MIN CHC 2009-05-08.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

a very practical and sound interpretation, it's unnecessary. It just keeps us more in doubt and in question that giving us clear - -- MR. GOODENOW: As Clerk, I'd have no objection to that. MR. ASHIDA: No objection. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Jarman. MS. JARMAN: I know that the current Legislative Auditor is off island, but it might be interesting to have her perspective on this at some point in time. Maybe we could put this on the agenda for the next meeting that we know she can attend and ask her perspective. I am of a mixed mind about this. I would like to hear what she has to say. MR. NAHALE -A: A quick question, Mr. Chairman. If the Council wanted to request a critical review of some more specific nature, they could just do so, correct? MR. ASHIDA: One of the Charter Amendments that passed in the 2008 General Election, or 2nd Special Election, was wide sweeping changes to the Office of the Legislative Auditor, which now performs more of a performance based audit, aka or i.e. Marion Higa -type reviews. I'm not very certain how those requests get initiated, but I would imagine that they can come from any source. They can come from the Council - - -I don't think from the Administration's side, we'd be prohibited from going to the Auditor saying, "Hey, we have concerns about this, would you take a look at it." I'm not familiar with the process, but that can occur. But, Mr. Nahale -a, it doesn't occur on a schedule basis as is currently expressed in Section 3 -16. MR. NAHALE -A: I would be interested to know what the process is, because, obviously, not anybody can request it, and I would imagine the Council could pass a resolution directing the Auditor to do it. So, somebody could get reviewed every week. MR. GOODENOW: Our staff is getting the provision, but just from my recollection, the Council, by resolution, can cause to be conducted - - -it says here "The Legislative Auditor shall conduct - -" well, hang on. I know that the Council can do it, and she can do it on her own. MR. NAHALE -A: While you are looking that up, my understanding is that the General Plan, it's every ten years. That's by ordinance, and it's the broad governing land use document for our County, and we're saying everything that gets County dollars has to be reviewed every four years. It just seems like a real disconnect to me in terms of Charter philosophy, in terms of what are we going to direct in this big document and what are we doing to direct in ordinance. Specifically, Mr. Goodenow talked about the scheduled reviews. Those are the kinds of things I would rather not have in the Charter; it is very difficult to implement. CHR. HAITSUKA: Any further discussion on Section 3 -16? 14