Comm No 0053.03 - Ad Hoc Committee Report re Charter Amendment Summaries

Home

PROPOSAL #10 (CA-18) RELATING TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION MAINTENANCE FUND: Shall the Charter of the County of Hawaii be amended to provide the Department of Finance full management responsibilities for the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Maintenance Fund and to expand the purposes for which the fund may be expended? This proposal would change the responsibility for administering the maintenance fund from the Department of Parks and Recreation to the Department of Finance. In addition, expenditures directly related to the purpose of public safety maintenance and preservation of lands and easements acquired by the public access, open space, and natural resources preservation fund would include building and installing toilet facilities, maintenance equipment storage sheds, weather protection structures, and creating trails and paths for land access. This proposal further refines the procedures by which stewardship grants are applied for and processed, to include requiring a detailed business plan and returning unexpended funds to the maintenance fund within thirty days of the final report. The commission finds that placing the maintenance fund in the department of finance and expanding the purposes for which the maintenance fund may be expended is in the best interest of the public access, open space, and natural resources preservation program. PROPOSAL #11 (CA-20) RELATING TO MANDATORY CHARTER REVIEWS: Shall the Charter of the County of Hawaiibe amended to align the process by which the County Charter Commission conducts its review of the Hawai‘i County Charter with the current requirements of State law? This proposal would more clearly define the process by which the county charter commission conducts its decennial review of the Hawai Revised Statutes (HRS), Consequently, the proposal would augment current charter review procedures by more closely aligning the commission’s charter review timeline and process withthe HRS structure established for initial charter development. In addition, the commission finds that appointing the commission in July of the year prior to the the charter review year does not provide additional time for the commission’s work, due to a state requirement that the review be accomplished within one year. As a result, the proposal would have the commission be appointed in January of the charter review year, which would allow for the completion of the commission’s review and development of ballot language in time for the electors of the county to vote on any proposed amendments during the general election of the year following the charter review year. 5