My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COMM. 004
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
1980
>
Agendas
>
Communications (agenda items)
>
COMM. 004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2018 10:49:51 AM
Creation date
7/13/2018 9:05:32 AM
Metadata
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1979-01-16
(Related)
Path:
\County Clerk - Council\County Clerk\Charter Commission\1980\Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
T. Suzuki -4- Februar 3 , 1976 <br /> Mr. Ted y <br /> requirement cpuld be unconstitutional , nonetheless was <br /> concerned with frivolous and fraudulent candidacy by individuals . <br /> Therefore, it held that absent a durational requirement, <br /> carpetbaggers can be candidates . Carpetbaggers meaning <br /> individuals who have no desire to promote the concerns of a <br /> " particular community but to promote their own individual <br /> gains . The Colorado Supreme Court in Cowans v. City of <br /> Aspen, supra, also found that the one-year residency requirement <br /> of the City of Aspen to be constitutional. <br /> Section 62-3 , Hawaii Revised Statutes , establishes a <br /> one-year residency durational requirement for members of the <br /> board of supervisors . Since the Council is a succeeding <br /> organization of the board of supervisors , absent a valid <br /> Charter provision which establishes the residency durational <br /> requirement, Section 62-3 will apply . Therefore , while we <br /> have held that the 2-year resident-elector requirement of <br /> the Charter to be unconstitutional , it is not to say that <br /> there is no residency durational requirement at all. If th? <br /> County of Hawaii were to adopt a valid residency durational <br /> requirement, it would be superior to Section 62-3 , Hawaii <br /> Revised Statutes , since the Constitution of the State of <br /> Hawaii states that charter provisions pertaining to the <br /> structure and organization of a county government is superior <br /> to that of the general laws of the State of Hawaii . <br /> As in the Cowan v. City of Aspen , supra, case , we find <br /> the Charter provision establishing the residency requirement <br /> to be unconstitutional and, therefore, we adopt the one-year <br /> residency requirement established by Section 62-3 , Hawaii <br /> Revised Statutes . <br /> Section 62-3, HRS , however, also contains a provision <br /> requiring that the candidate be an electorate of the county <br /> for a period of one year. For the same reason that the court <br /> found the provision to be unconstitutional in the Steele case , <br /> we believe that the electorate portion of the statute should <br /> be severed from the remainder of the statute and utilize only <br /> the residency durational requireme t. <br /> 1 •TSUMADA <br /> • Deputy Corporation Counsel <br /> KY:ds <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.