|
Transcript of Meeting of April 29, 2000Page 19 of 64
<br />excited reading that. And go and look at the State Constitution and tell me if you get excited reading
<br />that. I suspect that you’ll get excited reading the Preamble of the State Constitution, but not the former.
<br />And maybe we ought to start out with the right spirit. This thing says well, we’re going to support the
<br />laws of the land and we adopt our Charter. Whoop-de-doo. And you didn’t write that. That’s not a
<br />criticism to you.
<br />Article I, Incorporation and Geographical Limits. I’d like to have you turn to Section 1-2, Geographical
<br />Limits, and I would suggest that, perhaps, you’ll have to discuss this with your legal counsel, that
<br />perhaps you add some language ‘except as otherwise provided by law.’ And the reason for this is that if
<br />you look at the description of the geographical limits, it encompasses the lands and the waters adjacent
<br />to this, and I would suggest that the County’s powers do not extend to certain types of property, in
<br />particular the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands which are sovereign lands, and not under the
<br />jurisdiction of the County or the State, but under the jurisdiction of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
<br />and that is a Federal Law. They are completely separate and distinct lands. They are held by the
<br />fiduciaries, and I don’t say that just because I’m Native Hawaiian, but it’s the truth. Number 2 is that
<br />with respect to any lands which are held in trust by the State of Hawaii. There may be some cases where
<br />the County does not have certain powers over those lands, and I would ask you to look at that in
<br />conjunction with your Council.
<br />And one other preparatory remark, and that is whatever I say here today, and whatever work you’ve
<br />done, I think the key to all of this, and I want to say it again because I believe I said it last time I testified
<br />before you, is that how is the electorate going to perceive this. My experience has been, over the years,
<br />that the more proposals that come before the electorate, the less effective the voters’ actions will be in
<br />terms of whether to adopt or not adopt. I suspect that you’ll get many more blank votes. So, while I have
<br />a lot of things to say in terms of where you might improve this document, I urge your caution in terms of
<br />putting too many proposals forth, and I understand that some of you, if not all of you, are concerned
<br />about that, and I hope that you’ll take that into very careful consideration as you make your final
<br />decisions over the next few months.
<br />I’d like to turn to Article III, Section 3-3, page 2, and this is with respect to the Qualifications of an
<br />individual to run for Council. And you’ll notice there that it says ‘a person must be a citizen of the
<br />United States of America, and have been a duly qualified elector of the county for at least one year
<br />immediately preceding election, or appointment. A person must also have been a resident and registered
<br />voter of the district from which the person is to be elected or appointed for at least 90 days immediately
<br />preceding the Primary Election or the appointment.’ That section was amended in 1990, as I’m sure you
<br />recall, and I think, if we’re going to have these kinds of requirements for the Council, then I think these
<br />kinds of requirements should be imposed on all officers of the County – all officers of the County. And
<br />if you go through and you look at the most recent Charter Amendments, in particular that of the
<br />Planning Commission, you’ll note in there that the language talks about being a resident, does not have a
<br />time limit on it, and I’m not sure that these time limits are constitutional; you’ll have to discuss that with
<br />your counsel, and it has residency and it has registered voter requirements put into it. I wrote that section
<br />of the amendment, and I believe that the language contained in there, and if there’s going to be a
<br />residency requirement, it should apply to all officers. I’m not sure that’s constitutional. But the language
<br />with respect to length of time for residency, I’m sorry. Yes?
<br />IRVINE: Could I ask you what you mean by officer? Do you mean like Department Heads?
<br />TYLER: Officers as defined by the Charter.
<br />IRVINE: Okay.
<br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 04-29-00.html7/1/2011
<br />
<br />
|