Printable version (copy and paste into browser):

  http://www.honolulu.gov/nco/com/06/NC_2006_10rMin.PDF

NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION

CITY & COUNTY OF HONOLULU

***REVISED***

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 23, 2006

HONOLULU HALE, COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM,

2^ND FLOOR, 530 SOUTH KING STREET

CALL TO ORDER:  Chair Grant Tanimoto called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Tanimoto made a brief announcement regarding the sound system delay, apologized and asked everyone to speak up. 

Members Present:  Sheila Apisa, Clara Ching, Ed Gall, Robin Makapagal, Jeanette Nekota, Kalene Sakamoto, Grant Tanimoto, Sylvia Young.

Members Absent:  Bernard Kaahanui.

Guests:  Yuri Farrant, Michael Lilly, D. Keala Naluai, Ron Lockwood (Chair, McCully/Mo'ili'ili Neighborhood Board No. 8), Becky and Gayle Chestnut, L. Gary Bautista (Ewa Neighborhood Board No. 23); Paula Kurashige, Audrey Hidano and Al Canopin (Nu'uanu Neighborhood Board No. 12); Ray Gruntz (Wakiki Neighborhood Board No. 9), Mark Gilbert, Keith Griffin, Cruz Vina Jr. (Pearl City Neighborhood Board No. 21), Tom Heinrich, Tom Smyth (Downtown Neighborhood Board No. 13, Linda Wong (Diamond Head/Kapahulu/St. Louis Neighborhood Board No. 5), Cynthia Rezentes and Jo Jordan (Waianae Neighborhood Board No. 24), Jennifer Waihe'e (Corporation Counsel); Joan Manke (Executive Secretary), Ron Mobley (Aiea Neighborhood Board No. 20), Michelle Kidani, Cameron Heen, Nola Frank and Marie Richardson (Neighborhood Commission Office staff).

ROLL CALL OF COMMISSIONERS:  The following Commissioners answered the roll call – Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, and Young; eight of nine Commissioners were present.

FOR INFORMATION:

Executive Secretary's Report – Joan Manke reported the following updates:

• Staff Coverage – The NCO is under staffed by (1) NA. Meanwhile, the NCO is utilizing services of former NA's for board meeting coverages for on-call basis; utilizing overtime for some staff members who's been required to cover PIGroup meetings for the audit and the RNP meetings on Saturday's since July, as well as Commission Committee meetings. These are additional meetings to providing regular coverage at their neighborhood boards. 
• Kalihi-Palama Neighborhood Board Update – Since elections two years ago, the board has had trouble attaining a quorum. More recently, after loosing the tenth member and quorum, the Commission, was now able to step in and appoint another member, giving the Board the flexibility to fill the other vacancies. However, at the last board meeting, the Board still lacked a quorum due to illness and non-attendance of that member causing the Board the inability to fill the vacancies. Currently, the alternative provided in the plan calls for the suspension of the board, which Manke would rather not move forward with but instead consideration by the Commission to revisit the alternative and making it a part of the next meeting agenda.       

Questions and answers followed:

1. With only six months left to the board term, the possibility of a special election to fill the vacancies was questioned. However, with consideration to the cost, the special election alternative would run about $6,000 to $10,000.
2. The Kalihi-Palama's total membership is 19 and the appointment of Darryn Ng gave the board it's quorum of 10 with nine (9) vacancies currently.
3. Mobley realizes that the standard ruling says otherwise but he comments on the Commission's lack of power. There should be a special ruling allowing the Commission allow the remaining members to elect people to fill the vacancies. Waihe'e noted that the Plan is very specific of actions that the Commission can take and those actions could probably be subjected to challenge. Manke noted this is something being looked at as the Plan is being reviewed.
4. Nekota comments that the Charter states the powers and duties of the Commission are to assist areas of the City, in the formation and operation of neighborhoods and neighborhood boards upon request. And inasmuch as this being the case, it may fall under the Commission. Mobley suggested the request can be made by the chairperson themselves.

Sakamoto asked whether a motion is inline to request that Counsel Waihe'e help with looking into the request. Waihe'e already received that request and there's nothing in the Plan which authorizes the Commission to appoint members when the board has quorum to do so.  

Committee Reports:

Budget Committee – The following handouts were distributed for Sakamoto to highlight on:

·         Videogrpaher Agreement – listed eight points agreed upon by a contracted videographer including gavel to gavel coverage of monthly neighborhood board meetings and the responsibility for a safe setup to a final production submitted to Olelo for scheduled cablecast. Sakamoto read the amended June 2006 agreement aloud; contact the NCO if you wish a copy.

·         Neighborhood Board Treasurer's Report – amended by Kidani and Manke - the boards' treasurer's report will reflect an increase in the yearly budget beginning September 2006 statements. The funding increase would allow those boards to: videotape monthly board meetings (not to exceed 10 meetings per annual term) or to mail an annual four page newsletter (size 11" x 14" folded in half) to all residents in respective board areas. The change should be reported at the October board meetings.   

Questions, answers and comments followed:

1. Ching said, as part of the video agreement, a recording was to be provided as a library reference for the NCO; but information received from Kidani was that it would cost too much. Kidani explained that the NCO talked about putting that requirement in the agreement but only one vendor contracted to do several boards had the capability; other vendors expressed it would require additional hours of service and double in payment.

A brief discussion followed that videographer Makakilo.com could provide the service without difficulty and at no extra charge. Inasmuch as they do it as a business, other vendors do it as a community service. A comment raised from someone in the audience was it is easily duplicated and ridiculous to charge extra.

Chair Tanimoto gave a brief example of the increase: Waianae NB (who videotapes their meetings) had an increase of $326, as is the McCully-Mo'ili'ili NB (who mails out an annual newsletter) with an increase of $541 to their annual budgets.

Training Committee – Nekota reported:

·         Candidate applications for the 2007 - 2009 board terms will be put out in December/January.

·         The application deadline is January 16, 2007; thereafter, an informational meeting to give perspective candidates an overview of what is entailed with becoming a board member.  

·         Ballots will be printed in February 2007, mailed in March 2007 and results tabulated in April 2007.

·         Announcement of the election results for the 2007 – 2009 term in May. Thereafter, a tentative training meeting for the chair pro-tem on agenda setting, oath of office and an overview orientation meeting.

·         Beginning November 2006, a survey will be disseminated to board members at each meeting, collected by the NA's following each meeting, and the findings tabulated in early December. 

·         In order to assess the training needs, the survey will consist of basic questions: whether you are willing to attend training, rating a list of topics you might consider most important; a preference of training session locations (Honolulu or Kapolei), morning, noon or evening and preferred days (Monday thru Saturday); and a section for suggestions of topics/ideas of interest. A sample survey was circulated.

·         The next Training Committee meeting is scheduled for December 11, 6 p.m. in Kapolei.     

Questions, answers and comments followed:

1.       Wong questioned the NA's training for minute taking.

2.       Bautista asked whether the candidate information meeting is opened to the public.

3.       Recap of the timeline noted this will be part of an ongoing training and development effort.  

Permitted Interaction Group (PIGroup):  There were no objections to taking the agenda out of order to item C2 - Neighborhood Board System Audit.

PIGroup Neighborhood Board System Audit – Nekota reported:

• An area of concern raised in the audit was an issue of training for the neighborhood assistants, which Nekota will work on alongside with Manke on. A retreat was also discussed at a time to be arranged.
• There is a need to form a standing committee for Recruitment, Public Relations (PR) and Publicity.
• Starting in December, the Committee could put together a PR packet and get one of the newspapers to run a special interest series marking the 35^th anniversary of the Neighborhood Board System (NBS).
• This would be instrumental in the NCO's recruitment phase and the upcoming elections. It will also help in raising awareness and purpose of the NBS - as indicated in the City Charter; and clearly defining what it means in Section 14.101 - "to increase and ensure effective citizen participation in the decision of government."

Wong's comment regarded having the NA's trained to use their tape recorder for accuracy and not rely only on their notes. Tanimoto noted perhaps its something to be considered. Bautista's earlier inquiry was addressed.

PIGroup Neighborhood Plan Presentation of findings and recommendations – Tanimoto reported:

·         Thanks to everyone who participated in the RNP – PIGroup. The Plan is close to finishing and the group is looking to wrap-up by the next weekend or so (October 28 and November 4).

·         Acceptance of the plan for review by the full Commission, which he hopes to schedule tentatively on Tuesday, November 7. A second meeting of the full Commission will be scheduled to deliberate the findings and recommendations of the PIGroup. Hopefully, before the regular meeting on Monday, November 27.     

·         A general timeline being looked at: once the Commission accepts the plan for review from the PIGroup, the plan will be forwarded to Corporation Counsel for review and comment, thereafter, to the Mayor, and on to a series of public hearings (different locations on the island) sometime in January 2007.

·         A list of sections still needing to be worked on by the PIGroup was distributed.

FOR ACTION:

Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes of September 25, 2006 – Corrections to the minutes:

• Page 3, following the Questions section, first paragraph, line 5, delete and, insert or; should read "Chair or Vice Chair…"; 

• Page 3, item 4, last paragraph, second sentence, insert a period, "…the audit in Kapolei."; the rest of that sentence should be deleted.       

·         Page 4, under Public Concerns, item 2, 4^th line should read, "…afraid of SORT members."

Wong mentioned that Deputy Corp Counsel Waihe'e gave a response under Public Concerns that was not included in the minutes. The recollection was that the discussion came after the meeting was over. Wong insisted otherwise and wanted it reflected. In the interest of moving forward, Tanimoto will give Wong a copy of the memo from Corporation Counsel and OIP on her issue.

Apisa moved, Young seconded the approval of the meeting minutes as circulated. The motion carried by unanimous consent.  Aye:  Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Young.

The agenda resumed order.

Complaints Update – Manke reported in response to a concern raised at a previous meeting, the status is as follows:

• 13 cases were heard by the Commission back in 2004 – 2005.  
• Six (6) cases were closed and basically moot. The Commission was in communications with those complainants to make sure they were appropriately withdrawn.  
• Eight (8) cases are currently with Corporation Counsel for review and for pre-hearings.

• And without going into detail on each complaint, the NCO will continue to cleanup the back log. 

Questions and comments followed:

1. Keala Naluai questioned whether the (8) complaints reported were current and whether it was one of the eight complaints filed. Naluai's complaint was received by the NCO on October 18 and as part of the process, a letter was sent to the Kahalu'u Neighborhood Board No. 29 for response and a copy sent to Naluai. There is a 30 day response time and once the NCO receives a response, it will be shared with Naluai; and the eight complaints referred to dates back to 2003, 2004 and 2005.

Complaints for Action:  

Withdrawal of complaint – Patterson vs. Waianae NB #24 – Manke reported that the matter was taken up at a subsequent Waianae NB #24 meeting. The complainant received an apology and the matter was resolved. The complainant did call the NCO and asked that the complaint be withdrawn. The NCO is, therefore, in the process of closing out this complaint. 

Chair Tanimoto asked that Commissioners to refer to the packets distributed earlier with information relating to the complaints. He briefly commented on the three branches of government, which the Commissioners, the Executive Secretary and staff will be involved in administering tonight. 

Hearing of complaint – Lilly vs. Nuuanu NB #12 – Complainant Michael Lilly will give his testimony, present his opening statement of facts and be done; following him, witnesses Gayle Chestnut and Yuri Farrant will present testimony as well.  Paula Kurashige and Audrey Hidano are present and will be giving testimony on behalf of the Board.

Lilly's complaint involved a violation of the Hawaii Revised Statues and the Sunshine Law (Chapter 91), and the purpose to encourage citizen involvement. He said a tremendous outpouring of community members packed the May 2004 Nu'uanu Neighborhood Board meeting, where dozens signed up to give testimony on the agenda item, including the Institute for Human Happiness. They were surprised that then Chair, Joe Magaldi, announced that only one person would be allowed to speak for five minutes per side; and there was outpouring of resentment, heckling and uproar of people wanting to speak, thus, a breakdown of the ability for people to speak on an issue of great importance.

When the item came up for a vote, one or more members abstained from the vote due to conflicts with the Manoa NB #07 where members were sued for interfering with a private real estate transaction. Part of his complaint was that members have a duty to vote and to abstain because you're afraid of being sued lessens the Board's ability to function in an advisory capacity. Additionally, another issue was a request to place an item back on the agenda the following month. The parliamentarian wrongly stated, under Robert's Rules of Order it could not be put back on the agenda because it been tabled; and to say that it can never be brought back is just wrong as a matter or law. This not just affects the Nuuanu NB #12, there's a misunderstanding and a breakdown among neighborhood boards about citizen participations.

Paula Kurashige, current Vice Chair of the Nuuanu NB #12, thanked the Commission for the opportunity to give testimony on behalf of the Board. Being that this complaint was over two years ago, she suggests moving forward and clearing the Board from these complaints. Also, as a member since 1992 and a past chair, it was her decision to step forward and be available to answer any questions from the Commission. She reviewed the five complaints and past minutes, with the assistance of NA Matautia, and the minutes of April 2004, where a number of people spoke on the matter; including people from outside of Hawaii and non-residents of the community, who strongly supported the meditation center. The Board listened to every one that spoke at the April 2004 meeting, which went on for quite sometime. Because the discussions ran long at the April meeting, Chair Magaldi decided at the May meeting, to allow one speaker from each side to speak. At the June 15, 2004 meeting, the Board decided to deny complaints #2, #3 and #5 and accepted complaint #1 – for not having sufficient microphones/sound system and #4 – five of eleven members abstained on their free will and noted that she voted "no" in support of the residents in Pacific Heights because she felt the infrastructure of the mountain could not withstand the number of buses and people going up to Pacific Heights; the motion evidently failed; and complaint #5 – Kurashige understood could be tabled and under a certain law, members were not in favor to break that law.

The Board would like to see these matters resolved by not having to deal with something that happened back in May 21, 2004. Currently, the Board has a number of new members; and two or three of those who abstained their vote in May 2004, have already left the Board. And no offense to Mr. Lilly, because she could not say whether he was at the April 2004 meeting or not, and with that, her plea to the Commissioners, that NB #12 really tried being a part of the community and giving it full purpose and as a past chair for six years, NB#12 have continued to try and listen to the public. Kurashige was handed a complete list of exhibits.

Michael Lilly asked to submit the following exhibits to the Commission. He was not at the April meeting, but attended May/June meetings. The exhibits are as follows:  

• Exhibit 1 – is a copy of the sign-up sheet that included dozens of people who wanted to speak and which was the reason his name appearing on the log.    
• Exhibit 2 – the complaint he filed with the Office of Information Practices (OIP) and the subsequent opinion that summarizes what happened at that meeting.
• Exhibit 3 – a letter from witness Gayle Chestnut to OIP in support of Lilly's complaint with an attachment of the agenda item for the May 2004 meeting.
• Exhibit 4 – an article in the Star Bulletin stating that more than seventy Pacific Heights residents attended the meeting to protest the $8 million center at the top of the hillside; and describing then Chair Magaldi's action allowing only one speaker from either side to speak. Lilly makes a point that there were no two sides that evening, but that there were dozens to comment and state their positions. The minutes also incorrectly stated that Chestnut represented a coalition; Chestnut, Farrant and Lilly were all there as individuals and were denied the right to speak on the agenda item.
• Exhibit 8 – Hawaii Revised Statues 92-3, Sunshine Law, which basically affords all interested persons the opportunity to present oral testimony on any agenda items; and the provision of reasonable administration for oral testimony by establishing a ruling to limit each person to speak; and not limiting only one person from each side to speak.
• Exhibit 9 – training for neighborhood boards of what their duties and functions are and advising board members of their official capacity and scope of duty.

In conclusion, Lilly sees that this Commission oversees all the neighborhood boards and has a great opportunity to describe the purpose of the board and to facilitate community involvement.  

Gayle Chestnut read the letter he wrote (Exhibit 3) and stands by its accuracy to the best of his recollection then and now; and that the Nu'uanu minutes incorrectly stated that he was representing the Pacific Heights coalition. He noted there were as many reasons for opposing this lodging facility, and then he yielded the floor to Lilly. Chestnut stated there is no argument with what Kurashige said, but his argument remains with the inaccurate reflection that he represented the Pacific Heights coalition, when he was speaking as an individual representing himself. 

Chair Tanimoto asked any comments. Kurashige noted her absence from May's meeting, and is in agreement with Chestnut on his stated point. The issue is two years old and the Board would like to move forward.  She thanked the complainants for being present tonight and the Nu'uanu Board for their continued support of the community. Also, the other person who abstained is present tonight and might want to speak as well.

Hearing of complaint – Farrant vs. Nuuanu NB #12 – Complainant Yuri Farrant, Pacific Height resident, said he was denied the right to speak, a violation of the Sunshine Law, and that Chair Magaldi changed the agenda without getting board approval, a violation of Robert's Rule of Order. The Commission needs to recognize that the sensitive issue in Pacific Heights was attended by a mass of residents wanting their voices to be heard as stated in Section 14-101, and that the purpose of the neighborhood board and commission is to hear the voices of the public, which the chance to be heard was not given, thus showing the ineffectiveness of the board.

Kurashige had no questions but appreciated the comments. Chair Tanimoto cited Section 1-1.0 (f), the conclusion of the presentation and the Commission's determination whether sufficient evidence was provided. If so, the respondent could precede with her case.  If not, the Commission may go into Executive Session to make a determination whether or not to dismiss the complaint.

With that being said, Chair Tanimoto was opened to hear from the Commission members. Gall asked Lilly what he sees as a remedy for the various items. Lilly's reply was "education" – that the boards be advised of their obligations under the Sunshine Law, Robert's Rules of Oder, and their obligations to participate as quasi government officials to perform their duties. Understanding that the purpose of the board is only advisory, Lilly also understands that it is the one place where the community can actually participate in the government process of expressing their voices.  

Discussion followed: 1) Young asked to recuse herself from the voting; her conflict being a Nu'uanu board member. 2) Kurashige asked the following questions:  is it illegal to abstain on a vote? And if it is not allowed to abstain for a particular reason, what can the board member do? Or do they just get off the board? And how many meetings will it take to bring this matter to a close? 3) Mobley made a statement important to the issue that made it clear that there are procedures available if you get somebody from the board to apply them. The statement regarding board members not having the right to abstain is a violation of Robert's Rules; if they are forced to vote, as sometimes there is not enough information.  Secondly, if the chairperson rules on something, anyone on that particular board has the right to appeal the chair's decision, but Robert's Rule would support that decision if there was no appeal. And finally, spoke against the statement made that the parliamentarian wrongfully stated that the issue could not be put back on the agenda; but that anyone at that May/June meeting from the board could have asked that the matter be reconsidered.

More discussion followed: 1) Lilly said the reason one of the board members abstained was the fear of being sued as with the Manoa issue. 2) Audrey Hidano was one of the board member's who abstained. The minutes showed that she declared from day one she would be abstaining; in addition, knowing so little about the project, felt she would let the Department of Planning and Permitting go through its dual process. 3) Tanimoto inquired if the Board ever took a "no position" vote. Hidano said the church decided to keep it as a one person residency. Lilly said the church received their Conditional Use Permit, minor. 4) In a discussion with former the Executive Secretary Mr. Kama, Farrant said that Mr. Kama stated that abstaining for those reasons was inappropriate and had the people from the board had attended the training meetings on this subject, would've known that it was inappropriate.

Gall moved that the Commission go into Executive Session, Apisa seconded the motion. The motion carried by unanimous consent. Aye: Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Young.

The Commission moved into Executive Session at 8:43 p.m. and resumed at 9:08 p.m. with eight members.

Sakamoto moved in favor of the complainants for items #1 and #2.  Item #1 – is during the May meeting, the board denied the public to speak on the agenda item regarding the Conditional Use Permit minor for the Institute for Research and Meditation Center.  Item #2 – during the May meeting the board limited testimony on the agenda item to one spokesperson from each side for five minutes.  Nekota seconded the motion. The motion carried, 7-0-1. Aye: Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Recusal:  Young.

Gall moved to dismiss complaints #3 regarding the sound system, #4 regarding the abstention and #5 relating to the tabled item. Nekota seconds the motion. The motion carried, 7-0-1. Aye:  Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Recusal:  Young.

Makapagal moved that the Commission write a letter to the Nuuanu NB #12, strongly recommending training in Sunshine Law and Parliamentary Procedure; and copy that letter to all neighborhood boards. Nekota seconded the motion. The motion carried, 7-0-1. Aye: Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Recusal:  Young.

Apisa recommended and encourage all neighborhood boards and board members to reach out to the Executive Secretary and NCO on any question regarding parliamentary, litigation, etc. and she would seek an opinion from Corporation Counsel. Hopefully, this would reinforce that the Executive Secretary is there for assistance. Chair Tanimoto thanked everyone for coming this evening.

Election Alternative – Section 3-10.1 Optional Methods of Conducting Elections – Manke reported the next election is quickly approaching and the NCO is looking at exploring an on-line voting system possibility with Commercial Data Systems (CDS), who developed the system for Kids Voting USA.

Mark Wong, President and CEO of Commercial Date Systems gave a brief introduction of the 20 year old company in Hawaii.  CDS is the only top 250 technology company in the state dealing with the internet. This technology was developed at the request of Hawaiian Electric Industries in 2000 to revamp the system they were using. As the internet was becoming widespread they decided to make it a web browser based system which is now six years old.  It was selected by Kids Voting USA and is one of the most mature electronic voting systems.

CDS realizes the neighborhood board elections needs are different and will design the system to handle specific needs. CDS will be working with the City's information technology staff to get the election information. It will be put on a secure site at CDS to allow people to vote from anywhere online; and for those who don't, CDS will handle paper ballots in the normal fashion. The advantage of an online system is that the turnaround for tabulating the votes is seconds after closing the election with the ability to give running totals of the votes. Other major advantages of having an online system is the ability to provide links for all the different candidates, resulting in a more educated and aware voter base; decrease the cost of printing paper ballots; the ability to make last minute additions, corrections, deletions, thereby saving a lot of money.

Questions, answers and comments followed:

1. The City would host a webpage for the candidates profile with a variety of links.
2. The cost estimate is a little under $172,000 and includes all the setup working with the staff, setting up the ballots, tabulating the votes, providing the equipment and all follow-up.  This includes the first year development and while subsequent costs will be different because of added new features, subsequent years should be less. 
3. Regarding voter turnout for Kids Voting Hawaii, pass words are issued and between 80,000 and 100,000 kids are voting each year.  Voting is done over a two week voting period. M. Wong clarified stories where parents are drawn into voting by the kids because they've been studying the candidates and issues for weeks.
4. CDS proposes that the County maintain a website where candidates can upload information with the ability linking to the candidates own website.
5. Manke said the NCO is looking at election costs and making comparisons to include online voting. The proposal is $171,000. The intent is looking at any type of cost savings, but the real thrust is increasing voter participation. Cameron Heen noted that the total cost for past elections came roughly to $250,000, including re-mailings.
6. Young was concerned regarding security, accessing the site, and knowing whether or not you are voting in the right area. Mark Wong explained the voter registration data provided by the City would indicate which neighborhood area the voter will access by using a password. CDS won't even have access to the information.
7. Manke notes the use of the same processes, the register voter list and a separate process in place to register directly with the NCO. CDS will only handle the voting process, the NCO will still have to handle the registration course; and eventually onto an online registration.     
8. Makapagal commented that's it not just trying to save money, but trying to get more people involved in the process of voter involvement.
9. Nekota said the Hawaii Association of Social Workers sends the ballots out to all of them, but she opts to vote online using an identification number issued to her; but mailing back the ballot would be your cost. 
10. Ray Gruntz said it appears to be an expensive mailing to send all the registered voters the password; but the concern that multiple voters in the same household accessing the same computer would have a number of variables to be concerned with. Mark Wong indicated that CDS is not proposing to send the password in the mail, but with talking to the staff, what is being proposed is using part of the social security number. There's a question whether they would be allowed to vote without a social security number, which may be a problem or something to handle as a separate registration issue.  

More questions and answers followed: 1) Heen made a point that the Hawaii Bar Association is currently voting online and showing a 30% increase. 2) Tom Smyth said the two biggest problems are the timeline it takes to do the printing and to make changes minute changes, etc.; and the second biggest problems is the counting process and sorting valid from invalids ballots, which will all go away if we switch to the online system. 3) Naluai suggested when doing this to keep the integrity of each individual and not use the last four digits of your social security number and or mother's maiden name. 4) Mobley loves the idea of automation, but thinks that using the SS# is not a good idea. 5) Mark Wong said it would take three to four months to finish making all the changes, testing and integrating with the City's data systems, but most of the time is in planning and testing. 6) Understanding the social security issue, Jeff Watanabe of CDS noted that once you cast your vote, your number is disabled. Mark Wong addressed the SS# issue, because it was something discussed at length. Congress passed a law that governments cannot use a social security number without showing the legislation that requires it and if you choose to not provide a SS#, then you have to provide an alternative. 7) Smyth said the SS#'s are required in the municipal election and it's only to know who's who. Mark Wong repeated that CDS will not have access to whatever number. Whatever list is put into that system is the list CDS will accept. 8) Gall suggested someone from the Commission work with Manke and CSD.

Apisa moved that the NCO pursue and explore the online voting concept; Makapagal seconds the motion. Discussion followed:  Sakamoto suggested forming an election committee. The motion carried unanimously, 8-0-0. Aye:  Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Young.

PUBLIC CONCERNS: 

1. Naluai raised issue regarding the NCO's procedure for filing complaints process. She made a very serious complaint which jeopardizes the integrity of the NCO, the violation of a board member and the refusal of the Executive Secretary's office to handle that problem immediately. She questioned r why it's taken this long to address the matter that her way of filing the complaint was invalid and the decisiveness of the NCO didn't make any sense. Another concern was that she submitted a written, email and faxed complaints also with no response. Due to the sensitivity, she requested that the matter be handled discreetly and an investigation be done, but later found out she was ignored and the matter totally dropped. Naluai came in to physically file the complaint; assisted by Heen. Naluai is now requesting to amend the complaint to add other specific violations, 3-5.3, 1-2.1, 3-2.2, 3-3.3, and 3-5.1. Naluai was upset and would like an apology for the way this matter was handled and encouraged the importance to address it immediately. Naluai was thanked for sharing the concern.
2. Linda Wong noted it was interesting to know that OIP agrees with what she requested be done.  Specifically, that the board must include information when a board member is requesting during the meeting to be included or reflected in the minutes. She would like to know why her answer couldn't be put into the minutes. Wong was thanked for sharing her concern as well.

ADJOURNMENT:  Makapagal moved, Sakamoto seconded to adjourn the meeting at 9:58 p.m. The motion carried by unanimous consent, 8-0-0. Aye:  Apisa, Ching, Gall, Makapagal, Nekota, Sakamoto, Tanimoto, Young.

Submitted by

Marie Richardson

Neighborhood Assistant