Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014_0623_AgendaPacket James Nishida, Jr. Members: Chair Mary Lou Barela Joel Guy Ed Justus Jan TenBruggencate Patrick Stack Vice Chair Carol Suzawa COUNTY OF KAUAI CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA Monday, June 23, 2014 4:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/B 4444 Rice Street, Llhu'e, HI 96766 CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Open Session Minutes of May 19, 2014 BUSINESS CRC 2013-03 Review of Recommendations in Ramseyer form from legal analyst Curtis Shiramizu on identifying and proposing non-substantive corrections and revisions to the Kauai County Charter (On-going; defer pending Staff and Legal Review) CRC 2014-02 Discussion and possible decision-making on a proposed amendment to Article XXIV relating to signatures required in a petition for a charter amendment and Article XXII relating to signatures required for Initiative and Referendum (Deferred from 5/19/14) a. Comparison by island from Vice Chair TenBruggencate for signature requirements for voter initiated measures for charter amendments, initiative, referendum and recall b. Letter dated 6/9/14 from the Contractors Association of Kauai (CAK) supporting an increase in required signatures to 20% for petition initiated Charter amendments CRC 2014-04 Review and final approval of the purpose and findings for proposed amendment to Article XV relating to establishing a Department of Human Resources, Article XXVII Section 27.07 Recall, Article XXIV Section 24.02 on publishing charter amendments by the county clerk and adding Section 24.03 (Article XXIV) on publishing charter amendments by the charter review commission CRC 2014-05 Discussion and possible decision-making on whether a footnote is required to clarify subsections B. and C. of Section 26.04. Status of Departments and Transfer of Funds (Defer pending receipt of the County Attorney' s opinion) An Equal Opportunity Employer B. The offices of the county auditor and the county treasurer are abolished and their functions transferred to the department of finance C. The offices of the elected county clerk and the county attorney are abolished ANNOUNCEMENTS. Next Meeting: Monday, July 28, 2014 at 4:00 pm in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/13 The Office of Boards and Commissions will no longer be providing bottled water to our members starting July 1St, 2013 . This is one of our sustainability goals. Staff will provide cold water using a filtered system (i.e. Brita), so please bring in your water bottle that was provided to you. Mahalo. ADJOURNMENT c•' EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §92-7(a), 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 HRS §924 and shall be limited to those items described in HRS §92-5(a). Discussions held in Executive Session are closed to the public. Cc: Deputy County Attorney Marc Guyot 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 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. Charter Review Commission — June 23 , 2014 2 1 P a g e Send written testimony to: Charter Review Commission Attn: Barbara Davis Office of Boards and Commissions 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150 L-ihu`e, HI 96766 E-mail:bdavisa,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 June 23 , 2014 3 P a g e COUNTY OF KAUAI M i a =VA, Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee: CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date May 19, 2014 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B Start of Meeting: 4:00 p.m. End of Meeting: 6 : 16 p.m. Present Chair James Nishida; Vice Chair Jan TenBruggencate. Members : Joel Guy; Ed Justus; Patrick Stack; Carol Suzawa Also : Deputy County Attorney Marc Guyot; Boards & Commissions Office Staff: Support Clerk Barbara Davis; Administrator Paula Morikami; Administrative Aide Teresa Tamura and Galen Nakamura of Shiramizu Nakamura Loo, Attorneys at Law Testifiers : Glenn Mickens; Rich Hoeppner; Sandra Herndon; Louisa Wooten; Klayton Kubo; Wendell Kabutan; Felicia Cowden; Michael Shooltz; Gail Specuza (sp?); Jimmy Trujillo; Tec Nickerson; Victoria Holloway; Ken Taylor; Tim Bynum; Dustin Barca; Elaine (could not understand last name) Excused Members: Mary Lou Barela Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair Nishida called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. with 6 Commissioners present which constitutes a quorum. Approval of Regular Open Session Minutes of April 28, 2014 Mr. TenBruggencate moved to approve the Minutes minutes as circulated. Ms. Suzawa/Mr. Stack seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 Business Mr. Justus moved to place CRC 2013 -03 at the end of the agenda. Mr. Stack seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 :0 CRC 2014-02 Discussion and possible decision-making on a proposed amendment to Article XXIV relating to signatures required in a petition for a charter amendment S a. Comparison by island from Vice Chair TenBruggencate for signature requirements for voter initiated measures for charter amendments. `� initiative, referendum and recall Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. TenBruggencate explained that the fundamental document for the structure of County government is easier to change than it is to pass a simple ordinance, and Kauai is the only County in the State that does that. He wanted to propose increasing the number of signatures required for a charter amendment from 5 percent to 20 percent of the registered voters in the previous election, and to make the passage of an initiative for a referendum easier by dropping it from 20 percent to 10 percent of the registered number of voters in the last election. There has been support for this from members in the community saying this is in the best interest of the efficient running of our County. Mr. TenBruggencate then discussed the signature requirements for the various voter-initiated measures for each island (on file). Asked why the community is frustrated with the current percentages, the response was it is backwards to make it easier to change our fundamental form of government thap to pass a law. It was suggested that the two ballot items that failed through the courts might have passed muster if they were initiatives rather than Charter amendments. People are choosing the Charter amendment route, sometimes inappropriately because it is easier, and then it gets thrown out in court. Testifiers ; Glenn Mickens; Rich Hoeppner; Sandra Herndon; Louisa Wooten; Klayton Kubo; Wendell Kabutan; Felicia Cowden; Michael Shooltz; Gail Specuza; Jimmy Trujillo; Tec Nickerson; Victoria Holloway; Ken Taylor; Tim Bynum; Dustin Barca; Elaine (could not understand last name) Public testimony centered on the difficulty in obtaining signatures from 5 percent of the registered voters in the last general election, which is why there have only been 2 citizen petition amendments over the years; to raise that requirement to 20 percent would eliminate the public's voice in charter amendments. The proposed amendment raising from 5 percent to 20 percent Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION for the citizens to get something on the ballot is total hypocrisy since it takes only 4 votes from the Commission to put something on the ballot. Chair Nishida stated that it takes only 1 person to convince the majority of the Commission to place an amendment on the ballot. It was pointed out the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides the basic right for citizens to petition their government. It was suggested that by increasing the percentage, it strips the voices of the people. One speaker suggested the percentage should be less than 5 percent to allow the people to get something on the ballot and let the voters decide; not just for a few to decide for the masses. There was agreement from the Commissioners that the referendum should be lowered, and it was even suggested that it could also be 5 percent of the registered voters. Ms. Suzawa stated that a problem with the petitions from the people is they fail in court because they contradict other parts of the Charter, and questioned if the petition the people are currently working on complies with the Charter. Part of this Commission' s job is to send our Charter amendments for legal advice to check that it will stand in court, and she wants to see the petitioners do that so as not to waste the taxpayers' money. If the will of the people is not to increase the percentage of signatures then it should be added to the Charter that the amendment has to comply with the rest of the Charter. Upon the suggestion of deferring this item to the next meeting, Mr. Justus felt this issue could be discussed without delaying to the next meeting. Chair Nishida said he was looking at changing the voters registered in the last election to voters voting in the last election. Ms. Morikami reminded the Commission that the voters registered in the last election was a ballot Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION question in the last election. Mr. TenBruggencate said his preference would be to keep it as registered voters, and adjust the numbers so it is consistent throughout the Charter. Because everything says registered voters, if they were going to change a number they should change the percentage, in essence the denominator. The effect of changing that would be a drop from 10 percent to 5 percent. Mr. TenBruggencate added that was not a proposal, it was only what it sounded like Chair Nishida said. Mr. Justus said even if the Commission did pass this proposal it is contrary to the American way of thinking by making it harder on the people, and he does not see how this would pass. Mr. TenBruggencate said to make this clear it would be reduced from 20 percent to 5 percent. Mr. Justus said he has concerns about just changing the numbers, and he does not find it a sound argument to say it is for housekeeping purposes. It seems like the only reason this issue is being brought up is because voter initiated amendments that passed were thrown out in court; if they had not been thrown out in court we probably would not be discussing this. Changing the numbers does not resolve the issues of whether these are legally sound amendments that are being proposed. If the concept is to make sure that political ideals are being funneled into the proper direction why not reduce initiatives/referendums and amendments to 5 percent, which would give the ability for that idea to go to the proper area. Mr. TenBruggencate said that was what his original proposal was to take the charter amendment up to 20 percent with initiative being 20 percent and 20 percent for referendum and recall. He also said he did not object to lowering the number, but it should not be harder to create an ordinance than to change the charter. Lowering the percentage is less of a concern than whether it is the right thing to do. Mr. Justus said he had previously proposed the idea of a legal review for voter initiated charter amendments. Chair Nishida pointed out that discussion of a legal review was not relevant to the agenda item. Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair Nishida called for a motion to accept the proposal and perhaps an amendment to change the percentage. Mr. TenBruggencate moved to approve a charter amendment which reduces the number of signatures required for initiative and referendum from 20 percent to 10 percent of the number of registered voters in the last election. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Mr. Justus moved to amend the motion to reduce the number from 10 percent to 5 percent. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Ms. Suzawa said she had a problem voting for that because she really would like the legal aspect to be part of the amendment. Deputy Attorney Guyot said the procedure would be to send a memorandum to the County Attorney's Office asking for an opinion on whether they can perform a legal review for non-governmental bodies. Mr. TenBruggencate said this sounds like something the Commission has to work on and to come up with the appropriate language. Mr. TenBruggencate moved to defer both sections of the proposed amendment to June to allow discussion of adding legal language into both sections of the amendment. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Motion to defer failed on Roll Call Vote 2:4 (Nay-Guy; Nay-Justus; Nay- Stack; Aye-Suzawa; Aye-TenBruggencate; Nay- Nishida) The Chair called a recess at 5 :25 p.m.; meeting called hack to order at 5 : 34 p.m. Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Justus moved to amend the amendment to include that voter initiated charter amendments are required to have a legal review in compliance with the Charter. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Ms. Suzawa said a legal review can be done in several ways; it can be done by the person submitting the amendment, but she is not sure it can be reviewed by the County Attorney's Office. A legal review means whoever submits any amendment will have to have it legally reviewed by an attorney to see that it complies with all sections of the Kauai County Charter. It is an assurance that it will stand up in court, but this can be defined in further discussion after the Commission receives advice from the County Attorney. Mr. Guy said he supports strengthening the process in how these charter amendments come about, and it is an incredibly valuable conversation to have. It could be a separate agenda item that addresses it because no matter which attorney looks at it another attorney may find a conflict. Ms. Suzawa said she was not comfortable just lowering the percentages; the Commission needs to do its best to make sure the petitioners have all the information they need. Mr. Guy agreed, but was afraid Ms. Suzawa was limiting it by adding only the legal review rather than looking at all opportunities. Ms. Suzawa said if the amendment was not all inclusive she would vote no. Mr. Justus added it was important that all arenas in which charter amendments are made have the same legal review, especially if the percentages are brought down to a more approachable level. Mr. TenBruggencate said he has a fairly significant problem with requiring a legal review without any suggestion as to who does the legal review, is it binding, and are you forcing the petitioners to change their petition through the legal review. There needs to be a lot more clarity in the language. There O D Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION was agreement with those concerns, but it was noted that changes to the language also happens when the Commission receives legal review to their amendments. Mr. Stack stated that a member of the audience said the Commission was making this too difficult, and this was a First Amendment issue. Mr. Stack said he did not think it was necessary or desirable to make voters and members of the community more restricted in trying to make changes. Motion to include legal review to the amendment for compliance to the Charter amendment failed on Roll Call Vote 3 :31 (nay-Guy; aye-Justus; nay-Stack; aye-Suzawa; aye-TenBruggencate; nay-Nishida) Motion on the amendment to reduce the percentage from 10 percent to 5 percent carried on Roll Call Vote 5 : 1 . (aye-Guy, aye-Justus; aye. Stack; nay-Suzawa; aye-TenBruggencate; aye- Nishida) Chair Nishida said he would entertain a motion to defer this item since the Commission was seeing the language for the first time. Mr. TenBruggencate moved to defer action on initiative and referendum to the next meeting. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 Mr. TenBruggencate moved to defer action on charter amendments to the next meeting. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 CRC 2014-04 Discussion and possible decision-making on preparing the purpose and findings for proposed amendment to Article XV relating to establishing a Department of Human Resources and Article XXVH Section 27.07 Recall Mr. Justus moved that the Charter Commission Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION find these are necessary and desirable changes to the Charter. Mr. Stack seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:0 CRC 2014-05 Discussion and possible decision-making on whether a footnote is required to clarify subsections B. and C. of Section 26.04. Status of Departments and Transfer of Funds B. The offices of the county auditor and the county treasurer are abolished and their functions transferred to the department of finance C. The offices of the elected county clerk and the county attorney are abolished Mr. TenBruggencate said they need to consider adding a footnote to the transitional provisions of the charter, which are now forty years out of date from when the County transitioned from a Board of Supervisors to a Council/Mayor form of government in 1969. Mr. TenBruggencate's preference would be to remove the entire section, but that would require a separate charter amendment to delete Article XXVI for Transitional Provisions. Mr. Justus asked if that article could be listed as repealed so the numbers would not be changed. Mr. TenBruggencate moved to refer this matter to the County Attorney' s Office for an opinion on the ramifications of removing Article XXVI. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Deputy Attorney Guyot advised the Commission that typically items that are repealed require some type of legislative action whereas the item could be removed, or that section could be reserved if it is no longer there. That is where the discussion of the footnote came from in the first place alerting the public that it is no longer there without requiring the full mechanism of a legislative action. Mr. TenBruggencate asked the County Attorney's Office to provide the Commission with the best way to remove a superfluous r Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION charter section to which Deputy Attorney Guyot asked that the Office of Boards and Commissions forward a request to the County Attorney' s Office. Public testimony indicated confusion over the purpose of this agenda item, but following discussion from the Commission it was understood this referenced the structure of the County government in 1968, which included the referenced positions and offices that were removed when effected by the passage of the Charter in 1969. When questioned why this section was not removed from the Charter when Article XXXII established the County Auditor' s Office, Mr. TenBruggencate could only offer that a single section of the Charter can be referenced in a charter amendment, and it appears the creator of that amendment did not notice the transitional provision. The Commission further explained that the request to the County Attorney would Motion carried 6:0 include removal of Article XXVI in its entirety. CRC 2014-06 Discussion on how the quoted material in Section 32.02 E. applies to Section 3 . 12 and whether there are anv legal issues with either section as written Mr. Justus said that last month the words in quotes in §32.02 did not appear in §3 . 12, and explained if something is quoted it should be the exact word, otherwise it is not a quote. Mr. Justus suggested putting in the proper language, or find a way to address the different quotes to help the definitions. Mr. TenBruggencate suggested that was an unsubstantive change and this should become part of the current review for non-substantive changes. No action; staff to administratively include this in the on-going review. CRC 2014-07 Discussion and possible decision-making on proposing a Charter amendment to Article XXIV, Section 24.02 B. which would allow the Counjy the option of publishing proposed amendments in a newspaper of general circulation in the cojj= or publishing on-line Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Stack suggested publishing in a newspaper of general circulation and on-line. Mr. TenBruggencate noted this amendment did not come from him but he supports the concept. Mr. TenBruggencate moved to recommend approval of this proposal. Ms. Morikami explained the requirement currently is to publish in the newspaper. Publishing the non-substantive changes have been quoted as costing $35,000 in The Garden Island and $55,000 for Midweek; this does not account for publishing any of the ballot questions from the County Council, the public, or other amendments from the Commission. In looking at the financial constraints of the County, this maybe something the Commission might want to consider. Asked if it would not be too late for this amendment, Ms. Morikami explained that it looks like the non- substantive changes may not be ready in time for this ballot since staff are still reviewing it, and then it needs to go back for legal review. Mr. TenBruggencate noted that we have moved into a new century and the sense is more people are reading the Web than newspapers. To suggest the only way to publicize something is through the newspaper is probably no longer appropriate, and he would recommend approval of the charter amendment. For clarification, Ms. Morikami said this amendment could be on the 2014 ballot to be followed with the non-substantive changes in 2016. Mr. Taylor acknowledged there is a percentage of people who do not get the newspaper as well as a percentage of people who do not have computers. Therefore it makes good sense to duplicate it in both venues where the most amount of people can participate. Mr. Justus said he understood the desire to utilize this charter amendment as a way to allow the non-substantive changes to not incur such incredible costs; however there is concern about repercussions of leaving this as a i i Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION permanent amendment. It could allow all amendments in the future to only be put on-line, which could be limiting to the people.. Ms. Suzawa agreed but said it does not bother her because you still have to buy the newspaper, and a lot of people do not buy it, and although she does not have a computer she does have more access to a computer than the newspaper. Mr. Justus suggested that if it is not placed in the newspaper that copies be readily available in community centers and libraries to which the Staff advised that has always been part of the Commission' s educational process. Mr. Stack said he would be willing to give up the exposure in the newspaper because of costs and diminishing distribution for putting it on-line for minimal costs in which every citizen can access through the library system. Mr. Guy wanted to caution against creating a charter amendment designed for just one other amendment being proposed. Mr. Guy further suggested if there were a cause threshold such as costing more than $5,000 then it could be put on-line. Mr. TenBruggencate added that every public library has free internet terminals available for public access, and asked Mr. Guy if he would support a proposal that at a minimum a summary of every charter amendment be published in the newspaper with references to the fact that the entire text is on the County website. That would alert people who read the newspaper that there are amendments if they wish to read them in their entirety. Ms. Morikami said they would still be able to publish a notice in the newspaper telling the public the full text is available on-line. Mr. TenBruggencate amended the motion to read: the county clerk shall have summaries of the proposed amendments published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county and the entire text published on the county's website at least thirty days prior to the submission of the proposed amendments to the voters of the county at the next general election. i Charter Review Commission Open Session May 19, 2014 Page 12 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Mr. Justus noted there are 4 areas in the charter regarding publishing in a newspaper of general circulation, and suggested it read or/and or bring it up as a separate agenda item. Mr.. TenBruggencate said separate charter sections would need separate charter amendments. Mr. Justus said he would have that for the next meeting. Motion to approve the amendment carried 6:0 Motion to approve the main motion as amended carried 6:0 CRC 2013-03 Review of Recommendations in Ramseyer form from legal analyst Curtis Shiramizu on identifying and proposing non-substantive corrections and revisions to the Kauai County Charter for Articles XXIV through XXXII (On-going) Mr. Justus moved to defer this item. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 : 1 (nay- Justus Adjournment Chair Nishida adjourned the meeting at 6: 16 .m. Submitted by. Reviewed and Approved by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk James Nishida, Chair O Approved as is. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. Two proposed charter amendments changing signature requirements for 1 ) initiative and referendum and 2) charter amendment. 1 . A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR INITIATIVE OR REFERENDUM Proposing A Charter Amendment to Article XXII, Section 22.03 C. Relating to Signatures Required in a Petition For Initiative and Referendum. Findings and Purpose. The Charter Review Commission finds that a petition to approve or reject ordinances through Initiative or Referendum should require signatures of registered voters comprising not less than 10 percent of the number of voters registered in the last general election. ARTICLE XXII INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Section 22.03 C. Each initiative and each referendum petition must be signed by not less than 10 percent [20 percent] of the number of eligible voters in the last preceding general election 2. A CHARTER AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF SIGNATURES REQUIRED FOR A CHARTER AMENDMENT Proposing A Charter Amendment to Article XXIV, Section 24.01 B., Relating to Signatures Required in a Petition For Charter Amendment. Findings and Purpose. The Charter Review Commission finds that a petition to amend the Kauai County Charter should require signatures of registered voters comprising not less than 20 percent of the number of voters registered in the last general election. ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMENDMENT Section 24.01 B. By petition presented to the council, signed by registered voters comprising not less than 20 percent [five percent (5%] of the number of 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. (Amended 2012) Upon filing of such petition with the council, the county clerk shall examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters. (Amended 2012) Barbara Davis Subject: FW: Garden Island Article Some thoughts on citizen-initiated charter amendments: Just rechecked the other islands re signatures required for various voter-initiated measures: Charter amendments, initiative and referendum (citizen-generated ordinances, and repeal of ordinances), and recall (removal of elected officers). Type Hawaii Maui . Honolulu Kauai Charter 20% 10/20 10 5 Init/Ref 15 20 10 20 Recall 25 20 10 20 l(DFor Charter, ours is the LOWEST bar by far. But the numbers are not clearly comparable. Big Island charter amendment is 20 percent of ballots cast in last election, initiative/referendum is 15 percent of number who voted for mayor in last election; recall is 25 percent of registered voters in last election. Maui charter amendment is 20 percent of registered voters, initiative/referendum are 20 percent of cast ballots, and charter amendment is 20 percent of registered voters. Honolulu is 10 percent of registered voters for all three. On charter amendments, Maui calls for 10 percent to force a Council public hearing and 20 percent to get on the ballot. To try to normalize the numbers, if we assume voter turnouts in the 50 percent range, (Kauai 2012 primary Ckurnout was 39 percent and general turnout 63 percent) then the actual numbers recalculated for registered Voters look like this: Type Hawaii Maui Honolulu Kauai Charter 10 20 10 5 Init/Ref 7.5 10 10 20 Recall 12. 5 20 10 20 On average, by this calculation, that means the other counties place recall as the highest bar to leap ( 14. 17 percent), charter amendment next ( 13 .33 percent) , and initiative/referendum the lowest (9. 17). That reinforces my point that we are out of step with the rest of the state, which seems to believe: That the most difficult challenge should be to oust a public official elected by the voters. The next challenge should be to change the basic form of county government, through the charter. And passing or repealing an ordinance should be a lower bar. Jan TenBruggencate Z SF C000e 10 CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF KAUAI C A K 4231 Ahukini, Uhu'e, Kauai, Hawaii 96766 Phone (808) 246 -2662 Fax (808) 246-8642 n ' coNrsac-roas June 9, 2014 `► - F ASSOCIATM ( 1 . . UN 9 2014 cON1 ,1 . Mr. James Nishida, Jr. , Chair Kaua' i County Charter Review Commission Room 150 4444 Rice Street Lihu ' e, HI 96766 Dear Chair Nishida and Members of the Kaua' i County Charter Review Commission : The Contractors Association of Kaua' i (CAK) is a hundred member trade association of licensed construction professionals, suppliers and businesses affiliated with the construction industry on Kaua' i. Through its Board of Directors, the Association would like to provide comments and concerns relating to the issue of Charter Amendments . On May 29 , 2014 , the CAK Board of Directors unanimously approved a motion to ask the Charter Review Commission to put on the November 2014 ballot an amendment to increase the number of signatures required for Charter amendments to 20%, from the current 5 % . Further, the CAK Board recommends that no changes be made to the recall , initiative and referendum signature requirements. The Contractors Association of Kaua' i ' s position is based on the following : • If recall, initiative, referendum and charter amendments all require the same number of signatures, petitioners would not and should not be discouraged from using the right tool to get an issue on the ballot. This would be a consistent standard and should reduce or eliminate the kinds of confusion that has been prevalent in recent years . • The County' s charter is the foundation of Kaua' i ' s governing document. It is the base and structure from which our county government is built on. As such, any proposal to change, amend or delete any part of the Charter should require strong community support and the Contractors Association of Kaua' i believes 20% is a reasonable number. CAK fln WKNUSUTUM ANOMTM OF "Mel Mr. James Nishida, Jr. , Chair Kaua' i County Charter Review Commission June 9, 2014 Page 2 • Amending the Charter should not be easier than passing an ordinance or law. The number of signatures needed on a petition to change the Charter should at a minimum be at least equal to the number required to remove an elected official or to pass or repeal an Ordinance. The Contractors Association of Kaua' i does not believe that amending the Charter should be easier than passing a law or ordinance. • By having a low number (5%) of signatures required for Charter amendment issues as now provided for on Kaua' i, petitioners are encouraged to try and use the Charter amendment process to pass issues that should be an Ordinance. In recent years, that has been expensive for taxpayers of this county and after lengthy and costly legal challenges, the issues ultimately got rejected by the courts . The Contractors Association of Kaua' i (CAK) strongly urges the Charter Review Commission to give the voters of Kaua' i an opportunity to provide consistency and clarity on the Charter Amendment issue . Thank you very much. Sincerely, CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION OF KAUA' I J Nishek, Co-Chair Curtis Law, Co-Chair Government Affairs Committee Government Affairs Committee copy : Paula Morikami, Office of Boards and Commissions Proposing A Charter Amendment to Article XV Relating to the Department of Personnel Services. Findings and Purpose. The Commission finds that varying levels of personnel and/or human resources related duties are presently being performed by individual county departments and may result in duplication of work effort among the various county departments. The Cost Control Commission and the Civil Service Commission believe that efficiency can be achieved by consolidating these functions and duties in and expanding the scope of responsibility of the Department of Personnel Service to include employee training, worker's compensation, safety awareness and injury prevention, employee benefits and workforce planning. Consistent with this consolidation and expansion, the Commission believes that the department's name should be changed to the Department of Human Resources, Charter Amendment. Article XV of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: "ARTICLE XV DEPARTMENT OF [PERSONNEL SERVICES] HUMAN RESOURCES Section 15.01 . Organization. There shall be a department of [personnel services] human resources consisting of a civil service commission , a director and the necessary staff for the purpose of establishing a system of personnel administration based upon merit principles devoid of any bias or prejudice, and [providing a systematic and equitable classification of all positions through adequate job evaluation] generally accepted methods governing classification of positions and the employment, conduct, movement, and separation of public officers and employees. Section 15.02. Civil Service Commission Organization. The civil service commission shall consist of seven members who shall be in sympathy with and who shall believe in the principles of the merit system in public employment. Of the members appointed , one shall be selected from among persons employed in private industry in either skilled or unskilled laboring positions as distinguished from executive or professional positions. (Amended 2006) Section 15 .03. Powers and Duties. The civil service commission shall: A. Adopt rules and regulations to carry out the civil service and compensation laws of the State and county. Such rules and regulations shall distinguish between matters of policy left for the determination of the commission and matters of technique and administration to be left for execution by the director. B . Hear and determine appeals made by any officer or employee aggrieved by any 6ROLC 0 /9 - 0 L : 7Y F\ action of the director or by any appointing authority. Appeal from the decision of the commission shall be as provided by law. C. Advise the mayor and director of personnel services on problems concerning personnel and classification administration. D. Execute such powers and duties as may be provided by law. Section 15.04. Director of (Personnel Servicesl Human Resources. The director of [personnel services] human resources shall have had a minimum or five years of training and experience in personnel administration either in public service or private business, or both, at least three years of which shall have been in a responsible administrative capacity and shall be in sympathy with the principles of the merit system . He shall be appointed and may be removed by the commission. The director shall be the head of the department of [personnel services] human resources and shall be responsible for the proper conduct of all administrative affairs of the department, and for the execution of the [personnel] human C` resources management program prescribed in this charter and in the ordinances and regulations authorized by this charter. Section 15.05. [Civil Service and Exemptions. All positions in the county, except those exempted by law, shall be under civil service.] Human Resources Management Program. The director of human resources shall be responsible for the execution of the human resources management program which shall include: A. Classification, recruitment, selection , employment, deployment, promotion , evaluation, discipline, and separation of employees. B . Labor relations and negotiations. C. Administration of employment policies and trainings related to employee benefits. �1conduct, development, and safety and injury prevention . D. Workers' compensation . E. Equal employment opportunities. F. Workforce coordination and.planning . G . Administration of the civil service system as prescribed by statute. H . Other related duties as may be determined by the Mayor." Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed . New charter material is underscored . Proposed Ballot Question: Shall the title of the Department of Personnel Services be changed to Department of Human Resources and its existing scope of responsibilities broadened to include a more comprehensive human resources function? Amended 1 /27/14 Proposing An Amendment to Charter Section 27.07 Relating to Recall Ballots Findings and Purpose. Section 27.07 of the Charter presently requires recall ballots to designate voting targets (i .e . , spaces for voters to mark their ballot) to be "to the right of the proposition ." However, State law requires that placement of voting targets meet requirements of the voting system in use. The Commission finds that the current voting systems in use may not always allow for the voting target to be "to the right of the proposition" and that, as a result, Section 27. 07 of the Charter may, in certain situations, be inconsistent with State law. The proposed Charter amendment ensures that recall ballot design requirements in the County Charter are aligned with State law. Charter Amendment. Section 27.07 of the Kaua' I County Charter is amended to read as follows: Section 27.07, Ballots. The ballots at such recall election shall , with respect to each person whose removal is sought, submit the question : "Shall (name of person ) be removed from the office of (name of office) by recall?" Immediately following each such question , there shall be printed on the ballots the two propositions in the order set forth : " For the recall of (name of person). " "Against the recall of ( name of person). " Immediately next to the [right of the] proposition there shall be designated spaces in which to mark the ballot FOR or AGAINST the recall . A majority vote shall be sufficient to recall such officer, subject to the provisions of Section 27 .06 of this article. Note : Charter material to be repealed is bracketed . New charter material is underscored . Ballot Question. Shall Charter section 27. 07 regarding recall ballots be amended to comply with State law and allow the layout of axecall ballot question to meet voting system requirements? Proposing a Charter Amendment to Article XXIV Relating to Charter Amendment. Findings and Purpose. The Commission finds that the current provisions of Article XXIV of the Kauai County Charter relating to the Charter Review do not allow for flexibility to publish amendments by electronic or online publication . The Commission finds that the cost of publishing proposed charter amendments in the newspaper can be prohibitive in certain circumstances. Publishing the ballot questions online making it accessible to the public through the Internet should greatly reduce the high cost of publishing in the local newspaper and should be a viable option under appropriate circumstances . Charter Amendment. Article XXIV of the Kaua 'i County Charter is amended to read as follows : ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMENDMENT Section 24. 01 . Initiation of Amendments . Amendments to this 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 registered voters comprising not less than five percent of the number of 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 valid signatures of registered voters. Coo Ac'f l on Section 24 .02 . Elections to be Called . A. Any resolution of the council or petition of the voters proposing amendments to the charter shall provide that the proposed amendments shall be submitted to the voters of the county at the next general election . B . The county clerk shall have summaries of the proposed amendments published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county or published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kaua 'i the entire text at least thirty (30) days prior to submission of the proposed amendments to the voters of the county at the next general election . C. Should the majority of the voters voting thereon approve the proposed amendments to this charter, the amendments shall become effective at the time fixed in the amendment, or, if no time is fixed therein, thirty (30) days after its adoption by the voters of the county. Any charter amendment shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county or published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kaua 'i the entire text within thirty (30) days of the effective date of such amendment. Section 24 .03 . Charter Review. The mayor with the approval of the council shall appoint, with appropriate staffing, a charter commission composed of seven members who shall serve in accordance with Section 23 . 02C of this Charter to study and review the operation C` of the county government under this charter for a period of ten years commencing in 2007 . Thereafter, the mayor with the approval of the council shall appoint a charter commission at ten year intervals. In the event the commission deems changes are necessary or desirable, the commission may propose amendments to the existing charter or draft a new charter which shall be submitted to the county clerk. The county clerk shall provide for the submission of such amendments or new charter to the voters at any general or special election as may be determined by the commission . The commission shall publish not less than thirty (30) days before any election at least once in a newspaper of general circulation within the county or published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai the entire text of the amendments or new charter. A. Unless a new charter is submitted to the voters, each amendment to the charter shall be voted on separately. B . If a majority of the voters voting upon a charter amendment votes in favor of it or a new charter, - if a new charter is proposed, the amendment or new charter shall become effective at the time fixed in the amendment or charter, or if no time is fixed, thirty (30) days after its adoption by the voters. Any charter or amendment shall be published in its entirety in a newspaper of general circulation within the county or by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai not more than thirty (30) days after its adoption . QNote : Charter material to be repealed is bracketed . New charter material is underscored . Ballot Question. Should the Charter Review Commission be allowed to publish charter amendments in a newspaper of general circulation or online on the official website of the County of Kauai to fulfill the charter requirements?