MIN CHC 2009-10-09.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Next is Communication 42, which is term limits for the Council Members. I know there has been a lot of discussion on this. Life as a council member is not designed to be easy. It's not designed to be hard, but it's not designed to be easy. It is our job, our duty, to perform for the public and the constituents of our districts. I do not support four -year terms. I think that when a person comes into the Council office, they need to be able to prove themselves to their constituents that they are doing the job that the constituents hired them for. I believe that two -year terms do that. It keeps the Council Member on their toes at all times, responding to the needs of their constituents. If they don't, they are going to be out of the job. There might be the possibility of a compromise here. We could start off by having a Council Member run for a two -year term, and their second term, they could run for a four - year term. So, a total of six years consecutively, and then they would have to step down. The first two years, they are going to have to prove themselves to their constituents, or they cannot get the four -year term. It is difficult to run an election. We have to do it every other year, and yes, it takes time, a great deal of time. I guess there are some Council Members that can do it during the daytime, but I was never able to do my job and be a Council Member. I had to do my campaigning mostly on personal time, and it's tough. I admit, it's tough to do it every other year. But, it's not about whether it is tough for the Council Member; it's about what is best for the public. In my opinion two -year terms are best for the public. If you did go to a two -year, four -year scenario, then if the Council Member is not doing their job, then they can go to the recall or impeachment process depending on what the issue is. Those two processes, even though they are being vastly improved by the suggestions of Ms. Hecht, they are still very onerous for the public. That is the reason that I support the two - year terms. It doesn't cost the public anything more to have an election every two years. Then if the person is not behaving themselves in some way or not doing what they campaigned to do, then the public can go to the impeachment and or recall process; but they are very onerous. I think our primary function is to make it easy on the voters to get the kind of person they want on the Council for their district. I would like to now go to Communication 43, Public Notice of Council Meetings. We have a State law that says we are supposed to provide public notice of our agenda six calendar days before the meeting. We are all aware of what's been going on in the past few months, but the problems that we're facing have been going on for a long time. Fortunately we now have the internet and a lot of people have access to it and it makes it easier. I think it is important that we adhere to this law of six calendar days. However, with that said, the close of business for the County by Mayoral directive is 4:30 p.m. The community at large should be able to get their hands on that agenda by 4:30 p.m. on the sixth calendar before that meeting takes place. By public access, not only should it be prior to - -or no later than -4:30 p.m. on that day, but there should be some changes made on how we do it. First of all, since this is the Legislative Branch, public notice should be physically posted outside the building where the County Clerk resides. It shouldn't be locked up behind two sets of locked doors, over weekends, over holidays, and not posted on the internet as some of the other people have already testified to. That's the first place it should be. It should also be posted at the main buildings for the Mayor's office, wherever those buildings might be; there is one in Hilo and one in 20