HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0017.003 2006-2008 Pete Hoffmann w,w y Phone No. Hilo: (808) 961-8027
Council Chair ; Phone No. Waimea: (808) 887-2043
District 9 -North and South Kohala ~ Fax NO.: (808) 887-2072
E-Mail: poffmann@co.hawaii,hi.us
.
HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawai `i
Hawaii County Building Holamua Center
25 Aupuni Street 64-1067 Mamalahoa Highway. Suite C-5
Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Waimea, Hawaii 96743
r..
l
G>
1
Sent via email to all Council Members r_
(7:-,
y
January 3, 2007 -
s
TO: Council Members
Hawaii County Counci] ~
co
FROM: Pete Hoffmann, Chair
Hawaii County Council - p
RE: 01:07: Correspo nce Relating to Bilf 258, Draft 6
Attached please find a letter to Harry Kim from Prosecuting Attorney Jay Kimura, dated January
2, 2007, related to the above bill for your review and consideration at the January 4, 2007
Council meeting.
The letter will be circulated and submitted as part of the public record.
PH/lys
Comm. No. ' 7
Ref. To: f'res®'b'~1
Ref. Uate,-IAN D 4 2007
Serving the Interests ajthe People ojOur Island
Hawaii County /s An Equal Upporlunity Provider And Employer
34 RAINBOW DRIVE ~
JAY T. KIMURA - <+oax Hao,luwalv5~zo
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY yt%~:_u:- FAx: '
B3e-3x03
CHARLENE Y. IBOSHI - +a~-~
FIRST DEPUTY WEST HAWAII UNR
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY ?~r~«M',~,r 81-880 HALEKII ST ,
KEALAIO=KUA , HAWAl198T50
PX; 372-2552
FAX 322-6551
OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY
January 2, 2007
The Honorable Mayor Harry Kim
Office of the Mayor
25 Aupuni Street,
Hilo, Hawaii 92720-4252
RE: Request for Veto of Bill No. 258
Relating to Animals
Dear Mayor Kim,
The Office of the Prosecuting Attorney concurs with your Veto of Bill No. 258, Relating
to Animals which was passed on November 29, 2006, by the County Council. During
the Council meeting, the Police Department and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney
testified against the bill as drafted.
Over the last couple of years, the Office of the Prosecuting Attomey has been working
with the community to make changes that would improve the County's Animal Control
Ordinance. Changes that we were hoping to make, included changes to the noisy
animal ordinance, increasing fines, strengthening of the Dangerous Dog ordinance as
well as licensing of animals.
Numerous public meetings were held. Somewhere along the way, the mission changed
from making needed changes to making changes in a new bill modeled after the City
and County of Honolulu Animal Control Ordinance. Council then went through 5 drafts
of the Honolulu Ordinance.
These changes made parts of the bill Constitutionally unenforceable for vagueness.
They took out meaningful changes such as increasing fines put in by community
members and added potentially dangerous requirements for the police. An example is
Section 4-16 Seizure of Unlicensed Dogs:
(1) "Every o~cershall seize anv unlicensed dog found running at lame. .
(2) `Yf not so redeemed the dog shall be sold by the officer. ,
The "..shall.." language in this section would place an officer responding to an
emergency in an impractical position of violating this section. I believe that we can work
with the Council to find other language that could meet the intent of this and other
sections.
XawY'1 County la an EquN DPPOrNaJ1Y Pmrldsr and Employer
Mayor Harry Kim
January 2, 2007
Page 2
We understand and respect the authority you exercised in vetoing this bill. We
continue to be available to work with the Administration, Council and Community
on a bill that would be enforceable and practical.
Again, because of these problems, we concur with your Veto of Bill No. 258
Sincerely yours,
fG / ,
J T. IMU
Prosecuting Attorney