Council committee forwards Rebecca Kavehi Inaba nomination to full council amid ethics concerns

The Committee on Government Operations and External Affairs forwarded Mayor Kimo Alameda’s nomination of Rebecca "Kawehi" Inaba to the Leeward Planning Commission to the full County Council with a favorable recommendation by a 5–3 vote.

The committee debate centered on whether Inaba’s family relationship to a sitting councilmember created a real or perceived conflict of interest. Several members praised Inaba’s record of community service and qualifications; others cited the optics and precedent of appointing relatives of active council members to boards that often send recommendations to the Council.

Mike Alameda, executive assistant to the mayor, presented the nomination, telling the committee that Inaba is a longtime West Hawai‘i resident, founder and executive director of local nonprofit 2020, and would replace a commissioner who is leaving the Leeward Planning Commission.

Councilmember Villegas said Inaba’s background and community leadership made her “eminently qualified” and said she would “be wholeheartedly confirming, voting in support of your nomination.” Councilmember Kerkowitz and others likewise described Inaba as highly capable and said they would support her appointment.

Councilmember Galimba said the nomination raised concerns about concentrating influence and the optics of appointing a relative of a councilmember. “As a matter of policy, practice, precedent, and not least optics, I can’t support this nomination,” Galimba said during committee debate.

Corporation Counsel Renee Schoen told the committee she had reviewed the applicable ethics rules and said she did not see a statutory conflict with a relative serving on a planning commission and a county officer serving on the Council. Schoen also said the Board of Ethics had been asked for an opinion and that petition will be heard at an upcoming board meeting.

Several committee members requested a formal written opinion from the Board of Ethics and discussed possible guardrails or recusal requirements that might be imposed if the nomination proceeds and the board later identifies concerns. Councilmember Kimball said she would prefer an advisory opinion and suggested that, if necessary, the Board of Ethics prescribe specific recusal rules.

The committee recorded five votes in favor and three opposed; the nomination will be considered by the full Council. The committee also noted that a pending Board of Ethics petition regarding the matter is scheduled for review and that any subsequent guidance from the Board could require additional steps.

Votes at committee: forwarded to full council with a favorable recommendation, 5 in favor, 3 opposed.

Background: The Leeward Planning Commission reviews land-use and planning items for the island’s Leeward district and forwards recommendations to the Council. The committee’s discussion repeatedly distinguished between legal conflict (which Corp. Counsel said was not evident) and the appearance or optics of a potential conflict, which some members said warranted additional review or mitigation.