|
always going to be there, I don't care how you -, what you call it, but I think I'm looking at the
<br />public being better served because it makes for more of a straight election. It's real hard to plunk,
<br />you know; you get a clear winner. It clears up a lot of the things that the public likes to beat to •
<br />death.
<br />But -, so I guess the first question is how did single member come up? Was that something that
<br />the Commission itself, or was there some party or entity that brought that idea to you?
<br />BETHEA: It was the Kona people.
<br />YUEN: Well, it was constantly on -, it had been on the agenda.
<br />SANTANGELO: Oh, okay.
<br />YUEN: You know, the -, it had been voted on. I was actually surprised how many
<br />times it had been voted on, but there had always been a very strong interest, particularly in Kona,
<br />to have single member districts, and I think it's been -. I'm sure it was debated at the very, the
<br />very first Charter, whether to go single member.
<br />L'ORANGE: Well, there was always frustration in any place other than Hilo is how does
<br />anybody run without getting the vote in Hilo? I mean, that was the practical sort of thing. And
<br />there was -;the Shikada plan was a compromise that -, how many, we voted on three, four
<br />Charters before the County Council was finally, you know, it was -. So it is a controversy that
<br />went back to the initiation of the Charter.
<br />SANTANGELO: I think you did a good job with that one. And so, but that brings me to the
<br />question, you know, with John, right, my supporter, John as the Chair, was pretty much what you
<br />said is a fair minded person and also has the work ethic and is open to suggestions.
<br />My question I have, and this will be my main question, and this is where I struggle right now as a
<br />Commissioner, and it deals with the public input. My thing is informed decisions. And so I put it
<br />down as what is good government versus public's wants or informed decisions versus emotion?
<br />So an issue comes -up that may be emotional on a public viewpoint. How did you guys deal with
<br />that in terms of was there a process that you looked at and said how does this make for good -?
<br />Was there an ethic or -, you know, how does this make for good government versus, gee, I think
<br />this one sounded great but it's, you know, emotional but it doesn't translate to good government?
<br />Was there a process in that or -? And maybe I'm not making myself clear.
<br />L'ORANGE; John, I think the Commissioners voted their conscience. They did their
<br />homework, they did their reading, they listened to the department heads, they listened to the
<br />public, and they voted what they felt from the information that they had was appropriate. And we
<br />had good discussion on the floor. I said Bob was an excellent chairman. We had disagreements;
<br />it was never personal. But we had good discussion. I think you, as Commissioners, got to go
<br />17
<br />
|