Laserfiche WebLink
it took us, gee, two or three months to get the interpreta- <br /> tion, going back and forth, that we were able to use the <br /> statute rather than get tied down to this particular item in <br /> the Charter itself, we were using actually some of the other <br /> ones that promote exigency or effectiveness or efficiency. <br /> But there is a contradiction within the Charter itself by <br /> placing a you know dollar amount in the Charter. <br /> As an example, Kauai was not able to use the $10,000, <br /> because their charter is worded in such a way that they' re <br /> corporation counsel has ruled that they would be in viola- <br /> tion of their charter, so they' re unable to expend their <br /> $10,000 until they go through their charter revision. <br /> JUVIK: Excuse me . Would you favor perhaps amending the <br /> Charter or simply stating that ; on these issues, the <br /> Charter follow state statute? I don' t know, if we put any <br /> dollar value , inthe Charter, obviously that could be <br /> changed if the state ' s -own s-t a t u te .-may- be revised in the <br /> future before the Charter is revised. And maybe we shouldn' t <br /> have any dollar value in there. <br /> ONO: That could be well and dandy. There is also the <br /> possibility of the state statute becoming even more restric- <br /> tive. So we always look for the one that allows us to, you <br /> know, get our jobs done. <br /> CUSHNIE: Mr. Chairman. <br /> BETHEA: Yes . <br /> CUSHNIE: That was my understanding, that the more <br /> restrictive clause, whether it was the state statute or the <br /> County Charter, applied, the more strictive clause. Now that <br /> may be not legal, but that ' s my understanding. Perhaps when <br /> you have (inaudible) . <br /> BETHEA: Yeah. If we could note that that is a legal <br /> question for the attorney for the commission, whoever that <br /> is going to be, should take a look at. Because the state <br /> statute could operate to say specifically that, or it could <br /> be a statute of general application which may supersede <br /> Charter provision, so that we 're not really doing very much <br /> in any event . I assume that you have defined all of these <br /> things to be true in order to use the. . . to go without adver- <br /> tising. That these things are cumulative. You've got to <br /> find one, two, three, four and five. Is that the way you <br /> interpret it? <br /> ONO: No. The. . .we did interpreting at the . . .whichever <br /> condition best applies . Of course, there ' s always a concern <br /> that there will be abuse within the system, so there are <br /> 133 <br />