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. OMONAKA: Mr. Chairman. If the charter <br /> provision prevails over the two propositions then we don' t <br /> need the reapportionment language in the charter. So the <br /> only reason the reapportionment provision is set in is <br /> because of that district setup. The reapportionment <br /> language has to be tied into the two propositions so if <br /> either one prevails then we have to have language to take <br /> care of it. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: So what I 'm saying now, Akira, <br /> is that particular portion seems to be the :only subsection <br /> that would have to be changed to take into consideration <br /> those two options. <br /> MR. ODA: All you've got to do is take out <br /> that word "five" for the two options. <br /> MR. OMONAKA: And the present language would <br /> suffice? <br /> MR. ODA: Yes. <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Okay, fine. So we take out the <br /> word "five" and just say the commission may apportion the <br /> district council seats. <br /> MR. TRULSON: Mr. Chairman. Getting back to <br /> the length of terms of the 9 member council. I would have to <br /> agree with Mr. Omonaka that 2 year terms would suffice. I <br /> think some of the concern before about 4 year terms was mainly <br /> with at-large. If you put a 2 year term, you'd be running <br /> one year and working one year. Being strictly from district <br /> they will not have to campaign as much as they would at-large. <br /> I feel 2 year terms and not being staggered is best and I would <br /> so move. <br /> MR. OMONAKA: Second. <br /> CHAIRMAN SAKATA: It has been moved and <br /> seconded that we limit the term of the 9 member council to <br /> 2 years. Any other discussion? <br /> MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Chairman. I 'd like to speak <br /> in favor of the motion on the basis that this commission has <br /> been most concerned about participation as far as representa- <br /> tion is concerned. Should we go into a staggered term on the <br /> basis of a 4 year term on a 9 single member district, we are, <br /> in effect, telling that at every general election that at least <br /> half of the district are not going to be participating whatso- <br /> ever and I don' t think that ' s right. So I ' ll go along with the <br /> 2 year term. <br /> CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Any other discussion? <br /> MR. SCHUTTE: Question. <br /> -15- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.