The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011_0328_CharterAgendaPacket Sherman Shiraishi Members: Chair Mary Lou Barela Joel Guy Patrick Stack Carol Suzawa Vice Chair Jan TenBruggencate Ed Justus COUNTY OF KAUAI CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA Monday, March 28, 2011 4:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A1B 4444 Rice Street, Lihu'e, HI 96766 CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES Open Session Minutes of February 28, 2011 BUSINESS CRC 2011-01 Discussion and decision-making on proposing a Charter amendment to correct non- substantive items as they relate to grammar, spelling and formatting errors in the Charter(deferred from meeting on 2/28/11) (a) Review of and decision-making on proposed Press Release seeking public input on procedures to correct non-substantive items as they relate to grammar, spelling and formatting errors in the Charter (b) Communication dated 3/1'11 from the Charter Review Commission to the County Attorney's Office requesting legal guidance or an opinion on whether non-substantive changes can be made to the Charter without going through the amendment process and, if not, does each non-substantive change require a separate amendment or can all non-substantive changes be included as one amendment. (c) Confidential opinion dated 3/71111 from Deputy County Attorney Jennifer Winn offering legal guidance on whether non-substantive changes can be made to the Charter without going through the amendment process and whether each non-substantive change would require a separate amendment or whether all non-substantive changes could be included as one amendment. An Equal Opportunity EniplQycr CRC 2011-02 Discussion and possible decision-making on changing the required voter percentages for either or both Section 24.01 B (Charter Amendments by petition signed by 5% of registered C� - Z:� voters) and Section 22.03 C (Initiative & Referendum by 20% of registered voters) of the Kaua'i County Charter(deferred from meeting on 21128/11) (a) Communication dated 3.'1A I from the Charter Review Commission to the County Clerk's Office requesting clarification on the definition and use of terms "registered" versus "eligible" voters as provided for in the Charter. CRC 2011-04 Discussion and possible decision-making on clarifying Section 22.03.0. to reword the section to read "Each initiative or each referendum petition must be signed by registered voters comprising not less than twenty percent (20%) of the number of registered voters registered in the last preceding general election." CRC 2011-05 Discussion and possible decision-making on clarifying Section 24.01.B. by rewording the first sentence of Section 24.01.13 so that it would read, "By petition presented to the council, signed by registered voters comprising not less than five percent (5%) of the number of registered voters registered in the last general election, setting forth the proposed amendments." ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting: Monday, April 25, 2011 at 4:00 pin in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A1B ADJOURNMENT NOTICE OF EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Section 92-7(a), Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) the Commission may, when deemed necessary, hold an executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the executive session was not anticipated in advance. Any such executive session shall be held pursuant to Section 92-4, HRS and shall be limited to those items described in Section 92-5(a), HRS. cc.- Deputy County Attorney Jennifer Winn PUBLIC COMMENTS and TESTIMONY Persons wishing to offer comments are encouraged to submit written testimony at least 24-hours prior to the meeting indicating: 1. Your name and if applicable, your position/title and organization you are representing, 2. The agenda item that you are providing comments on; and 3. Whether you will be testifying in person or submitting written comments only; and Charter Review Commission--March 28, 2011 2 1 P 4. If you are unable to submit your testimony at least 24 hours prior to the meeting, please provide 10 copies of your written testimony at the meeting clearly indicating the name of the testifier. and 5. If testimony is based on a proposed Charter amendment, list the applicable Charter provision. While every effort will be made to copy, organize, and collate all testimony received, materials received on the day of the meeting or improperly identified may be distributed to the members after the meeting is concluded. The Charter Commission rules limit the length of time allocated to persons wishing to present verbal testimony to five(5) minutes. A speaker's time may be limited to three(3) minutes if, in the discretion of the chairperson or presiding member, such limitation is necessary to accommodate all persons desiring to address the Commission at the meeting. Send written testimony to: Charter Review Commission Attn: Barbara Davis Office of Boards and Commissions 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150 LThu'e, HI 96766 E-mail:bdax,i sO)kauai.gov Phone: (808) 241-4919 Fax: (808) 241-5127 SPECIAL ASSISTANCE If you need an alternate format or an auxiliary aid to participate, please contact the Boards and Commissions Support Clerk at(808)241-4919 at least five (5) working days prior to the meeting, Charter Review Commission—March 28, 2011 3 1 QR I9 B�� A ;1�1 COUNTY OF KAUAI J 144 Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee: CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date ] February 28, 2011 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213 Start of Meeting: 4:04 pm I End of Meeting: 5:25 pm Present Chair Sherman Shiraishi, Vice-Chair Patrick Stack, Members: Mary Lou Barela, Joel Guy, Ed Justus, Carol SLIzawa, Jan TenBruggencate .Also: Deputy County Attorney Jennifer Winn; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Support Clerk Barbara Davis, Administrator John Isobe, Administrative Aide Paula Morikami; County Clerk Peter Nakamura Audience Members: Rich Iloeppner, Lonnie Sykos, Ken Taylor, Linda Harmon, Glenn Mickens Excused Absent 'CT S'UBJF DISCUSSION --------- ACTION County Clerk Peter Nakamura administered the Oath of Office to Patrick Stack Chair Shiraishi congratulated Patrick Stack on prior to the meeting being called to order. his reappointment to the Kaua'i Charter Review Commission and thanked him for his continued service on the Commission. Call To Order Chair Shiraishi called the meeting to order at 4:04 pin with 7 Commissioners present. Approval of Rich I-loeppner asked for a point of order stating that the two items listed as Agenda Agenda Item CRC 201. 1-02 could not be put on the same ballot question as they are separate sections of the Charter. This should be 2 separate agenda items. Chair Shiraishi took note of the objection. Mr. 'renBruggencate moved to approve the agenda as circulated. Mr. Justus seconded the ....... motion. Motion carried 7:0 Approval of Open Session Minutes of January 24, 2011 Ms. Suzawa moved to approve the minutes as Minutes circulated. Ms. Barela seconded the motion. Motion carried 70 Business CRC 2011-01 Discussion and decision-making on proposing a Charter— amendment to correct non-substantive items as they relate to a gmtnuriar, Charter Review Commission Open Session February 2 8, 2011 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION 1/24/11) a) Review of and decision-making on proposed Press Release seeking public input on procedures to correct non-substantive items as they relate to grammar, spelling and fiannatting errors in the Charter b) Guide for Charter Review consideration as it relates to gender inclusive language provided by Ms. Carol Bain Chair Shiraishi said the gender neutral language submittal from Carol Bain was very educational. The Chair further noted concerns brought up previously by Ken Taylor in proposing a charter amendment to correct grammar and make it gender neutral; would this be one charter amendment or would each individual section have to have its own proposed charter amendment which would make it cumbersome. Secondly, a charter amendment has to be in Rarnseyer format which would present a lot of reading material for the public. With that in mind, staff prepared a proposal that would let the County Council approve charter amendments of a non- substantive nature relating to grammar or gender neutral language, (Chair Shiraishi asked to take item CRC 2011-02 out of order since Mr. Nakamura, County Clerk, was present in the room. The meeting returned to item CRC 2011-01 right after the request was made to Mr. Nakamura to provide an explanation of the difference between eligible voters (Charter §22,03 C Initiative & Referendum) and voters registered in the last general election (Charter §24.01 B Charter Amendments) Ms. Barela noted that legal papers such as corporation papers or by-laws making gender neutral changes do not have to go to the Board for approval when it does not take away from the validity of the by-laws. Mr. Stack Charter Review Commission Op(--,-ii Session February 28, 2011 Page 3 SUBJEC'r DISCUSSION ACTION pointed out that the gender inclusive language provided by Ms. Bain was written for the UK and the language is different so whatever is considered for our Charter should not be a carbon copy of what was written for citizens in the United Kingdom. Asked if gender neutral changes would be handled by reproducing the entire Charter in Ramseyer format or would there be a separate charter question for each section where there is a gender change, Mr. Isobe said that the Big Island submitted a comprehensive charter amendment to change words, gender, corrections in spelling and grammar which was placed on the ballot and did pass, Mr. Justus asked the County Attorney to offer an opinion on whether the Commission could change the gender neutrality language without an amendment, would they have to submit a separate amendment for each correction made or could they made the entire charter gender neutral and present it as one amendment. Attorney Winn pointed out that the Charter is a government document and changes could not be made without the people saying it was okay. Charter §24.03A says that unless a new charter is submitted to the voters each amendment to the charter shall be voted on separately. Case law has said that if a proposal has 2 or more changes that are substantive and not closely related it would violate this provision; the flip side is if it is non-substantive and closely related it could probably be done as one question but that is without specific knowledge of what the Charter is doing at this time. Attorney Winn thought the Commission might be able to include non-substantive changes as one amendment because the proposal would be non-substantive and the changes closely related. Lonnie Sykos--Mr. Sykos said his concern was of a greater legal matter and raised an issue with changes in punctuation such as a comma, an apostrophe or semi-colon which could create the opposite meaning. He asked who would be the non-partisan, non-political, legal entity to review the language and tell the public that the intent had not changed. While Mr. Sykos said he Charter Review Commission Open Session February 28, 2011 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION was not opposed to the county attorneys doing the changes, he questioned whether or not it would require an outside legal opinion. Mr. Tenl3ruggencate asked Mr. Sykos if he considered the Commission, which is a panel of citizens, to be the people who should be doing this work or should it be someone from outside and if so, who from the outside. Mr. Sykos said he presumed they would hire outside legal counsel who specialized in contract language or whatever the specialty would be for the charter. Ken Taylor- Mr. Taylor agreed with most of Mr. Sykos' comments. Changing a word or comma could change the whole meaning of a document. If you want to make a change to a charter item it has to be put to a vote of the People, not in a blanket process. Rich Hoeppner--- Mr. Hoeppner said that the Charter should contain one simple section stating that "he"means both genders. Chair Shiraishi said Charter §23.17 states When atj�y personal pronoun appears in this charter, it Shall be constrtied to mean either sex. Mr. Hoeppner said if it was already part of the charter, then it should be left alone and then requested a legal opinion of his initial request as to whether the two charter sections should be 2 agenda items or not. Chair Shiraisbi thanked Mr. Hoeppner for his opinion and noted that his point of order was taken for the record. Linda Han-non —Ms. Harmon said changing pronouns to he/she instead of he is not so hard and does not see any reason for confusion with the meaning. The writers of the Charter did not say they wanted to exclude women and she does not understand the reason for wanting an amendment. Mr. Justus moved to defer CRC 2011-01 to the March meeting pending an opinion from the ------- County Attorney on whether non-substantive Charter Review Commission Open Session February 28, 2011 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION changes can be made to the Charter without going through the amendment process and, if not, does each non-substantive change require a separate amendment or can all non-substantive changes be included as one amendment. Ms. Barela seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 Attorney Winn asked that the request for an opinion be sent to her in writing; Staff to initiate request for the Commission. Mr. TenBruggencate said he would personally vote against passing off making changes to the Charter to the County Council because that is the responsibility of the Charter Commission, CRC, 2011-02 Discussion and possible decision-making on changing the required voter percentages for either or both Section 24.01 B (Charter Amendments by petition signed by 5% of registered voters) and Section 22.03 C (Initiative& Referendum by 20%of registered voters) of the Kaua'i County Charter. a) Comparison chart of signature requirements by County for Charter Amendments and Initiative Petitions Chair Shiraishi asked Peter Nakamura, County Clerk, to explain the difference between eligible voters (Charter §22.03 C Initiative& Referendum) and voters registered in the Iasi general election (Charter §24.01 B Charter Amendments), Mr. Nakamura said he has not had experience with Initiative & Referendum during his time as County Clerk but had processed 2 charter amendment petitions and was fairly clear on what those requirements were. Mr. Nakamura asked the Commission's indulgence to allow the County Council staff to research the last time an Initiative was on the ballot to track historically how they identified that particular group. Mr. TenBruggencate asked if Mr. Nakamura's office would also . T se a uniform language for future consideration that is Charter Review Commission Open Session February 2S, 2011 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ---------ACTION understandable by the public as to its meaning. Mr. Nakamura said his office would also compare language from other charters in Hawai'i. (Return to item CRC 2011-02 following the completion of the discussion lor itern CRC 2011-01) Chair Shiraishi said that a point of order was noted by Mr. Hoeppner on this agenda item. Attorney Winn said there was no violation of the Sunshine Law by listing the 2 sections as one agenda item for discussion. Mr. TenBruggencate did agree that if this goes to the ballot it would have to be listed as 2 separate items but for discussion purposes there is a relationship since one of the key items is the language of how to identify the requirements of each segment of the voting population. Chair Shiraishi noted that Staff originally listed this as 2 separate agenda items but he decided to combine them into one agenda item for discussion and comparison purposes. Asked for the attorney's perspective, Attorney Winn could not provide an answer to the difference between eligible voters and registered voters without doing research. Ms. Suzawa said the comparison with the other counties reconfinns that we might not be in the ballpark with our percentage requirements and she would like to see a comparison between how many voters voted for the charter amendments as compared to how many voted for elected officials in the previous elections; Staff will work with Ms. Suzawa to gather the information. Mr. TenBruggencate pointed out that summary reports from the past 5 elections are available on the State Election's Website. Chair Shiraishi pointed out that Mr. TenBruggencate's proposal of Charter §2401 B was not to increase the percentage but to compare it with the Initiative & Referendum section. Mr. TenBruggencate verified that it was not the intent to increase the number of signatures required for a charter amendment petition and is not a proposal before the Commission. What is citug'discussed is the disr in the numbers between the requirements for Charter Review Commission Open Session February 28, 2011 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Initiative& Referendums and charter petitions and whether there should be public meetings to discuss this disparity. Glenn Mickens There is nothing broke so what are you trying to fix'? The 5% is adequate. Rich floeppner There were over 3,300 registered voter signatures gathered on the last citizen's petition to get it on the ballot; it passed with an almost 2:1 margin. If you want to compare 20% (Initiative) with 5% (Charter amendment) these are 2 totally separate Charter issues, one dealing with amendments and one with County Council ordinances. Article 22 is an issue directly involving the Council and its operations and if they want the 20% lowered, the Council should put it on the ballot. To raise the percentage for charter amendments will virtually eliminate public participation; leave it alone. Ken Taylor—There is a simple reason for the difference in the two percentages. Article 22.03 is to challenge an ordinance that Council has put into effect but you do not want someone challenging every ordinance and resolution that the County puts forth so it makes sense to have a high number to challenge those activities. Article 24.01 allows the community to put an issue on the ballot which they feel is not forthcoming from the County. There should be no change to the Charter on these two issues. Lonnie Sykos—He said it never ceases to astound him how unpaid officials do such a good job in dealing with the public and all of their views about their Constitutional liberties and civil rights. His question is whether or not it serves a good purpose to clarify the numbers involved in the 5%, historically, and the numbers involved in the 20%, historically, given they are two com tely different bodies. Without having the figures, at this po�ntit Charter Review Cominission Open Session February 28, 2011 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION could be a false assumption that it requires more signatures at 20%than it does for 5%. Chair Shiraishi asked fear a motion to receive the written testimony from the Wailua-Kapa'a Neighborhood Association on agenda item CRC 2011-02 Ms. Barcla moved to accept the two and the written testimony tioni Carl Imparato on agenda item CRC 2011-02. communications as submitted. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 Mr. TenBruggencate moved to defer CRC 2011- 02 to the March meeting pending the response from the County Clerk clarifying the difference between registered voters and eligible voters. Ms. Barela seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 Next Meeting Monday, March 28, 2011 4:00 pm, Meeting Room 2A/213 Agenda Items CRC 2011-01 and CRC 2011-02 will be carried forth on the March agenda with follow-up from the County Clerk,County Attorney and Adjournment Mr. TenBruggencate moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:25 pm. Ms. Barela seconded the motion. Motion carried Submitted by: Reviewed and Approved by: Barbara Davis, Staff Support Clerk- Sherman Shiraishi, Chair Approved as is. Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. BERNARD P. CARVAt_HC},JR. -.�, GARY K. HEU Mayer *Y t4° Managing Director COUNTY OF KAUAI News Release For Immediate Release: To be determined Public input sought by Charter Review Commission LIHU`E —Tasked with studying and reviewing the County Charter, members of the Charter Review Commission are asking for input from the public on procedures to correct non- substantive items in the Charter that relate to grammar, spelling and formatting errors. The deadline to submit comments on this matter is Monday, March 21, 2011. "We will be discussing corrections to non-substantive items in the Charter at our next meeting on March 28, and encourage the public to provide comment," said Commission Chair Sherman Shiraishi. He noted that the commission plans to use this information for developing a proposed charter amendment for the 2012 General Election. Other members of the commission include: Patrick Stack, vice-chair; Mary Lou Barella; Joel Guy; Ed Justus; Carol Suzawa; and Jan TenBruggencate. Suggested non-substantive changes can be submitted in writing to the Charter Review Commission, at 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150, Uhu`e HI, 96766. Information on Charter commission meetings, hearings, agendas, minutes and documents is available on the county website, www.kauai.gov or at the Office of Boards and Commissions located at the Liu'e Civic Center, Mo'ikeha Building, Suite 160. Commission meetings are held monthly. The next meeting is scheduled on Monday, March 28, 4 pm, at the Uhu`e Civic Center, Mo'i eha Building, conference rooms 2A and 2B. CRC 2011-01(a) For more information or to request additional support or an auxiliary aid for the meeting, please contact Barbara Davis at 241-4919 or via email: bdavis(@-kauai.g2y. Sherman Shiraishi, Chair Members. Mary Lou Barela Patrick Stack, Vice Chair Joel Guv Ed Justus Jan TenBru-gencate Carol Suzawa RAUA`I COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO: Alfred Castillo, County Attorney Cc: Jennifer Winn, Deputy County Attorney Gary Neu, Managing Director FROM: Sherman Shiraishi, Chairperson ' Via: Paula Morikami, Administrative Aldh DATE: March 1, 2011 RE: Request for Legal Guidance or Opinion The Charter Review Commission, at its meeting on February 28, 2011, requested that you provide written legal guidance or an opinion to the following questions: 1. Can the Charter Review Commission make non-substantive changes to the Charter without having to go through the amendment process outlined in Section 24.03 of the Kauai County Charter? 2. If non-substantive changes require going through the amendment process (Section 24.03, County Charter), does each non-substantive change require a separate amendment and ballot question or can all the non-substantive changes be proposed in a single amendment and presented as one ballot question? The next Charter Review Commission meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 28, 2011. In order to allow our office time to properly prepare for this meeting, we would appreciate receiving your written response by March 17, 2011. If you are unable to provide a response by the date above, or if you have any questions, please contact me at 241-4922. Thank you. CRC 2011-01 (b) ARTICLE XXXV CHARTER Al-dENDMENT Section S e -L s this on 24 . 01 . Initiation of Amendments. Amendme � charter may be initiated only in the following manner: A. By resolution of the council adopted after two readings on separate days and passed by a vote of five or more members of the council. B. By petition presented to the council, signed by not less than five percent (5%) of the voters registered in the last general election, setting forth the proposed amendments . Such petitions shall designate and authorize not less than three nor more than five of the signers thereto to approve any alteration or change in the -form or language or any restatement of the text of the proposed amendments which may be made by the county attorney. Upon filing of such petition with the council, the county clerk shall examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of apparently genuine signatures of voters . ARTICLE XXXX INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Section 22 . 03 . Submission Requirement. A. Voters seeking to propose an ordinance by initiative shall submit an initiative petition addressed to the council and containing ng -he full text of the proposed ordinance. The initiative petition shall be filed with the clerk of the council at least ninety-six (96) hours Pryor to any regular council committee meeting. B. Voters seeking referendum of an ordinance shall submit a referendum petition addressed to the council, identitfyinq the d4 particular ordinance and requesting that it be either repealed or referred to the voters of the county. C. Each initiative or each refe--endum Petition must be si gned by not less than twenty percent (20%) of the number of eligible voters in the last preceding general election. B. If an initiative or referendum measure is to be placed on the ballot- in a general election, the initiative and --referendum peti-tions must be submitted not less than one hundred twenty (120), calendar days prior to the day scheduled for the general election in the county. -Amended 19 /6) CRC 2011-02 (.3 F Sherman Shiraishi, Chair Members: Mary Lou Barela Patrick Stack, Vice Chair Joel Guy Ed Justus Carol Suzawa Jan TenBruggencate KAUAI COUNTY CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION TO: Peter Nakamura, County Clerk, Kaua'i County Council CC: Alfred Castillo, County Attorney Gary Heu, Managing Director FROM: Sherman Shiraishi, Chairperson, Charter Review Commission 4 "yo Via: Paula Morikami, Administrative Aide, Office of Boards and C4 mIssions DATE: March 1, 2011 RE: Request for Research and Opinion The Charter Review Commission, at its meeting on February 28, 2011, requested that you provide clarification on the definition and use of the terms "registered"versus "eligible"voters as provided for in the Charter. More specifically, these terms are used in the Charter to determine the number of signatures that are required on a petition that proposes to place a Charter amendment or an Initiative and Referendum measure on the General Election ballot as provided for below: "Section 24.01. Initiation of Amendments. Amendments to this charter may be initiated only in the following manner: B. By petition presented to the council, signed by not less than five percent (5%) of the voters registered in the last general election, setting forth the proposed amendments. Such petitions shall designate and authorize not less than three nor more than five of the signers thereto to approve any alteration or change in the form or language or any restatement of the text of the proposed amendments which may be made by the county attorney,"{emphasis added) CRC 2011-02[a] Memorandum to Peter Nakamura Request for Research and Opinion, Sections 24.01 B & 22.03 C March 1, 2011 Page 2 "Section 22,03. Submission Requirement. C. Each initiative or each referendum petition must be signed by not less than twenty percent (20%) of the number of eligible voters in the last preceding general election."(emphasis added) The next Charter Review Commission meeting is scheduled for Monday, March 28, 2011. In order to allow our office time to properly prepare for this meeting, we would appreciate receiving your written response by March 17, 2011. If you are unable to provide a response by the date above, or if you have any questions, please contact me at 241-4922. Thank you. An Equal Qpportunitv Employer ARTICLE XXXX INITIATIVE AND REMZENDUM Section 22 . 03 . Submission Requirement. A. Voters seek 4 Ing to propose an ordinance by initiative shall submit an initiative petition addressed to the council and containing the full text of the proposed ordinance. The initiative Petition shall be filed with the clerk of the council at least ninety-six=ety-six (96) hours prior to any regular council co=ittee meeting. B. Voters seeking referendum of an ordinance shall submit a referendum petition addressed to the council, identifying the particular ordinance and requesting that it be either repealed or referred to the voters of the county. C. Each initiative or each referendum petition must be signed by not less than twenty percent (20%) of the number of eligible voters in the last preceding general election. D. If an initiative or referendum measure is to be placed on the ballot in a general election, the initiative and referendum petitions must be submitted not less than one hundred twenty (120) calendar days prior to the day scheduled for the general election in the county. (Amended 1976) CRC 2011-04 ARTICLE XXXV CHARTER AMENDIAENT Section 24 . 1 . Tnitiation of Amendments . Amendments to this charter may be initiated only in the following manner: A. By resolution of the council_L1 adopted after two readings on separate days and passed by a vote of five or more members of the council. B. By petition presented to the council-, signed by not less than 'Live percent (5%) of the voters registered in the last general election, setting forth the proposed amendments . Such petitions shall designate and authorize not less than three nor more than five of the signers thereto to approve any alteration or change in the form or language or any restatement of the text of the proposed amendments which may be made by the county attorney. Upon filing of such petition with the council, the county clerk shall examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of apparently genuine signatures of voters . CRC 2011-05