|
minutes 03-18-00Page 21 of 27
<br />isn’t any privacy, and even the Corporation Counsel agrees with that.
<br />And finally, on page 31 concerning - I’m sorry. I’m going a little fast. If I’m going too fast, please tell me. I’m trying to keep
<br />this short and simple, and not get off. In the middle of page 31, on Section (d), it says ‘Business conducted by the Council,
<br />Board or Commission during a meeting which does not conform to the provisions of this section shall be null and void.’ I’ve
<br />pointed out to the Council several times the things that they have done where they violated the Sunshine Law, but there’s no
<br />provision, unless you want to take them to court, to make that work, so we either need to get rid of that or put some teeth in
<br />it. There needs to be some way that this can be dealt with. Theoretically, the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office is the one charged
<br />by the Sunshine Law with enforcing the Sunshine Law, but we’ve had virtually no response from the Prosecuting Attorney
<br />concerning these things. I have made about five complaints. The most recent one was within the last two months. Never have
<br />received a return from them.
<br />Okay, page 32, on the Board of Ethics. Now, I know we talked about the Police Commission, and Mr. Yuen said you can’t
<br />move - he doesn’t want to move the Police Commission out from under the Police Department because they get inside
<br />information. Well, right now we’re being hanged on our own petard because the Police Union went to the Legislature two
<br />years ago, and got a law passed which gives them even more protection from having anything that they do, as far as their job,
<br />not be made public knowledge. I think that’s what the basis of the County Council’s complaint, or information to the Police
<br />Commission is that they can’t violate that with the Chief because he’s protected under this. And I don’t know that he is
<br />protected under that law, but apparently that’s what they’re saying is this law exists, so they can’t ask him any questions
<br />about this because it has to do with his privacy and it probably has to do with the ongoing court case. But, the Board of Ethics
<br />and the Police Commission at least, and possibly the Liquor Commission Board of Review and the Planning Board of
<br />Review are oversight committees, and they should not be appointed by the Mayor. They should not be appointed by one
<br />person. The Police Commission overlooks nothing except people in the Executive Branch. The Ethics Board, while it could
<br />overlook things in other branches of the government, most likely is going to be overlooking things in the Executive Branch.
<br />You shouldn’t have the head of the department that they’re going to be looking at appointing the people who are the
<br />members. If you go along with what Mr. Yuen says, and decide that we shouldn’t remove the Police Commission from the
<br />Police Department, we should at least have these oversight Boards appointed by the County Council, and they should be
<br />appointed with each Council member appointing someone from their district, with the approval of the rest of the Council.
<br />That’s a simple change, and I’m not saying to take those other Boards and Commissions away from the Mayor because he
<br />has to run the government, but the oversight Boards should be removed from being appointed by one person. Yes sir?
<br />SANTANGELO: Del, that begs a question just real quick. The Council is a Legislative Branch dealing with policy.
<br />PRANKE: Right.
<br />SANTANGELO: The Executive is not a professional, only allowed to serve for a limited amount of years, and is island-wide
<br />representation. In other words, runs an island-wide race, and given the island-wide mandate to come in with that person’s
<br />policies and mission. Why wouldn’t it be appropriate for that person to be elected, and come in and say this is how we want
<br />this overlooked? I’m not, in any way, in conflict with what you’re saying, but just trying to look at the balance of power
<br />because I’ve struggled with that too. You move it to the Council and you have such a limited scope vs. the overall that you
<br />get from the Executive Branch, so in a way I’m confused. It seems to me it is appropriate for that elected person, who then
<br />oversees a bureaucracy.
<br />PRANKE: Well, the Police Commission, as it’s currently set up, there’s supposed to be one person from each district, so I
<br />would suggest that, theoretically, the Legislators from that district should know their district better than a Mayor. The current
<br />Mayor was elected by just a little over a third of the votes.
<br />SANTANGELO: But you know, as long as we’re going to allow other parties than just two, we’re going to have that.
<br />PRANKE: I understand that but they’re elected by a little over a third of the vote, okay?
<br />SANTANGELO: But I agree with you.
<br />PRANKE: So that’s the point. But I’m only talking about the oversight committees, and I’m not certain that the Liquor
<br />Commission Board of Review or the Planning Commission Board of Review, but certainly the Ethics Board should be nine
<br />members, and the Police Commission should be appointed, and that gives us a diverse opinion rather than - because I think
<br />we’re seeing with the Police Commission right now, the problem of that. I wasn’t supposed to say this. Mr. Mills went to the
<br />Waimea Police Station the day before the Police Commission met, and attempted to get the police officer to withdraw his
<br />complaint. That’s totally out of bounds and it may be a violation of the County Charter. But I really wasn’t supposed to say
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 03-18-00.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|