Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN CHC 2010-06-25.tif2009 -2010 HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION 16th Session Friday, June 25, 2010 County Council Chambers 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 CALL TO ORDER: CHR. HAITSUKA: Good afternoon. Today is Friday, June 25, 2010, and the time is approximately 1:40 p.m. I call this meeting of the Hawaii County Charter Commission to order. We have two commissioners at the chambers of the Hawaii County Council, located at 25 Aupuni Street in Hilo, and four commissioners appearing by videoconference here in Kona. I will now call the roll. ATTENDANCE: Present: Mr. Ed Haitsuka, Chairman (Kona videoconference) Mr. David Fuertes, Vice Chairman (Kona videoconference) Ms. Daphne Honma, Commissioner Ms. Casey Jarman, Commissioner Ms. Jamae Kawauchi, Commissioner (2:10 pm Kona videoconference) Mr. Joseph Kealoha, Commissioner (Kona videoconference) Mr. Alapaki Nahale -a, Commissioner Mr. Scott Unger, Commissioner (Kona videoconference) Excused: Mr. Guy Kaulukukui, Commissioner Ms. Susie Osborne, Commissioner Mr. Todd Shumway, Commissioner Also Present: Mr. William Brilhante, Deputy Corporation Counsel Mr. Kenneth Goodenow, County Clerk Ms. Pat Nakamoto, Elections Program Manager Mr. Levi Hookano, Legal Specialist Ms. Nora Avenue, Council Committees Ms. Kareen Forissier, Legislative Assistant (Waimea videoconference) Ms. Karen Eoff, Secretary (Kona videoconference) STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS CHR. HAITSUKA: Next on our agenda is Statements from the Pubic on items on the agenda. Do we have anybody to testify in Hilo? MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, we have one person, Mr. Goodenow, to testify on Communication 257, in support. KENNETH GOODENOW (At this time Kenneth Goodenow, County Clerk, came forward to address members of the Charter Commission.) CHR. HAITSUKA: Good afternoon, Mr. Goodenow. MR. GOODENOW: Good afternoon. I just wanted to sign up to testify to say how remiss I feel about the problem with CA -7 and CA -12. I think Mr. Hookano's memo recaps it well. Originally, in the existing Charter, it says, "...persons who registered in the last general election." We didn't like, "...persons who registered...," we wanted either, "valid votes cast," or "ballots cast." And as far as the general election portion, we really didn't address that. What makes it even more egregious, however, is that in reviewing this, for CA -35, which was the other recall amendment that failed, we pointed out this problem. In my communication, I state that it be amended to read, "the total number of votes validly cast in the recall election shall be no less than 50% of the total number of valid votes cast in the last election;" without "general." I guess what happened was that I was so relieved that CA -35 died, I must have left the room and I guess CA -7 was not addressed. So, I do apologize for that. But, we concur with Mr. Hookano's recommendations, and ask that you make those changes for both CA -7 and CA -12. I would also note that's the day Pat Nakamoto was not present. Thank you. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do we have any one else in Hilo to testify? MR. HOOKANO: No, Mr. Chair, that's our only testifier here. CHR. HAITSUKA: We have Sue Dursin here to testify in Kona. SUE DURSIN (At this time Sue Dursin came forward to address members of the Charter Commission.) MS. DURSIN: Thank you. I'm speaking for the League of Women Voters. I see that since you are reconsidering CA -12, something emerged about six weeks ago that I had not noticed. The League had testified on signature requirements when we started this process. We had asked that signature requirements be limited to the four digit social security number and the month and day of birth. That would correspond to Article XI, on initiative 2 and referendum. When the clerk's office pointed out to us - -and they were very strong of this opinion - -that the residence address absolutely had to be there, we did agree to that. We felt that perhaps that just simply having the language that is in the current charter on that point would do. But when it moved along, the social security number, the four digits and the birth date were included. So we talked to the clerk's office, and I came away understanding that it would be optional; the social security number and the birth date would be optional. So, the way this reads now, of course, it does not have the word optional there. Having those be mandatory is definitely going to make this a much harder process and give much more opportunity for the signer to make mistakes. If there is any way that we can insert the word, "optional," I certainly would like to see that happen. Thank you. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you, Ms. Dursin. Do we have anyone in Waimea to testify? MS. FORISSIER: Hi everyone, we have no testifiers here in Waimea. CHR. HAITSUKA: Let's move on to the approval of the minutes of our last meeting. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 21, 2010 CHR. HAITSUKA: Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the May 21, 2010 meeting? Ms Jarman moved to approve the minutes of the May 21, 2010 meeting. Seconded by Ms. Honma and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Kawauchi, Shumway and Osborne. CHR. HAITSUKA: Let's move on to Communications. COMMUNICATIONS COMM. 256: REPORT FROM THE AD HOC COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Memo from Commissioner Casey Jarman, Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee on Education, dated June 14, 2010, requesting this item be placed on the agenda. 3 CHR. HAITSUKA: We also have Comm. 256.1 which was forwarded to us subsequent to that. Do I have a motion to file these communications? Mr. Kealoha moved to file Comm. 256 and Comm. 256.1. Seconded by Mr. Unger CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any discussion? Mr. Hookano. MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: My understanding of the process is that we have to address the report at our next meeting. Is that the process? MR. HOOKANO: The members of the ad -hoc committee can present the report at this meeting; kind of let the whole commission know what they worked on. But the deliberation and decision - making has to take place at the next meeting. So at this meeting, the members of the ad -hoc committee can brief the entire commission on their activities and what they did, but that's about it. After that, it is postponed to the next meeting. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Jarman, will you brief us on the activities of the ad -hoc committee? MS. JARMAN: I'll just give a brief report. First I'd like to thank all the members of the committee. We, on very short time, all got together on a rainy day at Alapaki's; and I would like to thank Alapaki for providing avenue for us. So, we met on May 28, 2010 as a group and a lot of good ideas were set out at the meeting. We did some brainstorming and then after the brainstorming different commissioners agreed to do some follow up work on our ideas. The recommendations here are things that we agreed to at our first meeting assuming that the follow up questions sort of supported our recommendations. I won't read them because everyone has them in front of them. But, since Sue Dursin is there, I did talk to Sue and she spoke to the League Board to see whether or not they would be willing to take the first crack at drafting the proposed language for the pamphlet. But, ultimately, we as a commission would vote on it. So they would be happy to do that. Another thing we talked about in terms of giving presentations was that one of the issues was that we can't go to every single community meeting or community event. But we thought that we could all agree that we would at least make a few presentations, and we also thought that we should do them in pairs or groups of three when at all possible. So that was something that was important to us. And then the distribution of the information and the pamphlets through all the traditional media and the political blogs and we want to do enough pamphlets so we can actually get them out so that a lot of people have access to the pamphlets as well as putting them on the websites. Alapaki had a really good idea about tapping high school and college students to stimulate interest in the amendments also and encouraging them to participate in the political process so there would be some duel benefits from that. So that is a summary of our recommendations. It was a wonderful committee to work with and I appreciated everybody. 12 CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you, Ms. Jarman, and thank you committee members and thank you, Ms. Dursin. Is there any further discussion? Mr. Hookano, should we postpone this matter for the next meeting? Or can we vote on the motion to file? MR. HOOKANO: I would say do a motion to postpone, that way the same items come back on the agenda for the next meeting for a full discussion. CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright, do I have a motion to postpone? Mr. Fuertes moved to postpone Comm. 256 and Comm. 256.1 to the next meeting. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Kawauchi, Shumway and Osborne. COMM. 257: POSSIBLE ERROR IN CA -7 AND CA -12 Memo from Commission Attorney, Levi Hookano, dated June 16, 2010, informing the commission of possible errors in CA -7 and CA -12 regarding the number of voters needed in recall elections and the number of signatures required for recall petitions and charter amendment petitions. MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I don't think any action can actually be taken on this matter at this time, because to do it you will need to suspend the rules, and you only have seven members present. You need eight, which is 2/3 of the commission, in order to suspend the rules. CHR. HAITSUKA: So, perhaps we can defer this until Ms. Kawauchi arrives. MR. HOOKANO: That would be appropriate. Ms. Jarman moved to defer further discussion until another member arrives. Seconded by Mr. Nahale -a and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Kawauchi, Shumway and Osborne. 5 COMM. 258: PROPOSED BALLOT QUESTIONS FOR CHARTER AMENDMENTS Memo from Commission Attorney, Levi Hookano, dated June 16, 2010, transmitting proposed ballot language for the charter commission's proposed amendments. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do I have a motion to file? Ms Jarman moved to file Comm. 258. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha. CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any discussion? MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: Yes, Ms. Jarman. MS. JARMAN: Are we supposed to be voting on these at this time, or discussing them and ultimately voting on them? Maybe we can ask Pat when we have to have the ballot language to her. PAT NAKAMOTO (At this time Pat Nakamoto, Elections Program Manager came forward to address members of the Charter Commission.) CHR. HAITSUKA: Good afternoon, Ms. Nakamoto. MS. NAKAMOTO: Good afternoon. The ballot questions are due to the Sate Office of Elections on September 3, 2010. MS. JARMAN: What format are they required to be in at that point in time? Could they be in this format, like a list, with the questions? Or would something else have to be done to them to present them? MS. NAKAMOTO: I'm not certain, but I can find out. I can contact the Office of Elections and get that information to you. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Nakamoto, did you have a chance to look at Comm. 258? MS. NAKAMOTO: Just briefly. I haven't looked through the entire document. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do you have any comments on the form of the questions? MS. NAKAMOTO: No, I don't really have any comment as to the form. At this point, just based on the amount of questions, we know that we will be requiring two ballots for the general election. I guess as soon as the language is finalized and we can get even a 0 draft of this, I could pass it on to the State Office of Elections, to the ballot coordinator there, to see exactly what the ballot format will look like with the questions. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do we have any other questions for Ms. Nakamoto? Thank you, Ms. Nakamoto. Mr. Hookano. MR. HOOKANO: Yes, Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do we need to run the proposed language by anybody else? MR. HOOKANO: Perhaps, maybe Corporation Counsel, if they have a chance. This doesn't have to be decided on today. I think there is ample time to refine the questions so that it is satisfactory to everyone; to the entire commission. This is really just kind of a starting point for the discussion for the commission. CHR. HAITSUKA: So, maybe we should postpone this to the next meeting, and then send it out to Corporation Counsel for comments; maybe to anybody else who might be interested and then we can have further discussion at the next meeting. Do I have a motion to postpone? Mr. Unger moved to postpone discussion on Comm. 258 to the next meeting. Seconded by Mr. Fuertes and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Kawauchi, Shumway and Osborne. CHR. HAITSUKA: We will move on to the next item on the agenda. NEW BUSINESS CHR. HAITSUKA: We have no New Business. Let's move on to the next item. UNFINISHED BUSINESS CHR. HAITSUKA: We have no Unfinished Business. 7 REPORTS CHR. HAITSUKA: Next on our agenda are Reports; and we don't have any. REFERRALS FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION CHR. HAITSUKA: There are no Referrals for Executive Session. We are still waiting for Commissioner Kawauchi, who I understand is on her way. Why don't we take a ten minute break and then see if she comes by then. If not, then we can adjourn. RECESS: At 2:00 p.m., the Chair called for a 10 minute recess. RECONVENE: The meeting was reconvened at 2:15 p.m. CHR. HAITSUKA: I call the meeting back to order, and I note the appearance of Commissioner Kawauchi. Let's go back on our agenda to Comm. 257. Back to Comm. 257 CHR. HAITSUKA: Comm. 257 is the memo from Commission Attorney, Levi Hookano, dated June 16, 2010, informing the commission of possible errors in CA -7 and CA -12 regarding the number of voters needed in recall elections and the number of signatures required for recall petitions and charter amendment petitions. We are now in the middle of our discussion. Mr. Hookano, can you give us a quick breakdown as far as what the errors were in these two proposed amendments. MR. HOOKANO: Sure, Mr. Chair. The main thing is that the language says, "...valid votes cast." The number of signatures required for a petition is based on the valid votes cast in the previous general election. This applies for both the recall petitions and charter amendment petitions. But, to determine what a "valid vote cast" is in the last general election would be problematic, in my opinion, because on multiple questions on the ballot, you could vote validly on one question, but invalidly on another. So, it would be easier if the commission were to determine what question it has to be based off of, for example, an island wide question such as, the Office of the Mayor. The other issue was for the numbers of voters required to participate in a recall election, the language used was "valid votes cast" in the last general election, but the sitting official in that seat might not have been elected in the general election. It is possible for elected officials to win in the primary with 50% plus one vote; or in a special election. So it is my 0 opinion that the commission intended it to be whatever election that the current office holder, who is being recalled, was voted into office. That the number be based off of that number, rather than the last general election. So those were the two main issues that I brought up in my memo. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Is there any discussion? Mr. Hookano, I understand from your memo, you have a section on the procedures. We must first make a motion to suspend our rules before we can go in and make any amendment to CA -7 and CA -12. Is that correct? MR. HOOKANO: That is correct, because this has already gone through the two reading process and theoretically no changes can be made at this point. But, as I said in the memo, I would rather see this get done here rather than go through the whole process, the election, and then have to clean it up later on with a Council initiated charter amendment. I think it is in the best interest of the Commission to get this taken care of now. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Do I have a motion to suspend the rules so that we can consider making changes to CA -7 and CA -12? MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair. In my memo I recommended that you make it clear that it is for the intent of making theses changes, so that it is a very limited scope what can be done by the Commission. That way you don't go in and make any radical changes to the whole thing. CHR. HAITSUKA: Let me read that again as far as the motion. Do I have a motion to suspend the rules so that the Commission may consider making changes to CA -7 and to CA -12 for the limited purpose of clarifying the language in these amendments in accordance with Comm. 257? Mr. Nahale -a moved to suspend the rules for the limited purpose of clarifying the language in CA -7 and CA -12 in accordance with Comm. 257. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. MR. HOOKANO: Okay, Mr. Chair, so that was the vote on suspending the rules. Now you need a motion to amend CA -7 and CA -12. D CHR. HAITSUKA: Do I have a motion to amend CA -7 and CA -12 with the language recommended by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257? MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair, can we take them separately please? CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright. Do I have a motion to amend CA -7 with the language suggested by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257? Ms. Jarman moved to amend CA -7 with the language recommended by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257. Seconded by Ms. Honma. MS. JARMAN: Can we ask Pat Nakamoto to up again please? Pat, how difficult is it for your office to-- -Would you have, on hand, the total valid votes cast for the office subject to the recall petition? In other words, if it were the Mayor, would you have the information of the valid votes cast for the Mayor or for a Council Member? Would we be able to have that information? MS. NAKAMOTO: Yes, we would be able to get that information off of the results of the votes cast. MS. JARMAN: How would you interpret "valid votes cast ?" If someone voted on at least one of the things validly, would that be a valid ballot? MS. NAKAMOTO: My recollection is that on the election results, you are provided with the votes that were cast and also blank votes and over votes. MS. JARMAN: So how would this affect, potentially, the number of votes that would count to make up the 25 %? Would that be the people would have fewer names they would have to get signatures for, or more? MS. NAKAMOTO: I don't understand your question Casey. MS. JARMAN: Are there likely to be more total votes cast in general or total votes cast in that particular race? MS. NAKAMOTO: I would think in total votes cast in general. So if you are looking at total votes cast, or total valid votes cast, valid votes cast would be less than total votes cast. MS. JARMAN: Valid votes in the last Mayoral election, versus valid votes cast in that whole election, when everyone was voted for. MS. NAKAMOTO: Well, we don't know if everybody is going to vote in that race, so my interpretation would be that "total votes cast" would be greater than "valid votes cast." 10 MS. JARMAN: And how would you determine "valid votes cast" if we didn't have this language which said, "in the Mayoral election" or if it were not keyed it into the actual office of the person who is now potentially subject to recall? MS. NAKAMOTO: Based on this, if we needed to calculate the 25% for that particular race, we would look at the candidates in that race; add up the votes, less the blank and over votes. MS. JARMAN: And if you were doing it and it wasn't just for a particular race and it just said "valid votes cast" in general, what would you do? MS. NAKAMOTO: I can't recall how it is listed, but we would probably look at the total turnout for the election. MS. JARMAN: So it would be all of the ballots cast, minus the over votes, and under votes and blank votes total for the whole election, regardless of how many people were voted for. MS. NAKAMOTO: Right, right. That is correct. MS. JARMAN: So you actually could do what we asked, with what our current language is, it is possible to do that. Whether we meant it or not, it is possible to do it. That is what I am trying to find out. MS. NAKAMOTO: Kenny said it would be a reasonable interpretation to do it that way. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair, may I ask Levi a question? CHR. HAITSUKA: Yes. MS. JARMAN: Levi, did you go back and read the minutes to see what our discussion was on this issue? MR. HOOKANO: I did, and that's why I said it appeared to me that this was the Commission's intent; to base if off of the specific office of the official to be recalled. My main concern was that when I looked at the old election result print outs, there wasn't a box that said, "...valid votes cast in the general election." It just said, "...total votes cast in the general election." Total registered, and total cast. And for the offices it did say, the number of votes cast, total and subtracted out the over votes and blank votes. But, as a total number of participants in the whole election, it wasn't broken down that way. MS. JARMAN: Although Pat says you can get that information, right? MS. NAKAMOTO: My recollection is that on the most recent results of votes cast, for a particular race, it will give you the actual votes for each candidate. It will also provide you with over votes and blank votes. That is the information we have for each race. 11 MS. JARMAN: You also have it for the total votes cast in the election. MS. NAKAMOTO: For the whole county, yes. MS. JARMAN: I just can't remember what my intention was. MR. GOODENOW: Needless to say though, I think it is vague. So what we would do is we would go back and we would try to determine the interpretation of what you guys meant to do. We would go to corporation counsel, and we probably would come to the same conclusion as what we want to do here. As Levi said, he reviewed the minutes, so did I. We would probably conclude that this is what was meant, and it is vague. But as a lawyer, you know, that opens us up to a lot of possible challenge and scrutiny so we really do hope that you do amend it. But, I think this is pretty clear what you all meant to do. MR. NAHALE -A: This is my recollection of our intention of it. I think the overall intention was to make it easier to recall so I think this does that even further. So I am comfortable with the changes and I appreciate you caught it, Levi. I'll put that on the record, thanks. MR. GOODENOW: I would agree with that, and I also want to thank Mr. Hookano. Not that I would do this, but if you had an evil clerk, so to speak, maybe he could say it's the total number of people who voted in that election and make it much harder; and surely that was not your intent. We were so focused on the phrase, "persons who voted," we didn't like that phrase and we were so focused on changing that that we forgot about the general election part. The original draft said, "...persons who voted in the general election." That was the original proposal. We didn't know what persons who voted meant, so we said use valid votes cast or total ballots, your choice. Then you picked it, but we weren't focused on the "general election" language. So we do apologize for that and our thanks go out to Mr. Hookano. CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any further discussion? Are we ready to vote? MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I recommend a roll -call vote on this matter. The motion to amend CA -7 with the language recommended by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257 was carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. 12 CHR. HAITSUKA: Next, do we have a motion to amend CA -12 with the language recommended by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257? Mr. Nahale -a moved to amend CA -12 with the language recommended by Mr. Hookano in Comm. 257. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do we have a motion to approve CA -7 and CA -12 as amended? Ms. Kawauchi moved to approve CA -7 and CA -12 as amended. Seconded by Mr. Unger. MS. JARMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Chair. You cannot do that. We have to take each one of the separately as amended. CHR. HAITSUKA: Let's go first with CA -7 as amended. Do we have a motion? Ms. Jarman moved to approve CA -7 as amended. Seconded by Mr. Unger and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. CHR. HAITSUKA: Do I have a motion to approve CA -12 as amended? Ms. Kawauchi moved to approve CA -12 as amended. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha. CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any discussion? MR. NAHALE -A: Yes, Mr. Chair. I think we would like to get some comments on the record, we just aren't quite sure what they are yet. Can you give us like 30 seconds? 13 CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright MR. NAHALE -A: I'll repeat my comments for CA -7. I think it was our intention and it does make it easier to recall. I think that was the overall intention of these proposals, so I support it. CHR. HAITSUKA: Is there any other discussion? MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I just want to point out that for CA -12, I didn't actually specify or suggest language to amend with. My recommendation was that the Commission specify, if there is a question, like use the number of valid votes cast for the office of the mayor in the last general election, or some other specific benchmark for the number of votes to be based off of. MS. KAWAUCHI: Mr. Chair, I have a question. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Kawauchi. MS. KAWAUCHI: Can we postpone this vote until the next meeting to give Mr. Hookano some time to draft language and then decide at that point to vote on it? Is that okay to do? Then we would have specific language to look at and vote on. Or, should we draft it now? CHR. HAITSUKA: Mr. Hookano, did you hear Ms. Kawauchi's comments? MR. HOOKANO: Yes, I would come up with language for all of you, but I will not be here any longer after this meeting. Really, the vote to amend that previously occurred to amend CA -12 is actually invalid. It is an invalid vote because there wasn't really anything to vote on, because I did not make any recommendations. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair, maybe we could take a five minute recess and somebody can work with Levi and try to come up with some language in a few minutes. CHR. HAITSUKA: One thing, Mr. Hookano, do we have to send the amended proposed amendments back to the County Council? MR. HOOKANO: In my memo I recommend that it probably doesn't have to go back to the Council because you are not significantly changing the wording. My belief was that this is just reflecting the Commission's original intent when it was sent to the Council, and it is just kind of clarifying language. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Let's take a break then. RECESS: At 2:40 p.m., the Chair called for a 10 minute recess. 14 RECONVENE The meeting was reconvened at 2:52 p.m. MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I think we are good to go here. CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright, let's get started. Mr. Hookano, did you come up with some language? MR. HOOKANO: Yes, Mr. Chair, we have some language and I just want to put it on the record to say that it is my opinion that the previous vote taken on CA -12, the vote to amend, was invalid because there really wasn't anything that you were voting on. It is stricken from the record in that it was an invalid motion and vote. CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright, thank you. MR. NAHALE -A: Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: Mr. Nahale -a. MR. NAHALE -A: I would like to make a motion. Mr. Nahale -a moved to amend CA -12 by changing the language, "valid votes cast," to instead read, "total ballots cast." Seconded by Ms. Jarman. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair. In the print out, sometimes it's called, "ballots cast." and sometimes it's called, "turnout." It is the same thing, so we just want to make it clear that we mean the same thing as, "turnout." So "ballots cast" and "turnout" are the same thing. MS. KAWAUCHI: Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Kawauchi. MS. KAWAUCHI: I would just like to point out that if we use "total ballots cast," what that will mean is that we are now counting - -based on our previous discussion of CA -7 -- votes that may be spoiled ballots; is that correct? If that is correct, that means that our reasoning for CA -7, and changing the language there, doesn't carry over to CA -12. MR. NAHALE -A: The big difference is that in CA -7 we can point to a specific election or question, like the mayor's race or the council position; so you can determine if there are valid votes for that office or that question. For a charter amendment, which is what CA -12 is addressing, somebody could spoil or vote incorrectly in the council race, but vote correctly in the Mayor's race, so how would you count that ballot? Is that a good, valid 15 ballot, or an invalid ballot? So this way, I think the compromise is that there may be some folks where the whole ballot is spoiled, every election is incorrect; we are still going to count them. But, that should be insignificant in terms of the total numbers. Overall, we are still making it much easier to reconsider a charter amendment because we are going from registered voters to total ballots. So, it is still a much tighter move. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Jarman. MS. JARMAN: For example, in the last election, the total registration was 99,337 and the total turnout was 67,258. So that is a significant difference. To expand on what Paki said, there will not necessarily have been a charter amendment at the previous election that you can compare the ballots cast to, like he said, as you can if it's a mayor's race or a council member's race. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Are we ready to vote? The motion to amend CA -12 was carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, now you need to vote on the main motion to approve CA -12 as amended. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. Do I have a motion to approve CA -12 as amended. Mr. Unger moved to approve CA -12 as amended. Seconded by Ms. Kawauchi and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. 16 ANNOUNCEMENTS CHR. HAITSUKA: Next we have Announcements, and our next regular meeting scheduled for Friday, July 8, 2010 at 1:30 p.m. in Hilo. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair, I'll be gone the whole month of July, so I won't be able to make any meetings in July. MR. KEALHOA: That is a Thursday. CHR. HAITSUKA: Oh, sorry, July 9, 2010. Ms. Jarman is going to be gone. Would that give us sufficient time for our agenda, because we would have to get our agenda out next week, right? Next week, Friday. MR. KEALHOA: That is only two weeks from now. CHR. HAITSUKA: We postponed the language for the proposed amendments. We have to circulate that to some of the departments, at least to the corporation counsel and give them sufficient time to get back to us. I think we should at least go to the 16th to give the administration sufficient time to look over the proposed language. MR. NAHALE -A: I'm not available on the 16th but I am available on the 23rd CHR. HAITSUKA: How is everybody's availability on the 23rd MR. UNGER: I'll begone. CHR. HAITSUKA: Mr. Unger is not going to be here. MS. JARMAN: I won't be here. CHR. HAITSUKA: Ms. Jarman won't be here. MS. KAWAUCHI: Is Ms. Osborne gone for the whole month of July? CHR. HAITSUKA: I'm not sure. MR. NAHALE -A: She will be back in July. CHR. HAITSUKA: Let's set it for July 23, 2010 at 1:30 PM in Hilo. Do we need a motion for that? MR. HOOKANO: No, you just need to announce the location, date, time and place. CHR. HAITSUKA: The next meeting will be on Friday, July 23, 2010 at 1:30 PM in Hilo at the County Council Chambers. 17 MR. HOOKANO: Mr. Chair, I have one announcement. I will be departing next week for Virginia and Georgia for training with the National Guard for five months, which is why this is my final meeting with the Commission. It's been a pleasure working with all of you and good luck with the rest of your work. Remember, the State Office of Elections needs the ballot questions by September 3, 2010 and you have some printing requirements in getting the Charter amendments in the newspaper published so many days before the General Election, so I think I got all that information to you before too, so don't forget that. CHR. HAITSUKA: Alright, thank you Mr. Hookano, but I heard your orders got recalled though. MS. JARMAN: Mr. Chair, could we agendize for the next meeting who our official replacement attorney is? Ask Karen if she could put that on the agenda and perhaps you could work with Levi to make a memo to suggest somebody as our next attorney, so we could vote on that. CHR. HAITSUKA: I believe the corporation counsel was going to be providing us with somebody, so I'll follow up with that and put it on the agenda. MS. JARMAN: Thank you. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you. ADJOURNMENT CHR. HAITSUKA: Next on our agenda is adjournment. There being no further business, at 3:05 p.m. Mr. Unger moved to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Kealoha and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioners Fuertes, Honma, Jarman, Kawauchi, Kealoha, Nahale -a, Unger and Chair Haitsuka. Noes: None. Absent: Commissioners Kaulukukui, Shumway and Osborne. CHR. HAITSUKA: The meeting is adjourned. Thank you. IN Respectfully Submitted, Karen Eoff, Secretary Approved: Mr. Ed Haitsuka, Chair Hawaii County Charter Commission 19