Laserfiche WebLink
Hawaii County Council August 2, 1989 <br /> clarify what constitutes an appropriation and then <br /> perhaps we don' t need a Charter change. But under <br /> present circumstances, the Council really is <br /> meaningless. The Council has no authority or <br /> oversight over the Administration, the only recourse <br /> we would have is probably to bring a lawsuit for <br /> wrongful expenditure of funds or hiring of personnel <br /> to try to correct the situation in accordance with <br /> that provision that says money may not be expended, <br /> except in accordance with appropriations . I don' t <br /> think anybody wants to resort to that but I think the <br /> constant interpretations that have been given to us <br /> are going to force us into that position some point <br /> in time in the future . <br /> We still have not received the opinions of the <br /> Corporation Counsel as to when Charter prevails and <br /> when Statutory language prevails or Hawaii Revised <br /> Statutes prevails, cause that also could render the <br /> zoning process invalid or void in the Council <br /> because, if the interpretation is correct that rules <br /> and regulations can be amended by the respective <br /> departments or agencies and become effective upon <br /> filing without review of the Council, the SMA line <br /> could be moved to the top of Mauna Kea and all of the <br /> island would then fall into the SMA, which would then <br /> be subject to the Planning Commission' s final review <br /> without any oversight by the Council . <br /> I don' t think these results were ever the <br /> interpretation of the framers of the Charter . It <br /> bastardizes the situation or the structure we have <br /> tremendously but, like I said, I don' t think it <br /> requires structural change, I think we should clarify <br /> the intent of the framers of the Charter as well as <br /> proceed with your change. <br /> I 'm not speaking against this proposed change. I 'm <br /> just saying I don' t think the change will address the <br /> situation totally. That we have to really define <br /> what is an appropriation and what is the <br /> Administration ' s authority to expand an <br /> appropriation. Does the fact that we create an <br /> account--you know, like we just did for Mr . Mizuno so <br /> that Planning could buy a FAX machine--does the fact <br /> that we create that account now authorize them to <br /> transfer money into that account and buy something <br /> else by transfer, not by appropriation by transfer? <br /> 465 .8 <br /> 3 <br />