Voters in the November 3 election will decide whether the Honolulu prosecuting attorney should be limited to two consecutive four-year terms.

Honolulu City Council members voted unanimously on January 29 to add the measure to the 2020 election ballot.

Voters last addressed a potential term limit on the prosecutor in 2016.

That year, citizens voted down a measure that would have established a three-year term limit for the prosecuting attorney, the mayor and council members.

Chuck Totto, executive director of the Honolulu Ethics Commission, resigned effective immediately.

Totto acknowledged some commissioners do not trust him to make important decisions. He blamed his resignation, in part, on his longstanding adversarial relationship with the administration of Mayor Kirk Caldwell.

Through a spokesperson, Caldwell thanked Totto for his service to the city. Caldwell will face off against Totto’s attorney, former Honolulu Mayor Peter Carlisle, in this year’s mayoral race.

Totto has not decided what he will do next, but confirmed he will not seek the vacant position leading the State Ethics Commission.

Several Honolulu departments and agencies will soon be moving into the recently renovated Kapalama Hale, a 55,000 square-foot building formerly known as the Sprint Building.

The first phase of relocation begins mid-June with the Department of Customer Service driver licensing and Satellite City Hall operations moving from City Square to the new facility. Other departments, including the Ethics Commission, are scheduled to move at a later date.

To minimize disruption of service to the public, the moves will occur on weekends with only one day of closure for each facility.

The Honolulu Charter Commission is considering a proposal today to clarify conflict-of-interest provisions for city employees and officials. Current charter provisions prohibit employees and officials from soliciting or accepting any gift, directly or indirectly, if it can reasonably be inferred the gift is intended to influence the officer or employee in the performance of official duties. The new proposal would prohibit only those gifts intended to influence an officer or employee in the performance of official duties and benefiting the official, his or her family, or individuals or organizations with which he or she has a past, present, or future connection.

Proponents argue the proposal creates a clear standard of conduct, while opponents claim the changes would make it more difficult to enforce gift restrictions in the future. It is inherently difficult to prove the intent behind a gift or the existence of a connection with the recipient. The proposal, therefore, will likely result in individuals, namely lobbyists, avoiding penalties. Interestingly enough, several commission members are current or former lobbyists, or work for organizations employing lobbyists.