Minutes for October 12, 2016 Meeting

Posted in Minutes

Campaign Spending Commission
Leiopapa A Kamehameha Building, Room 204
October 12, 2016
10:00 a.m.

Commissioners Present
Bryan Luke, Adrienne Yoshihara, Gregory Shoda, Eldon Ching

Commissioners Absent
Kenneth Goodenow

Staff Present
Kristin Izumi-Nitao, Tony Baldomero, Gary Kam, Jessica Richey
Deputy Attorney General Valri Kunimoto

Call to Order
Chair Luke called the meeting to order at 10:02 a.m.

Consideration and Approval of Minutes on 9/14/16
Chair Luke asked for comments or changes.  Commissioner Shoda noted a repetitive phrase on the top of page 14 which required deletion (i.e., “for candidates running in the 2016 election”).  Chair Luke called for a vote to approve the amended minutes.

Vice Chair Yoshihara moved to approve the minutes of 9/14/16 as amended.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (4-0).

**Chair Luke asked to take Docket No. 17-14 – In Re the Matter of Forward Progress under “Old Business” out of order because attorney, Mr. William McCorriston, was present and requested the Commissioners to advance the matter on the agenda.

Old Business
*Docket No. 17-14 – In Re the Matter of Forward Progress
General Counsel Kam reported that this matter was continued from the last meeting to permit Respondent time to respond.

General Counsel Kam reported that a complaint was filed by the Executive Director against Forward Progress for an excess contribution resulting from the financing of the republication of a candidate’s campaign material pursuant to HRS §11-363(a).

Mr. William McCorriston, local counsel to Respondent, stated that he had two arguments for the Commission.  First, he asserted an equitable argument that this matter occurred in the 2014 election cycle, that there was no guidance from the Commission regarding application of this law at this time, and that Sierra Club was also decided in this cycle.  Second, he maintained that Respondents substantively disagree with the Commission’s interpretation of the law and would argue that the Commission should adopt federal precedents.

General Counsel Kam stated that Respondent is a noncandidate committee making only independent expenditures registered with the Commission.  He stated that Commission staff obtained a mailer in support of Ka’ala Buenconsejo, a Maui County Council candidate, which was financed and distributed by Respondent during the 2014 general election.

In the 2014 primary election, Ka’ala Buenconsejo sent out a tri-fold mailer to voters in Maui County.  Respondent’s mailer in support of Ka’ala Buenconsejo contains the same photograph of the 3 boys holding Ka’ala Buenconsejo’s campaign signs as well as the candidate’s campaign logo.  These images were also on Ka’ala Buenconsejo’s campaign website and social media accounts along with 2 other images (i.e., Ka’ala Buenconsejo’s family dressed in white and 4 youths holding campaign signs) which were also on Respondent’s mailer.

HRS §11-363(a) provides that the financing by any person of the dissemination, distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any broadcast or any written or other campaign materials prepared by the candidate, candidate committee, or agents shall be considered to be a contribution to the candidate.  Respondent paid for or financed a campaign mailer that disseminated or republished campaign materials prepared by candidate Ka’ala Buenconsejo.  As such, under HRS §11-363(a), the cost of Respondent’s mailer in support of Ka’ala Buenconsejo, $22,444.94 (i.e., the cost for postage to send out the mailers $22,178.88 plus $266.06 which is 20% or the pro rata share of the $1,330.29 paid to Mission Control for photography because this expense involved 5 candidates), is deemed to be a contribution to the candidate.  Further, under HRS §11-357(a)(1), the contribution limit for Ka’ala Buenconsejo for the 2012-2014 election period, was $2,000.  Thus, Respondent made an excess contribution in the amount of $20,444.94 to Ka’ala Buenconsejo.

General Counsel Kam argued that these facts are the same as Sierra Club, and therefore, they stand on the same footing.  Moreover, Respondent and its Executive Director were present at the meeting in which the Commission considered Sierra Club so they are aware of the facts and the violation that the Commission found but did not say anything.

Lastly, General Counsel Kam stated that Advisory Opinion #16-02, which was requested by Respondent’s attorney, controls the outcome of this complaint because of the same fact pattern.  For these reasons, General Counsel Kam recommended that the Commission make a preliminary determination of probable cause that the Hawaii campaign spending law has been violated pursuant to HRS §11-405(a), assess an administrative fine of $1,000 for the violation pursuant to HRS §11-410(a), and order that any and all fines be deposited in the general fund pursuant to HRS §11-410(e).

Commissioner Ching asked whether Respondent’s matter occurred before or after the Commission’s decision in Sierra Club.  General Counsel Kam responded that it occurred after the republication in the Sierra Club case.  General Counsel Kam also clarified that the Commission did not dismiss the complaint in Sierra Club, but made a preliminary determination of probable cause that the Hawaii campaign spending law had been violated and issued a cease and desist order.

Vice Chair Yoshihara asked General Counsel Kam to refresh the Commissioners regarding the facts in Sierra Club.  General Counsel Kam responded that Sierra Club, a noncandidate committee making only independent expenditures that was registered with the Commission, took a family photo from a candidate’s website and used it in independent mailers that it financed.  This photo was also used by the candidate in his own campaign, and therefore, constituted a republication of campaign materials such that it should have been considered to be a contribution to the candidate pursuant to HRS §11-363(a).  He further commented that in the Sierra Club case, the Commission decided to treat it as a “teachable moment” because it was the first time this law was being applied, and thus, the Commission issued a cease and desist order even though Commission staff recommended an administrative fine.

Commissioner Shoda stated that he was inclined to issue an administrative fine in the Sierra Club complaint but went along with the cease and desist order.  As such, in fairness to Respondents, he would be inclined to issue a cease and desist order in this matter.

Vice Chair Yoshihara asked whether there was an argument to treat Respondent differently than Sierra Club.  General Counsel Kam replied that Respondent and its Executive Director were present at the meeting in which Sierra Club was decided and that it could have said something back then.  Vice Chair Yoshihara recalled that Respondent was at that meeting and further stated that Respondent is a sophisticated and well-managed organization represented by well-informed counsel, and that it is odd that they did not say anything when the decision was made given the similar fact pattern presented in Sierra Club.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that Respondent may have had no intention of saying anything because they continue to object to the Commission’s implementation of this law.  In fact, per General Counsel Kam, it was happenstance that Respondent’s flyer in support of Ka’ala Buenconsejo came into the Commission’s possession.

Commissioner Ching stated that he was in favor of treating Respondents the same way as Sierra Club.  He further commented that after attending the COGEL Conference last year, the Commission seemed either like trailblazers or mavericks in its implementation of this law.  He asked if there were other jurisdictions with the same law.  General Counsel Kam replied that our law is modeled after the federal law and that the Commission is merely enforcing what the law provides.  General Counsel Kam added that HRS §11-363 is clear and it is not ambiguous.  Further, he stated that there is a lack of enforcement at the federal level with the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) because of the 3-3 split vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to make a preliminary determination that probable cause exists that a violation had been committed.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

Commissioner Shoda moved to assess a penalty in the form of a cease and desist order against Respondents for this violation.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (3-1) with Vice Chair Yoshihara opposing.

**Chair Luke asked to take Docket No. 17-13 – In Re the Matter of Matt LoPresti v. Bryan Jeremiah under “New Business” out of order because Representative LoPresti and Friends of Byran Jeremiah chairperson Brett Kulbis were present.

New Business
*Docket No. 17-13 – In Re the Matter of Matt LoPresti v. Bryan Jeremiah
Representative Matt LoPresti filed a complaint against Bryan Jeremiah for the inaccurate reporting of three contributions in the 1st Preliminary Primary Report for the 2016 election and for the failure to file a Notice of Intent to Hold a Fundraiser in the 2014 election.

General Counsel Kam stated that the complaint did not cite any law or rule that was violated as required by HAR §3-160-70.  He then went through each of the four alleged violations as well as recommended the following outcomes:  (1) Respondents reported a false name contributor named “Reframe Ministries” in their 1st Preliminary Primary Report – Staff  would consider this to be a typo because the contributor’s name was “Reflame Ministries” and staff would recommend that Respondents fix their mistake.  (2) Respondents did not include the full address of a contributor – Staff would recommend that Respondents fix their mistake.  (3) Respondents reported an in-kind contribution from the candidate for paying for car magnets and banners from Vistaprint – Staff would consider this to be a reporting error and would instruct Respondents to report the funds used for these expenditures as an “Other Receipt.”  (4) Respondents had a garage sale in 2014 and failed to file a Notice of Intent to Hold a Fundraiser – Because there was no cost to attend this garage sale, staff would not require a Notice of Intent to Hold a Fundraiser be filed.  For these reasons, General Counsel Kam recommended that the complaint be dismissed since there had been no violation of the campaign finance laws, or in the alternative, because there was no compliance with HAR §3-160-70.

Representative Matt LoPresti addressed each of the alleged violations.  Regarding #4, he maintained that if any single item goes over $25 at the garage sale, and there were several donations over $25, then Respondent should have filed a Notice of Intent to Hold a Fundraiser.  Regarding #3, he stated that Respondent hid the address of a $1,000 contributor and entered a false address.  Regarding #2, he commented that Bryan Jeremiah does not work for Vistaprint and that Respondent’s entries suggest that he is receiving support from a well-known company.  Regarding #1, he stated that there were multiple attempts to conceal the true contributor’s name and questioned why the check was made to an individual, not a candidate committee, makes reference to an “honorarium,” and is from a non-profit organization that cannot make contributions to candidates.

Respondent’s chairperson Brett Kulbis stated that these are not violations but administrative errors.  He further commented that this is the 4th complaint that Representative LoPresti has filed against them and that it amounts to harassment as well as using the Commission as his personal law enforcement entity.

Vice Chair Yoshihara asked if the check from Reflame Ministries was for the campaign.  Chairperson Kulbis responded that it was deemed a contribution and was not sure why the pastor wrote “honorarium” on the check.

Commissioner Ching asked about the non-profit status of Reflame Ministries.  General Counsel Kam replied that if an entity is a 501(c)(3) organization, it cannot engage in political activity; however, this is not an area that the Commission regulates nor is responsible for.  Furthermore, staff does not even know if Reflame Ministries is a 501(c)(3) organization.

General Counsel Kam clarified that with respect to fundraisers, the law requires that a committee file a Notice of Intent to Hold a Fundraiser when the cost to attend the function is more than $25 per person.  The law does not rely upon how much was spent at the fundraiser.

Commissioner Ching moved to dismiss the complaint.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

**The Commission resumed New Business.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that the next ten (10) matters concern the late filing of the Final Primary Report which was due on 9/2/16 and/or the Expenditures of Public Funds Report which was due on 9/2/16, or the failure to file the Late Contributions Report which was due on 8/10/16.  These proposed Conciliation Agreements were a result of investigations pursuant to HRS §11-314(7) to determine whether there had been a violation of the Hawaii campaign spending laws.  The committees in all matters have been informed of the violation in a letter from Commission staff.  Further, they have been notified of today’s meeting and received a copy of the proposed Conciliation Agreement.  Executive Director Izumi-Nitao recommended that the Commission make a preliminary determination of probable cause that a violation had been committed, waive further proceedings, and approve the settlement amounts stated in each of the proposed agreements.

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-18 – In Re the Matter of Friends of Heather Kimball
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $200 to $70.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-18.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-19 – In Re the Matter of Fo Real!  Elect Gil!
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $256.66 to $128.33.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-19.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-20 – In Re the Matter of Friends of Matt Bernabe
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $200 to $70.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-20.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-21 – In Re the Matter of Street Bikers United
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $200 to $70.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-21.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-22 – In Re the Matter of HFIA PAC
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $200 to $70.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-22.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-23 – In Re the Matter of Heavenly Hawaiian, Ltd. Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the failure to file the Late Contributions Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $750 to $250.  Executive Director Izumi-Nitao further informed the Commission that Respondent filed the Late Contributions Report on 10/3/16 upon being notified of the violation.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Vice Chair Yoshihara moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-23.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-24 – In Re the Matter of Friends of Kanoe Ahuna
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and the Expenditures of Public Funds Report.  Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that there are three (3) proposed conciliation agreements for the Commission’s consideration.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that this is the first time Respondents filed late reports.  There were two (2) reports which were due on 9/2/16:  (1) Expenditure of Public Funds Report (reporting period 1/1/16 to 8/13/16); and (2) Final Primary Report (reporting period 7/30/16 to 8/13/16).  Both reports were filed 13 days late on 9/15/16 resulting in a late report fine of $500 for the Expenditures of Public Funds Report and $1,550 for the Final Primary Report for a total fine amount of $2,050.

The first proposed conciliation agreement reduces both late report fine amounts by two-thirds because it is the first time Respondents filed a late report resulting in the $500 fine being reduced to $167 and the $1,550 fine being reduced to $517 for a total reduced fine amount of $684.

The second proposed conciliation agreement reduces the Final Primary Report’s late report fine by two-thirds or $517, and the Expenditures of Public Funds Report’s late report fine by one-half or $250, for a total reduced fine amount of $767.

The third proposed conciliation agreement reduces the Expenditures of Public Funds Report’s late report fine by two-thirds or $167, and the Final Primary Report’s late report fine by one-half or $775, for a total reduced fine amount of $942. 

The three proposed conciliation agreements were discussed with Respondents.

Chair Luke stated that both reports were due on the same day so they should be treated the same.  Commissioner Shoda disagreed and stated that these are 2 violations, and therefore, they should reduce accordingly; however, he was in favor of the $767 reduction because it was the lesser amount.  Chair Luke commented that determining which report would get the two-thirds reduction and which report would get the one-half reduction would be difficult since both were due on the same day.

Chair Luke moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-24 to the extent that both late report fines are reduced by two-thirds for a total reduced fine amount of $684.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (3-1) with Commissioner Shoda opposing.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao confirmed with the Commissioners that if Respondents filed another late report in the future that staff would be authorized to reduce the fine amount to one-half through a proposed conciliation agreement which would come to them in a public meeting for consideration.

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-25 – In Re the Matter of American Resort Development Association Resort Owners Coalition PAC
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $200 to $100.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao added that on 10/7/16, Respondents submitted a proposed paragraph for insertion into the Conciliation Agreement.  Specifically, they requested the following paragraph:  “Respondent’s inadvertent omission was caused by reliance on a filing deadline schedule provided to them by counsel that inadvertently excluded the Final Primary Report.”

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao stated that the Commission’s Conciliation Agreements are standardized and are a means in which fines are reduced in limited circumstances which do not consider blame or responsibility.  Therefore, Respondents’ request is not relevant nor does it represent a compelling reason why the Commission should alter its standardized agreements.  Moreover, the meeting minutes can reflect Respondents’ position.

Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Chair Luke moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-25.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Shoda.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-26 – In Re the Matter of S.A.F.E. Sustainable Action Fund for the Environment
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the late filing of the Final Primary Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $446.02 to $148.67.  Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-26.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-27 – In Re the Matter of Hawaii Carpenters Market Recovery Program Fund PAC
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao explained that this proposed conciliation agreement concerns the failure to file the Late Contributions Report and requests that they assess a reduced fine from $750 to $250. Executive Director Izumi-Nitao further informed the Commission that Respondent filed the Late Contributions Report on 9/30/16 upon being notified of the violation.   Chair Luke asked if there were any comments or questions.  There were none.  Chair Luke called for a vote.

Commissioner Shoda moved to approve proposed Conciliation Agreement No. 17-27.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Docket No. 17-16 – In Re the Matter of Toagaifasa Mataafa and Friends of Junior Mataafa
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that a complaint had been filed against candidate and treasurer Toagaifasa Mataafa and the candidate committee called Friends of Junior Mataafa for the late filing of the 1st Preliminary Primary Report.

Respondent was granted a Conciliation Agreement at the 8/10/16 Commission Meeting for this violation which reduced the late report fine from $200 to $70.  Respondent did not comply with the terms of Conciliation Agreement No. 17-03 by signing the agreement nor paying the $70 fine.  Commission staff left messages with Respondent to see if he would be complying and notified him that the instant complaint would ensue for failure to comply.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao recommended that the Commission make a preliminary determination of probable cause that the Hawaii campaign spending law has been violated pursuant to HRS §11-405(a), assess an administrative fine of $200 for the violation, order that the fine be paid from the candidate’s personal funds if the candidate committee’s funds are insufficient to pay the fine, and order that any and all fines be deposited in the general fund pursuant to HRS §11-340(g).

Commissioner Shoda moved to make a preliminary determination that probable cause exists that a violation had been committed and to accept the fine and terms stated in the complaint.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Docket No. 17-17 – In Re the Matter of Richard Fale, Erin Fale, and Friends of Richard Fale
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that a complaint had been filed against candidate Richard Fale, treasurer Erin Fale, and the candidate committee called Friends of Richard Fale for the late filing of the Supplemental Report.

Respondent is not running in the 2016 election and was not named on the 2016 ballot.  Pursuant to HRS §§11-333(a) and 11-334(a), Respondents are required to timely file accurate supplemental reports.  The Supplemental Report for the period covering 1/1/16 to 6/30/16 was due no later than 11:59 p.m. Hawaii standard time on 8/1/16.  Respondents did not file this report by the deadline.

On 8/2/16, Commission staff sent Respondents a “Notice of Late Report” via first class mail informing them that the Supplemental Report had not been filed and that a fine would be imposed.  The letter was addressed to Respondents at the addresses listed on their Organizational Report.  Respondents electronically filed the report on 8/19/16.

On 8/22/16, Commission staff sent Respondents a “Notice of Fine for Late Report” via first class mail informing them of the $200 fine for the late filing report.  The letter informed Respondents that they could avoid the complaint process by waiving their right to be heard at a HRS chapter 92 public meeting and a HRS chapter 91 contested case hearing, by voluntarily paying the fine.  Respondents did not pay the fine so on 9/27/16, Commission staff sent Respondents a copy of the complaint and informed them that the matter would be set on the 10/12/16 Commission Agenda.

For these reasons, Executive Director Izumi-Nitao recommended that the Commission make a preliminary determination of probable cause that the Hawaii campaign spending law has been violated pursuant to HRS §11-405(a), assess an administrative fine of $200 for the violation, order that the fine be paid from the candidate’s personal funds if the candidate committee’s funds are insufficient to pay the fine, and order that any and all fines be deposited in the general fund pursuant to HRS §11-340(g).

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao added that Respondent Fale was granted a deferred acceptance of no contest plea on 7/1/16.  This deferral arose out of Docket No. 15-54 (filing a false report) which was heard at the 2/11/15 Commission Meeting and resulted in a criminal referral for prosecution to the Attorney General’s Office as well as Docket No. 16-27 (failure to file the Supplemental Report) which was heard at the 3/9/16 Commission Meeting and resulted in a criminal referral for prosecution to the Attorney General’s Office.  One of the terms of his deferral is that he “must be in full compliance with Campaign Spending Commission including payments of all fines assessed.”  Notably, in addition to this matter, the following matters remain outstanding with the Commission:

  • Pay $500 administrative fine and file the Supplemental Report (reporting period 11/5/14 to 12/31/14) – see, Docket No. 15-99 heard at the 3/11/15 CSC Meeting; and
  • File the Supplemental Report (reporting period 7/1/15 to 12/31/15) – see Docket No. 16-27 heard at the 3/9/16 CSC Meeting.

Respondent Fale’s proof of compliance date is 1/2/17.  Both the prosecutor and the probation officer have been informed of his noncompliance and subsequent violation.

Vice Chair Yoshihara moved to make a preliminary determination that probable cause exists that a violation had been committed and to accept the fine and terms stated in the complaint.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Shoda.  Motion carried (4-0).

Old Business
*Docket No. 17-11 – In Re the Matter of Hawaii Electrical Workers, Local 722 and Rodney Capello
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that a complaint had been filed against Hawaii Electrical Workers, Local 722 and treasurer Rodney Capello for the failure to file the Preliminary Primary Report (reporting period 1/1/16 to 7/29/16) which was due on 8/3/16.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported this matter was continued from the last meeting to permit Commission staff to better understand the facts behind this noncandidate committee’s union which was dissolved by its parent union due to misuse of funds around May 2016.

Since the last meeting, Commission staff has been working with attorney Randal Yoshida who does not represent Respondents but is assisting their sister organization.  Mr. Yoshida has submitted Respondents’ request to terminate their registration; however, when Respondents’ bank account was closed on 8/3/16, there was a surplus of $6,349.50 which does not appear in Respondents’ disclosure reports.  The last report filed by Respondents was the Supplemental Report covering the period 7/1/15 to 12/31/15.  They have not filed the Preliminary Primary Report, the Final Primary Report, and the 1st Preliminary General Report.  Treasurer Rodney Capello contacted Commission staff on 10/12/16, and presently, is at the Commission’s office filing the reports with staff assistance.  Staff is reviewing their bank records to determine whether Respondents fall in the $1,000 or less category such that they would only have to file the Final Election Period Report.

Executive Director Izumi-Nitao recommended that the Commission continue the matter until the 11/16/16 Commission meeting.

Commissioner Shoda moved to continue the matter until the 11/16/16 Commission meeting.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Ching.  Motion carried (4-0).

*Docket No. 15-60 – In Re the Matter of Hawaii Solutions, Dylan Nonaka, Jose Perez, and Earle K. Kealoha
Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that a complaint had been filed against Hawaii Solutions, Dylan Nonaka, Jose Perez, and Earle K. Kealoha which was addressed at the 6/17/15 Commission meeting in Executive Session.  She recommended that the Commissioners convene Executive Session pursuant to HRS §92-5(a)(4) to consult with the Commission’s attorneys on questions and issues pertaining to the Commission’s powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities concerning prosecution to address the update in this matter.

Chair Luke recommended that the Commission continue with the public meeting and move this matter to the end for consideration in Executive Session.

Report from Executive Director
Report on Compliance of Filing Timely Disclosure Reports
With respect to the Commission orders that were referred to the Attorney General’s Office – Civil Recoveries Division (“AG-CRD”), AG-CRD generated a spreadsheet with the status of each case.  There appear to be 3 referrals which were resolved, 6 referrals that are outstanding, and 2 referrals that are new.

As for the report on compliance of filing timely disclosure reports in 2016, Executive Director Izumi-Nitao reported that:

-For the Late Contributions Report (reporting period 7/30/16 to 8/9/16) which was due on 8/10/16:

  • There were 5 candidate committees who did not file.
  • There were 4 noncandidate committees who did not file.

-For the 1st Preliminary General Report (reporting period 8/14/16 to 9/26/16) which was due on 10/3/16:

  • There were 251 noncandidate committees who were required to file → 1 filed late & 30 did not file. As of today, 11 have not filed.
  • Staff is still trying to identify/ascertain the $1,000 or less noncandidate committees.

-Upcoming reports:

  • Preliminary General Report which is due on 10/31/16 (only for candidate committees running in the general election)
  • 2nd Preliminary General Report which is due on 10/31/16 (only for noncandidate committees)
  • Late Contribution/Expenditure Report which is due on 11/7/16

The general election will be on 11/8/16.

Discussion of 2017 CSC Meeting Schedule
Discussion ensued on the proposed Commission meeting dates in 2017.  The Commissioners agreed that the tentative dates worked (i.e., 1/11/17, 2/8/17, 3/8/17, 4/12/17, 5/10/17, 6/14/17, 7/12/17, 8/9/17, 9/13/17, 10/11/17, 11/8/17, and 12/13/17).  The meeting dates will be posted on the Commission’s website.

Chair Luke asked for a motion to convene Executive Session to:  (1) Consider and approve Executive Session minutes from the Commission meeting on 9/14/16; and (2) Consult with the Commission’s attorneys on questions and issues pertaining to the Commission’s powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and liabilities concerning prosecution of Docket No. 15-60, pursuant to HRS §92-5(a)(4).

Commissioner Shoda moved to convene Executive Session for the aforementioned reasons.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

Public session reconvened at 11:33 a.m.

**The Commission returned to Old Business.

Old Business
*Docket No. 15-60 – In Re the Matter of Hawaii Solutions, Dylan Nonaka, Jose Perez, and Earle K. Kealoha
General Counsel Kam recommended that the complaint be dismissed based on the discussion in Executive Session pursuant to HRS §11-404.

Commissioner Ching moved to dismiss the complaint.  Motion seconded by Vice Chair Yoshihara.  Motion carried (4-0).

Chair Luke moved to adjourn the meeting.  Motion seconded by Commissioner Shoda.  Motion carried (4-0).  Meeting adjourned at 11:34 a.m.

Next Meeting:
Scheduled for Wednesday, November 16, 2016.