My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHC 1989-02-15
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
1990
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHC 1989-02-15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2018 10:49:51 AM
Creation date
4/9/2018 10:07:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1989
Meeting date
2/15/1989
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1989-02-15
(Related)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\1990\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
OMANAKA: Excuse me a minute . What do you think about <br /> the (inaudible) . <br /> VAN DYKE: The balloting, you mean? <br /> OMANAKA: No, the (inaudible) but that ' s the education <br /> process . <br /> VAN DYKE: Well, I think this sort of thing is very useful <br /> to kind of lay out all of the revisions in some sort of detail <br /> and to make it accessible to. people . I think they then tend to <br /> trust the system more, the more education you can provide to <br /> them. <br /> BETHEA: Did anybody else other than me think the for-and- <br /> against thing (inaudible) ballot confusing on the Hapuna <br /> initiative? <br /> COMMISSION: (Agreed. ) <br /> BETHEA: Everybody? <br /> VAN DYKE: I think the problem is that in different issues , <br /> you may be. . .if the initiative (inaudible) zone, which is <br /> against the hotel . In another case, it may be for something. <br /> In other words , it ' s difficult , because each case is a unique <br /> situation where you may be . . . in one case, if you' re for a <br /> hotel, you' re against down zoning. So, I don' t know how a <br /> (inaudible) resolve that . . . <br /> DUNCAN: Well, that question has been brought up. . .was <br /> brought up in the process , that there is a need for procedures <br /> on the determinig language and it probably has to come after <br /> the filing of the petition with the County Clerk. Just how much <br /> input does a petitioner have (inaudible) have in determining <br /> the language that ultimately gets on the ballot? <br /> BETHEA: Well, just as a general comment, it means to me <br /> that the whole thing should be just asobjective and just as <br /> clear as possible and, maybe, I don' t know that it . . .should be <br /> some other way so that it really is as clear as possible to <br /> the voter and perhaps that means more flexibility, not for or <br /> against, or yes or no, or whatever you're supposed to most <br /> appropriate to state the question fairly and objectively in a <br /> manner that ' s easily understood. <br /> JUVIK: That may have to do with the summary provision, <br /> you know, the actual language of the. . .down to the ordinance. . . <br /> or initiative may be fairly specific because it ' s addressed to <br /> a specific issue. But the summary that proceeds that on a <br /> ballot that briefly summarizes it, could say, if you want a <br /> 121 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.