Laserfiche WebLink
coul;d_ throw him out even if he is doing a very good job. I <br /> tYiink , in-the `p-at_, if you were to go over it, you would find <br /> situations that have come up in this respect where individuals <br /> might have been taker out of county employment. Not necessa- <br /> rily because of the quality of work they were doing or the type <br /> of job. But merely'`because of personalities. I would imagine <br /> that this same thing would exist if you were to extend the <br /> Mayor the right to appoint people he feels he can work with, <br /> yet give the council the opportunity of sitting on top of him <br /> and possibly get rid of a department head he had already put <br /> on. The balance is always the purse strings. The Mayor wants <br /> some things done and the council sits on that budget. It is <br /> 'the same ft` everything else. So there is a certain amount <br /> of-balance`fhere and I 'm just wondering about giving the <br /> council too much. I think what we are getting involved with <br /> now is . a city-managing type of thing where the council is <br /> responsible for hiring the managing director and dictating to <br /> him what they expect to be done. <br /> I think you summed it all up in your earlier <br /> statement that you felt that this wasn ' t necessarily the <br /> thing that you wanted to seerFhappetb. The better thing would <br /> be to revise maybe or implement that portion of government <br /> that exists today and maybe kind of modify it so that it will <br /> work. I think what we are getting into now is one of those <br /> city=managing director type of things where the council <br /> becomes ultimately involved with the administration of govern- <br /> ment instead of the legislative side of it. As it exists <br /> today, the reason they can ' t get along is because they are <br /> both looking at one another andthey are both trying to ins <br /> fringe on the other ' s powers® That is all it amounts to., <br /> They have this disagreement. It ' s not a problem. It ' s just <br /> a disagreement. They have agreed to disagree. <br /> MR. - CADINHA: Under your organization, the <br /> water function would fall under the Mayor. Currently, the <br /> department of water supply is a semi-autonomous body. Now, <br /> it has the wherewithal to purchase property,. lease, or what- <br /> ever and also to float water revenue bond`s under the name of <br /> the commission. Now, your debt limitations ;a nddebt_sejvice <br /> limitations that you propose. Have you considered the fact <br /> that the water function in the county would then have to fall <br /> under the Mayor and that any expenditure of the water—dis- <br /> tribution of water to enhance growth is going to have to fall <br /> under that limitation. Have you looked at that , and is this <br /> limitation suffihcient: <br /> MR. MOSS: No, I completely overlooked that® <br /> That point of what the debt,,;of the water board is. I never <br /> thought of it® <br /> MR. ZUZA_K o_ Wouldn ' t the County Council , in <br /> effect, be the one then that would make that determination <br /> and provide for funding for water and its transmissions? <br /> MR. CADINHA: As it stands now, my understanding <br /> is that the water commission. . . let ' s take a hypothetical situ- <br /> ation somewhere out in West Hawaii between Ahaehoomalu and Kailua. <br /> - 30 - <br />