HomeMy WebLinkAboutCHC 1979-04-10 HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER COMMISSION
M IN U T E S
13th Session
April 10, 1979
Hilo, Hawaii
The thirteenth session of the Hawaii County Charter Commission
was called to order at 3 :40 p.m. in the Hawaii County Councilroom,
Hawaii County Building, Hilo, Hawaii, by Mr. Kimiaki Sakata,
Chairman.
The roll recorded the following:
Present: Mr. Harlan Cadinha
Mr. Richard Ishida
Mrs. Amy Iwamoto
Mrs. Gloria Kobayashi
Mr. Akira Omonaka
Mr. Kimiaki Sakata
Mr. Herman Sensano
Mr. Joseph Trulson
Mr. Basilio Yagong
Mr. Matsuo Yanaga
Absent Mr. Spencer Kalani Schutte
and
Excused :
Also Attorney Stuart Oda
Present : Recording Secretary Joan Carnett
GUESTThe Chair called for a motion to suspend
P
COMMITTEE: the rules and consideration be given to the
guest committees.
Motion was made by Mr. Omonaka.
Seconded by Mr. Trulson and un-
animously carried.
UNITED PUBLIC The Chair introduced Mr. Jack Konno, Division
WORKERS : Director representing the United Public Workers.
MR. KONNO: Mr. Chairman and members. My name is
Jack Konno, Hawaii Division Director of the United Public Workers.
I am here addressing you on behalf of our union. At this time, I
would like to thank this body for allowing us additional time to
present our testimony.
The first article that we would like you to
review and revise is Article III , Legislative Branch, County
Council.
Presently, there is a nine member council and
the present language in the charter which gives every district
representation we believe is a fair and sound one. We disagree
with the provision where it states that even though you run
from a district every voter in the county has an opportunity to_
vote for each and every council seat. We see a great need to` "
encourage much more qualified candidates to run from every
district. In order to accomplish this, we need to revise the
present language. As it is now, even though you may lose in
your own district, where district residency is a requirement,
you can still win. In essence, by having to campaign island
wide, we are discouraging many candidates from running because
of the campaign costs involved.
A Kona resident offering testimony last week
stated that Kona was not fairly represented. Based on its present
population this may be true. Under the one man, one vote concept
Kona may be under represented but under the present breakdown of
districts, Kona does have a councilman. Like any other district,
Kona has access to the three council members who run at-large.
Maybe there is a need to make it similar to how we elect our
house members, but we have not taken a firm position on that issue
of numbers. We are primarily concerned with fair representation.
We propose a two-year term for council members representing a
district and a four-year term for the at-large members.
On Chapter 2, Corporation Counsel , we believe
that the county council needs to retain its .own legal counsel.
It is quite evident that where legal counsel is involved it is
difficult for them to serve two masters. Being appointed by the
mayor, the corporation counsel has a moral obligation to the mayor
and it is difficult to perceive him having to also be the chief
legal advisor to the council. If the charter is revised enabling
the council to appoint its own legal counsel then the corporation
counsel should not be subject to approval by the council.
Mr. Chairman and members, our union is also
aware that with the creation of a separate office of legal counsel
for the county council it might create additional costs and we
are suggesting that to possibly keep the costs down that the legal
counsel for the county council could utilize the present services
existing of the clerical staff of the corporation counsel and the
prosecutor ' s office.
The UPW has always been a strong proponent of
changing the status of the department of water supply from the
present semi-autonomous status to making it a part of the county.
The mayor, in his proposal , stated that the reason for the semi-
autonomous status was solely because it was thought that the water
department would have a better credit rating in selling bonds.
However, as some of you are aware it has not happened the way it
was intended. Instead, you either have the legislature appro-
priating funds or the county council authorizing the sale of bonds.
- 2 -
The department of water supply has been operating no differently
than any other department within the county. Why then the semi-
autonomous status?
Even though the present administration favors
the return of the water department, you may be wondering about
the feelings of the employees for the move as proposed. The
workers, themselves , are strongly in favor of bringing the
department under the mayor ' s jurisdiction. The workers feel that
they are not on the same status as other county employees. They
do not have equipment to work with and many equipments that are
needed on the job are rented from private contractors. The
repair and maintenance of their vehicles is done by private firms
and not at the county mechanic'sp. Cost-wise, does it not make
more sense to have a centralized system where all repairs of
county vehicles would be done in-house? If government is going to
become, or has=become, cost conscious then it makes more sense
moving toward utilizing what we have in the county such as the
county garage.
Let me give you another example of the kind of
problems other governmental agencies within the county have in
trying to work with the water department. Within the water
department, there is an electronic data processing system. It is
our understanding that some move was made to have that system
fully utilized to its maximum by sharing it but the water depart-
ment has not been cooperative. it is beyond our comprehension
why the department of water supply would not want others to reap
the benefits of such a sophisticated piece of equipment.
The department of water supply is also under the
control of a commission. In this situation we would prefer to
see that commission abolished because it is our understanding that
the commission is just a "rubber stamp" commission that approves
whatever the manager recommends. HOW many of us, here, know who
the commission members are that we can relay our concerns or
problems to? If that department comes directly under the juris-
diction of the mayor, as he suggests, then the people can express
their concerns directly to their respective councilmen. There
is a dire need to make that department more accountable.
Presently, there is no knowledge by any of us how money generated
is spent.
Another problem that our members encounter is
they feel that promotions are granked or created for those the
department wants to take care of and not under the merit system
as the director of personnel services stated to you much earlier.
We are in favor of the department of water
supply being under the jurisdiction of the mayor.
The mayor, in his address to you, also proposed
some major revisions such as his having direct control of certain
departments and the abolishment of commissions with the exception
of the police commission. There is some merit to his proposal
with one exception. We vehemently oppose abolishing the civil
service commission and the mayor having the power to appoint the
civil service director.
— 3 -
It is not normal practice for us as union
officials to speak highly of management personnel . However,
in this situation we have a lot of respect for the present
civil service director. He is a man of integrity. Although
the civil service commission members are appointed by the mayor
and they, in turn, appoint the director, we are quite certain
that the commissioners will not knuckle under any political
pressure and appoint someone the administration favors.
Mr. Edward Silva in his report to you stated
that in order to keep the merit system as free as possible from
political pressure, the director should be fully controlled by
the commission. He also stated that in order to strengthen the
merit system by making it less dependent on political sources,
the director' s salary should be set by the commission and not
by elected officials whom the director will have to deny requests
from time to time. If you will recall , the last time that the
administration granted pay raises for department heads, the mayor
was very selective in that certain department heads did not
receive any increase at all. We are wondering why the mayor was
so selective. The civil service director was among the few that
was not granted a pay raise. Is it because Mr. Silva, being a
man of principle, will not knuckle under any political pressure?
We concur with his recommendation that being under the control
of the commission, they should set his rate of pay. We do not
believe that there is anyone among you that would like to remove
the merit system but would rather maintain the system and keep
it as far away from politicians as possible.
For these reasons, ladies and gentlemen , we do
not want to see changes that would make the civil service
director obligated to the administration. The director ' s pro-
posal to this honorable body has a lot of merit and we ask you
to seriously consider it and revise the charter accordingly.
We would like to suggest that the Charter Com-
mission take a serious look into creating an office of collective
bargaining. Presently, the deputy director of personnel services
represents Hawaii County in all of the negotiations. As some of
you may be aware, contract negotiations is very time.cconsuming.
To have a deputy director of personnel involved in negotiations
means that the level of services being performed by the office
results in a backlog of paperwork. The state government
presently has an office of collective bargaining and we see a
great need for this county to also create such an office. The
county' s negotiator would be under the direct supervision and
control of the mayor and would report directly to him. By
continually having a top management person from the office of
personnel directly involved in negotiations, you are hurting the
internal workload of all of its employees. We strongly recommend
this body to take positive action towards creating an office of
collective bargaining.
There is one section that we do not have in
our printed material , Mr. Chairman, and that is a comment that
we would like to make to you regarding the statement made by the
- 4 -
director of finance on Article X, Financial Procedures. We are
not experts on financial matters, but we hope that this body
does not include stringent controls on spending limits.
Particularly, there is much room for growth in the county and
the collective bargaining revenues are needed for negotiating
contracts. Those employees that we represent are basically
those in the lower income bracket and they are trying to cope
this year with inflation. We need to negotiate a basic pay
increase for members so we sincerely hope that our concerns
are seriously considered by you ladiesand' gentlemen- of the
Charter Commission. Thank you very much.
MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Konno, the apportionment as
far as the councilmen is concerned--you have stated that your
organization was primarily concerned with fair representation.
Has your organization attempted to come up with a recommendation
as to howIth_. srepresentation can be made? Practically speaking,
anyway.
MR. KONNO: Yes, we discussed the setup of the
present council as representatives and we probably see that as
being a fair representation of the districts.
MR. ISHIDA: Using the same number of represent-
atives per district?
MR. KONNO: No, as we stated, we couldn ' t come
out with numbers, specifically. Our primary concern was to give
every district representation so that they 'would have a voice.
The present setup, probably, as it is spelled
out under the supreme court ruling may not be a fair one but our
concern is really to give every district representation and this
body might have to tackle with the numbers as far as to give fair
representation to each district.
MR. ISHIDA; I think that as far as the commis-
sion: is
ommis-sion; '. is concerned, I don ' t think we disagree with your statement
that we believe each district should have fair representation.
I think what is going to be the problem with this commission is
how do we get there. Do we use the division we have now where we
have six different districts all running at-large and three at-
large. Or if that is not quite fair, do we use the present
state representative district. ysHas your organization made any
determination orany recommendation as to any other division .
other than what we have now? I notice that your organization has
proposed a two-year term for council members representing districts.
Now, I am assuming from that statement that your organization
recommends that we have at-large councilmen as well as district
councilmen. Is that correct? What is the rationale for your
organization to have two-year terms for councilmen representing
districts?
MR. KONNO: Well , at least those running from
districts would be voted on by people living in the districts only.
We feel the cost involved to that candidate would be much more
reasonable than those running at-large would have campaigning
island wide.
- 5 -
MR. ISHIDA: Is the distinction that your
organization made that because of cost factor?
MR. KONNO: That was one consideration. We
had quite a lot of discussion regarding the terms of the council
members and the final conclusion was that in fairness to those
that would be running at-large and having to campaign island
wide and those running in districts because you know when you
are running from districts you probably can revert back to the
old system where all councilmen had a two-year term--we felt
that any candidate who wins as a councilman cannot accomplish
much in two-years time. You really need the learning process
especially if you are a new candidate. We really couldn ' t
come up with strong answers that we could give to you why,<<we•
really feel a four-year versus a two-year term would be a
favored one.
MR. ISHIDA: In your discussion;__did the matter
of staggered terms come up? No one raised that. You know, last
week, this representative from Kona stated one of their recom-
mendations was retaining nine councilmen and at the same time
dividing the island into nine separate districts. Should this
commission seriously consider that recommendation, then I take
it as far as your organization is concerned under that kind of
setup that all the councilmen would be running two-year terms?
Would I be correct in assuming that?
MR. KONNO: I would not be able to answer that.
MR. ISHIDA: Another thing. On that legal
counsel for the county council , one of your last statements is
that if,:the council has its own legal' counsel , the corporation
counsel should not be subject to approval by the council. Using
that statement then I am also assuming that--is your organization
recommendation, oncposition , that all department heads not be
subject to the county council confirmation?
MR. KONNO: We did not address that problem
of the various heads of departments being subject to council
approval.
MR. ISHIDA: Let me ask you this; then, what
was the rationale should the present county council have its own
legal counsel, that the corporation counsel not be confirmed by
the county council?
MR. KONNO: The County Charter states that the
corporation counsel is subject to approval by the county council.
He is appointed by the mayor but is subject to approval by the
county council. Now if the council were appointed its own legal
counsel there would be no need of the council having to approve
the corporation counsel because he would be under the direct
jurisdiction of the mayor and he would have no ties whatsoever
with the county council.
_ „ MR. ISHIDA: I see. I 'm assuming, of course,
-as far, as that _subject- matter -is : concerned, the: corporation
- 6 -
counsel would still be the legal representative of the county
as far as any third party is concerned. The legal counsel
for the county council would be strictly for internal matters.
MR. KONNO: Yes, for internal matters.
MR. ISHIDA: There is one more question I
would like to ask. Concerning the board of water supply--the
department of water supply--you have indicated that the workers ,
themselves, are strongly in favor of bringing the department
under the mayor ' s jurisdiction. I take it your organization
has quite a number of members who work for the department of
water supply, is that correct?
MR. KONNO: We represent the blue collared
workers of the °department` of' water supply for the Island of Hawaii.
MR. ISHIDA: About what number?
MR. KONNO: I wouldn 't be able to give you the
exact number. They are scattered island wide.
MR. TRULSON : We have heard a lot of testimony
regarding the redistricting and apportionment and we have heard
the reasons why they don ' t want at-large. I notice in your
proposal , you are retaining at-large. ;I would like to hear your
views as to why you feel we should have at-large county council-
men.
MR. KONNO: We could__not"-comeup'with. the_
magic number of what the county council should be but we felt
that with the number nine that is presently in the charter as
the basis of determination as to the correct number of councilmen
there was a need to continue having candidates running at-large
because basically in our proposal we have six people from districts
representing their constituents that way. We felt that we needed
to have three running at-large in order to represent all of the
people throughout the island.
MR. TRULSON : One other question. Regarding the
water commission, you state that the government should become
more cost conscious perhaps by putting the department of water
under the direction of the mayor and deleting the semi-autonomous
position we now have. That there would not be as many private
contracts let out regarding the repairof vehicles which the
county could do. Has there been any study as to whether there
would be money saved by having county workers doing the work
where you would probably have to hire more people? Has there
been any study as to where money could be saved?
MR. KONNO: I don ' t think there has been any
study made but I do think there is quite a duplication of
services between that department and the other=departments.
MR. OMONAKA: Mr. Konno, your proposal with
regard to setting up a collective bargaining structure within
the county organization. What percentage of the time would
- 7 -
this particular person be involved in collective bargaining?
Is it a year round job?
MR. KONNO: Actually it is a year round job
because those years that this individual would not be
involved in negotiations he probably would be the contract
interpreter for the county also. We believe that he would be
involved in doing a heck of a lot of research into the area
of collective bargaining. It really would be a time consuming
position as far _as_ the individual concerned would be in charge
of the collective bargaining.
MR. TRULSON: Mr. Konno, at the present time
the deputy director of personnel services represents Hawaii
County and when he is not doing this then he is doing the job
in the personnel administration or office of the county. Do
you feel that the present system where this deputy director is
doing the negotiating, that there is a conflict?
MR. KONNO: We hate to make that kind of public
statement that there is a conflict of interest. When we were
trying tp put together our testimony to present to this commission
we discussed the issue of possible conflict of interest of some-
body involved in negotiating when that office has to determine
who gets the promotions, who gets reallocated=-and womewhere inthe
back of my mind we see a probability of some conflict of interest.
MR. CADINHA: Mr. Konno, with regards to the
water board. There were several statements made--that you just
made--in this written handout that I would like clarification of,
if I could. You say that the workers, themselves, are strongly
in favor of bringing the department under the mayor's jurisdiction.
Was any study done? How do we know that the workers feel that way?
MR. KONNO: Well , we do meet with them. We have
a monthly meeting and when this commission was appointed we had
started talking about going back to the old union position of
trying to get that department back into the county. From those
who we represent we got the strong feeling that they would rather
become part of the county and not be under the semi-autonomous
body.
MR. CADINHA: You mention that there is no
knowledge by any of us of how money generated is spent. What do
you mean by that? They have to file a budget annually. Where is
there any deception?
MR. KONNO: That may have been a general state-
ment. Actually, a financial statement is required by any de-
partment andwe are at liberty to take a look at it and possibly
you could get information--general information--which is what we
regard this as a general statement. In having to look at what
happened to several of our members, we quite often wonder how
the money they generate is being spent because if you take the
number of equipment that is in the baseyard and the kind of equip-
- 8 -
ment that is in the baseyard. There is no heavy equipment in
the baseyard. The equipment is very minimal . We could not
understand where the money is being spent. The money funded
for projects through the county council.
MR. CADINHA: What about the mayor' s promotions?
Isn ' t the water department under civil service?
MR. KONNO: It is.
MR. CADINHA: How can one circumvent civil
service?
MR. KONNO: Let me give you an example. Consider
the problem that we presently have with the department of water
supply. Maybe those are serious charges for one to make
There is a matter of a garage man being promoted to a position
that is not on the table of organization , all the mariager has to
do is ..g.o_to the commission and ask for a change of appeal of the
department—creating a position. We have complaints on these
matters regarding promotions which did not go through the normal
procedures.
MR. CADINHA: What you are saying is that the
head of the water supply--head of the department-is creating a
separate table of organizational item that is exempt?
MR. KONNO: No, we are not saying a separate t.o.
we are saying that what they have done or are allowed to do is
to change the positions within the present t.o. to raise some
other positions.
MR. CADINHA: You mean upgrade one position
and thereby creating a promotion for that person in the position.
Is that what you are referring to?
MR. KONNO: Yes.
MR. SENSANO: Mr. Konno. In your statement you
mentioned that there is in the eyes of your organization dupli-
cation of work. You mentioned the garage, for example, of the
department of water supply. Has your organization ever looked
at and studied rthe various departments and perhaps carried this
consolidation or merging of departments beyond to include, for
example, the department of planning and research and development
and public works and the parks and recreation. Has your organi-
zation ever looked at the possibility of perhaps making merging
of departments?
MR. KONNO: We haven ' t really made a compre-
hensive study of such a merging of the various departments.
Because of collective bargaining, before such a move is made,
the county cannot, we feel, under the collective bargaining law
just merge departments without talking to the union involved in
the respective departments. We have seen the minutes of this
commission and a lot of proposals were made by various speakers
for consolidation, but we have not really stud:=ed .: the proposal
- 9 -
of merging the various departments into one. But there is a
moral issue involved regarding the merging of departments
because we have seen a statement made by an individual who
stated that probably the department of water supply and public
works could be merged into one, thereby, lessening cost to
government. In talking to some members of our sister union ,
the HGEA, there appeared that certain positions might be
eliminated by the merging of the two departments. We see a
possibility that that could be averted by a grandfathering
clause in the positions within the departments and eventually
we may come to a point where this position may not be available
but we have not really decidedthecomposition of the depart-
ments into one or two or whatever.
MR. SENSANO: The reason why I am asking you
this question is we are talking about your mentioning that
perhaps maybe some of these jobs like repairing vehicles could
be done more efficiently and at less cost. I don ' t know whether
you and I are talking the same language but we are interested in
seeing that government cost is contained. In private business
sometimes cost containment can be achieved by mergers. I recognize
the problem that your organization has but there are ways that
this can be done. It can be accomplished. If it is a long range
plan none of the present employees would be laid off and sometimes
in bargaining unitsmerger_s may reduce the work force but they put
in a clause whereby none of the present employees will be laid off.
For example, in changes in the hospital , they have never laid off
any employees. What, I think , we are interested in is the
containment of government costand if it can be done by merger's, I
as a member of this commission would be open to some ideas from
organizations and individuals as to how this can be done. By
merging some departments that seem to have the same function.
MR. KONNO: Our further position is that we hope
that this commission really can bring the water department back
into the county. T.o_-have the department on its own within _the
county and not to really merge it with some other department.
Our primary concern is to see the department of water supply
on its own within the county.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: On the district representation
you make the statement that to campaign island wide is going to
cost a lot of money and would be very difficult for good candi-
dates to run for office now. Is your body in any way advocating
the fact that we should have a campaign spending law for running
at-large or district?
MR. KONNO: We have not discussed that, no.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: You haven ' t discussed anything
of that sort?; If you have a spending law here you would be able
to get more qualified candidates to run because you set a limit
to their campaign spending. You people have never looked into
that? Also on this idea of abolishing commissions , you stated
that the department of water supply under the control of a
commission you would like to have this commission abolished. You
say that "in this situation we would prefer to see this commission
abolished because it is our understanding that the commission
- 10 -
is just a 'rubber stamp. ° A commission that approves whatever
the manager recommends. " Now, this manager that you referc!to
is the manager of the department of water? In other words ,
that whatever the manager recommends the commission is going
to okay, according to this.
MR. KONNO: That is the understanding that we
have in talking to our employees.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: So you feel that there is no
need for a commission here?
MR. KONNO: If the department of water supply
comes back under the direct jurisdiction of the mayor as part
of the county' s departments then:-there would no longer be any
need for a commission.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: If the department comes, under
the county, then, you don't:want a:commission__ r-etained?_=Is there
any other commission you people feel should be abolished?
MR. KONNO: We haven ' t considered the commissions
that are presently under any of the other departments at this
time.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: But you people are very strongly
recommending that the civil service be retained.
MR. KONNO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: One more question and this is
pertaining to the workers feeling that the department of water
should be a separate department rather than the semi-autonomous
department here. You say that the workers strongly favor the
department going under the mayor' s jurisdiction. According to
Commissioner Cadinha' s question he asked if there was any test
made or any way you people came to this conclusion that the
workers are expressing this and you stated that by simply having
your meetings that many of them voiced this opinion. This is
strictly a verbal kind of situation where people have voiced
their opinion. There has never been a consensus taken of all
the workers involved in the water department. It is strictly
those who come to the meeting? Those who represent the workers?
MR. KONNO: No, we have what we call a_chairman
within the department of water supply. We have -asked the
chairman to go back to the workers to have them give us the
consensus of their feelings as to what they would prefer to see
and what changes they would like to see regarding the department
of water supply and the result of that consensus is that they
would_ like to become a part of the county Like any :other- of the
employees of the county. Vie have not stated that -in our response
before the committee. It Would be a too general statement to
make. One employee stated that certainly they feel that they are
second class employees of the county which I did not state in my
report and I am expressing to you the view expressed by one
employee and he feels that he is kind of more or less a second
class employee and not in the regular class.
- 11 -
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: You would say that most of
the workers with the water department have voiced their concern
that they are second class citizens or workers in that depart-
ment and they would like to get this department into a depart-
ment of their own under the county?
MR. KONNO: Yes.
MR. TRULSON: Mr. Konno. You have stated to
abolish the water commission. Under the present charter there
are various duties of the water commission. How do you propose
these duties would be carried out if there was not a water
commission?
MR. KONNO: Under the present charter the manager
is -appointed by the board; of water _department',commission.
Our thoughtis really to have the department of water supply
come back to the county as we indicated earlier thereby we see
no need for a commission.
MR. TRULSON: All the present duties of the
commission would be done by the personnel in the water depart-
ment including the county, itself?
MR. KONNO: Yes.
MR. TRULSON: Then the mayor would have the
authorityto. issue revenue bonds? Right now the commission
has the authority to issue revenue bonds. Then it would go to
the mayor'. 'for issue?
MR. KONNO: Yes.
MR. TRULSON : There would still be a department
manager, right? The water board ' s?
MR. KONNO: Whatever he would be called, a
director or manager.
MR. TRULSON: A director or a manager. He would
be in charge of the budget which would be submitted to the mayor
and the council as other departments do now?
MR. KONNO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Thank you, Mr. Konno, very much.
KONA COAST The Chair introducted Garry Garrison, President
CHAMBER OF of the Kona Coast Chamber of Commerce.
COMMERCE:
MR. GARRISON : Mr. Chairman and members of the
Charter Review Commission, my name is Garry Garrison , President
of the Kona Coast Chamber of Commerce and member of the Charter
Review Committee.
After many weeks of talking about the charter
we find the charter to be an excellent article practically the
way it is written. Written in 1968 by a gentleman from Kona.
- 12 -
We think he did a very fine job and it has served the county
well. There are some items that have come up over the years
that possibly could be improved on and that is what we are
here to talk to you about today. The language of the issues
that we will be bringing up, we feel, is left to your discretion
and counsel in putting it together. Therefore, we have come in
with an outline of ideas that we feel you should be looking at
and the language could be written later should you so choose
to adopt those positions.
The first six articles in our outline state:
That the county council shall consist of nine members. That
one member be elected from each of nine districts. There would
be no councilmen at-large. That terms of the office of council-
man be for four years. That the four year terms be staggered
and set up on the same basis as that which the Con Con set up
for the Hawaii State Senate in 1978. That the nine districts be
reapportioned following the _1980 census and that every eighth
year, thereafter, Shall- be _reapportionment years. And that
there will be interim appointments when a councilman is unable
to carry out his duties as a representative to that council .
The next item, Item No. 7, refers to Article X
of the Charter. That there be a balanced budget.
Article No. 8 would be new to the charter and
would have to be incorporated therein. That the property tax
and if you will , strike out(any piece) and add--on residential
property--must not exceed 1% of its assessed value wi i s
assessed value not to increase more than 2% per year except : ,.
that when the property is sold the assessed value goes to the
fair market value. Add in, also, commercial and industrial
properties should be under separate const era ion or axing
urposes.
Item No. 9 is also new and would be written
into the charter. That a provision for a "Sunset" law be
incorporated into the County Charter.
And, No. 10 which comes under various headings
in various language in the charter: That all agency--and I
address the word "all" agency and department head appointments
and removals be ratified by the county council.
Gentlemen, those are the ten basic items that
we feel could improve the charter to make it more helpful to
the people of the County of Hawaii . A county that is growing
very rapidly. West Hawaii , apparently, a little more but I
am sure that we have allsee_n the growth in East Hawaii and
South and North, as well.
There are four additional items that we do
not have on this (outline) that we have not considered but
I would like to bring to your attention today and we will be
probably presenting our positions on those at the open hearings
which you will be conducting around the island.
- 13 -
First of all , in relation to commissions as
established in the charter. we feel a review and the proba-
bility of redistricting of those commission members should
be looked at for better help to the people around the island,
generally.
The second item would be removal, of a section
of _ three articles in the charter. I am referring to, primarily,
£o Article VII. . . 1 , 2, and 3. Administrative supervision.
This would be in relation where commissions are involved with
that department.
In relation to the Article VIII , special con-
sideration should be given to condos, resorts, apartment zoning
and other residential and/or quasi residential taxation of
those properties around the island. All falling back in under
No. 8, the property tax on residential property.
The fourth item that we would like to consider
at a later time would be the water department and the possi-
bility of an appointment by the mayor of the water department
head rather than autonomous as it stands right now.
Those positions we have not taken totally and
we will refer those to the open hearings when they do become
available to us.
Generally, we found the County Charter, as it
exists , very adequate for the needs of the people and the
service by the various elected officials and commission people
through the past years has been, let ' s say, very good.
Because we do live in an area that is a beautiful place to
live and the-`_?. sland has run extremely well . We really are
pleased with that particular position so the review of the
County Charter is a task which you ladies and gentlemen have
taken on and it is a demanding task and our congratulations go
out to you and we hope it will be a good revision whatever it
may come out to be. Thank you4. very much.
MR. TRULSON: Mr. Garrison , on those first
eight items, I think we heard quite a bit on last week and they
seem to coincide with the Kona Women' s-group. I have one question
and that is on ,No. 9, the Sunset Law. What w.as the rationale
for th ._s ..provisi:On in your presentation?
MR. GARRISON : Those bodies that are set up
that have a budget that could be ongoing and a drain on oper-
ating budgets that could be used elsewhere. If they are con-
tinued to be used year and year and serve no purpose, it would
be much better if we used that available money for goods and
services that people do need. Police protection, fire pro-
tection and so on down the line in those areas rather than
have a commission that is basically not doing anything and we
are expending money that should be going elsewhere.
- 14 -
MR. TRULSON : Thank you.
MR. OMONAKA: Mr. Garrison. Point No. 7, that
there be a balanced budget. What happens when we have a severe
recession and this naturally would affect government? There
is no way we can adopt a balanced budget if we get to that kind
of a state financial dilemma.
MR. GARRISON: This was discussed at some
length as to what basically is a balanced budget. How do you
really balance a budget out. Basically, you start from ground
zero. A department, as we see it, should present a budget from
ground zero. What his needs and/or expenditures are going to
be for his department in the fiscal year that it will bepperating
rather than the current situation where you have an add-on based
on what you did last year. The add-on sometimes can be carried
away, maybe 5%, 7% or possibly even a cut in the department of
7%, 10% or 20%, depending on what the current fiscal situation
is at the county and what the administrative and what the council
feel is going to be necessary to carry the county in its operating
budget for the next year as well as its capital improvement
budget. Therefore, if you start with a zero balanced budget and
project what you are going to need for the future, you get better
efficiency out of your department heads . you get better effic-
iency out of the people. They feel more involved in what they
are doing in balancing that budget and we don ' t create ongoing
budgets that get higher and higher and higher and we have more
loose flow of money that is being spent from the county coffers
and from that operating budget. That would be our position as
far as the balanced budget is concerned.
MR. TRULSON : Mr. Garrison. Item 3, the terms
of office would be four years. You don ' t contemplate staggered
terms but straight four year terms?
MR. GARRISON: They would be staggered by the
districts that would be set up. Each man would be elected for
a four year period.
MR. TRULSON: Say there was an election in 1980
and then in '84. _It wouldn ' t be every two years there would
be an election?
MR. GARRISON : It would be every two years but
one man would overlap for two years in each district. The
rationale being the cost of being elected anymore around the
island or even in a district is difficult.
MR. TRULSON: And No. 5 , the nine districts to
be apportioned following the 1980 census. By this do you
suggest we wait until 1981 before we begin the nine districts?
MR. GARRISON : Yes.
MR. TRULSON: Last week Ms. Isbell suggested
a way to do it prior to the next census taken in 1980 but by
- 15 -
this I take it you; would say wait for 1981 or after the next
census. Or, if you wanted to do it now, how would you set
up the districts?
MR. GARRISON: We discussed this issue, at
some length as to how that would be done. The basis for the
1980 census--we have been in touch with the census bureau by
letter and they have answered our request as to how the census
is going to be handled in 1980. We will get a door to door
count and we will have an exact count of what our population
is by each district. Or by wherever they fall on the map
around the island. Therefore, we will do better to be looking
at a one to one relationship with our people and we can
evaluate the district at that point. In the interim, it had
been suggested that we follow the current house of represen-
tatives four districts situation. Their mandate, of course,
also is for reapportionment in 1980. Possibly, we would end
up following in their same footsteps, we don ' t know. It is
something that we don 't know until the census is actually done
as to how we could do that. In the meantime we could have an
interim situation even if we possibly continued with our
current existence until that time came that would give us -a
better one to one relationship around the island for represen-
tation to the people.
MR. TRULSON: At the present time, there would
be an election in 1980. at the same time as the census so it
would probably be in 1984 before it would change from the
present council setup or makeup is now.
MR. GARRISON: Yes.
MR. CADINHA: Mr. Garrison , you just mentioned
that you are recommending a zero based-budgeting procedure .
insofar as the county operating budget, is that correct?
MR. GARRISON : Yes.
MR. CADINHA: That does not necessarily mean
that we are going to operate on a surplus or deficit, however?
If we went_ on a zero based budgeting process, if it is deter-
mined that x number of services are needed and are going to
be paid for and the revenue is something else, it could be
deficit or surplus. Are we clear on that?
MR. GARRISON: Yes.
MR. CADINHA: Okay, I understand that. Thank
you.
MR. ISHIDA: Mr. Garrison, on the area of this
districting, I am sure you are aware that the Kona Women were
represented last week and the proposals that you propose and
what they proposed were essentially alike. Are you familiar
with-that, is that correct? Had this been discussed with '
them?
- 16 -
MR. GARRISON: We have spent some time with
many people around the island. I might mention those. We
have spent time with Virginia Isbell ; we have spent time with
the West Hawaii Committee; we have spent a limited time with
the Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce and the Japanese Chamber
of Commerce and the Hilo Contractor ' s Association who are
doing a study on this. We have discussed with them, with all
of these people--as well as individuals, select individuals ,
around the island--as to what some of the things that we are
talking about--whether they would work or whether they would
not work ; whether they would improve or whether they would
not improve. And it has , basically, been our consensus that
the general recommendations we have made here have been county
wide recommendations. The implications of those things , the
language that is to be written on those has been differing in
one form or another, but the basic idea is pretty well uniform
from our experience and those who _:have -been setting the issue
around the island. in reading the charter oursel'.ves and
discussing it within our committee, we have all come to the
same conclusions that the other groups have as well. That the
charter we are living with is probably an excellent charter
and that not too many changes or recommendations really need
to be made. But those that could improve the distribution of
the legislative process and the administrative process for
the people of the island could possibly be improved in these
ways.
The redistricting, yes , there are a number of
ways 'In _which it can be handled. Tb replace from seven members
on the council with three at-large and four from each district
--on the representative district. Or nine separate districts
with no at-large. Maybe five with four at-large. There are a
number of ways that it can be handled. But, of course, the
challenge is up to you, gentlemen, to kind of make those
decisions at that point. Our recommendation is somewhat
uniform around the island, from those that we have talked toR,
that a councilmari should be elected from his district and be
answerable to the people of his district on a day to day basis.
Rather than have the ambiguousness of being elected from some-
place else anddropping by "once yin-.,..awhile to say hello and
goodby and that is the end of the story. It seems to be a very
workable process that most of the people who are reviewing the
charter, including some government people, feel could be
beneficial to the Island of Hawaii.
MR. ISHIDA: Is it your organization ' s belief
that there is no basis for at-large councilmen?
MR. GARRISON: Yes, that is our belief and I
am going to have to question one of my associates as to why we
came up with that. It was some time ago that we did that.
May I have just a moment---Mr. Chairman, could I interject
another gentleman_ in-to the =proceedings? I would like to intro-
duce the past president of the Kona Coast Chamber of Commerce,
Mr. Gordon Bartsch He says what I wanted to say much better
than I and I would like to have him say it.
- 17 -
MR. BARTSCH: Gentlemen, we felt that the one
man, one district concept is probably fairer to the individual
citizen and the voter. We _fe;it:` that he would get better
attention from his representative. We felt that the nine
districts would give good representation. It would make,
probably, a better climate to run for office in and less
expensive. You are more accountable to your constituents.
We feel that the at-large member is more subject to party
politics, group pressures and this sort of thing whereby
lobbying can influence and at-large members can be elected
through special interest groups. We didn ' t feel that this
was in the best interest of the general population. However,
in Kona, in the particular circumstances of Kona now wherethe
population is somewhat questionable it really could work in
the Kona favor. Because the population can control the at-
large member which, of course, reapportionment would take care
of when there are fixed districts. So that we really do feel
that better representation is given to the voters of the
island through voting for their representative by district
rather than at-large. That was the rationale.
MR. ISHIDA: One more question, Mr. Bartsch.
Item 10--there has been the issue raised that should the
department head be appointed and be subject to ratification
and confirmation by the county council and also the fact that
should .the removal of the department head be subject to
county council action also--that the department heads are
facing a position of having two masters. There has been some
discussion that this might not be a favorable, feasible thing
as far as the operation of the administration of the county
government. Would you expand on that as to why the Chamber
recommends that the appointments and removals be ratified by
the county council . I assume that the appointments are to be
made by the mayor and removal initiated by the mayor and 'then
to be ratified by the county council. Would you expand as to
the rationale of the Chamber ' s thoughts.
MR. BARTSCH: The agency and/or department
head would be--the recommendation for his position would be--
by the mayor, approved by the council. Removed by the mayor
and approval of that removal by the council. The idea being
that the legislative body of the government has very little
teeth. They can develop the things that we need around the
island and they can suggest to the administration but to always
have the administration get that process done doesn 't seem to
always work. When that doesn ' t work it is up to the constit-
uency, the people, to either approach the administration or
.the legislature to request that this type of thing be done.
When you approach through the legislator-,- it is sometimes harder
for him to make a direct approach to that department head and/or
his group and get the work done. The assumption being that he
is _ a legislator. Not an administrator and, therefore, the ad-
Ministration would _carry. the power and he should go throughother
channels. We are not sure that that is a bad situation. :But
we feel that possibly the availability of the councilman to
give approval to that vote might let the person think well
maybe I should at least find out from my boss if we should do
this or not. It ' s quasi, yes. We are in tune with that.
We are looking for some help for you as well.
- 18 -
MR. ISHIDA: I am unfamiliar with any county
or state government which has this position. Do you folks
"know :of_ any government that has this position? One point I
am concerned with is the removal portion. Whether the removal
should be approved by council or the legislative branch of the
government of a department head. i , personally, am not aware
of any and I was wondering if someone in your organization
might known-, that.
MR. GARRISON : No, I am not familiar with
that and in the other charters they don ' t go into that detail
in many cases.
MR. ISHIDA: We have a lot of governments that
where the appointments , in many cases, are subject to confir-
mation. I have never seen one where the removal has that same
procedure.
MR. GARRISON: In some of my review of the
various charters that I requested from around the country,
I have found our charter to be rather clear and concise in
many areas where other charters are not as clear and concise.
I think the intent of the Kona Coast Chamber of Commerce
position is to clarify some issues and try and develop _some
things that maybe could enhance the overall administrative
legislative process of our county and represent the people
better because we are still a government of the people and by
the people and for the people. The intent is not 'to limit any-
body' s responsibility or position. The intent is to enhance
and make it more workable within the community. Maybe my
compadre has a comment.
MR. BARTSCH: I think what we were attempting
to do in that particular item was to force a closer working
relationship between the mayor and the county council . - Prior
to 1968 it was the board of supervisors. They all had pretty
well equal poweras they discovered. This charter was de-
signed to correct that and in our opinion this charter did an
overkill on it. The pendulum went too far the other way
where now we have a very strong mayor and a very weak county
council . What we were attempting to do in some of these
things is bring the power back somewhat to the middle where
the councilmen have some power and the mayor does not have
as much power. But we feel that it is a good charter, as
Garry said, but it went too far to correct the situation that
existed prior to 1968. We feel that we would like to see it
brought back somewhere in the middle. This was one of the
things by giving the council members more power. It may be
the wrong approach, but that was what our rationale was.
MR. ISHIDA: I can understand that. The only
thing I have in mind, right now, is if we do have the removal
portion subject to council ratification--I 'm also assuming
that the Chamber' s position is that the council can initiate
the removal also. Would I be wrong in assuming that?
- 19 -
MR. GARRISON:' No, that power was to remain
with the mayor and the_.administrative end of the government.
MR. ISHIDA: My feeling again was if the
removal portion-is whether if we give the council some power
of action as that, that . maybe .would not the pendulum be
going back to again too much? I don 't know, that is my
personal feeling, right 'now. Maybe you could expand on that.
MR.GARRISON : We felt it would bring the
pendulum back from the older position as Gordon has said ,
back to a more even center position. It is certainly not
designed to be an overkill.
MR. ISHIDA: I understand that. I am just
trying to see what the feasibility is and practicality is
as far as the administration is concerned where you have two '
bodies fighting each other all the time. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Mr. Garrison , have you
people ever looked into this term of office for councilmen
. . .it looks like this four years must be the magic number all
the time. Everybody talks about four years for the term .of
office and right now they are talking about staggered terms.
Have you ever looked into this as a two year term or three
year term?
MR. GARRISON : Yes , we did consider two year
terms on.. a staggered basis as well . The rationale behind
the four year was we felt that the two year basis would -have
the elected representative back running for office more-than
he was legislating and trying to keep in favor with his
people and not giving him a chance. Also the four year
staggered term we felt would possibly help eliminate_ the_ _ _
problem we faced at the last change of council; when the
whole slate was wiped out and a___new slate started. Many -of.
them politically naive in their handling affairs and it did
create some problems at the- legislative level to the point
that wefinallyhad Harvey Tajiri resign his position and
we changed the council again. We lost six to eight months,
or longer, of legislative process. It ' s an expertise to be
able to handle the legislative process and know the ins and
outs. By having the staggered terms and by having the
possibility of not having a whole new slate of officers on
an election to election basis we would have a better flow
from the legislative end of the county council. Therefore,
we felt four years on a staggered basis from district to
district would give that person a chance to set in , get •
acquainted and know where- and when he was going and how he
was going to be able to operate- within the confines of the
laws and the regulations that are set up for him.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: I see the merit of a
staggered. term because I think from some of the rumblings
that I have heard that to keep a councilman in office for four
years and not be able to really represent his constituents i-s
going to be a really heavy burden on the voters. So what you
- 20 -
are saying that even on a two year term or a four year term it
is staggered, yes , I can see the merit of that. Where we
can get rid of the bad councilman , the one who is not working
and representing his constituents from his district. I can
see that.
MR. GARRISON : If he is elected by district,
he is going to have to be more accountable to his district
people. It is possible that during the first six months of
a term, we might not have a good councilman. However, if he
waged a campaign worthy of his becoming elected, it isn ' t
often throughout this great land of ours that we find the
person that wages a good campaign and gets elected that
doesn ' t do a fair representative job. There are just not
really poor legislators.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: You think a one year honey-
moon is ample enough? Then say he really has got to start
working or else we have to get rid of that councilman. . . .
Thank you very much for your input.
MR. YANAGA: I think we have asked all the
questions on the items except Item 6, Interim Appointments.
Who does the appointing? The councilman, himself? The whole
council or the mayor?
MR. GARRISON: We wrestled with that question
as well , as to how the appointment and when do you really
find the councilman incapacitated. The charter does take
into account death and how that appointment will be made.
Probably one of the reasons we didn ' t put language into our
proposals was how to write the language to cover what_`°,that parti-
cular situation is going to be what we felt would be a delicate
task. How do you decide whether a councilman or elected rep-
resentative is incapacitated and cannot fulfill his position as
such. Of course, we are all specifically talking about Farmer
Bill and his unfortunate situation right now. However, I have
seen Farmer Bill at a few meetings in Kona, recently, so we
know he is up and around. Is he really incapacitated?
However, the purpose for it being in there is that is a situation
that is unique in itself and each situation would practically
be a situation within itself. If a councilman had a severe
stroke that left him totally paralyzed for the remaining period
of his office time, there is no way you can make that change
in the charter at this point. It just isn ' t written into the
charter and the only thing that can happen is that the other
councilmen can say we will help cover this man ' s position .
We will come out and see you in your district and we will try
to help. But it really gives you lack of representation from
your district. At that point, possibly, without going into an
election again , at least until such time as the term of office
was to expire when an election would be held, possibly a
mayoral appointment or a unanimous council appointment to
that position. We really didn ' t know. We just feel that
there should be some provision in there that could cover it.
- 21 -
In the case of a completely incapacitated member of the
council representing a district that district should have
some type of representation. The language we will leave
up to counsel on that.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: We would like to thank
the Kona Chamber of Commerce for coming out today.
MR. GARRISON: Mr. Chairman, thank you,
and ladies and gentlemen of the commission.
RECESS: At 5 :07 p.m. the Chair called for a short
recess.
RECONVENE: At 5 : 27 p.m, the meeting reconvened with all
members present..
APPROVAL The Chair called for the approval of minutes
OF MINUTES : dated March 27, 1979.
Motion was made by Mr. Trulson.
Seconded by Mr. Yagong and
unanimously carried.
CALENDAR The following correction was noted for the
CORRECTION: Revised Calendar, Agenda and Target Dates :
July ( 22) to July 24
Add the date of July 31
COMMUNI- The following communications were considered :
CATIONS:
Comm. 38 : List of recommendations for charter revision,
dated March 22 , 1979, submitted by the Kona
Women ' s Committee.
Comm. 39 : Report from County Clerk R.B. Legaspi , dated
April 4, 1979 regarding action of the Hawaii
County Council on request for special counsel
to Charter Commission.
Motion was made by Mrs. Kobayashi
to receive and file Communications
38 and 39. Seconded by Mr. Trulson
and unanimously carried.
- 22 -
NEW The Chair called upon Stuart Oda, Attorney for
BUSINESS: the Charter Commission to present his findings
on several items of research requested by the
commission:
MR. ODA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As requested
by the commission, I did some preliminary, very preliminary,
research on several areas. One of which had to do with the one
man , one vote concept which is talked about at practically every
meeting and on the issue of reapportionment. What is meant by
general supervision and control of the mayor. The third item
being the legality of residency requirements for county council-
men. The fourth being the proposed definition of "vacancy. "
I would like to stress that nothing that I say
here, today, is a final recommendation or anything like that.
It is very, very preliminary. Based on brief and limited research.
It is merely being given this afternoon to give all of you an
idea as to what some of these concepts might mean so that when
the comments are being made at the public hearings you might have
a better idea as to how that particular matter can be looked at.
Regarding the matter of "vacancy.; "--I am going to
take this kind of helter-skelter. Backwards , really. On the
matter of vacancy, I checked all of the charters of the various
islands and no charter, in this state, has a definition of
"vacancy. " I suspect that there is a very good reason for it.
I also researched in our library, the various definitions of
vacancy with regard to public officers. I couldn ' t find one that
really fits this situation so I had to sort of "invent" a defini-
tion which I 'm not really satisfied to be a complete definition.
I suspect that what Mr. Schutte and the others of you who have
expressed some concern about what "vacancy" means with regard to
vacancy, really means the death or resignation , removal from
office of any public officer who is unable to continue his duties
because of physical or mental infirmity or a conviction of a
felony. Our charter, as Icrecall , does not have any provision
for a conviction of a felony being a subject to forfeit your
office. Most of the other charters , if not all , of the other
counties have a provision for forfeiture of an office resulting
in a vacancy if a elected official is convicted of a felony.
As you know, a'felony is any crime that results in more than
one year in prison or a fine over $1 , 000. Let ' s leave the
definition of vacancy sort of hanging until such time that , first
of all , you decide you want one; secondly, under what type of
circumstances you feel that definition should be applied. Then
we can work one out to fit the situation.
So far as residency requirements for county
council , under the present charter, of course, to qualify under
Section 3-3 you have to be a citizen of the United States and
a qualified elector of the county for at least two years pre-
ceding the election or appointment to the county council. The
only other charter that has a two year provision or any other
type of residency provision , in this state, is the Kauai County
Charter which was enacted back in 1969, just about the time that
ours was. About ten years ago. I don ' t know whether they have
- 23 -
.changed that since then because according to-the Hawaii- Revised
Statutes ' copy of the 'County Charter it is still on the books.
They may have changed it by ordinance or some other way which
I don ' t have a copy of, but assuming that it is still in
existence we also have a two year residency requirement. it
appears to me, from my research of the cases in the law
library that the two year residency provision is unconstitu-
tional. So that provision would have to be changed. The
question is, next, what is constitutional? I haven ' t found
one single case that said three months, six months, one year
or anything like that. Again, going back to the Maui and
Honolulu Charters , by the way, which were revised very recently,
the last few years--Honolulu and Maui Charters have no' resi-
dency requirements for running for office. All you have to do
to be qualified to be elected to the councils of Maui and ,
Honolulu is that you be a duly qualified elector of the
district from which you are running. In other words , a re-
gistered voter, citizen of the United States. That sort of
thing. There is no specific time limit on how long you have
to live--for example, if one of you wanted to move to Maui ,
tomorrow, and the next day you could register to run as a
county councilman. .. If you change your residency:and-you qualify
to vote over there and, assuming you do, you can run for county
council. The same in Honolulu. I would say that that particular
provision regarding residency is one matter that should be taken
up by the commission. I cannot say, right now, what the recom-
mended specific period of residency requirement would be but
more than likely it appears that no residency requirements
would be the best possible alternative.
MR. TRULSON : Mr. Oda, you say residency require-
ment. . .how about a resident voter requirement, or a registration
to vote? That is also almost the same thing, isn 't it? You can 't
do one without the other. You can ' t be a registered voter for
two years unless you are a resident for two years. That is also
in :the charter. So the whole thing then would go? Is says here
that"a person must have been a resident voter of the district
from-which he is elected or appointed for at least two years. "
Where the residency in the district is a requirement. But that
also would have to be eliminated.
MR. ODA: That ' s right. Anytime you have
residency requirements, it is constitutionally suspect today.
are residencys such as requirements in certain instance
There
divorces!wThey used to have them_ in _welfare requirements but the
United States Supreme Court did away with that. In limited
situations, residencies are permissible. But very limited type
of residencies.
I suppose the basic premise behind getting rid
of some of these archaic residency requirements, as I call it,
is that if an individual moves into Hawaii County and wants to
run for the mayor or one of the council seats or whatever; if
he hasn ' t been living here long enough, his unfamiliarity with
the county would immediately show in his bid for election.
You can leave the intelligence of the people who are voting to
- 24 -
determine that. In almost all cases I think they would weed
them out. So the process has a built-in protection against
voting for people who don ' t know the island or what this
place is all about. Maybe that is the protection that is
sufficient. I don ' t know, I 'm just guessing.
Is there any question on the matter of resi-
dency? Preliminarily, I would say, more than likely my
recommendation would be to eliminate all questions of resi-
dency in order to qualify to run for the county council . ,
MR. OMONAKA: How does the state set its
requirements for the members of the house? By district?
MR. ODA: There may be some residency require-
ments there. I haven ' t researched that but I am almost sure
that I ran across some residency requirements in the state
representatives and the senate. I think they, in fact, may
have been either in the constitution or the state statute.
I 'm not sure.
MR. CADINHA: Stuart, what is the Supreme
Court ' s logic behind the abolishment of the residency require-
ments? Particularly, why is it unfair.
MR. ODA: Basically, when they struck down
residency requirements in various laws, state statutes such
as welfare and other things , they hung their decisions on
several constitutional so-called pegs. First of all , when
you are speaking of residency, because of the type of mobile
society we have today, people cannot be penalized for traveling
interstate. You, in effect, are penalizing people for
traveling and under the Thirteenth Amendment, I believe, which
contains the privileges and immunities clause of citizenship,
you cannot deny a person the right to obtain the privileges
and immunities of citizenship. Such as a basic right to vote
if he travels interstate and moves to another community. The
other premise is that generally and again this is connected
when you do create barriers for new residents in a community
you tend to discriminate under the Fourteenth Amendment ' s
equal protection clause against newcomers thereby perpetuating
the policies or type of government of the old regime without
giving the newcomers the right to participate. Thereby, also
denying them what we call due process of law. So there are
all kinds of constitutional bases on which the courts have
struck down these statutes. But the basic one, I believe, is
the fact that you are denying them the privileges and immunities
of citizenship.
MRS. KOBAYASHI : Regarding the residency, under
the section on qualifications , it also says if the councilman
elected from a district leaves residency from that district his
seat will be vacant. Does that also apply? Or would that also
be unconstitutional? We could still keep that?
- 25 -
MR. ODA: That is very valid. That will be
part of the definition of vacancy, I would presume. If you
have a county councilman running from a specific district--
right now, I believe we have three, or six running from a
specific district--if he moves from that district he can no
longer be a councilman from that district. In effect, it
should be forfeited because he is no longer a resident of
that district.
MR. CADINHA: Stuart, let ' s say a councilman
determines that he wants to move into an area that does not
have a residency requirement though the one in which he was
elected does have one. Theoretically then his term doesn ' t
expire until the new term, right?. . . . . . .
MR. ODAa But if he moves. Let ' s say he runs
from a district , if he moves he vacates his previous seat.
If he moves to another district where he doesn 't have to be
•
a resident of that district to run, hecan_ run,_ from_ ther_e_
the next time around but he vacates, of course, that previous
seat. There would be some way, as you call it, musical chairs
can be played a little bit under that kind of provision. But
even if that happens , if you look at it in terms of maybe that
person is in effect almost running like an at-large candidate
the effect might be the same thing almost like an at-large
candidate. He may be running from that district but he is
being voted upon by all of the electors, the voters of the
entire county. Any other questions on residency?
MR. OMONAKA: Is it legal for a person to have
two residences?
MR. ODA: Is it legal for a person to have
two residences ? For the purpose of running for a county
councilman?
MR. OMONA,KA: I can physically live in Ka'u
and then own a condo here and just commute back and forth.
MR. ODA: You can legally own two residences
or fifteen. But you have to commit yourself to one specific,
what we call a domicile, a regular place of residence. The
others would be subordinate or whatever you want to call it.
Secondary residencies. I suppose somebody who wants to play
some games can say, oh, I live in Hilo even if I_ have a home
in Ka'u. He might own a condominium at BayshoreTowers, youu
know, that kind of thing but that would depend on the facts
of the situation, I guess. He has to pick and choose where
his residency is. Theoretically, 1 suppose, something like
that could happen.
General supervision and control of the mayor.
That concept is another one of those difficult, broad defini-
tions that I could not really find anything specfic on.
Basically, from some of the court cases that I read regarding
general supervisions, it--again this is nothing final--it
- 26 -
implies something more than mere power to advise and suggest
and confers authority to oversee new acts and to correct the
errors of those over whom the right to supervision is granted.
In a nutsell, general supervision and control really means the
right to oversee the entire operations of a department.
MR. ISHIDA: Then you could have a conflict.
When you take the police commission, for instance, would there
be a conflict between the mayor ' s office and the police commis-
sion as far as the powers and duties of the chief is concerned?
MR. ODA: It does not have to be. It depends
whether thereJwould be a conflict, let ' s say, between the mayor
and the chief of police. First of all , it depends on how rules
and regulations of the police commission give the police
commission authority over what areas of the operations of the
police department. If the operations of the police commission
is given jurisdiction over limited areas of the police depart-
ment, as I understand it, having been legal advisor to the
police department and police commission one time, many, many
years ago. The police commission has jurisdiction, primarily,
over the general policy matters involving the police department.
They don ' t get involved in the nitty gritty day to day opera-
tional type of thing.
Now, what would the mayor be doing on the other
hand? The mayor would have some control over what the chief of
police is doing on the, operational standpoint, whereas , the
police would not, ordinarily. But the rules and regulations
conferring, as"I say, and the charter provisions conferring the
specific jurisdiction of the commission itself overseeing the
executive department have to be pretty clearly drawn so there
will not be a clash as to who has jurisdiction, over what.
I think, oftentimes, you have that trouble because the charter_
and the rules and regulations conferring jurisdiction on_ the
police commission are not very,-clear. They are very vague.
I can ' t say whether that exists right now because I haven ' t
looked at it recently. _ You__also have the additional problems
of personalities. If you have a strong mayor vis-a-vis a weak
mayor or a strong police commission vis-a-vis a strong or weak
mayor then you have problems as to who has power over whom.
Anytime you are talking about power you have some problems
depending on the personalities involved. So the respective
charter provisions on the jurisdictions over the various::-`
commissions have to be very carefully looked at. They=_have
_to- be' looked at in terms of what does this commission want
the specific commission, let ' s say the police_ commission- or
civil service commission to _have power_ over and in terms _of -what
would be the mayor' s duty or obligation or control - at the same
time. They shouldn ' t be clashing or overlapping too much.
There would tend to be some overlapping, unfortunately, ,but
as much as possible that should be minimized.
So, as I am saying now, in a nutshell the
phrase "general supervision and control of the mayor" seems
to give the mayor pretty much of a hand over how the executive
department operates.
- 27 -
MR. CADINHA: Stuart, specifically, let ' s just
hypothetically take a situation where the mayor tells the
police chief or the water department head to perform a
function--do something--and he gets a no. Under our current
charter, he turns around and says , well you are under my
general supervision and I interpret that to mean that it
implies that I am your boss. The commission behind the police
chief and behind the water department turns around and says,
no, no. We agree with our chief ' s or our department head ' s
stand. What process then would take place to determine who is
right? Does the corporation counsel render an opinion?
MR. ODA: Generally, yes. That would be the
situation. Corporation counsel will have to interpret the
charter provision regarding the powers of the commission and
the powers of the mayor. They have to be looked at and some
decision has to be made as to who has got the overseeing
authority. Or, whether it is a collateral kind of thing,
bilateral,WlhateVer you want to call it. Jurisdiction by both
groups. - In general , the commissions , themselves , don ' t really
get too much involved in , as I say, the day to day operational
`aspects of the executive departments. They meet maybe once a
month, at most. Most of these, from what I have seen, most
of these just go through the motions of listening to reports
by the department heads. They don ' t really act on too many
day to day type of decision making matters. In fact, they
seldom present it to the commissions for action. Except ,
perhaps , for the water commission. I would say, that under
the present language of that proavision, that perhaps some
study should be made between the commission powers; the mayor ' s
powers and that specific sentence in the charter. I cannot
make any specific recommendation, at this time, because I have
to look at it further. Any other questions on that?
With regard to the redistricting and reappor-
tionment matters. This is again a very controversial area.
On the one man, one vote concept, the basic case that we all
fall back upon is that Reynolds versus Sims case back in 1964,
I believe.
As you know, on the mainland , unlike Hawaii
they have had quite a bit of racial discrimination. Most of
the court cases that have overturned the legislative districting
of various states and _counties throughout the nation have been
based on the fact that the districting plans that were in
existence have been racially motivated to discriminate against
negroes and other minorities. For example, let ' s say this
island--if you picture the island into--how many districts do
we have--six--eight--if you have at-large voting for all nine
county councilmen and let ' s assume that in the district of
Puna you had predominantly, let ' s say most of the
immigrants from the Philippine islands live in the district of
Puna. This is just hypothetical . Let ' s say 90% of the
Filipinos or members of the Filipino community live in the
distr-ict 'of Puna. You have an at-large voting plan, nine
councilmen running at-large. The totality„'of the vote of the
- 28 -
Filipino community makes only 10% of the registered voters.
By no stretch of the imagination would a candidate of Filipino
extraction running from the district of Puna ever hope to get
elected on the at-large scheme. Because, assuming that there
is racially motivated voting, the at-large scheme makes him
subject to the vote of the entire county making it virtually
impossible for him to get elected from the County of Hawaii.
Whereas , if he was running strictly from the district of Puna
his chances of being elected would increase_by:-tenfold. _The same
applies whether that district was made up of Japanese or only
Haoles, Hawaiians, or whatever it is. So that is the situation
the mainland was faced with and as a general rule the courts
have looked at at-large voting schemes very, very carefully.
They suspect at-large voting schemes because many such voting
schemes, especially in the south , were created to perpetuate
white supremacy. This is not true, here. I don ' t think such
concepts can be applied, here. It is probably not applicable.
So, the one man , one vote concept everybody
uses it very loosely. The law doesn ' t require that each person ' s
vote have the same weight in Puna as it will in Hilo or in Ka'u
or in Kona. It does require, as much as possible, equality of
representation. But factionally it doesn ' t require exact
equality. You cannot do that, from a functional standpoint.
The court cases have gone all over the place.
If I were to read you some of the decisions, you would be more
confused than you were prior to listening to me this afternoon.
Basically, as I say, the basic rule is that one person ' s vote
should equal another' s as nearly as possible. In terms of its
weight in proportion to its ability to elect a candidate.
Now, the scheme does not minimize or cancel out
voting strength of racial , ,,-political , or economic groups inthe
population. You cannot set up a plan to favor any racial ,
political , or economic groups or other types of factions in a
community. Or even a political candidate, for that matter.
There have been situations where politicians try to redraft,
what we call gerrymander, district lines so that they can
perpetuate their own election. Or see that Mr. Jones , down
the street cannot be reelected because he has to run from
another district where he is not very well liked, for whatever
reason.
Population. Population is the proper measure
of equality in apportionment. Population. The registered voters
1 si _=.has been used but basically the courts favor population.
Because as we all know the number of the difference between
registered voters and the population can differ substantially.
The elected officials are supposed to represent the people in
the community, not just the registered voters. So we fall
back to population.
The other guideline is when you are talking
about voting dilution cases, as these racial cases have been
called. You have to consider access to political processes.
- 29 -
If you have been denying certain groups of
people access to the political system, that would be one test
of discrimination.
No matter what, next one, at-large plans cannot
be used to minimize voting strength of any person , group, or
whatever. You cannot use at-large plans for that purpose.
The courts seem to favor, and there are
exceptions, they seem to favor districts. Where the population; ,
can somehow--the districts can somehow be drawn to fairly equal
proportions. So long as you are not doing it for the purpose
of satisfying or favoring special interest groups. Or denying,
in other words, groups of people their rights to political--
participating in the political process.
Such other matters as the responsiveness of
the representatives to the needs of the group; whether there
is a state policy behind at-large districting; whether there
has been past practice of inequality or discrimination ; the
size of the district;, how many candidates an elector must vote
for if positions are not contested for individually. That also
is a consideration. To give you one or two examples that
closely tie to Hawaii County. In Virginia Beach, Virginia back
in 1967, the United States Supreme Court dealt with a case
there involving eleven councilmen who were elected at-large. _ _ _
Seven of the eleven were required to reside in seven boroughs.
which is equivalent to our district. You know, of course;-
there was a challenge that these at-large voting schemes were
discriminatory. The supreme court, in that particular case,
upheld the, what they called the seven-four plan, because
under the particular plan there was no attempt being made to
discriminate against the negroes , the people who resided in
the rural areas of the community of the eleven specific boroughs.
The boroughs were used merely as a basis of residence for
candidates. Not for voting or representation , necessarily.
There were quite a few rural candidates. Virginia Beach,
itself, was a tourist oriented borough. Just to give you an
idea, the smallest district that had one candidate, one
candidate running representing that particular borough, had
only 733 residents in population. They had one councilman of
the eleven. The largest borough had 29 , 000. They also had
one councilman. You talk about equality of representation
in terms of the one man, one vote rule. You divide in one
situation 733 votes equal one councilman. The other one
man,
,
29, 000 , you can see, mathematically, a
it cannot be one
one vote. What the courts have looked at is the total picture.
Not just mathematically does it come out to one man, one vote.
The total picture is more important than any specific--like
I say, the total forest is more important than whether one tree in
the forest is termite eaten or not.
In Mobile, Alabama in 1978, which is the most
recent case ,that I could find, the United States Court of
Appeals for the 5th Circuit held that at-large voting plan
in Mobile, Alabama was illegal. They had three commissioners
- 30 -
who were elected to run at-large for four years in numbered
positions. They were all elected by majority vote. There
was no requirement that any person reside in a specific
district. There were no blacks who were elected to one of
the three commissioner positions. Of the population of
190, 000 in Mobile, Alabama back in 1970, 35% of the people
in Mobile were black . Because of that, the court of appeals
held that the at-large voting plan was unconstitutional.
Because of the reasons that I previously explained. The
blacks were not given access to the political process and
the at-large plan because the whites held a majority they
could always elect whites. . `The court ordered nine single
member districts instead of three at-large seats. Under this
scheme, it almost guarantees that at least a number of negroes
would be elected based on ,their percentage of the population.
Basically, so far, that is what I found to
give you some guidelines on how to apply the provisions in
the County Charter. Do you have any questions) can answer?
I don ' t know whether I can answer them. Under our provision
of the charter, we have six members elected at-large of the
nine. Wait a minute, nine members who shall be elected at-
large with terms of four years. Of the nine, six are
required to reside in specific districts, right? Otherwise
known as 'a _
plan. More questions?
One parting shot, so to speak. As I say,
we have to exercise some caution in using the racial cases,
reapportionment cases, to apply here. The reasons may not
be applicable.
MRS. KOBAYASHI : Ms. Isbell , last week ,
talked about a reapportionment commission that. the Honolulu
Charter .wanted. Is there also an apportionment commission
for the state house?
MR. ODA: Under the State Constitution there
is a reapportionment commission for state offices. I don ' t
have the specific statute, here. They have a new one now
under their present,__ recent amendment to the State Constitu-
tion.
MRS. KOBAYASHI : The proposals have been
according to the state house districts and that would be
a change in the district representation. I suppose that we
could put something in the charter that says there shall be
a reapportionment commission also?
MR. ODA: That can be done. There is a
county that has a reapportionment commission. It is Honolulu.
The other counties do not, at the present time. As Mr. Ishida
and I were discussing this , maybe the concept of reapportion-
ment should be left to a -separate- -body like a reapportionment
commission to give it appropriate deliberation. This Charter
Commission has so many things that it must do that reapporti'on-
men'c, or redistricting , ' whatever can be left as a specialty
for one group to look at in depth.
- 31 -
MR. CADINHA: Stuart, what method is the state
going to use? Are they going to stick to the voter registra-
tion.
MR. ODA: I 'm not sure, right now. I haven ' t
looked into that.
MR. CADINHA: Could we, conceivably, legally
piggyback this thing? Using legal voters?
MR. ODA: I think so. You said, piggyback?
Yes.
MR. CADINHA: Yes, in other words, if they
reapportion house districts , that we would automatically re-
apportion accordingly?
MR. ODA: According to state house districting
and things like that? I would think so, offhand. "
On the other hand, you can draw your own
districts as well.
CHAIRMAN SAKATA: Any other questions? Thank
you very much, Stuart.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting
was adjourned at 6: 20 p.m. until Tuesday,
April 17, 1979 at 4: 30 p.m. 14th Session ,
Punalu'u Village Restaurant; 7:00 p.m. Public
Hearing, Naalehu Elementary School Cafeteria,
Naalehu.
11111 . t
Joan Carnett
RECORDING SECRETARY
- 32 -