CHC 1979-07-18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MR. SCHUTTE : Mr. Chairman, would it be appropriate at this time to discuss first of all in regards to this 9 member council, the length of office2_ That it be two years as one consideration or that it be staggered four and two with the individual receiving the largest votes out of a district serving for four years and the other serving for two, if it ' s to be staggered. In the case of Hilo, I would assume then also that in district 42, the largest vote getter there would serve the four years and the other two council members would serve the two year terms, if we are looking at a staggered term. Just as a matter of discussion before so we can put something to a motion. CHAIRMAN SAKATA: What is the feeling of the rest of you? Do you want four year terms, staggered terms, 4-2? Or, strictly a two year term for the 9 members? On the 5-2 proposal it was strictly two years for districts and four years for at-large. MR. SENSANO: Mr. Chairman. As far as the 5-2 is concerned I think the terms should stand as originally proposed. MR. SCHUTTE: Yes, that ' s correct, Herman. I think what we are looking at is we have to put the language in on the 9 member council and specifically state the intent so that could be added on if that happens to be the option that the voters so desire. We have to make the term of office stipulated. I just mentioned this for discussion if some of the other members would discuss it while I am trying to read over the other reapportionment sections. MR. TRULSON: Mr. Chairman. If we did stagger them it would give more continuity to the council. If you're going to have 4 members with 4 year terms and 5 members with 2 year terms. Then again you more than likely are not going have 9 new councilmen every two years. There has been a lot of concern by various people regarding the staggered terms and the continuity of the council, especially with regard to the 2 year term. They figure it takes 2 years to learn what they are doing. . .I would like this open for discussion, but it would seem like we would have more continuity if we had staggered terms. Realistically, you will probably not have most councilmen reelected for more than two terms. . . CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Any other input from this? MR. OMONAKA: Mr. Chairman. with regard to the 9 member district councilmen. If they vote to come strictly from district, I would like to think that a 2 yeari\, term is sufficient and the whole concept of district represen- tation is to have the man responsive to the electorate and there is nothing wrong with a guy getting elected and going back to his constituents every year and say, hey, look at me, this is what I 've been doing and this is what I refer to as being responsive. So I would prefer a 2 year term for councilmen running from districts. -13-