|
minutes 03-18-00Page 9 of 27
<br />PAVAO: Good morning Chairman Ray and members. My name is Milton Pavao. I’m the Manager of the Department of
<br />Water Supply, and first of all, I’d like to thank you very much for this opportunity to provide comments to the Commission.
<br />I, as with Mr. Ben, brought a comment sheet from our Water Commission, signed by our Vice-Chairman, Mr. John Tolmie,
<br />due to the fact that our Chairman, Mr. Clark, was out of town. Our Commission would like to comment on the requirement
<br />that the Commission be consisted of nine members of each of the nine Council districts. Our Commission feels that the
<br />present set-up works really well for them, especially in a Department of Water Supply such as us, where decisions are made
<br />based on the island-wide water system. To have individuals from nine Council districts would tend to encourage the ‘what’s
<br />in it for my district’ philosophy. We operate now with six representatives of the geographical districts and three at-large, and
<br />I think the three at-large brings in a good mix of comments and decisions. And as I said, the present make-up has worked
<br />well. We found it a little unusual that one amendment being proposed now contradicts the amendment that is being asked of
<br />the Water Commission, and we find that kind of unusual, but I guess, as you can read, and I passed out copies of Mr.
<br />Tolmie’s comments, that we would prefer that the Water Commission remain as is. And as the old cliche says, ‘if it ain’t
<br />broke, don’t fix it’ because it does work well.
<br />On another matter, this is in regards to Qualifications of Heads of Department of Public Works and the Department of Water
<br />Supply, I am a registered engineer in the State of Hawaii, and I would like to provide these comments in opposition to the
<br />proposed Charter Amendment that would eliminate the requirement that the Heads of the Department of Public Works and
<br />Department of Water Supply be registered engineers. As far as I know, registered engineers head a great majority of the
<br />utilities and the Departments of Public Works around the country, and specifically in the State of Hawaii. In our case, being a
<br />water utility, the essence of the service we provide relies heavily on logical scientific considerations and sound engineering
<br />analysis. For me to effectively lead and direct my department, I need to know the specifics necessary to make these decisions,
<br />and a lot of times when we do things, the cost is involved too, and we need that background and that engineering and
<br />scientific requirements to make these sound decisions. It would not be in the best interest of the public, department, nor to an
<br />individual to take on technical responsibilities without the education and training necessary to do so.
<br />In our County government, and speaking from my past experience, I’ve been asked to speak to a lot of groups on a variety of
<br />subjects, and the public is no longer satisfied with general information. Many times they want to know specific information
<br />for things that you contemplate. Being an engineer, having that background, answers can be given right on the spot because
<br />we know the history, we know the scientific reasons and logistical rationale for what we’re doing. Kind of like ‘we’ll get
<br />back to you’ answer if the head or the manager does not know is not good for anyone. We don’t feel it is. Our department,
<br />when we go out and do presentations, we want the people to trust and respect the department by providing them answers as
<br />readily as we can. It is, therefore, beneficial to the public and the Department Head that he has an education and training to
<br />properly field these questions. In summary, we feel that a requirement for registered engineer as the head of the Department
<br />of Public Works and Department of Water Supply is in the best interest of the public, the county, and the department. We
<br />therefore urge you to withdraw the proposed Charter Amendment. Incidentally, on my comment sheet, if you take a look at
<br />the bottom, this was discussed at one of our sub-committee meetings of our Water Commission, and the Water Commission
<br />concurs and supports the comments made by it’s Manager. Any questions?
<br />SANTANGELO: Milton, in this representation thing that Tolmie has here, you have nine Commissioners now.
<br />PAVAO: Correct.
<br />SANTANGELO: Could you tell me which ones don’t live in the Puna/Hamakua/Hilo area?
<br />PAVAO: We are one short right now so we only have eight. I don’t know the answer to that.
<br />SANTANGELO: Because I defended you. I said that we should have more Commissioners from this side of the island
<br />because we have a lot more water to deal with.
<br />IRVINE: Yes, he tried.
<br />PAVAO: I don’t want to get there.
<br />SANTANGELO: No. It really is an attempt to try to, kind of, and I understand where you’re coming from, but if you could
<br />just make comment to - and trying to be a little bit more open to this, and maybe we’re trying to be consistent too, in terms of
<br />this representation from around the island. And it was interesting, Milton, that you said you’re trying to be representative of
<br />the island. We have an awful lot going on economically on the other side of the island, and geographically they’re given
<br />basically one Commissioner, and it just seems if we could - I understand on a Council level, that’s what happens. You have
<br />this parochial territorialism. Commissions tend to be, because of a willing to serve more than a political agenda, I found it to
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 03-18-00.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|