HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0798.016 2004-2006
•~v w
Harry Kim Lawrence K. Mahuna
Police Chief
Mayor ;
OF Vk" Harry S. Kubojiri
Deputy Police Chief
County of Hawaii
POLICE DEPARTMENT
349 Kapiolani Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3998
(808)935-3311 • Fax(808)961-8869
November 9, 2006
r.,
d
z
C °c _A )
TO STACY K. RIGA, COUNCIL CHAIR -
D CO CIL MEMBERS _
FROM L NCE K. MAHUNA, POLICE CHIEF r!
N
SUBJECT : ANIMAL CONTROL BILL, BILL 258 (DRAFT 3)
(WRITTEN TESTIMONY ONLY)
The Hawaii Police Department would like to provide written testimony on Bill 258, Draft 3,
relating to Animal Control.
Upon reviewing the Animal Control Bill, Bill 258 (Draft 3) (hereinafter "Bill 258") the Hawaii
Police Department would like to inform the Council of several serious concerns that the Council
may have to address before Bill 258 can pass final reading.
1. According to Section 4-49 of Bill 258 agreements between the County and the animal
control contractor are required. Specifically, Section 4-49 of Bill 258 states that "[a]ny
Contract/Agreement shall be reviewed by the Finance Committee and then approved by the
Hawaii County Council."
This broad and ambiguous language may be construed to mean that contracts between the
County and Hawaii County Council are to be signed and agreed to by the Council and the
animal control contractor. Such a scenario appears to be an encroachment on the power and
authority of the Mayor.
According to Hawaii County Charter section 5-1.3(g), "the mayor shall have the power
to.... sign instruments requiring execution by the county, except as otherwise provided by
this charter or by ordinance."
Is the Council specifically intending to take the signing power from the mayor with respect
to the animal control contract? If the Council does not intend such a result, then Section
4-49 of Bill 258 should be redrafted. This issue needs to be addressed before this Bill can
pass final reading.
Comm. No. 149616
_ Ref. Tot presstlhl
Ref. Ga"e VQV 1~_=___
"Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer'
SUBJECT : ANIMAL CONTROL BILL, BILL 258 (DRAFT 3)
(WRITTEN TESTIMONY ONLY)
PAGE2
2. According to Sections 4-13 and 4-28 of Bill 258 fines and forfeitures collected shall be paid
into the County treasury and deposited in the general fund of the County. However, the
proceedings that give rise to the fines and forfeitures fall within the jurisdiction of the State
of Hawai'i court system.
Specifically, according to Sections 4-9 and 4-11 of Bill 258, complaints and summons for
violations of the animal control laws are filed in the district courts, with the payment of fines
via mail sent to the district courts. These are two different governmental entities.
Currently, it is our understanding that fines go to the State of Hawaii, via the judiciary.
This inconsistency of "who gets the money and where it goes" needs to be addressed before
this Bill can pass final reading.
3. According to Section 4-17 of Bill 258 license fees are to be deposited into the Spay/Neuter
Fund. Section 4-17 of Bill 258 is unworkable since it is our understanding that the County
of Hawaii currently does not have a Spay/Neuter Fund because such a fund was never
created. This issue needs to be addressed before this Bill can pass final reading.
4. Sections 4-5 and 4-6 of Bill 258 sets forth what would be considered "animal nuisance."
Within sections 4-5 and 4-6 of Bill 258, it appears that defecation has been
excluded/omitted. The reference to Hawaii Revised Statutes section 322-2, that states that a
"source of filth, or cause of sickness or disease is found on private property" may imply that
defecation should be considered animal nuisance. However, such implication is vague.
Within the current Hawaii County Code, Section 4-19, defecation is specifically and
effectively addressed.
Is the Council choosing to remove defecation from the definition of animal nuisance or was
that just an accidental omission? If it was an accidental omission, then perhaps the language
from the existing Section 4-19 should be incorporated to the proposed revision. This issue
needs to be addressed before this Bill can pass final reading.
5. According to Section 4-18 of Bill 258, "the impoundment of unlicensed dogs shall be as
provided in section 143-8, Hawaii Revised Statutes." Presently, the Hawaii Revised
Statutes sets the impoundment fee at $2.50/day, unless another fee amount is provided by
ordinance. Bill 258 does not have any impoundment fee/rate schedule, therefore
establishing the impoundment fee at $2.50/day. If the impoundment fee is set at $2.50/day,
that fee would be less than the impoundment fee currently collected.
SUBJECT : ANIMAL CONTROL BILL, BILL 258 (DRAFT 3)
(WRITTEN TESTIMONY ONLY)
PAGE3
Currently, the County of Hawai' i is charging $10.00/day for the first two days and $5.00/day
thereafter. These charges are made pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 4-20. No
portion of Hawaii County Code Section 4-20 has been incorporated into Bill 258. Thus, the
effect in passing Bill 258 would be that the impoundment fee would be $2.50/day instead of
$10.00/day for the first two days and $5.00/day thereafter.
Is the Council intending to reduce the impoundment fee? If so, there will be a drastic
budgetary change. This issue needs to be addressed before this Bill can pass final reading.
Thank you for allowing the Hawaii Police Department to provide written testimony on Bill
258, Draft 3.