Laserfiche WebLink
minutes 04-01-00Page 15 of 22 <br />BARRY: Thank you for being here. First I’ll address number 3 on the Summary of the Proposed Charter Amendment, with <br />some additional information. Since the last public hearing last week, I have done more research, and in every area a Manager <br />type of government has increased, and not decreased, as was stated by one person at the last public hearing. I don’t believe <br />that one can take a few isolated disgruntled cases and view that as a trend. I have statistics and charts to support these <br />findings. We also can’t look at Hawaii as a normal County because the State allows us but one City, the City and County of <br />Honolulu. Our island is actually run like a City with rural and urban areas. <br />There are 6,832 local governments in the United States with populations over 2,500. Out of the total, 48.3% operate under the <br />Council-Manager government. It is the fastest growing form of government in the United States, outpacing its competitor, the <br />Mayor-Council form. There are 2,988 Mayor-Council governments, 43.7% of the total types of communities. Again, those <br />over the population of 2,500. The other forms of government are commission, town meeting and representative town <br />meeting, making up only 8%. <br />During the past 16 years, an average of 63 U.S. communities per year have adopted the Council Management form. <br />In working with your parameters in the proposal, regardless, by having a Managing Director, even with a Mayor, for him to <br />be effective, the Charter amendments must stress that the Manager needs to be granted enough authority that he or she can <br />truly manage the operation independent of day-to-day interference and oversight by the elected official. The manager must be <br />selected based on qualifications and experiences that are defined in the Charter. This avoids the appointment of a patronage <br />position. You do propose hiring the Managing Director by the Mayor with the approval of the County Council. To be <br />consistent, you must have the firing of the Managing Director by the Mayor with the approval, or confirmation, of the County <br />Council. A manager whose fate lies in the hands of one elected official, i.e. the Mayor, looks to that one person to set the <br />agenda regardless of who appointed him. The manager must have the authority to develop and administer the budget. Final <br />approval will, of course, be up to the elected officials but the initial development should be done by the professional. The <br />manager should have the authority to select and terminate most of the Department Directors, which he would hire based on <br />qualifications and experience. There should be language in the Charter that states that all employees work under the direction <br />of the manager, via the Department Directors, and also that states that except for the purpose of inquiry, the Mayor and <br />Council should deal directly with the manager and not with his subordinates. Again, this establishes a clear line of authority, <br />enhances the professionalism of employees and reduces personal patronage. <br />The manager also should actively participate in the development of policy that is approved by the elected officials. These are <br />key components of a professional management position regardless of a strong Mayor or a Council-Manager form of <br />government. <br />I’ll go on to the summary proposal number 2. You do not mention the possibility of increasing the County Council as a <br />whole, but reducing it to 6 and having 3 at-large, which I totally oppose for reasons stated at the last public hearing. <br />However, I do feel we should increase the number of Council members to 11, 13, or 15 member Council, which would be far <br />more representative. The Council members would be better attached and in tune with their constituents. With only 9 <br />members, the districts at-large and council members are not likely to be known by the majority of their constituents. In <br />addition, it is far too easy to buy-off, pay-off, or influence just five members. It would be far easier for the average person to <br />run and get elected. In other words, it would not take $30,000 or more to run a race. This would mean less influence by <br />special interest donations. It would also reduce the Council members’ workload to a more manageable level. <br />And on to Elections should be partisan. There is good reason for this. Political parties are made up of people from the <br />community regardless of what party they’re from. They give the candidate an instant base and an initial place to go for moral <br />and volunteer support. They are also a chance for people from the community to do a very close examination of a candidate <br />prior to him or her going to the public. Remove this influence of the political parties and then you are left with only the <br />influence of special interest. <br />Thank you for hearing me out. Aloha. I’m a fourth generation kama’aina, born and raised on the Island of Lanai, Patty Barry. <br />RAY: Thank you. George Wallace. <br />HERKES: Wait. Can we have comments? Do you want to keep going? <br />RAY: If it’s anything new that we haven’t covered before. I think that testimony’s been brought up and I think you’ve <br />commented. Are you going to comment in regard to more Council people? <br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 04-01-00.htm7/1/2011 <br /> <br />