Comm No 0012.04 - Testimony - April 1 Public Hearing

Home

April 1, 2019 To: Hawaii County Charter Commission CA -1 Draft 3: Relating to Rephrasing District Residency Language I see only one problem with this and that is that, no matter where else it is stated, this proposal should include a clear definition of "resident". CA -2 Draft 2: Relating to Holding an Equal Amount of Council Meetings in East and West Hawaii: I agree. CA -4 Draft 2: Relating to Powers. Duties and Functions of the Director of Research and Development: I agree. CA -5: Relating to Changing Name of the Legislative Auditor to County Auditor: What's in a name? Names of Government agencies, departments and positions should accurately reflect their functions, duties and responsibilities. One of the jobs of the auditor is to ensure that new State laws requiring specific County action are addressed by the Council or Administration. Many things fall through the cracks anyway, but if you remove the "legislative" word it will become arguable that that function is also removed. If there is no change in function, there is no need to change the name. If there IS a corresponding change, then it should be stated dearly so that voters will know what that change is. CA -6: Relating to Disciplinary Actions for the Police Chief and Fire Chief: I agree. CA -8: Relating to Terms of Office for Coundl Members: Previous attempts to return to 4 -year terms have been rejected at the ballot box. The reason is that the voting public wants to make sure that if they erred in their choice they will not be stuck with it for four whole years. An elected official can do a lot of damage to a system in even two years (witness the current POTUS). We have had council persons who were alcoholics, who threw temper tantrums and objects during council meetings, who bad a high absentee rate and failed to attend most community meetings and events, and who refused to represent their constituents by voting. I am ashamed to say that these examples were all from Puna. Fortunately, we were not stuck with them for 4 -year terms. I hear the argument that 2 -year terms force elected officials to spend too much time in fundraising and campaigning, to the neglect of the performance of their duties. That may be true, but there is another and better solution to that: publicly funded elections. The Charter Commission missed a great opportunity to make a positive change by not considering that alternative in its deliberations. I do not support the proposed change to 4 -year terms. CA -9 Draft 3: Relating to Staff to Administer the PONC Fund and Maintenance Funds: I served on the PONC and totally support the change of oversight responsibilities from Parks & Rec to Finance. However, your wording must clarify that the additional staff Finance will need is just one dedicated staff position. Limiting the current wording to "staff" can give rise to misinterpretation — it is too vague and can be misconstrued. CA -12: Relating to Disciplinary Actions for Council Members: I agree. Comm. No. 12.4