My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0521.001 1996-1998
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
1996-1998
>
COM 0521.001 1996-1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/20/2016 3:58:36 PM
Creation date
5/10/2008 7:57:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
1996-1998
Communication
0521
Point
001
Author
Richard D. Wurdeman, Corporation Counsel
Communications - Referred To
FC
Comments
Presented: FC - 10/14/97
Document Relationships
AGE FC 10/14/1997 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\1996-1998\Finance Committee (FC)
BIL 147 Draft 01 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Bills\1996-1998
COM 0521.000 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Communications\1996-1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> Ms. Connie Kiriu <br /> 25 August 1997 <br /> Paye 2 <br /> from the enacting clause or to limit the scope the statute (or <br /> in this case, charter provision) something that would otherwise <br /> be within its terms. c'ommerro Hank of Rancor itv, 762 SW 2d <br /> 931 (Mo. App. 1988). <br /> Normally, were we to strictly construe this law "Ezcept as <br /> otherwise provided...', we would conclude that the ezception <br /> need be included in the same document, i.e., the Charter. But, <br /> since the Charter contains no ezceptions, we must conclude that <br /> the obvious intent of the framers, was to allow for ezceptions <br /> to be created by ordinance. <br /> Accordingly, we Conclude that the language of Sec. 13-13(c) <br /> allows the Council to provide by ordinance, for the Council <br /> Chair (or some other officer), to sign contracts involving the <br /> Legislative Branch. <br /> We emphasize, however, that this opinion is limited to these <br /> contracts necessary to Carry out the Legislative function. It <br /> does II.4~ eztend to those contracts involving an ezercise of <br /> authority eaclusively vested in the ezecutive branch. See <br /> Harris v. Desoto, 80 Haw 425 (1996). <br /> II. Application of Civil Service Law to Council Contracts <br /> You have also raised the question of the applicability of Civil <br /> Service Law to Council contracts, in light of the decision in <br /> Konno v. County of Hawaii, 85 Haw 61 (1997). That case made it <br /> clear that under ezisting law, services, the nature of which <br /> have customarily and historically been performed by civil <br /> servants, may not be contracted, unless there is a specified <br /> ezemption in Civil Service Law. <br /> HRS Sec. 76-77(10), ezcepts from Civil Service those services <br /> specifically eaempted by any other State Statute. Such <br /> ezemption for the Council is found in Sec. 46-32, which gives <br /> the Council of each County broad authority to "appoint and <br /> employ personnel as it deems necessary'. <br /> In view of that language, it is our opinion that the authority <br /> of the Council to enter into contracts, necessary to carry out <br /> the Legislative function, has not been altered by the gonno <br /> decision. <br /> Sincerel <br /> . WURDEMAN <br /> Corporation Counsel <br /> RDW:1694Lbre <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.