed what you wanted us to do.

You have the bill exactly like you wanted it and so therefore I cannot support having to hire special counsel. I would need more information.

Thank you, Member Sugimura. I do want to recognize that I see some council members with their hands up. I would like the chance to ask some questions before doing a second round of questions. So I guess for corporation counsel, the notes that I inherited from member common from the recollection of her staff is that you were confident that you would be able to represent the county for any future lawsuits. That sounds like that was not the case. Can I ask you to confirm?

I can tell you my recollection. Thank you for the question. But I can tell you my recollection. I can go check the minutes of those meetings. I remember getting that question, not being certain how to answer it because I couldn't tell you with any sort of certainty what would happen in the future. Apart from that, we would try to keep it in house as much as possible. I do believe that is what we are doing.

Part of the reason I didn't think this was very timely was because in my conversations with the mayor during my appointment process, he was adamant that no lawsuits would be ripe until the sunset dates kicked in. Has something changed where you now need additional help before the sunset date hits?

Thank you for the question. We can't control when other people decide to file. They can decide to file whenever they like. We did just prevail in a court agreeing with us that the takings claim is not right. So, we successfully, had that dismissed. So I I do believe that supports what the mayor held and what you heard from him.

Thank you. For mister Minken,

we're

right

do to

fact we're And able that. Do

Having not sat in those meetings or that or read the minutes, I don't know. I mean, I have been tasked from the Big Island to Honolulu Board of Water Supply to Kauai to defend legislation that has come out from the various councils and signed by the mayor, and sometimes even over a mayor's veto. Right? I I go into it, and I believe that everyone should have an successful advocate on their on their behalf. When I was asked to, you know, what I consider this particular matter, I all I had was media accounts.

I can tell you that because of my desire to give back, my rate is half my normal rate. That's what I'm doing here. And when when I forget which council person asked, right, the 250,000. If I alone was working on it, that would be six hundred and twenty five hours. Six hundred and twenty five hours, and that's that's not gonna happen, right?

I mean, I delegate out if necessary, and if I need to put, you know, super smart, really good associate to work with corp counsel, I don't need to sit it. I don't need to sit in that. I mean, that's the situation that's occurred with the fires. Right? Jordan Inufuku, we had a team of people in the beginning, and then we basically delegated it between Jordan Innofuku and myself so that the carrier has never grumbled with us about how we're building the case.

That's the type of thing that I do because I look at every single bill. If I believe somebody has put has spent way too much time, I'll knock it down. So I'm being tasked with basically legislation is passed. I believe that it's my job as an advocate to ensure that that legislation stands, and that's what I that's what I'm gonna do, sir.

Thank you. I guess I was asking the question because I wanted to ensure philosophic alignment between, corp counsel and co counsel.

Tom Colby, corporate deputy corporation counsel. I I think we're getting into dangerous territory here where we're talking about the strengths or weaknesses of a ripeness argument or or other things. And what's agenda is today is the consideration of special counsel as co counsel to kind of help us through a process that is perhaps going to take a long time, perhaps not. I'm a little uneasy about us asking opinions in terms of whether or not they align with us from a legal perspective because I think that's the type of thing that would need to be discussed in executive session because it would go to the strengths and weaknesses of our liabilities.

Thank you, corporation counsel. So that concludes my questions. I see some other hands on a desire for a second round of discussion. If we are going to take a vote on this matter today, is there any desire to go into special executive session to ask those before we do our second round of questioning? I see some no I see some yes. Okay. I guess yeah. But if that's the will of the body, then that's the will of the body. Yes. Member Rollins Fernandez.

Mahalo, chair. I agree with mister Colby, that the council members need to rein it in. That was as he won't repeat it. I think you can just take a poll. Because, like, basically, if it's going to be a four four, then that should end it now and then we can just take it up in executive session in another meeting.

That's my position. My colleagues did not make their positions as clear as member Polson and I did in the earlier round. And now that they have and explained their position, which would be to not pass it, to not adopt, recommend adopting it today, then I don't really see the point in going into a session now. We may as well just wait until we take it up again there. Because what I heard from member Cook and member Siguimura is they want to talk about the content of it and not the hiring of special counsel.

I heard member U Hajin share her concerns about hiring special counsel at all, and that's more relevant to the agenda item. But going into the Planning Commission's recommendation, that's way off topic. Is not appropriate for this discussion of hiring special counsel. And member Sugemara didn't even vote for the amendments to keep the bill clean, so I don't even know what she's talking about.

She didn't take the recommendation. She voted against Objections.

Yeah. Member Wallace Fernandez?

Yeah. Exactly. It's not appropriate, and it wasn't appropriate You're not appropriate. Objection. You're not appropriate.

Alright. Members, can we maintain the quorum in the chamber? I appreciate the, the passion, and I appreciate the guidance from member Rollins Fernandez. You know, as a new member of this body, I am still learning how to exercise the power of the chair. And I appreciate the patience that you guys have afforded me in that.

So can I ask for a two minute recess to confer with staff? And then, yeah. I'd like to ask for for a recess to confer with staff before figuring out how to navigate the rest of this meeting. I do wanna recognize that I've seen hands up for quite a while. Oh, I guess, member

I took Johnson. I'm sorry. I I I totally for the recess, but I have to leave soon. I just wanna let you know I the crops are really ruining this rain, and I I've got I just arrived on Lanai because of this the storm. So I got work to do before sunset, so I have to leave.

Thank you, member Johnson. Alright. That being the case, I'll take two minutes to reconvene. We're make

to

seventeenth. Can the government relations, ethics, and transparency committee meeting please come back to order? Alright. Members, we have a motion on the floor, which we need to dispense of before we can do anything else. Member Palton, since you were the maker of the motion, would you like to withdraw your motion, or would you like me to call for the question? And if you do choose to call for the question, then I will recognize the hands that have been raised before we actually take, take the vote. I just wanna know how you would like to proceed as the person who offered the motion.

I don't really care. I mean, I I would like to get this done with because I know the freaking pile of work we got coming up, and it's only gonna get worse. I mean, the way I feel like is we're gonna be in for a lot of long nights. This is my only paying job job I have, and I'm willing to do the work now. But whatever whatever you wanna do Okay.

I mean That being the case

it's gonna pile up.

Okay. So that being the case, I will, offer those who wanted to have more discussion the opportunity to ask their questions. I just ask that you be respectful of each other's time. Actually, members, can you set a timer for two minutes in this round? I'll start with member Johnson since I saw his hand first and then member Sanenzi since I saw his second.

Aaron, in the interest of time, I'm ready to go. My point was I have to leave. Oh. My hand

was Thank you. Alright. Member Senenzi.

I I'm not sure when you're gonna call this up again since we are going into the budget session. So, I'm I'm for supporting

we're to a

child asking me a sense question.

Okay. My bad. Alright. That being the case, staff, can you do please do a roll call? The motion on the floor is to recommend adoption.

Yes, sir. Proceeding with roll call. Councilmember Cook? No. Councilmember Johnson?

Yes.

Council Chair Lee?

Excused.

Councilmember Poulton? Aye. Consulmator Ron Fernandez?

Aye.

Consulmator Senensi? Aye. Consulmator Sugimura? No. Committee Vice Chair O'Hoo Hodgins? No. Committee chair, Batanggan? No. Chair, that's four ayes, four nos, one excused. Motion fails. Yep.

Alright, members. So we've taken a vote to defer. We've taken a vote to, recommend adoption. Both have failed. At this point, I could just adjourn, or we could, without objection, defer the item. Do you have a preference?

Or you could lose quorum.

We could lose we could also just lose quorum, those who need to leave can just leave. It would have the same effect of us. Okay. Sounds like that is the pleasure of the body. Oh oh, Gabe left.

Gabe went.

Okay.

Went to his farm.

So I'm gonna try this one more time. If there are no objections, I will now defer this item. We will alright. Seeing none, that okay. So that brings us to the end of our agenda. This concludes the government relations ethics, and transparency committee meeting. Thank you very much, members. The time is now 05:25. The great committee meeting is adjourned.