My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
MIN CHARTER 2019-02-08 (2018-2020)
PublicDocuments
>
County Clerk - Council
>
County Clerk
>
Charter Commission
>
2018
>
Minutes
>
MIN CHARTER 2019-02-08 (2018-2020)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/17/2019 1:03:54 PM
Creation date
4/3/2019 9:24:54 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
92
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
Hawai`i County Charter Commission -8 February 8, 2019 <br />MR. HAMANO: 16, yeah, so the way I look at it, we should let CA -7 as <br />amended stand on its own and not allow this amendment and allow this to go <br />forward as far as being voted upon and allow the consideration of CA -16 which <br />has her recommended percentage amount. <br />CHR. ADAMS: Thank you. Are there any other comments in discussion on this <br />particular motion? Seeing none, it would be a roll call vote on this particular <br />motion. <br />Mr. Yoshimoto. <br />MR. YOSHIMOTO: So, I just want to make sure, if the Chairman can explain to <br />the members what a "yes" vote is and what a "no" vote means so we know what <br />we are voting for, just to be clear. <br />CHR. ADAMS: Thank you. I would do that and you will correct me where I am <br />incorrect. Alright so, let me just bring us back to where we were. So the context <br />is, is that we have an amendment that was made by Commissioner Todd that <br />changed some of the... that primarily changed from the one percent in the fund to <br />two percent, maintaining the .25 percent in the maintenance fund. That we had <br />voted on that, we reconsidered it, so that that vote never took place for the <br />purposes of the record. The point of order was made. My ruling was to the point <br />of order, that it was not a substantive amendment in the sense that it struck at the <br />heart of CA -7, Draft 2. That ruling is now the ruling that the motion is trying to <br />overturn. So if you vote "yes" for this motion, you are saying that my ruling is <br />wrong and in doing that, the amendment fails, is my understanding. The <br />amendment goes away. <br />If you vote "no" on the motion, then you are saying that my ruling was correct <br />and then we are back in discussion mode on the motion that Commissioner Todd <br />proposed and Commissioner Hopkins seconded. Does everybody got that? (No) <br />Okay, so a "yes" vote on the motion means that I am wrong and the amendment <br />goes away. A "no" vote means I am right in my ruling and the amendment is <br />open for discussion. <br />MS. RICE: Can I ask a question? <br />CHR. ADAMS: Commissioner Rice. <br />MS. RICE: So, the amendment that we are talking about is Commissioner <br />Leithead-Todd's amendment? <br />CHR. ADAMS: That's correct. <br />MS. RICE: To increase the amount of money back up to the original. <br />Page 27 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.