MIN CHC PH 2000-04-01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

any rush. I don't want to jump ahead of anybody. 411 RAY: Going through them, one through nineteen. The non-partisan elections. This would basically effect all County elected officials. Should this pass, everyone running at a County level would run on a non-partisan basis. This has been adopted by every other county in the state; by the City and County of Honolulu about eight years ago, and by Maui and Kauai more recently. The way this process works in the election is if in the Primary you win 50% of the votes plus one, you win outright. Otherwise, the top two folks go on to the General. If item number 2 should pass, in other words, creating at -large seats, we've also addressed that and proposed language in regard to how the at -large seats would work in the Primary and the General Election, and basically for the three at -large seats, the language suggested today is that the top six voters in the Primary would go to the General. If there were six or fewer, there would be no Primary. There would only be a General Election. So, we've tried to follow models that are most commonly used in other jurisdictions across the country. And these, like I say, are very common. In fact, I think close to 80% of all similar jurisdictions have non-partisans at this point in time. It's pretty routine how these things work other places. Number 2, the Council to include at -large seats. This is probably the item that we've received the most amount of testimony on. Probably the most controversial. This would change our present Council representation from the nine single member districts, running for two-year terms, to having six single member districts and they'd be the same districts as the State House of Representatives. They'd be six single member districts running for the two-year terms, and then the suggestion is that we'd have at - large seats which would run for four-year terms. We're up in the air about exactly how we'd implement this, and the effect on term limits. We had term limits kick in in 1996 that created four two-year terms for the County Council. So, we're in a little bit of a dilemma as far as should this pass, when to implement it; what effect it would have on the term limits. And a couple of possibilities are that you could implement it in 2004. In other words, it wouldn't take place until four years after it was voted in. I don't really like that idea of pushing it that far into the future. If we were to implement it in 2002, there are couple of things we could do. We could make the first at -large term for two years only, and then after that the at -large seats would be for four-year terms. If we did that, it would have two pluses, in my mind. Number 1, it would make the terms concurrent with the Mayor's term. And the plus of that is a lot of people that are in favor of the four-year terms - One dynamic that they like is that you're training Council people and grooming them to run for the Mayor's race. In other words, these would be island - wide elected Council terms, and logically people that may be interested in running for Mayor. So, if that were the case, it would probably make sense to have those terms run concurrent with the Mayor's term, in the same cycle. The other thing that would do is it would avoid any conflict with the term limits because the first suggestion we came up 3