Laserfiche WebLink
to be able to talk about it; the same as we had with these other two, it's basically the same <br />rule, so I just wanted to remind everybody of that. <br />MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I think what Ms. Jarman is getting at is that a motion to <br />remove (f) may not be germane to what the main motion is. The subject matter of this <br />amendment is relates to compensation of board and commission members, which is what <br />I think Ms. Jarman is getting at. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Kawauchi. <br />MS. KAWAUCHI: How would people find out if you belong to a certain political party? <br />I don't recall that part of the application where you had to disclose a party. Oh, I didn't <br />recall, but it is on the application. I don't know how political affiliation would really be a <br />requirement of a commissioner. I am tending to be in favor of striking (f), but I'm open <br />to listening more, if other people have other thoughts on that. Maybe Mr. Unger might <br />be able to tell us why he would want to strike (f). <br />MR. UNGER: Just for those reasons. It is not applicable, and it would be difficult to <br />enforce. I don't think I've ever declared a party in my whole life, and I certainly <br />wouldn't want to be asked not to join a board because I'm not part of a particular party. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: Mr. Hookano, in order to proceed with Mr. Unger's motion, we <br />would need 2/3 rd maj ority? <br />MR. HOOKANO: As the Chair, you need to determine if this is a proper amendment to <br />CA -38. Amendments to CA -38 have to be germane. So, the question you have to <br />answer is, is changing the political affiliations of a board or commission applicant <br />relevant to their compensation; which is what this amendment focuses on. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: So, probably not. <br />MS. JARMAN: I would argue it isn't. But I'm going to vote in favor both ways. I think <br />we should be consistent in our procedures and do the 2/3 rd vote first, and then do the <br />maj ority. <br />MR. HOOKANO: It would essentially create a CA -39 from what Ms. Jarman is saying. <br />It would be a separate amendment that would strike out that, because it is not something <br />that is related to board and commission member's compensation. <br />CHR. HAITSUKA: So, procedurally, we would have to close up the vote on the first <br />reading of CA -3 8, and then do another vote? <br />MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, if we could take a five- minute recess so I could discuss <br />this with you. <br />29 <br />