My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CHC 1979-07-18
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
1980
>
Minutes
>
CHC 1979-07-18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/19/2018 10:49:53 AM
Creation date
6/19/2018 10:40:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
AGE/MIN (Charter Comm.)
Agency
Charter Commission
Year
1979
Meeting date
7/18/1979
Type
MIN
Document Relationships
AGE CHC 1979-07-18
(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.
/
48
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
MR. SCHUTTE: I assume. . .T_ assume, now, in <br /> addition to everything else, the original would be put on <br /> the ballot and the second because if it is not there, if there <br /> are no more than two options then I would assume--and this is <br /> taking it from what you have said--that what is there now <br /> would stand. Is that correct? <br /> MR. ODA: If what happens? <br /> MR. SCHUTTE : If whatever is on the charter now <br /> would stand. <br /> MR. ODA: In case of what? <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: If the voting public did not <br /> accept what we had proposed. <br /> MR. ODA: Up to now? <br /> MR. SCHUTTE : Yes. <br /> MR. ODA: Right. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: So whatever else would stand. <br /> MR. ODA: Right. We don ' t have a multiple <br /> option situation, except right now, so you always fall back <br /> to the original if the proposal is defeated. So far as the <br /> way I understand Richard Ishida' s question , I think that matter <br /> touches on ballot design and yet, as I say, if you have multiple, <br /> two options in addition to the present language of the charter <br /> I would hate to see a Lawsuit to determine which one prevails. <br /> So I think that that matter should be clarified in terms of <br /> whether, in fact, if we have two options, do we, in fact, have <br /> three including the present one? <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Mr. Chairman. I amend my motion <br /> to include the existing council makeup as option #3. <br /> MR. TRULSON: Second. <br /> MRS.KOBAYASHI : Mr. Chairman , may I ask counsel , <br /> is the second option constitutional? It is all district. It ' s <br /> district representation from the 4 districts, 4 present <br /> representative districts. <br /> MR. ODA: In terms of the one-man , one-vote? <br /> MRS. KOBAYASHI: I suppose from what Kalani says, <br /> it is an interim solution, but I just wondered if it is <br /> constitutional. <br /> MR. ODA: The numerical setup was 3, 2, 2, 2, right? <br /> I don ' t=-frankly, I think it will stand. It can be questioned <br /> in terms of how many voters in South Hilo and district #2 would <br /> be represented by the three people and °°,gumerically I 'm sure it <br /> won ' t come out but I think looking at it as a whole, I would <br /> think because it ' s a preliminary and tentative apportionment <br /> -11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.