Laserfiche WebLink
CHR. HAITSUKA: We have a motion to approve CA -38 at first reading, is there any <br />discussion? Ms. Jarman. <br />MS. JARMAN: Actually, I'm not totally opposed to doing what you want, but one of <br />the reasons I like it this way, and maybe in practice you never reimburse anybody, but <br />the only reason I can do this is because I'm a law professor, and I'm allowed to come <br />over here and take a day off and my employer doesn't dock it from my pay. But there <br />area lot of people out there that don't have the luxury of that kind of job. And by not <br />leaving that in, so that somebody who has a different kind of job has a different point of <br />view, would never be able to serve on a board or commission. I think that takes out a <br />huge chunk of people from being able to serve on boards and commissions. So, I can <br />understand the reason from a fiscal point of view, but I do really think that most people <br />are not in the position that I'm in, and I'm just very fortunate. So if had my druthers, I <br />think I would keep it in. Thank you. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Mr. Brilhante. <br />MR. BRILHANTE: One of the primary concerns, and I think Commissioner Jarman <br />alluded to it, is the fiscal responsibility. I think with the vagueness of the language as it <br />currently reads, as well as the potential for some significant economic impact on the <br />county if all of a sudden board and commission members would be able to avail <br />themselves to compensation. They could create a very problematic situation for the <br />county as we move forward in this current economic situation with the tight budgetary <br />constraints we have. I think we have been fortunate up to this point that none of our <br />current commissioners or board members or past serving have raised this issue. But <br />now that it is in the public arena and it's under public perception, I think the potential for <br />that changing could be great and that could be the problem as we move down the road. <br />MS. JARMAN: I still think I would like to have a wider range of people being able to <br />serve. But thank you. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Alapaki. <br />MR. NAHALE -A: I agree with commissioner Jarman that we don't want to eliminate <br />folks, so my intention is to change "shall" to "may." That folks may be compensated; <br />that's the problem I have with the language right now. I think if there was a process for <br />folks to ask for compensation, I don't think a lot of folks would avail themselves of it. <br />But it would certainly be nice if folks who needed to could. Right now, I think it is <br />vague, and it does imply that we are supposed to be compensating folks, whether we like <br />it or not, and whether they want to or not. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any further discussion? Ms. Jarman. <br />MS. JARMAN: Alapaki, do you want to make a motion to amend? Do you want to <br />change it to "may ?" I'll vote no with the "shall." <br />25 <br />