The Honolulu Ethics Commission voted Wednesday to adopt a media policy that severely restricts what any of its seven members, longtime Executive Director Chuck Totto and staff can tell news reporters.

The policy, adopted 5-1 with Commission Chairwoman Katy Chen the sole “no” vote, comes about a month after city Corporation Counsel Donna Leong chastised Totto for comments on a case involving former City Councilman Nestor Garcia. Totto told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser that his staff raised questions about the validity of Garcia’s votes on the city’s $6 billion rail project and major land use decisions after the Ethics Commission found that he improperly accepted gifts from lobbyists and parties that would benefit from those land use approvals.

The new policy, drafted by commission member Riki May Amano, a former Circuit Court judge on Hawaii island, in effect, prevents any commission member, Totto or his staff from attempting to explain, elaborate on or clarify any positions taken by the commission without first discussing the matter with at least the commission chairman.

Queries by the media are to be directed to the executive director, who is to work with staff on a response “and consult with the Ethics Commission, if time permits.”

In circumstances where a response to media is needed immediately, the executive director is to respond after consulting with the commission’s chairman, vice chairman or a designee.

“To avoid confusion and potentially contradictory information, Ethics Commissioners and/or staff shall not communicate with media on behalf of the Ethics Commission without prior written authorization from the executive director,” the policy states.

Additionally, any written media communications put out by the commission now needs to be sent to, in order, commission members, complainants and respondents (when applicable), the mayor and his Cabinet, City Council members, and then media and members of the general public who have asked to see commission news releases.

After the meeting, Gerald Kato, a University of Hawaii journalism professor, said in response to a reporter’s questions that the public seems to have a low priority in finding out what’s going on under the new rule.

“That may not be the intent of the rules, but it certainly creates that impression that the public is secondary or ancillary to the process, and yet the public is a very important part of the process.”

“Controlling the message or the messenger” is the wrong tack “if the powers that be feel that (Totto’s) wrong,” Kato said. “Let’s have an open and honest debate about it.”

Leong, who has had other public disagreements with Totto, submitted written testimony supporting the new media policy as drafted by Amano. Leong cited a May 28 Star-Advertiser story in which Totto states that his staff contends that votes taken by Garcia that benefited the interests of lobbyists who gave him gifts he failed to disclose should be nullified.

“I do not believe the commission has the authority to determine that a violation nullifies a Council member’s vote on any matter,” Leong said her letter to the commission. “Such an assertion, which has far-ranging implications, should not be made lightly or without consideration of the proven facts and circumstances of the case.”

Totto’s comments to the Star-Advertiser “illustrate the importance of the adoption of the commission’s proposed media policy,” Leong said. “This is especially important when such comments are outside of the scope of the advisory opinion.”

A commission staff report, however, objected to the language in the Amano draft media policy.

“The policy should not restrict staff’s ability to efficiently, promptly and accurately respond to media inquires,” the staff report said.

To have the executive director contact commission members to get approval on responses to the media “will be counterproductive to the goals of ethics education and transparency,” the report said. “If (the commission) is unable to promptly and professionally respond to media inquiries, the media will get its information from other sources and (the commission) will lose the opportunity for timely input into the discussion.”

As for the issue of responding to media requests for interpretation of advisory opinions, the staff wrote: “To effectively communicate to the public, city work forces and the media, staff needs to be able to interpret the practical effect that a formal advisory opinion will likely have on similar ethics issues in the future.”

Alternative draft media policies proposed by commission staff were not discussed or voted on Wednesday.

Amano could not be reached for comment Wednesday afternoon.

The minutes of a discussion on the topic at the commission’s May 13 meeting show Amano explained that the commission’s advisory opinions should be able to stand alone without any interpretation by Totto, commission staff or commission members.

“To me, comment sometimes is elaboration and that’s not what you want when you issue an advisory opinion,” Amano said at the May meeting. “It has to speak for itself.”

But Commissioner Michael Lilly, a former state attorney general, raised concerns about the language. “When an advisory opinion is issued that has city-wide concern … the media may want to have somebody explain, I mean, that’s what they do,” he said at the May meeting.

Lilly was out of the country Wednesday and did not take part in the vote on the policy.

Commission Chairwoman Chen also raised concerns at the May meeting, saying that not being allowed to elaborate defeats one of the commission’s primary goals: to educate the public. “If you can’t explain or anything or comment any way to media inquiries about an opinion, then I think that diminishes our ability as a commission to educate the public on ethics. And I think that’s a disservice.”

Remaining unresolved is the issue of whether there should be an invalidation of the votes of Garcia and former Councilman Romy Cachola, who also was fined for not disclosing that he accepted free golf and meals from lobbyists who have an interest in rail and other land use development approvals. Cachola, after being fined by the commission last fall, said he was being picked on unfairly and that other Council members also had accepted similar gifts.

City Council Chairman Ernie Martin said last month that he has asked Leong’s office to look into the matter and offer legal advice. Leong said Wednesday she would not comment on a legal opinion requested by a client because it would be privileged and confidential.