CHC 1979-06-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MR. ISHIDA: One more question, to clarify in my mind. The York case, was it construed on the State Constitution? Or was it the Federal Constitution? MR. ODA: I am not sure, but it was based on equal protection rights. MR. ISHIDA: If it was construed on the Hawaii Constitution, I can, see the distinction. But, otherwise, I can ' t see the distinction. . . MR. ODA: Well, all I can say is that my role is to advise this commission and whatever you folks want to do, whatever years you want to put in there, that is the decision you will have to make. MR. CADINHA: Stuart, what is the ;intent behind this not putting in residency? Exactly, what is the intent? MR. ODA: I think again, this is what I gather from the flavor of the court decisions. . .in not having residency requirements is that since the days of local protectionism and that kind of thing. . .this is throughout the nation, now. . .that the concept of free and unhampered travel and the right to the-mobile society that we have, that govern- ment agencies should not set up arbitrary requirements as to who can get =:jobs, who can apply for welfare, who can run for elective office. . . MR. CADINHA: Regardless of which level of government? MR. ODA: Well , I think the higher level of office, the greater the tendency of providing some kind of qualifications, some kind of criteria of just residency. You' ll notice that, examing the various levels of government offices.., But, I think that at the county level which is the lowest level of government office holding. . .especially, that level , because that level of government is closest to the people with whom they are dealing and I think, basically, the courts tend to feel that especially at that level they have to be very careful their representation and the right of people to run for office is more stringently protected. As I say, you always can fall back to the idea that for all we know, the best qualified candidate might walk into and transfer- to _the. county from Alabama, this month. . .Or from California, wherever, and let the electorate choose. In other words, I suppose it ' s more of leave it up to the voters, to their intelligence, to make a decision. Standards of roadblocks tend to have been looked upon with some suspicion, especially the last ten years. To prevent people from doing this or doing that. . .I think the times are changing and the philosophy of the courts are changing, as a result. MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Chairman , in view of what legalt;ounsel has just informed us, I will at this time, if my -8-