Laserfiche WebLink
From: Josh Lopez <josh.lopez@epinc.pro> <br />Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 11:59 AM <br />To: Charter Commission <br />Cc: Nimr Tamimi <br />Subject: CA -26 Letter of Opposition <br />To whom it may concern, <br />I oppose CA -26, the proposal to amend Section 6-2.2 relating to Qualifications for the Director of the <br />Department of Public Works. It is vital that the Director's qualifications continue to include the requirement to <br />be a "registered professional engineer", more accurately, a "licensed professional engineer (P.E.)" because: <br />The Director frequently makes engineering decisions as part of their duties and responsibilities, in fact has the <br />power to over -rule engineering decisions made by his or her subordinates; many of these decisions potentially <br />affect the safety, health, and well-being of the public; <br />The adverse risks of an unlicensed engineer, or a non -engineer, over -ruling the engineering judgement of local <br />DPW engineering staffs, have been well-documented by the National Society of Professional <br />Engineers (NSPE), and is an unacceptable risk for Hawaii County; <br />Licensed P.E.'s are bound by the NSPE Code of Ethics for Engineers, which first cannon states that <br />"Engineers, in the fulfillment of their fundamental duties, shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of <br />the public". <br />The very concept of engineering licensure was developed over a century ago after a series of engineering <br />disasters, causing much damage and fatalities, occurred, due to inexperienced persons making <br />critical engineering decisions. Degrading the nationwide system of licensed engineers in responsible charge of <br />matters of vital engineering decisions goes against the need to "hold paramount" the safety of the public." <br />Regards, <br />Josh S. Lopez <br />Engineering Partners <br />i <br />Comm. No. 43.39 <br />