My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC 1999-12-04
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHC 1999-12-04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 12:38:29 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 4:02:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1999
Meeting date
12/4/1999
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1999-12-04 SP MTG
(Related)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\2000\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
HERKES: I just want to point out that the two Kona people voted for this. <br />• While you're saying Kona will be against it, we both voted for it. <br />RAY: That's good. <br />KUROZAWA: I want to say something real quick. I did vote for it but, my feeling <br />about these things, is that the people should vote, and I don't want to stonewall things <br />as a Commissioner, thinking even if they're going to vote against it, that's fine. But I <br />think the people should have a say. <br />HIGASHI: Opportunity to vote, yes. <br />SANTANGELO: The question is, I voted, not based on what a few people are, <br />maybe, going to come in here and beat up on it. I think the good doctor stated it very <br />clearly. But, as we go along, if other information comes up, this isn't written in stone <br />yet. Or is this pretty much we're going to put this up and we're going to fine tune it? <br />RAY: I think this is the strong will of the Commission at this point, to put <br />this up, and that's the way it should be presented. <br />HIGASHI: That's right. <br />RAY: I don't think we should be willy nilly about things. <br />BESS: Exactly. Bite the bullet. <br />SANTANGELO: I'd like to make a quick comment then. If you'll look at it, where it <br />points to the terms of Council members, it should say - second line - One member <br />shall be elected from each of the six `single' member districts. That should be put in <br />there, and then later on, it says for member elected in the six 'single" member districts, <br />because it states `at -large' but it doesn't say 'single' member, and that's going to be a <br />big thing when it comes to perception. <br />RAY: Okay, as with everything else, I think we'll have to have our <br />attorney - so maybe Roland can get together with Chris and get him to come up with <br />some proposed language that we have in the file, that exactly reflects the best <br />language. <br />HIGASHI: And it also reflects that we're using six State House of <br />Representative districts as a guideline, if it's lawful, so that we don't have to wait for the <br />Reapportionment Commission. <br />RAY: <br />HERKES: <br />Okay. Marni. <br />My feeling, on these votes, is that if we're voting for or against it, so <br />18 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.