|
minutes 04-01-00Page 9 of 22
<br />50% are registered and less than 50% vote. The people have such a power they can demonstrate through an individual
<br />initiative that is far more important than money. Unions have proven that because 90% of our legislation out of the last 40
<br />years has come from Union influence because they would put the people out there and support politicians. The other part is if
<br />you have a representative in your district that you have a lot of trouble communicating with, if you have these three at-large,
<br />does it not hold these three accountable, and give you three other alternatives or possibly four advocates. So, there’s this part
<br />of it. And so, money, and I have to agree with you, has influence. I really don’t like what’s being sold on this island that
<br />because you got a check from someone, you’re a crook, and that somehow bought your integrity. But one moment I look at
<br />the people representing us and I see very little community service. I see very volunteerism. I don’t see them paying the dues
<br />within the community. So, then I would be suspect in that area. So again, it comes back to the public. So, I’ve made my little
<br />pitch. I could go on forever, but it was that trying to balance what’s going on, and try to give a broad perspective, and I’ll tell
<br />you, public opinion has been very negative on this. So, thank you.
<br />FRANKEL: There are 9,000 responses running in my mind and I won’t be able to remember them all. But, look at the
<br />experience on other islands. I, quite frankly, think the Council that is least representative, or least grass roots oriented, is the
<br />Kauai County Council, elected at-large. Maui has that same problem. I can say that, both on this island and Oahu, you have
<br />single member districts where members are cognizant and responsive to the needs and concerns of other districts, so you
<br />didn’t have just the Council members from Kona voting against allowing a developer not to build that access road in Kona.
<br />You had Council members from other districts. You had people looking at it from a different perspective. The Council
<br />member from this district, which does not have constituents up there, voted against it. You had Councilman Dominic Yagong
<br />voting against it. He does not represent that area. On Oahu, you have folks that have concerns about when people creating the
<br />Kaiwi park on Oahu, they went to Council member Steve Holmes who, that area was not in his district. The people that were
<br />working on that were not from that district but they went to him. So, the fact that someone is at-large or single district, I think
<br />it’s a question of the person, not the function of how the government is structured as to whether someone’s responsive or not.
<br />But there’s no question that someone who’s running for at-large seat needs more money. I mean, you need more money to
<br />get your message out and, therefore, it does increase the influence of big money. And that’s not to say that big money is
<br />telling people how to vote, but it means that somebody who does not agree with, say, a developer, they’re not going to get a
<br />developer’s money. And someone who agrees with a developer, is going to get the developer’s money. So, it’s not a question
<br />of a quid quo pro. It’s a question of the person who doesn’t agree with the developer doesn’t have a level playing field. And
<br />if you have more of these seats that you need more money for, it means the people that do not support more and more
<br />development of everything don’t have a chance to compete. So -
<br />SANTANGELO: Just one quick comment.
<br />RAY: John.
<br />SANTANGELO: I thank you. We need more dialogue like that. The money issue has been so hard for me because I guess I
<br />come from such an ideal world that - I won’t go into myself, but I’ve seen people really pay their dues, really develop who
<br />and what they are, and they’re not for sale. But it is a point, which one? At what cost do we go one way or the other? And
<br />because of your comments on other issues, I really do trust the depth and the integrity that you give, and so I thank you for
<br />that. Again, I didn’t want to have the dialogue with everybody. I figured I’d pick on one person. It’s been really hard. It’s
<br />been hard for us because again, you see the good in your own heart of it, but do you put that in front of people so that it
<br />comes down to this ‘why not’. So, in an issue like this, what would be your comment about putting this out and letting people
<br />vote on it, or really, what is the good or bad of pulling it off ahead of time?
<br />FRANKEL: The only thing is that it jeopardizes all your things on the thing. I’ve seen e-mails going on already, ‘we’ve got
<br />to vote down everything the Charter Commission is recommending’, and that’s the risk you throw out there.
<br />SANTANGELO: Okay, thank you for articulating that.
<br />RAY: Okay, George has a quick question on the trails -
<br />MARTIN: Yes, one of your first statements was concern about the Planning
<br />Department changes and trails being left out of the loop. I know that there’s a department within DLNR that specifically
<br />deals with trails. Do you see it possible to possibly put a mechanism in there to trigger them coming in, in an instance where
<br />a trail possibly is in question? I mean, because it is like John indicated to me, a County issue and this is a State agency, but
<br />they do have overwhelming power in this particular matter, yes?
<br />FRANKEL: There’s a couple of issues. One is whether - I know that the Na’alahele Program doesn’t have enough money to
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 04-01-00.htm7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|