My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC PH 2000-03-18
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2000
>
Minutes
>
Public Hearings
>
MIN CHC PH 2000-03-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/9/2018 12:58:43 PM
Creation date
3/7/2018 8:39:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
2000
Meeting date
3/18/2000
Type
MIN
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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
Pavao. I'm the Manager of the Department of Water Supply, and first of all, I'd like to <br />thank you very much for this opportunity to provide comments to the Commission. I, as <br />with Mr. Ben, brought a comment sheet from our Water Commission, signed by our <br />Vice -Chairman, Mr. John Tolmie, due to the fact that our Chairman, Mr. Clark, was out <br />of town. Our Commission would like to comment on the requirement that the <br />Commission be consisted of nine members of each of the nine Council districts. Our <br />Commission feels that the present set-up works really well for them, especially in a <br />Department of Water Supply such as us, where decisions are made based on the <br />island -wide water system. To have individuals from nine Council districts would tend to <br />encourage the `what's in it for my district' philosophy. We operate now with six <br />representatives of the geographical districts and three at -large, and I think the three at - <br />large brings in a good mix of comments and decisions. And as I said, the present <br />make-up has worked well. We found it a little unusual that one amendment being <br />proposed now contradicts the amendment that is being asked of the Water <br />Commission, and we find that kind of unusual, but I guess, as you can read, and I <br />passed out copies of Mr. Tolmie's comments, that we would prefer that the Water <br />Commission remain as is. And as the old cliche says, 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' <br />because it does work well. <br />On another matter, this is in regards to Qualifications of Heads of Department of <br />Public Works and the Department of Water Supply, I am a registered engineer in the <br />State of Hawaii, and I would like to provide these comments in opposition to the <br />proposed Charter Amendment that would eliminate the requirement that the Heads of <br />the Department of Public Works and Department of Water Supply be registered <br />engineers. As far as I know, registered engineers head a great majority of the utilities <br />and the Departments of Public Works around the country, and specifically in the State <br />of Hawaii. In our case, being a water utility, the essence of the service we provide <br />relies heavily on logical scientific considerations and sound engineering analysis. For <br />me to effectively lead and direct my department, I need to know the specifics necessary <br />to make these decisions, and a lot of times when we do things, the cost is involved too, <br />and we need that background and that engineering and scientific requirements to make <br />these sound decisions. It would not be in the best interest of the public, department, <br />nor to an individual to take on technical responsibilities without the education and <br />training necessary to do so. <br />In our County government, and speaking from my past experience, I've been asked to <br />speak to a lot of groups on a variety of subjects, and the public is no longer satisfied <br />with general information. Many times they want to know specific information for things <br />that you contemplate. Being an engineer, having that background, answers can be <br />given right on the spot because we know the history, we know the scientific reasons <br />and logistical rationale for what we're doing. Kind of like `we'll get back to you' answer <br />if the head or the manager does not know is not good for anyone. We don't feel it is. <br />Our department, when we go out and do presentations, we want the people to trust and <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.