CHC 1979-03-06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

But when you come down to the practical aspects of it, when you do, have conflicts between emphasis in terms of policy implementation then it puts the 'administrator in a rather uncomfortable position. MR. ISHIDA: To your experience, Mr. Fuke, have you found yourself in this position where if there is a policy difference between the administration and the council that you are faced with a quandary as to who or what you should implement? MR. FUKE: I will make an answer to your question in this regard, like, when I testify before the State Legislature, for example, I would have to say that the position represents the position of the administration. Then again . there are, indi�r,ect comments like aren' t you also supposed to be representing the legislative branch because they have confirmed your position and saying in so confirming you' to that position are sort, sof like suggesting that you could bethespokesman for the legislative branch as . well. But I have, traditionally, taken the position that I am speaking for the _administration at the legislature except where concurrence on the proposed bills have been reached between the Mayor and the County Council_ prior to coming forth with the .testimony=. MR. CADINHA': Mr, Fuke, then if the position of planner is merely to respond to the,executive,:or_legislative branch, why even have the position? In other words, the branches themselves could dictate what the plans should be. MR. FUKE: I 'm not saying that the position of the Planning Director should be merely only to implement. One of the basic requirements of the Planning Director is to advise in policy formulations. To not only advise the Mayor t/. also the legislative branchas well. I don ' t see the role also. as . spe ,led out in the chatter as being Planning Director merely only responding to different kinds of crises but rather to also assist in the leading process. MR. CADINHA: I have the same problem under- standing, I think, that Mr. Ishida does. In other words , what I 'm asking is that your view as a planner seems to me, by existence, to be the primary view that you should take. it/: sounds like whatyou are telling us is that the function of the planner is relegated to being a political football , if you will , and thatpresents occasional problems in taking a position. I know it is an appointive position and that by nature there is • - going .to be someof that, but , theoretically the charter wants a planner, wants a professional to sit. there and to work every- thing down to the bottom and give his best opinion as a planner. MR. FUKE : That is true. And part of the problem comes about in having under the existing system of Mayor appoint. and council confirm, the potential for that position to be used to the political advantage or disadvantage of .either the legislative or the executive branch exists. - 9