July 26, 2002 Board Meeting where board chair Rochelle Gregson claimed in the Oct. 29, 2002 board meeting that she appointed the 3 nominating committee members, although there is no mention to the claimed appointment in the minutes of the meeting.

October 25, 2002 Board Meeting at which the board chair Rochelle Gregson appointed ONLY Ron Rex as chair of the nominating committee in violation of 'Olelo's bylaws. The board is supposed to appoint the nominating committee members, not the board chair, and they must appoint 3 members, not just 1.

January 29, 2003 Board Meeting  at which the invalidly-appointed Nominating Committee chair submitted names of nominees that were apparently decided upon in a meeting at which no minutes were taken.

April 23, 2003 

Minutes by ASAC member appointed to Nominating Committee (.doc) shows 'Olelo CEO was handpicking Director Candidates.  (This action is a gross conflict of interest in that the Directors would be responsible for evaluating the CEO's performance, deliberating on increases in pay, etc.)  ASAC member also attempted to point out it was difficult to make an informed choice when the committee did not have any information about the people being considered. Names of at least 2 persons who submitted applications were not even mentioned or considered at the meeting. The CEO was in possession of their applications which were forwarded to her by DCCA.

April 30, 2003 Board Meeting at which names selected at the April 23 Nominating Committee meeting were presented. (for the record, original minutes were posted in PDF)

July 30, 2003   Board Meeting at which Chair Gregson (for the Nomination Committee of which she was not a member) "was going to appoint a nominating committee as required by ‘Olelo’s bylaws" but didn't because the DCCA "asked ‘Olelo to defer decision making and appointment on the Nominating Committee" due to the pending PEG plan. They also planned to make a  By-Law Revisions to allow for the chair to appoint the Nominating Committee rather than the full board, but tabled the action "until next board meeting" due to only 5 members being present rather than the 6 required. The board has yet to attempt the revisions again, possibly due to OIP &/or DCCA intervention. The board did unanimously accept a Board Resolution.

October 29, 2003   Board Meeting where Chair Gregson asked the Board to ratify, nunc pro tunc (now for then), her alleged appointment of three nominating committee members at the July 2002 meeting (an action that did not happen at that or any other meeting).

January 28, 2004 Agenda   Board meeting was purportedly canceled due to a lack of a quorum.

February 19, 2004 Agenda (minutes not available yet)  Board director appointments were on the agenda again, but they weren't seated. CTPA officers contacted DCCA Director Recktenwald regarding this attempt to seat directors he said in the DCCA PEG plan he would not seat until June 30, 2004.

February 27, 2004 Agenda  Special Meeting via Telephone Conference Call at 6:30 AM to appoint Keali'i Lopez as interim "Executive Director". The meeting was canceled on 02/20/04, but no cancellation notice was posted. The agenda was just removed from their website with nothing put in it's place explaining why, even though there had been an agenda posted and an announcement had been made in the February 19, 2004 board meeting after only the Chair and CEO returned from Executive session alone and brought the meeting back to order without the required quorum.

'Olelo attorney's letter to DCCA implying the Nominating Committee actions were done in compliance with 'Olelo Bylaws.

My email(s) to the DCCA director showing that 'Olelo's Nominating Committee actions were NOT done in compliance with 'Olelo Bylaws.

----- Forwarded by Clyde Sonobe/DCCA on 01/27/2004 03:09 PM -----
                                                                                                                                       
                      Clyde Sonobe                                                                                                     
                                               To:       <sean@akaku.org>, <senihara@Capitol.hawaii.gov>, <jrobertson@hoike.org>,      
                      01/23/2004 03:50          <naleo@interpac.net>, <mmccartney@pbshawaii.org>, lmcgregor@olelo.org                  
                      PM                       cc:       Mark E Recktenwald/DCCA@DCCA, Glen WY Chock/DCCA@DCCA                         
                                               Subject:  Fwd: question                                                                 
                                                                                                                                       



Lurline,
Mark Recktenwald has asked me to respond on his behalf.  Although Olelo's
bylaws may need to be amended, Olelo should comply with HRS 92 and 92F.

The Plan states: "Accordingly, for those PEG entities that remian under
DCCA's oversight, DCCA will require that they adopt bylaws and policies
which comply with the requirements of HRS chapters 92F and 92".

The Department acknowledges that Olelo's bylaws or policies / procedures
may need to be amended.  However, the Department feels that there is
nothing that should prevent any of the PEG organizations from complying
with HRS 92 and 92F prior to these amendments.

Please contact me if you have any further questions regarding this matter.

Thanks,
Clyde



Hi Mark,

I am forwarding my question again in the attachment.

Just to let you know, we are also checking with our attorney to get a
better understanding of this.  There is still the issue for us of
whether we are nonprofit vs a state agency.  If the State Plan
supercedes our by-laws by requiring that we comply with procedures not
included in the by-laws, then it would appear to further erode our
independent, nonprofit status.

So the issue is as not having to comply with the specific procedures
themselves (with which we have no particular objections) but the extent
to which we are self-governing.

Thanks,
Lurline


Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:29:27 -1000
From: "Lurline McGregor" <lmcgregor@olelo.org>
To: <Mark.E.Recktenwald@dcca.hawaii.gov>
Cc: <sean@akaku.org>,<senihara@Capitol.hawaii.gov>,
<clyde.sonobe@dcca.hawaii.gov>, <jrobertson@hoike.org>,
<naleo@interpac.net>, <mmccartney@pbshawaii.org>
Subject: question
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

Hi Mark,

In response to an inquiry from Jeff Garland, OIP informally advised us
to change the agenda for our upcoming board meeting next Wednesday,
Juanary 28th, to reflect our  compliance with sunshine laws, as directed
by your recently issued Statewide Plan.

In our meeting with Senator Ihara last Friday, we all had an  overall
question regarding compliance with the Statewide Plan pending an
implementation plan and timeframes.   Senator Ihara will discuss this
with you in more depth. Since we have not yet changed our by-laws, it
would appear that we technically are not required to comply with state
sunshine provisions beyond what is already provided for in the by-laws,
for example, allowing public comment before each scheduled board action.


We are concerned about implementing bits and pieces of the Statewide
Plan until we have a more definitive understanding of a larger
implementation plan and timeframe for compliance.

Could you please advise me regarding whether your intention in the
Statewide plan was to require us to follow sunshine law immediately,
before we change our by-laws?

I know things have gotten much busier for you with the opening of the
legislative session, but we are trying to resolve this question before
the agenda has to be finalized by the end of this week, so we can at
least be in compliance with that part of our bylaws!

Thanks,

Lurline