COMM. 010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

• • _ . . • 1 • SUPREME COURT OF lHA.%all-2 j • • Opinion of the Court • t 1 tory provision, provided such statutory provision is not of statewide concern •or interest or does not relate to the fiscal powers of the county. •s I ,4., • CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—effect of intention of framers and people adopting - ' provision. t I ' • The fundamental principle of construction it to give effect to the intention of . the framers and the people adopting it. • r !j!! SAME—same. j In construing a particular constitutional provision. the object sought to be accomplished and the evil sought to be remedied should be kept in mind by the courts. • e MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS —delegation of potters —statewide or Local concern. • I / Because hhe state legislature.duly delegated to the counties the.adminis- - 4 1 ' tration of police.waterworks and liquor control,the legislature could not be said .;.4 to have preempted the field of regulatii�n..As a result of such delegations,these I areas ceased to be matters of statewide concern and became matters of local I \ concern. i t SAME—charter—structure and organization—conflicting statutory provisions. I . All challenged provisions of the revised charter-with respect to the depart- I ments of water supply. police and liquor control relate solely to Maui County's t executive and administrative structure and organization.and under HRS§50-10 ' . these charter provisions supersede all laws of the state in conflict therewith. • CONSTITUTIONAL LAW—Municipal corporations--charter—home rule. . . The constitutional amendments made to article. :'II,section 2 of the State Constitution did not grant complete-home rule to political subdivisions;they only gave to the local governments limited freedom from legislative control in certain 1.. areas. - t f. . I. •i • SAME—same—same—provisions relative to civil service. `'" • - i = • ' It was not the intent of article VII.section 2 to grant to the political subdivi- , • ;A -sions authority to adopt charter provisions on civil service which would conflict • ` 1 . with statutes. I q STATUTES—municipal corporations—charter—conflict with civil service law, c 1 Any conflict in chapters 2 and 3 of the revised charter of Maui County with t respect to the staff of the corporation counsel and the prosecuting attorney with • HRS§ 76-77 would render such conflicting charter provisions nugatory. ` b SAME—same—same—same. F Any inconsistency between chapter 9.of article 8 of the revised charter and, • • • Part III of HHS chapter 76 would result in the latter prevailing. t OPINION OF THE COURT BY OGATA.J. - $ • , On February 18, 1977, a decision and final order was • entered by the circuit court of the second circuit which up held the validity of the revised Maui County charter provi- • •e sions and denied the,injunction prayed for by the plaintiffs- - - I. appellants(hereinafter appellants), Hawaii Government Em- i• , TSnin;sal.w--,- ..,rrwirr.. a...70,,—.,wort•-'—...•1..----_- -,. .-----‘•,,,--. ^-,..•11.9.7.1,-..:4-.--•••,-.....-- ....