Laserfiche WebLink
IRVINE: Bobby Jean, can you just say a bit about what the vote on the non- <br />partisan, why they're in opposition? I suppose they are a Party and that might mean <br />why. <br />LEITHEAD-TODD: Part of it is Party, but some of the rationale in opposition to non- <br />partisan was similar to the rationale for our support of single member districts. We think <br />that in a non-partisan election, by removing labels from people, you're really removing <br />information about the candidates from the population, and that most of the Parties go <br />through a process where you have Precinct meetings, you have a County Convention, <br />you adopt a platform, you take positions on various issues, and so there is a process <br />before people run as candidates where they receive input from the entire island. And <br />also for those of us who go to the State Convention, we get input from the entire State <br />regarding their positions on particular issues. When you run in a non-partisan election, <br />you don't have any of that, what we consider grassroots input, so we think that it <br />weakens grassroots participation in the political process. You know that some of the <br />criticism you have about the current system, we think will be worse in a non-partisan <br />situation. We think it will favor the candidate who is an incumbent. We think it will <br />favor the candidate who has the biggest war chest. That's some of the reason we are <br />also opposed to the single member district. Those things cut both ways for us as <br />Democrats. If I happen to be the Democrat — <br />RAY: You mean opposed to the at -large district? <br />LEITHEAD-TODD: Yes, we are opposed to the at -large. It raises the cost of the <br />• elections and it also, I think, makes it more difficult for grassroots participation. <br />RAY: Okay. Thank you. Harold Jim and Patrick Kahawaiola'a. <br />KAHAWAIOLA'A: Good evening. My name is Patrick Kahawaiola'a. I'm a Native <br />Hawaiian and a resident of Keaukaha. I would like to preface my statement, and <br />maybe show some disappointment, but, however, with our coming before this Charter <br />Commission, being asked to propose some language for Charter review a month ago, <br />and not have had the opportunity by the Commission to even receive any kind of <br />acknowledgment, approval, or disapproval, of our language based on, maybe, some <br />unfounded fears that we hope maybe could have been cleared up. So let me again <br />thank you for allowing us, as Native Hawaiians, to come forward and make testimony. It <br />pains me based on the fact I don't know how many Native Hawaiians, or somebody <br />sitting here, that have really, within their hearts, the ideas and the thoughts that what <br />Native Hawaiians go through in their own lands. However, I'm not going to dwell there <br />because I believe you have responsibilities, and the responsibilities that you, some so <br />aptly gave testimony to, with different people that I've been privy to sit in on in your <br />discussion here with interacting with other people that gave testimony, was that one, I <br />guess, Commission member mentioned that they were duly constituted under the laws, <br />and as far as they were concerned, they're operating here in a legal fashion. I'm not <br />saying that you're illegal. I'm saying that you need to consider the facts and the plights <br />of the Native Hawaiian. When you took this job, some of you swore to uphold the <br />12 <br />