MIN CHC 2009-11-06.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

about a vast number of properties that are extremely desirable for preservation and for park lands and the way these monies get leveraged into increasing our tourism product and local experience, our happiness on this island. I want to give the Director of Finance as much opportunity as we possibly can, so that they can reasonably negotiate. Just imagine yourselves as trustees put in that position and having to go down a list, and receiving other opportunities that you cannot even go and address. So, I think it's too restrictive there. If it were in an ordinance, I wouldn't have any problem with it, because it could be changed when it seemed to be problematic. If this is going to go in the Charter like this, I have a concern with that. Most of these, I really just want to touch on briefly. I'll try to speed it up here in respect to everybody's time. Four year council terms, I do support. I echo Ms. Harden's sentiments on that. I only support it if it is together - -if you take the two Charter amendments that you have proposed here - -the one on making it easier to recall, and put that in with the four -year council terms. I have spoken to a lot of people in the community and I found that to be the general agreement in the population. We have seen so much stop and start in the Council, and this two -year term thing just doesn't seem to be working at all. On the other had, many people feel four years is too long if we don't have a legitimate and easy way to get the people out, should it be necessary. Office of Council Services, I don't know if I'm confusing this with another Charter Amendment that might have been on a month before. I just got off the web an hour and a half ago, but I'll speak to it the best that I can. I'm not really in favor of it. This seems to be setting up a separate - - -You know I get the conflict of interest argument about legal representation by the Corporation Counsel when he represents all the administrators of government, department heads, and county council. Sure there can be conflict. The problem I have is that there are situations where this could be so distracting to the government. We can have so many petty disputes that drag on and on and on. I see no reason why we can't address the conflict of interest problem in the current system, maybe in the ordinance, the Corporation Counsel could still be the head legal advisor, or representative of all the county departments and the council, but maybe there can be something put in by ordinance, that he needs to appoint somebody a little further down the line - -maybe the most senior deputy corporation counsel -- specifically to the County Council. County Council already has many attorneys under hire. I believe Mr. Hookano is actually titled a Legal Specialist. Oh, you are the one and only, so he's the best, guaranteed. But, the point is, I just don't want to see what looks like a well intended amendment create nothing but trouble down the road. In another vain, the more attorneys you get, the more arguments you are going to have; that's a guaranteed given, right there. People pretty much understand that, and I just hope that wouldn't get abused. I just have one last thing to say on the council service, if I still have any time left at all. City and County of Honolulu has their own council service. There are quite a few attorneys in that division, I understand. They authorized the passage of an ordinance in Honolulu- - imagine this- -you get pulled over by a police officer, the officer offers you a $10 off ticket. He says, "Well, you know, I could give you this ticket that costs $80, but we passed an ordinance that tells me that I'm supposed to offer you $10 off, and if you pay the money, it goes directly to City and County of Honolulu's coffers, and you are deemed never to have committed the offense. Now, imagine repeat speeders, high speed speeders and that. It 12