Laserfiche WebLink
d,L''•' er <br /> <br /> Stephen K. Yamsshiro Riclurd Wurdettutt <br /> Mayor Coryomtbn Ce~nul <br /> ~,i'si'Miy <br /> nun#~r IIf ~ttfuttii ' ° l ~1nY 7 fill 9 7 <br /> OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL //~~[~]CICL~!`L!i <br /> 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 • Hilo, Harni'I 96720.4262 • (808) %I-0251 • Fes (BOtfyfr•Ltlce~tY lUi- FiAV'JAII <br /> 6 May 1997 <br /> TO: HONORABLE AARON CHUNG <br /> Chair and Members, Finance Committee <br /> Hawaii County Council <br /> FROM: RICHARD D. WURDEMA~!°`~~~ <br /> Corporation Counsel <br /> SUBJECT: BILL 62, Comments of Lanny Sinkin <br /> This is a response to your request of May 5 for comment on the <br /> criticism of one Lanny Sinkin to the manner in which the Finance <br /> Committee hearing on Bill 62, relative to a Post Harvest <br /> Treatment Facility, was conducted. I will respond item by item <br /> in the order these points of criticism were presented. <br /> 1. The bill does not include the estimated cost of the facility. <br /> Section 10-6(a) (2) of the Charter requires that items on <br /> the Capital Budget include the estimated cost of the <br /> improvement and the estimated operating cost. Draft 2, <br /> since it does not include the estimated operating cost for <br /> the facility is incomplete, and to this extent the criticism <br /> is valid. <br /> 2. Bill 62 violates the one subject Rule. <br /> Section 3-10(b) of the Charter requires that every ordinance <br /> embrace but one subject,t which subject shall be expressed <br /> in its title. The Title of Bill 62 indicates that it is <br /> "relating to public improvements and financing thereof..." <br /> This office has already found the title of Bill 62 to be <br /> adequate. Letter of Frederick Gianinni to Aaron S. Y. <br /> Chung, April 16, 1997. In ruling on the parallel <br /> requirement in the State Constitution, the Supreme Court has <br /> said that such requirements be literally construed, and <br /> violations would only occur when the infraction was clear, <br /> manifest and unmistakenable. Schwab v. Arivoshi, 58 Haw 25 <br /> (1977). <br /> .ti ~ a_~_~..... <br /> . ) --~Y.,___7, ,1997 <br /> <br />