My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHARTER 2019-05-10 (2018-2020)
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2018
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHARTER 2019-05-10 (2018-2020)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/21/2019 8:20:08 AM
Creation date
6/7/2019 3:04:21 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
Hawai`i County Charter Commission -11 May 10, 2019 <br />CHR. ADAMS: Okay. Okay, great. Any other discussion? Seeing no <br />Commissioners identifying that they would like to, all in favor of the motion to <br />pass Charter Amendment 28 on First Reading, please signify by saying "aye" <br />(aye), any opposed? Motion passes unanimously with Commissioners Bergin and <br />Hamano excused. <br />Vote on Motion The motion to pass CA -28 on First Reading was carried by the following <br />To Approve CA -28 roll call vote: <br />(Approved): <br />Ayes: Commissioners Galimba, Hopkins, Rice, <br />Roehrig, Saquing, Springer, Todd, <br />Zelko-Schlueter, and Chair Adams — 9 <br />Noes: None. <br />Absent: Commissioner Bergin and Hamano — 2 <br />Excused: None. <br />CHR. ADAMS: Moving on to Item 2 in New Business, Communication No. <br />47.1, that Transmits Charter Amendment 29, Draft 2 for First Reading. I would <br />entertain a motion to pass Charter Amendment 29, Draft 2 on First Reading. Is <br />there such a motion? <br />MS. GALIMBA: So moved. <br />CHR. ADAMS: Is there a second? <br />MS. RICE: Second. <br />CHR. ADAMS: It has been moved by Commissioner Galimba and seconded by <br />Commissioner Rice to pass Charter Amendment 29, Draft 2 on First Reading. <br />Discussion? <br />Commissioner Galimba. <br />MS. GALIMBA: So this proposal comes from discussions that I have had with <br />people in the Administration expressing a dissatisfaction with the process of <br />prioritizing funding for CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) projects and <br />dissatisfaction is not abnormal. People generally have you know, things that they <br />are not happy about but I have heard it from a number of different people and <br />especially I have heard it from Administration officials, especially the Planning <br />Department, saying that they would like to see CIP priorities be more transparent, <br />that criteria be more transparent. And I have also talked with Council members <br />and they have indicated that they would like more information about how CIP <br />projects are prioritized, that they are not getting that information. So this is just <br />Page 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.