Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0425.003 2004-2006 From: Tim Rees (808) 959-5023 January 4, 2007 P.O. Box 1787 Pahoa, Hawaii 96778 To: All Hawaii County Council Members; 2006-2008 Subject: Addendum to Oral Testimony presented on January 4, 2007 Re: Bi11147 (Draft 2) Re: Bi11258 (Draft 6) These are my opinions on Bills: 147 and 258. Bill 147 (Draflt 2) Bill 147 is little more than a thinly disguised attempt to defeat Constitutional Rights to Due Process by mechanism of a "Legislative decriminalization" of conduct. There is no better way to demonstrate this than to explain the abuses that have occurred in our District Courts (with Bench Judges only - no juries) regarding HRS 249-2. These abuses would have ended immediately upon the first case brought before an unbiased jury of peers. However, since 1994 with the enactment of HRS Chapter 291 D (Adjudication of Traffic Infractions) the right to a jury trial is not allowed even if you are willing to pay all associated costs. The District Courts routinely and in some cases the Circuit Courts, have egregiously abused the simple premises of 291 D even though the Judiciary was given unprecedented access during the Legislative process and a continuing right to remediate any problems presented by the "decriminalization" process. Chapter 291D would have worked fine if we had Honest, Competent, and Unbiased Judges to implement it. This didn't happen. One of the biggest problems was that the Judges Statewide in @ 90% of contested citations did not allow informa1291 D-8 "Hearings" as contemplated by the Legislature. Instead, they would immediately enter Judgment for the State without any defense allowed; impose Fines and Court Costs; and Order a defendant back for a full HRPP "Trial" forcing them to pay up without any defense or have to take more time off work, hire an attorney to appear at the "Trial", etc. These actions were in direct contravention of Chapter 291 D and its rational purposes as eloquently stated in 291D-1: Purpose. Please read it when you have time. I have many Transcripts and Court Autolog tapes proving the above. Again, these circumstances would not have occurred but for the fact that the trust we place in twelve unbiased peers through our Social Contract was relegated to one fallible Bench Judge. Bill 147 Draft 2 anticipates a similaz reduction of Constitutional guarantees and should be defeated today. I spent many hours researching the records of the Third Circuit Court yesterday. I could find only one relevant case Comm. No. 2 Ref. Tod 1 Ref. Uate JAN 4 2067 since 1987 that even went to a jury trial. Does one case in twenty years justify the action you are about to take? Dces one case in twenty years validate the pretended necessity of your action today as intimated by the Prosecutor's Office; the same office that is willfully and intentionally looking the other way in collusion with our State Judges when they prosecute our Citizens under HRS 249-2? I say it Loud and I say it Proud! We don't have to put up with this! © Tim Rees 2007 - All Rights Reserved CHAPTER 249 COUNTY VSHIC[TL71R TAXES §249-2 Lmpoaition of tax. Except as otherwise provided in sections 249-1 to 249-13, and except in the case of antique motor vehicles which shall be subject to an annual tax of S10 in lieu of the annual tax otherwise imposed by this section, all vehicles and motor vehicles as defined in section 299-1, shall be subject to an annual tax, computed, except for the minimum tax provided for in section 299-13 according to the net weight of each vehicle at a rate determined as hereinafter provided in section 249-13. The tax shall become due and payable on January 1 and must be paid before April 1, in each year. The tax shall be paid by the owner of each vehicle in the county in which the vehicle is located at the time of registration, whether the original registration or any subsequent registration, and shall be collected bV the director of finance of such county; provided that if any such vehicle is transported to another county after the payment of such tax, no additional tax shall be imposed on such vehicle for the remaining period of the year for which such tax has been paid. [RL 1935, pt of §2157; am L 1937, c 214, §1; RL 1945, §5705; am L 1951, c 162, §1; RL 1955, X130-2; am L 1963, c 97, §2; am L 1965, c 266, §1; am L 1966, c 49, §2; am L 1967, c 137, ~2; HRS X249-2] Partial List of Citatioas Issued in 2005 in Haxaii County HRS 249-11 Fraudulent Use of Plates, Tags or Emblems 221 HRS 249-10 Delinquent Vehicle Tax 2534 HRS 249-2 Delinquent Vehicle Tax 3119 HRS 286-25 No Safety Check 9063 HRS 286-22 Inspection of Unsafe Vehicle by Police Department 6 2 The Police Officers generally write the Citations and the Penalty Amounts as they are described by the Judiciary's "Schedule of Fines" commonly referred to by Police as "the cheat sheet" issued to all patrol officers. Our District Court Judges instruct the Officers what laws to use and the amounts to write on the ticket. Then they look the other way when it comes to Court in order to favor the State's Prosecutions (Our County Prosecutor's represent the State Attorney General through deputization. He, Mark Bennett, must be looking the other way too. There's a lot of money to be made in looking the other way.) §249-10 Delinquent penalties; seizure and sale for tax. (a) Any tax imposed by sections 249-1 to 249-13 for any year and not paid when due, shall become delinquent and a penalty shall be added to, and become part of, the delinquent tax. The amount of the delinquency penalty shall be established by the county's legislative body. Bill 258 (Draft 6) And the townsfolk lived with a wary eye and constant fear that Young Frankenstein would succumb to the madness that had once driven his grandfather to re-animate that which was already dead. Bi11258 died a natural death on November 15°i, 2006 when it failed upon 2nd reading. It was then unlawfully re-animated by an Out of Order vote on The Motion to Reconsider which was supposed to be held for at least 24 hours and agendized for the next regular meeting, November 29`h, 2006. At the November 29, 2006 meeting the bill was unlawfully amended with a very substantive, rather massive list of floor amendments which were neither agendized or met the minimum six day notice requirements. The Council Rules if read slowly aze very cleaz on the proper procedures which were not followed with Bi11258. All actions taken by the Council after the 11-15-2006 Motion to Reconsider was made have been out of order and violated the established Rules. The dead Bill should not have been sent to the Mayor and the Bill should not be on today's agenda under O[her Business. The following underlined Rules explain this in detail. It's time to let this old dog crawl off into the bush and die peacefully. It was a terrible, overly ambitious project to attempt to repeal and rewrite a whole Chapter of our Code. And to any Council members that still feel adopting and modifying laws designed for the City and County of 3 Honolulu is a good model for future Big Island legislation based upon presumed Legality and Constitutional Standing I suggest you become acquainted with Honolulu Bilt 04-13. This Bill passed and has been in effect since July 1, 2005.One problem; it can't possibly be implemented by those charged with the task because it would subject them to summary dismissal from employment. The Honolulu City Council attempted to legalize a system of bribery that would offer Traffic Offenders a ten dollar off "coupon ticket" if they agreed to send their "penalty" to the City rather than have the ticket processed under Chapter 291 D. And there are certain very attractive perks offered for illegally doing so. It's a severe violation of 286-138 which prohibits "ticket fixing" and it is unlawful for anyone, including Council members, to induce others to commit unlawful acts. Fortunately for the Council members, all Officers, and those who would process the bribe tickets the Honolulu Police Department had an Officer that remembered he was an Officer of the Law and not an Officer of whatever nonsense some silly ninnies had collaboratively passed. This Officer's acute analysis outperformed the entire City and County of Honolulu's staffattomeys and the SHOPO attorneys who seem to have been out of the loop. I believe this Officer was Captain Gaytan, since retired, an excellent guy who saved the City an inestimable amount of money and heartache through his professional diligence. Upon verification of this and full posting of my website around mid-February Captain Gaytan will receive the inaugural safetyscamhawali.com Officer Of the Law of the Year award -The OOLY -along with a 500 Dollaz check to a Charity of his choosing and a personal token of gratitude. As for the sometimes inexplicable actions of our State's Legislative bodies their remazkable attempts at Craftsmanship will be fairly displayed on intentionallymental.com when warranted and satireforchange.com that will actively be seeking participation from talented youths and others from the community as a forum for respectful and free expression. None of these websites are owned by the Stephens Media Group. Our Laws are similaz to canoes. They are vehicles to take us places and facilitate the business of living. They have a spirit enhanced by the Knowledge and Craftsmanship put into them. A Waa Kaulua doesn't need to be fast or quickly made. It needs to be stable and sturdy and trustworthy 4 enough to protect what and who we cherish. Our Ancestors and particularly Hawaiians have long known that you don't build such things out of rotten raw materials when strong ones are at hand. © Tim Rees 2007 - All Rights Reserved Relevant Excerpts from the Rules of Procedure of the Council of the County of Hawaii RULE N0. 17 RECONSIDERATION 1. When a motion has been made and carried in the affirmative or negative, any Council Member voting with the majority may move for a reconsideration of the vote on the motion at the same meeting or at the next regular meeting. 2 A motion to reconsider the vote taken at the time any bill or resolution fails to pass final reading shall not be voted upon until twenty-four (24) hours have elapsed, in which case the bill or resolution shall be placed on the agenda for the next regular meeting, and the vote on the motion to reconsider and the vote on the reconsideration shall be taken at that meeting. 6 A motion for reconsideration and any subse4uent action thereon shall only be considered in accordance with these rules and any public notice requirements. 7 Any measure once considered shall only be reconsidered once. RULE NO. 20 SUSPENSION OF RULES 1. When the Council or Committee proposes to do something that it cannot do without violating one or more of these rules, it can adopt a motion to Suspend The Rules interfering with the proposed action; RULE NO. 27 BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS 1. General Procedures. (b) In order to be considered for placement on the Council or Committee agenda all bills, resolutions, petitions, and other communications shall be filed with the Clerk by 12:00 P.M., Noon, on the ninth calendar day preceding the day of the Council meeting or by 4:30 P.M. on the eleventh calendar day preceding the day of the Committee meeting. Any bills, resolutions, 5 petitions, and communications received later than said time shall be placed on the agenda of the next regular meeting. (c) Upon compliance with the mandated six (6) calendar day posting notice, bills, resolutions and matters requiring Council action shall be placed on the Council agenda within the next two Council meetings. Bills, resolutions and matters requiring (f) A bill or resolution up for final reading which has been the subject of a substantive floor amendment at that meeting shall not be acted upon until the next regular meeting. 2. Bills (Section 3-10, Hawaii County Charter). (e) A motion to reconsider made at the time any bill fails to pass final reading shall not be voted upon until after twenty- four hours. 4. Submission of Bills to the Mayor (Section 3-12, Hawaii County Charter). Every bill adopted by the Council shall be duly authenticated by the Clerk and the Chair and thereupon presented to the Mayor for approval. Such bill shall become effective as an ordinance upon its approval or such later date as specified therein. If the Mayor disapproves a bill, the Mayor shall return the bill together with any objections in writing to the Clerk within ten days (excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) after receipt. If the Mayor does not act within such ten day period, the bill shall become effective as an ordinance as if the Mayor had approved it. The objections of the Mayor shall be entered in the journal of the Council and the Council may, after five and within thirty days after the bill has been so returned, reconsider the vote upon the bill. If the bill, upon such reconsideration, is again passed by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the entire membership, the Chair shall verify that fact on the face of the bill and such bill shall become effective as an ordinance with like effect as if approved by the Mayor. A bill failing to pass upon such reconsideration shall be deemed lost. 6