After Office of Hawaiian Affairs trustee Bob Lindsey sent a public statement to the Independent regarding his role in convincing other trustees to forfeit the state agency’s role as a plaintiff in the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) contested case hearing, we sent a series of follow up questions regarding how that decision was made. We will post trustee Lindsey’s responses upon receiving them. The Board of Land and Natural Resources voted to approve the sublease between the University of Hawaii and the TMT Corporation, allowing the project to proceed pending the resolution of the contested case hearing.
Was the issue of whether or not OHA should pursue its role as a plaintiff in the contested case hearing regarding the TMT sublease proposal discussed during the executive session that followed public testimony on July 15?
Was a decision to back-out of said contested case hearing made during said executive session?
What was the quorum present during said executive session? Who made the motion to go to decision making and who seconded? Is there a record of this process? Was it recorded in minutes and were those minutes approved at the subsequent board meeting on Kauai two days later?
If there was a vote taken on this issue during the executive session, did the board have quorum then?
Isn’t it true that decisions of this nature cannot be made during executive session, as such sessions are not exercises on public record?
If so, how can the OHA trustees have been said to have reached a decision on this matter?