Harris donors
fined for big gifts

An investigation into excessive
donations to the mayor is ongoing

---

By Gordon Y.K. Pang
gpang@starbulletin.com

Five companies and individuals who made excessive contributions to Mayor Jeremy Harris' campaign will be penalized for the violations.

That does not mean the mayor's campaign did anything wrong, said Chris Parsons, an attorney for Harris' gubernatorial campaign.

But Robert Watada, executive director for the state Campaign Spending Commission, said his office is continuing an investigation into the Harris organization, noting that about 60 companies are being scrutinized.

Restaurateur Alan Ho, two associates and a number of his business interests agreed to pay the largest fine, $5,500, to the public campaign financing fund.

Ho and the various entities -- which include Seafood Village; Antonio's Steak, Ribs & Pasta; Lobster & Crab House; and Royal Steak & Seafood -- jointly gave $6,000 to the Harris committee's 1996 campaign and $15,500 toward the 2000 effort. Ho is also a member of the city Police Commission.

Campaign laws allow for a maximum of $4,000 in contributions from a single interest during a four-year mayoral election cycle.

According to Watada, Ho said he had no knowledge he violated the law, adding that his only knowledge of campaign spending limits came from reading newspaper stories.

The others agreeing to settle their cases were:

>> The AES Design Group and Dexter Yee, which contributed $6,000 to the Harris campaign. AES will pay $750.

>> Hawaii Design Associates and Melvin Kuraoka, which donated $5,000 to the Harris campaign. Hawaii Design will pay $500.

>> Community Planning Inc. and Bernard Kea, which contributed $6,000 to the Harris campaign. Community Planning will pay $500.

>> John Farias Jr., who donated $5,000 to the campaign. He will pay $500.

Commission member Della Au Belatti asked why the Harris campaign's actions were not being called into action.

Watada said a broader investigation into excessive contributions to the Harris campaign is still under way.

Parsons told the Star-Bulletin that he does not believe any wrong was committed by the organization.

"The way the law is structured, it puts the responsibility on the contributor not to make excess campaign contributions," Parsons said. "It's probably impossible for the campaign to police it. There's no way of knowing what connections there are, for example, among various corporations, and the law recognizes that."

Watada, however, has a different interpretation.

"The campaign has a very clear obligation to monitor contributors and contribution limits," Watada said after yesterday's meeting.

According to Watada, one of the five excessive donations has been returned to the donor.

Parsons said the campaign intends to return any excessive contributions, but added that it should be emphasized the campaign committee does not seek or want excess contributions.

"We discourage them because they embarrass the campaign," he said. "We don't want to be embarrassed."

Belatti, during the meeting, also questioned whether the Ho case would be better served if forwarded to prosecutors.

"What I'm afraid of is that if we agree to this conciliation is that what we've learned is that we can violate (the law) and we can just say we didn't know," Belatti said.

But committee Chairman Duane Black said the commission's actions yesterday would be sending a proper message to the public. "I think a lot of people are going to wake up," he said.