Subject: Hawaii CSC Investigation Started - meeting like "Kitten in cage with 4 Big Dogs"
From: WEWoodsMPH <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1998 01:08:42 EDT

Hawaii CSC Investigation Started - meeting like "Kitten in cage with 4 Big
Dogs"

Aloha Folks,

This afternoon the Campaign Spending Commission voted 4 out of 4 (one
commissioner not present) to combine all complaints and proceed with a formal
investigation by Commission staff.

Wheeeeew!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!

In the course of the Commission's meeting today I was first to present
information and evidence on each complaint followed by my rebuttal of the
respondent's attorneys responses to the original complaints.  (See list of
specific complaints and corresponding law firms representing the respondents
at end of this news bulletin.)  After my presentation the respondents'
attorneys presented their response.

Each of the responses presented requested dismissal of the complaints.

In each of my presentations I recommended that the Commission move the
complaint process to a formal investigation level based on the amassed
information I had collected during my investigation which should have
demonstrated sufficient information to raise actionable violations of law.

In this regard, the Commission made a motion and passed it unanimously (of
those present) that the three complaints heard today to be combined and the
Commission staff be authorized and directed to begin an investigation on these
issues.  The Commission specifically added a caveat to the motion for the
investigation citing a Commission rule which will allow the staff to add other
violations to the combined complaints should they identify them during the
course of the investigation.  To remain timely the Commission emphasized
promptness of the investigation.  The Commission staff noted they would return
to the Commission during the course of the investigation to notify them of
changing status as a result of the investigation.

As CSC Staff Attorney Brian Nakamura began his recommendations to the
Commission on what actions they could take, he said in reference to me and the
large number of coat and tie attorneys representing the respondents that this
meeting "was like a kitten in a cage is 4 big dogs."  Never been compared to a
kitten before, but I did appreciate the analogy.

Importantly the staff recommendation to the Commission noted that there are
two basic reasons that the Commission might not continue any action on a
complaint: 1.  "that the issues or complaints are manini"  - Manini is local
word (Japanese or Hawaiian) that means small or too little to have much
importance. and 2.  there might be political considerations that might be
objections to proceed with further action.  Mr. Nakamura stated that this
about the alleged violations of the complaints: "these are not manini
violations."  He further stated that political consideration should not be a
factor in the Commission taking any action.

Commission staff noted a point of fact that they had received a number of
calls to their office by political contributors listed on the STM98 CSReport
stating they did not know the event was a political fundraiser.  Mr. Nakamura
said although this was not specifically covered in complaints files thus far,
it appeared to be the "most actionable."

CSC staff were very clear to state for the record that this was not a true
evidentiary hearing and thus not all materials are actual material facts as
rules of evidence are not present.  The following comments of staff on the
actual complaints are as follows:

1.  Excess contribution of HFT including monies from aggregate of HFT
officers/principals also making contributions for same cause was an apparent
abuse of law which obligates Commission to pursue;

2.  On Stephen Covey and Franklin Covey complaint the staff is currently not
able to verify or dispute claims;

Then the recommendation was made to proceed with formal investigation -
Probable cause would be premature at this time.  That the complaints deserve
to be verified or disputed; which may produce other violations upon
investigation.

Enough for now - I encourage all of you that have concerns on this and
emerging issues, please take heart that the system seems to be working to
identify and deal with alleged political abuse of our democratic system.

do good,

William E. Woods, MPH

Now all complaints heard today:  Today's complaints to be reviewed are: Docket
# 98-02 alleged other political contributions from a foreign-based company
(DFS-Hawaii) and contributions in excess of the $1,000 legal cap; Docket #
98-03 alleging Hawaii's Future Today is by definition a political action
organization and should be required to file all appropriate reporting forms
and be in compliance with provisions of a political organization; and Docket
#98-04 which alleges that Stephen Covey contributed over $140,000 political
in-kind contribution in excess of the $1,000 legal cap and alleges that the
Franklin Covey Company is either a political action organization and should be
required to file all appropriate reporting forms and be in compliance with
provisions of a political organization or be properly reported in an amended
political action committee report for Save Traditional Marriage 98 for
contributions related to a political action fundraiser.

	Law firms already identified as representing the various parties in opposing
the allegations by Woods' complaints is a very powerful group.  Firms
identified at this time (more are expected at day of meeting) to oppose Woods'
presentation are: Cades Schutte Fleming & Wright for Hawaii's Future Today,
Diane M. Kurtz, Ronald T.Y. Choo, George P. Shea, Jr., Debi Hartmann, John A.
Hoag, and [Fthr.] Marc Alexander;  Chun Chipchase Takayama Nagatani for
Stephen R. Covey; Carlsmith Ball Wichman Case & Ichiki for Save Traditional
Marriage '98, Diane M. Kurtz and Ronald T.Y. Choo.