The Committee on Executive Management met in person to consider Resolution 26-210 (referred to as "Resolution 26-10" in one portion of the transcript), a proposed amendment to Council Rules restricting taxpayer-funded mass communications in the period immediately preceding an election. The meeting was called to order at 2:35 p.m. local time on Wednesday, September 23, 2026; the official meeting timestamp is 2026-09-24 00:31:04 UTC. The resolution is intended to draw a bright line between official constituent services and campaign activity. After testimony and discussion, the committee deferred the resolution.
Hello, everyone, good afternoon. It is now two thirty-five p.m. on Wednesday, September 23rd, 2026, and I'd like to call the committee on executive management to order. I'd like to welcome committee members Nishimoto and Kia Aina and Okimoto. Thank you, folks, for being here. Although remote oral testimony is being permitted, this is a regular in-person meeting and is not a remote meeting by interactive conference technology under section ninety-two-three point seven. Horrier vice statutes. Therefore, the meeting will continue not withstanding loss of audio-visual communication with remote testifiers or loss of public broadcast of the meeting. Members of the public will be allowed to provide oral testimony on all items on the agenda in person in the council chamber and remotely when each agenda item is taken out. As both English and Hawaiian are official languages of the state of Hawaii, pursuant to Article 15, section four of the Hawaii State Constitution and section one-thirteen of the Hawaii Revice statutes. Members of the public may testify in either language. When the timer goes off, please conclude your remarks promptly. Persons who have not registered will be given an opportunity to testify following the registered testifiers. For persons who are testifying by telephone only, I will identify you by the last three digits of your phone number. Some friendly reminders and tips. Video conference for a more quiet location if possible. As a courtesy, please turn off all your cell phones for the duration of the meeting. Moving to action item one, resolution 26-210. The resolution amends the council rules related to mass communication near election dates. Before today is before us today is a proposed amendment to the council rules that will establish a clear restriction on taxpayer funded mass communications during the period immediately preceding an election. Its purpose is straightforward to draw a bright line between official constituent services and campaign activity, and to ensure that the public resources are never used or perceived to be used to provide an electoral advantage to an incumbent. At present, Honolulu has no council role specifically governing taxpayer funded mass communications in an election year. Other legislative bodies, including the state legislature, have long observed a 60-day election blackout practice. I have followed that practice throughout my public service, including during my time on the council, even when it was not formally required here, because I believe it is important to safeguard the public trust. That context is particularly important because recent reporting focused on heavily on one of my constituent mailers and created a different impression. It highlighted the 60-day practice without clearly acknowledging that my mailer was sent in compliance with the same practice. Although the council had no written rule at the time, I nevertheless observed that restraint because it is the appropriate standard for mailing public confidence for maintaining public confidence. The measure before us is not intended to limit legitimate constituent services or restrict the public's access to information about council business. Rather, it would establish a clear and consistent standard for when taxpayer funded mass mailings should pause as an election approaches. A written rule will give council members, staff, and the public a common understanding of where the line lies between official communications and campaigning. The issue has appropriately generated public discussion, and the ethics commission is considering a similar policy. In my view, there is no reason for the council to wait to formalize the best practice that we should already be following. The council has both the authority and the responsibility to establish clear internal standards governing our use of public resources. At the same time, this is a body of rules, and it details deserve thoughtful consideration. I welcome discussion regarding the appropriate scope of the restriction, the definition of covered mass communications, the length and timing of the blackout period, and any necessary exceptions for emergency notices, public safety information, or other essential communications. Today's discussion gives us the opportunity to ensure that the final rule is clear, workable, and applied equally to every member. With that, I look forward to the committee discussion and recommendations on the measure. I believe we have one in-person registered testifier, Sandy Ma from the Honolulu Ethics Commission. Aloha and welcome and thank you so much for being here today. Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the committee. My name is Sandy Ma. I am the new executive director and legal counsel for the Honolulu Ethics Commission. Thank you for having me here today. I'm here to testify and give comments on resolution 26-10. This resolution and the matters contained herein have not been formally supported or commented on by the Honolulu Ethics Commission. So my comments here are just comments. So we respectfully raise questions regarding this resolution regarding the distribution of 200 to or less uh individuals. Um we just provide comments regarding the number, 200 on the federal side regarding federal distribution. The number is 500. Um, the area covered by federal distribution and their constituents are much greater, and the area covered here is 200, so that is just a comment.