Laserfiche WebLink
/2 <br /> TESTIMONY <br /> TO: HAWAII CHANTER REVIEW COMMISSION <br /> FROM: PUNA COMvIUNITY COUNCIL <br /> RE: INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM <br /> Puna Community Council is united in its support for initiative and <br /> referendum as part of the check and balance process between elected and <br /> appointed officials and the electorate. The basic premise which supports <br /> the need for initiative and referendum is that you cannot have better <br /> government with less public participation. The right to petition the • <br /> government through initiative and referendum was placed in the Charter <br /> • <br /> so that as a last resort, the general public (at least those who register <br /> and vote) could use these measures to make their case when legislators <br /> fail to hear them. Initiative and referendum act as a pressure relief <br /> valve and must remain in place to protect the civil liberties of our citizens. <br /> In order to facilitate the use of this process Puna Community Council suggests <br /> that the number of signatures required to mount an iniative or referendum <br /> effort be reduced to seven percent of the registered voters. <br /> We believe that keeping the possibility of initiative and referendum <br /> viable and strong will have the effect of bringing questions abopt development <br /> out in the open, and further encourage cooperation between county officials <br /> and developers prior to the zoning and permitting process. The impact of <br /> a development must be clearly outlined prior to zoning and permitting and if <br /> this is done the possibility of an initiative is reduced because the process <br /> provides information to the public and can be modified if public opinion requires it. <br /> We are aware of the current State Supreme Court ruling against the use of <br /> initiative in matters dealing with land use, and we are cognizant of the possible <br /> losses a developer may incur in the event public opinion cancels a project <br /> • through initiative. It is possible that limitations could be put on the <br /> initiative (or referendum) process, but we would rather see open discussion <br /> at the planning stage in order to obtain and assess community opinion. <br /> 552 <br />