Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0212.027 1996-1998 OONSY;OF y,~'' AARON S.Y. CHUNG " ~ yl;r,„., F Phone: (808) 961-8396 Cuuncilmember ~ ~E. FAX: (808) 969-3291 +rE u.~„Fa COUNTY COUNCIL Counh~ of Hawaii n Hawaii Cmmty Buitdin,Q On 25 Aupuni Street Z O Hilo, Hawaii 96720 ~ ~ - ~ o; ) O May 5, 1997 2 D " ' r-~ c, Mr. Richazd D. Wurdeman Corporation Counsel 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 133 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Letter Dated May 5, 1997 From Lanny Sinkin Enclosed is the above-referenced letter from Lanny Sinkin wherein several objections aze raised regazding the special Finance Committee meeting held on Apri124, 1997, relating to the Post Harvest Treatment Facility. Please address each of the points of contention raised by Mr. Sinkin and provide me with an opinion as to whether the action taken by the committee was valid. Should you have any questions regazding this matter, please contact my legislative - assistant Liana Cox at ext. 8491. Sincerely, S.Y~hun Cha' Aazon g, Committee on Finance ASYC/lkc CC: Mayor Stephen K. Yamashiro >~0. 2 ~z . z~ lnle n®.__.F1~ C lP idef. 1b1 T1H7 V Re4. Dsln Lanny Sinkin ~.r,~_., 277 Keawe Street r Hilo, Hawaii 96720 .S7 (1~9Y 5 fi(~ 8 `i5 May 5, 1997 CC's:, ~ COUNTS' CiF HAWAII Council Membe Aaron Chung Chair, Finance Committee 26 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr. Chung, Enclosed is a letter sent on behalf of various individuals and organizations. This letter challenges the April 24 meeting of the Finance Committee as illegal, requests an immediate opinion of Corporation Counsel, and calls upon the Council to take no further action on the food irradiation ordinance until a properly convened and conducted meeting of the Finance Committee takes place. I am serving as coordinator of this particular communication to you and the Council. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 969-7768 or 934-9609. However you may view the legal challenge to the meeting presented in the accompanying letter, we believe you know full well that the meeting was conducted in a manner that denied many people opposed to and supportive of this project an opportunity to express their views to the Finance Committee. We look forward to your taking appropriate steps to ensure the democratic process is restored to the irradiator debate and preserved in all County Council proceedings. Sincerely, `~~K~~~~~~~~ cw Lanny Smkin c.c.: All County Council Members Corporation Counsel Media Representatives Senator Daniel K. Akaka May 5, 1997 Council Member Aaron Chung Chair, Finance Committee 26 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Re: Bill No. 62 (Draft 2), May 7 and Finance Committee Meeting, April 24 Dear Mr. Chung, The conduct of the Finance Committee meeting on April 24 violated County Procedures, denied participation and due process to many citizens and calls into question whether any further action on the irradiation ordinance can legally be taken. This letter challenges the conduct of that meeting and requests that you schedule a new Finance Committee meeting to cure the defects in the first meeting. Please make this letter a numbered communication at the May 7, 1997 meeting of the County Council related to Bill 62 (Draft 2). The Chair of the Finance Committee had a "duty" "to make diligent inquiry into all the facts and circumstances" connected with all the items for which this money might be spent. County Council Rules of Procedure, Rule 5.4. The Chair failed to make diligent inquiry for many reasons, including and not limited to: An expenditure of $2 million was approved without any fmancial plan as to how the money would be spent. The Charter requires that the Capital Projects Budget include detailed information on the estimated cost and operating cost for each item. County Charter Article X, § 10-6(a)(2). The Finance Committee recommended approval of an amendment to the capital budget with no detail at all. Bill 62 (Draft 2). Nor were members of the Committee provided any detail prior to voting as to how this money would be spent. The Ordinance simply states that the money "may be applied to planning, design, construction, crop and product development, marketing, promotion and related infrastructure." Bill 62 (Draft 2). Recommendation of this capital amendment without any detailed financial information constitutes maladministration in office. Charter Article XII, § 12-2. Such action may also constitute a violation of your fiduciary responsibilities creating personal liability. The ordinance violated the one subject rule. Bill 62 (Draft 2) contains numerous subjects, including and not limited to an irradiation facility, development of new agricultural crops, and marketing of agricultural crops. The ordinance, therefore, violates the one subject rule. Charter Article III, § 3-10(b). Mr. Aaron Chung Page Two May 5, 1997 The Finance Committee meeting did not comply with the Order of Business required by the Rules. According to the Rules, the approval of the minutes is immediately followed by "Statements from the Public on Items Listed on the Order of Business." Rule 17.4 and 17.5. The Committee scheduled "Presentations by Various Agencies and Consultants" prior to statements from the public. Included in that part of the meeting was the Isomedix testimony. Isomedix is not a "consultant" to the County Council. They are a private business and testified in support of their industry. Their testimony constituted a statement from the public. Scheduling the Isomedix testimony during "Presentations" meant that proponents received a special preference in testifying. The Committee Chair abused his discretion in allowing testimony by proponents far in excess of the three minute rule. Rule 5.4(b)(1) limits presentations to three minutes subject to the discretion of the Chair. The Chair abused its discretion by giving Isomedix unlimited and extensive time, far in excess of three minutes, to make a presentation. Improperly registered people were not declared out of order. Proponents were also given priority when the Committee took testimony from the public. Prior to the meeting, the Chair received a letter from Mr. Rory Flynn with the names of twenty five people wishing to speak in favor of the irradiation plant. These people did not provide their addresses. Rule 5.4(b)(1). Under Rule 5.4(b)(~, the failure to register with all the necessary information compelled a ruling from the chair that the registrations were out of order. In violation of Rule 4(b)(6), the chair did not so rule and, instead, allowed the list to be used to call those speakers. Improperly registered people were given priority to testify. Rather than ruling the defective registrations out of order and requiring the individuals to register like everyone else at the hearing, the chair gave priority to those speakers during the hearing. Those proponents used that priority to take up an extended period of time in the hearing. The improper preference given to proponents denied opponents an opportunity to speak. The testimony of Isomedix and those called from the improperly used list of Mr. Aazon Chung Page Three May 5, 1997 proponents took many hours. During that time some people signed up to speak in opposition left the meeting before being heard. The preferential treatment given proponents significantly delayed the testimony of opponents properly registered to be heard. Such preferential treatment violated the rules, the due process rights of those who could not stay, and the requirements of democratic process. A quorum was not present at all times. Rule 3.1 states: "A majority of the entire membership of the committees shall constitute a quorum for meetings." There are eight voting members of the Committee. The quorum required was 5 members. There were various points during this meeting when a quorum was not present. On only one occasion did the chair recess the meeting to seek a quorum. On that occasion, the chair returned to state, in error, that a quorum was not necessary to proceed. Rule 3.3 requires a quorum to convene a meeting where actions, such as the inquiry and vote on April 24, are to be taken. Rule 3.4 states: "During the course of any meeting, a majority of less than a quorum may recess until a quorum has been established." This rule simply provides one option for the members when there is less than a quorum. The rules are not specific as to when a quorum is required after the convening of the meeting. When the rules are silent, Rule 27 states that Robert's Rules of Order, Revised "shall govern the council." Robert's Rules, 9th Edition, 1990 at pages 341 and 342 states: "In the absence of a quorum, any business transacted (except for procedural actions noted in the next paragraph) is null and void. The only action that can legally be taken in the absence of a quorum is to fix the time to which to adjourn, adjourn, recess, or take measures to obtain a quorum." The business of this committee was to "make diligent inquiry," to vote on a recommendation, and to prepare a report. The failure of a quorum to be present foreclosed the committee from continuing to transact business. Nevertheless, the committee continued to take testimony. The violation of the rules requiring the presence of a quorum makes the committee inquiry null and void. Written testimony was not considered. There were numerous submissions of written testimony during the meeting. Rule 5.4(b) There was no opportunity for the committee to read and consider such written testimony prior to the vote being taken. As a result, the committee did not fulfill its duty to • n Mr. Aaron Chung Page Four May 5, 1997 conduct the diligent inquiry required by Rules 5.4(a). The letter listing 25 proponents demonstrates that those preparing the list had prior knowledge that the private company would be given preference over the public and asked that the remaining private companies and individual proponents be given similar preference. The facts above are evidence of an orchestrated plan to illegally delay the time when opponents could speak. Such a plan would constitute a deliberate act, not an inadvertent violation of the rules. Charter Article XII, § 12-2. We urge you to seek an immediate opinion from Corporation Counsel on the legality of the April 24th meeting and the need for a new posting and consideration of this ordinance. To truly claim to represent all the people, you will halt any further action on this ordinance until such time as a properly posted and properly conducted meeting of the Finance Committee is held. If the County Council persists in pursuing passage of this ordinance on May 7, they will be guilty of malfeasance in office and be wasting the time and money of the taxpayers. Charter Article XII, § 12-2. This letter is sent on behalf of all citizens committed to democratic process. This letter is sent on behalf of all those listed below, each of whom requests a prompt reply. Some of those listed went to the meeting and had to leave before sharing their information and concerns with you. This letter is also sent on behalf of many other people who did not have an opportunity to speak and feel the orchestrated effort to prevent them from speaking denied their rights. We believe the letter also speaks for many people who were fooled by the false story on the front page of the Tribune Herald, which said the project was in trouble because most members opposed Mayor Yamashiro's proposal. Many people reading that story assumed the proposal would be defeated and did not even come to the meeting based on that belief. We believe we speak for tens of thousands of peop?e on this island who do not want the irradiation facility built here. Finally, we believe we speak for all the citizens of this island. Their right to have County Council make fully informed decisions and to a democratic process of governance were violated by the lack of specific information and the conduct of this meeting. ~ ~ • r Mr. Aazon Chung Page Five May 5, 1997 Signatories to May 5, 1997 letter Lanny and Mary Rose Sinkin, 165 Alae Street, Hilo 96720 Donnalyn Johns, Kalahui Hawaii, 119 W. Lanikaula St. #D302, Hilo 96720 Hawaii Organic Fazmers Association, P. O. Box 984, Haiku 96708 Kathy Dorn, Irradiation-Free Food Hawaii, P. O. Box 323, Kea'au, Hawaii 96749 Alice Sunclound, P. O. Box 7, Kurtistown 96760 Merle Hayward, 1574 Wailuku Drive, Hilo 96720 Bonnie Bator, P. O. Box 565, Kurtistown 96760 Dawn Hurwitz, huna ohana Bookstore and Cafe, P. O. Box 536, Pahoa 96778 Evangeline K. Kapumau, Darren T. Fernandez, Susan Peeters, 174 Paneawa Street, Hilo 96720 Malu Aina Farms, P. O. Box AB, Kurtistown 96760 Big Island Rainforest Action Group, Box 341, Kurtistown 96760 Lucien Doe, P. O. Box 1451, Kurtistown 96760 Steve Tiarney, Box AB, Kurtistown 96760 Michael Davison, HCR 1 Box 5087, Kea'au 96749 Kalei Michelle Minchew, P.O. Box 791, Mountain View 96771 Adutchie Eton, P. O. Box 1237, Kealakekua 96750 Robert G. and Adriana E. Duerr, 99 Honolii Place, Hilo 96720 Children of the Earth, SR 5664, Kea'au 96749 Vivian Lerner, 100 Bazenaba, Hilo 96720 Gerdine Markus, 27 Ululani Street, Hilo 96720 Adrian Barber, President; Puna Malama Pono, Inc; P. O. Box 263, Pahoa 96778 Adrian Barber (individually), P. O. Box 1483, Pahoa 96778 c.c. Members of the County Council Corporation Counsel Media Representatives Senator Daniel K. Akaka