Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014_1027_AgendaPacket James Nishida, Jr. Members: Chair Mary Lou Barela Joel Guy Ed Justus Jan TenBruggencate Patrick Stack Vice Chair Carol Suzawa COUNTY OF KAUA'I CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA Monday, October 27, 2014 4: 00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Mo 'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/B 4444 Rice Street, Lihu'e, HI 96766 CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Open Session Minutes of August 25, 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 2014-05 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) CRC 2014-06 Discussion on whether there is a need to define what a charter amendment is a. Add a preamble or an additional paragraph to section 1 .01 (Defer pending receipt of County Attorney's opinion as to whether the Preamble to the Charter was adopted by the people in 1968 and why it does not show up in subsequent documents) b. Revision of Article XXIV by Commissioner Justus clarifying what constitutes a charter amendment ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting: Monday, November 17 at 3 :00 pm (must conclude by 5 :00 pm)o or November 24, 2014 at 4:00 pm in the Mo 'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/B ADJOURNMENT An Equal Opportunity Employer 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 §92-4 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 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. Send written testimony to: Charter Review Commission Attn: Barbara Davis Office of Boards and Commissions 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150 Lihu` e, HI 96766 E-mail :bdavis(&,,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 — October 27, 2014 2 1 P a g e COUNTY OF KAUAI r r r r Yeti j` Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee: CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date August 25, 2014 Location Mo 'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B Start of Meeting: 4:09 p.m. End 'of 6:02 p.m. Present Vice Chair Jan TenBruggencate. Members : Joel Guy; Ed Justus; Patrick Stack; Carol Suzawa Also : Deputy County Attorney Nick Courson; Boards & Commissions Office Staff: Support Clerk Barbara Davis; Administrator Paula Morikami; Administrative Aide Teresa Tamura Testifiers: Judah Freed; Carl Imparato; Sandra Herndon; Michael Shooltz; Wendell Kabutan; Klayton Kubo; Judy Dawson Excused Chair James Nishida. Member Mary Lou Barela Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Vice Chair TenBruggencate called the meeting to order at 4:09 p.m. with 5 Commissioners resent. Approval of Regular Open Session Minutes of June 23 , 2014 Mr. Justus moved to approve the minutes as Minutes circulated. Mr. Stack seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 Communication CRC 2014-09 Memorandum dated August 1 , 2014 from Council Chair Jay Furfaro to Commission Chair James Nishida and Members of the Charter Review Commission requesting the Charter Review Commission to consider convening a public educational workshop relating to charter amendment, initiative, and referendum proposals oQ r Judah Freed — Supports the idea of having a public meeting and ;3r reconsidering the way of approaching the initiative and referendum issue. u� Both initiatives and ordinances should have the same percentage and have a requirement that ordinances be framed in the language of an ordinance and �C (A t initiatives be framed in the language of an initiative. The Kauai Council has no business intervening in the process; it should be a matter of the Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION county clerk. The workshop would be helpful, but the Charter Commission needs to recommend solutions rather than just have a public forum. Carl Imparato — (written testimony on file) — Asked the Commission to decline to conduct an educational workshop on the difference between a charter amendment, an initiative, and a referendum. There is no reason for public education on this matter as any group of citizens that qualifies a measure for the ballot will have thoroughly examined the words, the intent of the Charter, relevant legal precedence, and consulted with their attorneys. It is insulting to the public for County officials to presume that the public needs to be educated on the concepts of what is a charter amendment, an initiative, and a referendum. Mr. Imparato also strongly opposed any suggestion that the County Attorney' s Office should be invited or involved in providing guidance to the public on these topics. Sandra Herndon — Wished to address CRC 2014-06 and CRC 2014-08 to which she was told she could address these issues as they come up on the agenda. Discussion was then sought from the Commission to which Mr. Stack asked Mr. Imparato what the estimated costs would be to conduct this workshop. Mr. Imparato said the cost is in the time and effort for members of the community to prepare and participate in a workshop where they are lectured, and longer term costs would be disinformation circulated via Hoike to the public; he did not know what County costs would be involved. Mr. Guy asked Mr. Imparato if he would be available to hold a workshop on what an initiative is. Mr. Imparato said no; there is no good definition that can be clearly put together -as to what constitutes a charter amendment versus what constitutes an initiative. Mr. Guy thought the request was for the Charter Commission to initiate the workshop but not to hold the Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION workshop, per se. Education is always a good thing and it might inspire more people to get involved in the process. Mr. Imparato stated that if they were to go forward with a workshop it needs to be carefully defined so it does not become a forum for one group. Mr. Justus said that what Chair Furfaro is requesting is beyond the scope of this Commission as defined in the Charter, Section 24.03 . The Council can do this themselves, or have the County Clerk's Office do it since they have the knowledge of election requirements. Mr. Justus stated he was not in favor of this body being the one to do a workshop. Ms. Suzawa agreed there were too many shades of gray, and it could not be clearly defined by having a workshop. Mr. TenBruggencate said clearly this Commission does not agree among itself on everything so how do they, as a Commission, hold a workshop to express an opinion, which is not necessarily the Commission' s role. Mr. TenBruggencate said he would request a motion to receive this document, and if the Commission so chooses he will express some of the opinions heard today to Mr. Furfaro. Mr. Justus moved to receive the communication. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 Business CRC 2013 -03 Review of Recommendations in Ramseyer form from legal analyst Curtis Shiramizu on identif3dniz_and proposing non-substantive corrections and revisions to the Kauai County Charter for Articles XXIV through XXXII (On-going defer pending Staff and Legal Review) a. Proposal from Staff to eliminate underscoring of all charter subsections in lieu of bolding subsections to eliminate Ramseyer problems Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Staff explained that in putting non-substantive changes into Ramseyer form, it was noted that subsections that require underscoring appear the same as an underscored Ramseyer change. When the approved corrections are made to the document that underscoring is inadvertently removed creating the same problems the Commission is trying to now correct. By removing all underscoring in the titles and bolding those sections, this should eliminate future problems. It was also noted that Kauai is the only county still using the underscoring. Mr. Justus moved to bold all section titles versus using underscore. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :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 (Defer pending receipt eceipt of the County Attorneys opinion) Deputy Attorney Courson advised the Commission that the Attorney assigned to this request has not completed the opinion. Mr. Guy moved to defer. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 CRC 2014-06 Discussion on whether there is a need to define what a charter amendment is a. Add a preamble or an additional paragraph to section 1 .01 b. Add new paragraph to 24.03 clarifying what constitutes a Charter amendment Staff apologized for placing the wrong proposed amendment in the packet for item a. Mr. Justus then read the correct proposed amendment which was suggested as either a Preamble or as a second additional paragraph in section 1 .01 : The County of Kauai Charter is a constitutional document, drafted in accordance with the will of the people; it, along with any Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION revisions and amendments, establishes the structure, organization, operation, powers, and responsibilities of the local government of the County of Kaua'i. Sandra Herndon — Stated she is supporting CRC 2014-06 and CRC 2014- 08. It is important to clarify the language of the Charter regarding what constitutes a charter amendment, and the seemingly ambiguous language in which the charter is written. She requested that the Commission define what an amendment is, how it is to be structured, how it is distinguished from an initiative, and address it in a way that does not require an attorney to interpret it. Asked if she approved of the specific language proposed, or just saying the Commission should submit an amendment that clarifies the difference between an amendment and an initiative to which the reply was the latter. Mr. Justus noted he did not read item b. aloud of which the point of the two items was to either put something in the preamble or section 1 .01 or put something in section 24.03, which would define a charter amendment. Mr. Justus then read the following proposed amendment: Section 24.03 . Qualifications for Amendments. The County of Kauai Charter is constitutional document, drafted in accordance with the will of the people; it, along with any revisions and amendments, establishes the structure, organization, operation, powers, and responsibilities of the local government of the County of Kaua'i. Any proposed amendments to the charter must only be in regards to these aforementioned matters. Carl Imparato — Noted his concern in that this is a laudable effort, but not an achievable effort. He would support the broadest possible interpretation of the words, i.e., operations and responsibilities, but the broader the interpretation the more people will say it is going over the line into areas Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION more like initiatives. There needs to be the broadest interpretation of the words, which let non-charter amendments slip through the cracks, because if the wording is not broad enough, and those words do not cover 100% of the purpose of the Charter, the public's rights will be diminished. It will be difficult to come up with the right words to define what a charter amendment is, and personally does not see that there is a problem to be solved. Judah Freed — Changing the language as proposed is inadequate. Item b. would limit the right of the citizens to fully participate in their government. What this Commission needs to do is to put before the voters an amendment that says Council has no say, and further suggested that the County Attorney and the County Clerk cannot withhold information from those putting forth initiatives or petitions, such as adequate information on the format. Mr. Justus pointed out that the courts have already determined what a charter amendment is supposed to be, dealing with the powers and responsibilities and the workings of government. It is obvious the Charter has not been made clear to the public on exactly what a charter amendment is supposed to be so initiative language gets rolled in. This is not closing the doors on the people' s abilities as much as funneling it to the correct direction. Michael Shooltz — Emphasized the most critical thing to focus on is which government bodies currently have what authority. Wendell Kabutan — The major concern is what was presented in both sections does not state any type of authority. The preamble stops at stating whether "we the people" have the authority to determine what is being presented, and to make a judgment on whether it is an amendment or an initiative. These two additions only present more gray areas, and he would oppose adding the language unless it defines the rights of the people. Mr. Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Justus asked what the will of the people would look like as an authority. Mr. Kabutan said that as it is stated in the preamble that the people have the right to present their opinions through an amendment; if there is a question about the legality that it is deferred to the people. The intent should be to serve the people, and it needs to be stated as such so it is not left to interpretation. Klayton Kubo — If the Commission would put everything at 5% there would not have been a scenario like what happened at the Council. Mr. Kubo also asked where "we the people" was at in all of this, and proposed there be no more executive sessions. Mr. Justus said it is obvious the Charter does not define what an amendment is; it does define what an initiative and a referendum is. Article XXII, which clearly defines the process for initiative and referendum, is entirely absent with the process for a charter amendment. He stated he was not sure if presenting a preamble to define what the Kauai County Charter is will do the trick, or if defining what is worthy of a charter amendment will do it. In doing research, the Charter does have a preamble, but it is somehow missing from the codified Charter. For the record, Mr. Justus read the Preamble adopted March 11 , 1968, by the Charter Commission: WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY OF Kaua i, to secure the benefits of an improved form of county government and to exercise the powers and assume the responsibilities of county government to the fullest extent possible, do hereby adopt this charter of the County of Kaua `i, State of Hawai `i. Mr. Justus moved to request the County Attorney's opinion on whether the Preamble presented to the public is or is not part of the legal language of our current Charter. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Wendell Kabutan — Stated his issue with this is the County Attorney had Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION given an opinion that the County of Kauai is a municipal type of corporation. This preamble might refer to the people, but it only says County of Kauai — not "we the people". Mr. Justus interrupted to say the first three words are "we the people"; this is not adding new language. It is language that was voted on and is absent in the Charter. Mr. Kabutan noted his concern is that the County Attorney has said he does not represent the people, and he wants to make sure the language is clear that it is "we the people" who have the ultimate authority. Motion carried 5 :01 Vice Chair TenBruggencate pointed out there were two different proposals, and asked Mr. Justus if he wanted to make a motion on one of them. Mr. Justus said if there is already a preamble in the Charter it does not need another one or language added to it. His preference would be to amend Article XXIV to define what a charter amendment is. He would like to copy Article XXII and put it into Article XXIV after removing the parts that are not relevant. Mr. Justus moved to defer this item to the next meeting at which time he will present a new proposed amendment. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 CRC 2014-08 Discussion on whether there is a need to amend Section 24.01 that voter petition amendments shall be presented to the county clerk instead of the county council Carl Imparato — (written testimony on file) — Supports the proposed changes to Section 24.01 , and strongly urges the Commission to act on this to restore to the people of Kauai the fundamental rights that the Council seized from the citizens. It is his belief that the Council acted under a dubious premise that the Charter grants the Council some unstated implicit authority to unilaterally decide which voter initiated petitions are to be placed on the ballot. That flies in the face of logic in light of Section 24.01 B, which Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION states that the petitioners shall present petitions to the Council, and that upon filing of such petition with the Council the clerk shall proceed to verify signatures. The concept of the Council ' s acceptance, approval, or rejection of a charter amendment petition are nowhere to be found in the Charter. It was further suggested that the wording in the second paragraph be changed from "filing" to "presentation"- for consistency, and to prevent future misinterpretation. Mr. Imparato urged the Commission to place this on the 2014 ballot even though he has been told the deadline for getting things on the ballot was last Thursday. Deadlines are rarely firm and he believes getting this on the 2014 ballot is achievable if the Commission has the will to do so. The Commission has the authority under Rule 11 to suspend Rule 2 requiring 2 reviews of a proposed amendment and Rule 4b requiring legal review. On a question from Ms. Suzawa regarding the history of why it was written that the petition needed to be presented to the Council, Mr. Justus said in his research, information regarding decisions made by the Charter Commission that created this Charter (during the 60's) are conspicuously missing from the county clerk's office. Judah Freed — Research into the initiative process indicates that the role of the county clerk should be no more than to verify the legitimacy of the signatures; they should not have the right to rule whether or not the petition is valid. Mr. Freed suggested amending the language by adding that the county clerk shall do no more than verify the legitimacy of the signatures. Judy Dalton — Stated on behalf of the Kauai Group of the Sierra Club of Hawaii that it is believed that the Council's action violated Section XXIV of the County Charter, and created a dangerous precedent that will be used in the future to enable the Council and/or Administration to undermine and Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page I0 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION interfere with future citizen sponsored petitions. The Group asked the Commission to support the proposed amendment, and make every effort to get it on the 2014 general election ballot. Saridra Herndon — Supports agenda item 2014-08 and the letter from Carl Imparato. The County Council should be removed from the chain of command for the charter amendments so that the proposed amendments go directly to the county clerk for counting. Mr. Stack said they need to err on the side of what is right, and what is right is being proposed by this particular amendment. Mr. Justus wanted to respond to Ms. Suzawa's question of why it is in the Charter to begin with in regard to the Council. Research shows that in the 1965 discussions with the Commission there was discussion as to whether the Council should have a public hearing, and to consider the question as to whether an amendment or a vision to the proposed Charter be submitted to the electorate for approval or disapproval. There were concerns at that time about Council having authority over the people in which Mr. Justus then read from minutes of that time. Mr. TenBruggencate said it did not matter they did not have the language from the 1965 Charter as it was rejected by the voters. After further comments, Mr. Justus thought in some sense the historical aspects of all this was completely unnecessary. Mr. Guy moved to amend the current wording to take out "filing" and replace it with "presentation". (The Commission was advised an amendment cannot be made until after a main motion has been made) Mr. Justus moved to accept this item as a charter Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION amendment. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Mr. Guy then moved to amend the current wording to take out "filing" and replace it with While generally in agreement, Mr. Guy cautioned that the public' s eye is on "presentation". Mr. Justus seconded the motion. the council versus the county clerk, and this would be taking it away from that process and putting into a body of government that no one really sees or talks to. Mr. Justus agreed and thought defining the process would help. Mr. TenBruggencate agreed that the County Council should not have this authority, but before they can fix this part they need to fix the part that confused the County Attorney sufficiently enough that they gave the County Council this authority. Fixing one without fixing the other creates the problem; it needs to be made very clear that the county clerk only gets to decide whether the petition signatures are sufficient. As it stands now, Mr. TenBruggencate said he will be voting against the motion. Mr. Justus noted during a conversation, the County Attorney stated clearly the reason he saw the Council had the authority was the Charter stated that the petition be presented to the Council. Mr. TenBruggencate thought it conveyed no more and no less authority to the county clerk than it conveys to the County Council; it is exactly the same language. A second concern is rushing an important process like this because there are normally two readings and attorney opinions. With a citizen's petition there is a ministerial function on the part of the County; they accept the petition and they process it. Asked by Deputy County Attorney Courson for clarification if they were voting to put this on the 2014 ballot, members responded there was no timeline only approval of the idea. Mr. Guy said there are still hoops to jump through. Mr. TenBruggencate said if the Commission wants to have the staff try to get this to the election office for the 2014 ballot there needs to be a further amendment to the motion to call for that. Deputy County Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 12 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Attorney Courson said Rule 11 says they can only suspend the rules unless superseded or prohibited by state or county law. Staff has contacted the elections office who said the deadline has passed, and they are very strict about election rules. If the Commission cannot use Rule 11 to suspend Rule 4 then it is Deputy County Attorney Courson' s opinion that the Commission cannot accomplish this for the 2014 ballot. Paula Morikami explained that all the ballot questions go through the legal review, and then on to the communications team for the educational piece. Communication has been received from Scott Nago, Chief Elections Officer, State of Hawai'i, stating that constitutional amendment questions, county charter amendment questions, and county initiative questions be in the Office of Elections by Thursday, August 21 . The county clerk has submitted the 3 ballot questions to the State Office for insertion on the general election ballot. Mr. Justus asked what the workload is in presenting the Commission's question. Ms. Morikami said it would have to go to the County Attorney' s Office to be sure it is legal. Mr. Justus said they have the right to by-pass that. Deputy County Attorney Courson said they cannot suspend it because there is already State law contrary to it. Mr. Morikami stated the purpose of the legal review is to keep the chance of it being contested to a minimum. Carl Imparato — questioned suspending Rule 11 and the question of whether they are prevented by State or County law from suspending the rules is one question. It is a separate question from the county clerk' s deadlines and he would argue they should suspend the rules in order to move this forward. Wendell Kabutan — the issue with the County Attorney and the whole process is a lawyers ' main job is to create reasonable doubt. They came up with an opinion that violated the law, and all they are doing is creating Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 13 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION reasonable doubt. Deputy County Attorney Courson said he would only be repeating himself; the deadline was clear. To suspend the rules to try to bypass a deadline, one thing flows from another. Attorneys need time to research, and this is the best advice he can give. Judah Freed — You can apply the process of severability to the amendment and if it can be included in the ballot, wonderful. If not the amendment has still been agreed to. Motion on the amendment to change "filing" to "presentation" carried 5:0 Roll Call Vote on the Main Motion to accept this item as an amendment carried 4: 1 . (aye-Guy; aye- Justus; aye-Stack; aye-Suzawa; nay- Amendment to proceed through the process with legal review. TenBruggencate) CRC 2014- 10 Transmittal to the County Clerk of the 2014 Proposed Charter Amendments and Ballot Questions Mr. Justus moved to receive the communication. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 CRC 2014- 11 Voter Education — Explanation of County Charter Amendments Proposed in the 2014 General Election Paula Morikami noted the Educational piece is optional and that the Office of Boards and Commissions does it to assist voters in describing what the ballot questions are about. It is distributed throughout the community, which Ms. Morikami elaborated upon. She further elaborated that on the back of the mail out ballot envelope is a notation that for description and Charter Review Commission Open Session August 25, 2014 Page 14 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION exact language changes to go to www.kauai. gov/elections. The proposals will be published in Ramseyer version in the Garden Island Newspaper and Ms. Suzawa moved to receive the voter For Kauai. education material. Mr. Guy seconded the motion. Motion carried 5 :0 Announcements Next Meeting: Monday, September 22, 2014 — 4:00 p.m. Adjournment Vice Chair TenBruggencate adjourned the meeting at 6 :02 p.m. Submitted by: Reviewed and Approved by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk Jan TenBruggencate, Vice Chair ( ) Approved as is. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of meeting. ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMENDMENT Section 24 . 01 . Power of Charter Amendment . The power to amend the charter , or create a new charter , is the amendment power . (section 24 . 01 redefined; language adapted from article XXII , section 22 . 01) Section 24 . 02 . Constitution of Amendments . Any amendment to the charter is limited in substance to amending the form or structure of county government as initially established by adoption of the charter . Any charter amendment cannot serve or function as a method through which to adopt local legislation , and cannot alter , create , or repeal any ordinance ; thereby any charter amendment cannot contain ordinance language . (section 24 . 02 redefined; created per discussion at 812014 meeting; language taken and adapted from ohana amendment court decision ; follows concept and layout pattern of article XXII , (e . g . sec . 22 . 02} ) [ Section 24 . 01 . ] Section 24 . 03 . Initiation of Amendments . Amendments to this charter , or the creation of a new charter , [ may ] are to be initiated only [ in the following manner : ] by the county council , or by petition of registered voters in the County of Kaua ' i , or by the charter review commission . (original section 24 . 01 renumbered as 24 . 03 ; new language added for clarity) Section 24 . 04 . Amendment Proposal by Council . [ A . ] An amendment to the charter , or a new charter , can be proposed [ By ] 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 . (new section created; original language from section 24 . 01A, modified and new language added for clarity) Section 24 . 05 . Amendment Proposal by Voter Petition ; Submission Requirements . A . Proposals . Voters seeking to propose a charter amendment , or a new charter , are required to submit a petition containing the full text of the proposed amendment or new charter . The petition is to be [ B . By petition ] presented to the council [ , ] . After being presented , the county clerk will immediately present to the county attorney the text of the proposed language . B . Signature requirements . Each petition must be signed by registered voters comprising not less than 5 percent [ 50 ] of the number of voters registered in the last general election [ , setting forth the proposed amendments ] . C . Committee . For each petition , there is required to be a petitioners ' committee representing all the petitioners . [ Such petitions ] The committee shall be comprised of [ designate and authorize ] not less than three nor more than five [ of the signers ] members who are registered voters of the county and signers of the petition . The committee is to be responsible for circulation of the petition and for assembling and filing the petition in proper form . The committee will have the power to amend or withdraw the petition as provided by this article , and thereto to approve any alteration or change in the form or language or any restatement - of the text of the proposed amendment [ s ] , or new charter , which may be [made ] suggested , not less than ninety calendar days prior to the day scheduled for the general election in the county , by the county attorney . D . Timeliness . If an amendment proposal , or new charter , is to be placed on the ballot in a general election , the petition must be submitted to the county clerk not less than one hundred twenty calendar days prior to the day scheduled for the general election in the county . E . Petition form and sufficiency . For immediate acceptance of a completed petition , the county clerk shall require reasonable compliance with the following : ( 1 ) The petitions indicate by name and address , the signers who constitute the petitioners ' committee for that petition . ( 2 ) The petitions indicate the address which all notices for petitioners ' committee are to be sent . ( 3 ) The signatures to the petitions be filed on papers of uniform size and style and assembled as one instrument . ( 4 ) Each signature on the petition shall be followed by the printed name and physical address of the person signing . ( 5 ) The petition be signed by the required number of currently registered voters of the county . F . Invalid signature ; insufficient petitions . Signatures are invalid and petitions insufficient : 2 ( 1 ) If signers are not given an opportunity to read the full text of the proposal and if the full text of the proposal is not contained in or attached to each signature paper or set of signature papers of the petition throughout circulation . ( 2 ) If affidavits ( executed by the circulators for each set of signature papers ) are not attached to the papers at the time of filing of petitions with county clerk . Each affidavit shall attest to the effect that : a particular individual personally circulated an identifiable set of papers ; each paper bears a stated number of signatures ; each signature on a paper was affixed in the circulator ' s presence ; each signature is the genuine signature or the person it purports to be . G . Withdrawing signatures . Individual signatures may be withdrawn within fifteen days after the filing of a petition with the county clerk by the filing of a written request thereof , by the individual , with the county clerk . H . Procedure after filing ; certificate of county clerk . Upon filing of [ such ] a completed petition with the council , the county clerk [ shall ] is required to examine it within twenty days to see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters and meets all other requirements as defined in this article . The county clerk is required thereafter to complete a certificate within ten days as to the sufficiency of the petition . As soon as a certificate is completed , the county clerk is required to notify the petitioners ' committee of the contents of the certificate . If a petition is certified sufficient , the county clerk is required to present the certificate to the petitioners ' committee . If the clerk certifies a petition insufficient , the certificate is required to show the particulars wherein the petition is defective . A majority of the petitioners ' committee may elect to amend a petition certified insufficient and must so notify the county clerk , but if a majority does not elect to amend a petition , the county clerk is required to present the certificate to the petitioners ' committee . I . Supplementary petition . If a majority of the petitioners ' committee elects to amend its petition , then within ten days after receipt of the county clerk ' s certificate , the committee is required to file a supplementary petition upon additional papers . The supplementary petition is to be governed 3 by the same requirements as for an original petition . Within five days after the filing of a supplementary petition , the county clerk is required to complete a second certificate as to the sufficiency of the original petition as amended by the supplementary petition . Thereafter , the procedural requirements for the petition as amended will be the same as that for the original petition as provided in this section . J . Final review ; new petition . A final determination of insufficiency shall not prejudice the filing or a new petition for the same purpose . K . Withdrawal of petitions . A petition may be withdrawn at any time prior to the sixtieth day immediately preceding the day scheduled for a vote in the county by filing with the county clerk a request for withdrawal signed by at least three members of the petitioners ' committee . Upon the filing or the request , the petition will have no further force or effect and all proceedings thereon will be terminated . (entire section note : new section created, original language from 24 . O1B; rearranged for clarity, and new language taken and adapted from article XXXI , sections 22 . 03 through 22 . 08) [ Section 24 . 03 . ] Section 24 . 06 . Charter Review Commission ; Amendment Proposal . The mayor , with the approval of the council , shall appoint , with appropriate staffing , a charter review commission composed of seven members who shall serve in accordance with [ Section 23 . 02C ] section 23 . 02c of this [ Charter ] charter to study and review the operation 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 review 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 the entire text of the amendments or new charter . [ ( Amended 2006 ) ] (original section 24 . 03 renumbered as 24 . 06; modified and new language added for clarity) 4 Section 24 . 07 . Legal Review . Any charter amendment , or new charter , is required to have a legal review before being put on the ballot . Charter amendment , or new charter , proposals by either the county council or the charter review commission are required to have a legal review by the county attorney , or special counsel as may be determined by the proposing body . Charter amendment , or new charter , proposals put forth by voter petition are required to have notarized legal review by an attorney who has practiced law in the State of Hawai ' i for at least three years , a copy of said legal review is required to be submitted along with the original petition . (new section created; new language proposed; concept adapted from "court review" section in article XXII , section 22 . O6D) [ Section 24 . 02 . ] Section 24 . 08 . Elections to be Called . A . Any resolution of the council , [ or ] petition of the voters , or majority approval of the charter review commission proposing amendments to the charter , or a new charter , [ shall ] are required to provide that the proposed amendments , or new charter , [ shall ] are to be submitted to the voters of the county at the next general election , unless as otherwise provided in this article . B . The ballot for a proposed amendment , or new charter , is required to contain an objective summary of the substance of the proposal . Copies of the proposed amendment , or new charter , are also required to be made available at the polls . [ B ] C . The county clerk shall have the proposed amendments published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least thirty [ ( 30 ) ] days prior to submission of the proposed amendments , or new charter , to the voters of the county at the next general election . [ C ] D . Should the majority of the voters voting thereon approve the proposed [ amendments ] amendment to this charter , or new charter , the [ amendments ] amendment , or new charter , [ shall ] will become effective at the time fixed in the amendment , or new charter , or , if no time is fixed therein , thirty [ ( 30 ) ] days after its adoption by the voters of the county . [ Any ] charter amendment , or new charter , shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county within thirty [ ( 30 ) ] days of the effective date of such amendment , or new charter . (original section 24 . 02 renumbered as 24 . 08 , and modified for clarity; language of new subsection B adapted from article XXII , section 22 . O7D) 5 Section 24 . 09 . Election Requirements . [ A . ] Unless a new charter is submitted to the voters , each amendment to the charter shall be voted on separately . (new section created; original language is from section 2403A, modified for clarity) Section 24 . 10 . Results of Election . [ Be ] If a majority of the voters voting upon a new charter , if a new charter is proposed , or charter amendment votes in favor of it [ or a new charter , if a new charter is proposed , ] the J amendment or ] new charter , or charter amendment , [ shall become ] becomes effective at the time fixed in the charter amendment or new 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 not more than thirty [ ( 30 ) ] days after its adoption . (new section created; original language is from section 24 . O3B; modified and new language added for clarity) (original Article XXIV, original Article XXII & exceprt from Ghana Amendment Court Ruling below) ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMMOdENT 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 . Be By petition presented to the council , signed by registered voters comprising not less than 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 6 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 ) 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 the proposed amendments published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county 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 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 . 020 of this Charter to study and review the operation 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 the entire text of the amendments or new charter . ( Amended 2006 ) A . Unless a new charter is submitted to the voters , each 7 amendment to the charter shall be voted on separately . Be 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 not more than thirty ( 30 ) days after its adoption . mom W = MrMW ,WMMMM ARTICLE XXII INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUIK [ areas adapted into amendment proposal are italicized] Section 22 . 01 . Power of Initiative and Referendum . A . The power of voters to propose ordinances (except as provided in Section 22 . 02) shall be the initiative power . Be The power of the voters to approve or reject ordinances that have been passed by the county council ( except as provided in Section 22 . 02 ) shall be the referendum power . ( Amended 1976 ) Section 22 . 02 . Limitations to Powers . The initiative power and the referendum power shall not extend to any part or all of the operating budget or capital budget ; any financial matter relating to public works ; any ordinance authorizing or repealing the levy of taxes ; any emergency legislation ; any ordinance making or repealing any appropriation of money or fixing the salaries of county employees or officers ; any ordinance authorizing the appointment of employees ; any ordinance authorizing the issuance of bonds ;. or any matter covered under collective bargaining contracts . (Amended 1976) 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 the full text of the proposed ordinance . The initiative petition shall be filed with the clerk of the council at least 8 ninety-six ( 96) hours prior to any regular council committee 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 registered voters comprising not less than twenty percent (20 %) of the number of voters registered in the last 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, 2012) Section 22 . 04 . Committee . For each initiative or each referendum petition there shall be a petitioner ' s committee representing all the petitioners , which committee shall be composed of five (5) members who shall be qualified voters of the county and signers of the petition . The committee shall be responsible for circulation of the petition and for assembling and filing the petition in proper form . The committee shall have the power to amend or withdraw the petition as provided by this article . (Amended 1976) Section 22 . 05 . Initiative and Referendum Petition : Form and Sufficiency . A . For immediate acceptance of the petition , the clerk of the council shall require reasonable compliance with the following : (1 ) The petitions indicate by name and address , the five (5) signers who constitute the petitioner ' s committee for that petition . (2) The petitions indicate the address which all notices for petitioner ' s committee are to be sent . 9 (3) The signatures to petitions be filed on papers of uniform size and style and assembled as one instrument .. (4) Each signature on the petition shall be followed by the name (printed) and the place of residence of the person signing . (5) The petition be signed by the required number of qualified registered voters of the county . B . Signatures are invalid and petitions insufficient : (1 ) If signers are not given an opportunity to read the full text of the ordinance sought to . be reconsidered and if the full text of the ordinance is not contained in or attached to each signature paper or set of signature papers of an initiative or referendum petition throughout circulation . (2) If affidavits (executed by the circulators for each set of signature papers) are not attached to the papers at the time of filing of petitions with the clerk of the council . Each affidavit shall attest to the effect that : a particular individual personally circulated an identifiable set of papers , each paper bears a stated number of signatures ; each signature on a paper was affixed in the circulator ' s presence ; each signature is the genuine signature or the person it purports to be . C . Individual signatures may be withdrawn within fifteen (15) days after the filing of an initiative or referendum petition with the clerk of the council by the filing of a written request thereof, by the individual , with the clerk or the council . (Amended 1976) Section 22 . 06. Procedure After Filing . A . Certificate of Clerk ; Amendment . Within twenty (20) days after the filing of an initiative or referendum petition , the clerk of the council shall complete a certificate as to the sufficiency of the petition . As soon as a certificate is completed , the clerk shall notify the petitioner ' s committee of the contents of the certificate . If 10 a petition is certified sufficient , the clerk shall present his certificate to the county council at its next meeting . If the clerk certifies a petition insufficient , his certificate shall show the particulars wherein the petition is defective . A majority of the petitioner ' s committee may elect to amend a petition certified insufficient and must so notify the clerk , but if a majority does not elect to amend a petition , the clerk shall present his certificate to the county council at its next meeting . B . Supplementary Petition . if a majority of the petitioner ' s committee elects to amend its petition , then within ten (10) days after receipt of the clerk ' s certificate, the committee shall file a supplementary petition upon additional papers . The supplementary petition shall be governed by the same requirements as for an original petition . Within five (5) days after the filing of a supplementary petition , the clerk shall complete a second certificate as to the sufficiency of the original petition as amended by the supplementary petition . Thereafter , the procedural requirements for the petition as amended shall be the same as that for the original petition as provided in subsection A . this section . C . Council Review . A majority of the petitioner ' s committee may request the county council to review a clerk ' s certificate , at or before the meeting at which the clerk presents the certificate to the council . . The council shall review the latest clerk ' s certificate , upon the committee ' s request , and shall approve or reject the certificate or may substitute its own determination of sufficiency of the petition by resolution . D . Court Review; New Petition . A final determination as to the sufficiency of a petition shall be subject to court review . A final determination of insufficiency , even if sustained upon court review, shall not prejudice the filing or a new petition for the same purpose . (Amended 1976) Section 22 . 07 . County Council Action on Petitions . A . The county council shall proceed immediately to consider an initiative or referendum petition which has been determined sufficient in accordance with the provisions of this article . If 11 an initiative petition is concerned , the ordinance it proposes shall at once be introduced subject to the procedures required for ordinances under Article IV of this charter ; however , not more than sixty ( 60 ) days shall elapse between the time of first reading of the initiative proposal as a bill and completion of action to adopt , amend , or reject the same . If a referendum petition is concerned , the ordinance to which that petition is directed shall be reconsidered by the council ; and not later than thirty ( 30 ) days after the date on which the petition was determined sufficient , the council shall , by ordinance , repeal , or , by resolution , sustain the ordinance . B . If the council rejects an initiative amendment proposal or passes it with an amendment unacceptable to a majority of the petitioner ' s committee , or if the council fails to repeal an ordinance reconsidered pursuant to a referendum petition , it shall submit the originally proposed initiative ordinance or refer the reconsidered ordinance concerned to the voters of the county at the next general election . C . The council may , in its discretion , and under appropriate circumstances , provide for a special election . D . The ballot for such measures shall contain an objective summary of the substance of the measure and shall have below the ballot title designated spaces in which to mark a ballot FOR or AGAINST the measure . Copies of initiative or referendum ordinances shall also be made available at the polls . E . Suspension of Ordinance . When a referendum petition or amended petition has been certified as sufficient by the County Clerk , the Ordinance sought to be repeated in the petition shall not be effective and shall be deemed suspended from the date the petition is certified as sufficient until the voters have voted on the measure and the election results have been certified as provided in this Article . ( Amended 1976 , 1980 ) Section 22 . 08 . Withdrawal of Petitions . An initiative or referendum petition may be withdrawn at any time prior to the sixtieth ( 60th) day immediately preceding the day scheduled for a vote in the county by filing with the county clerk a request for 12 withdrawal signed by at least four ( 4) members of the petitioners committee . Upon the filing or the request , the petition shall have no further force or effect and all proceedings thereon shall, be terminated . (Amended 1976) Section 22 . 09 . Results of Election . If a majority of the voters voting upon a proposed initiative ordinance shall vote in favor of it , the ordinance involved shall be considered adopted upon certification of the election results . If a majority of the voters voting upon a referendum ordinance shall vote against it , the ordinance involved shall be considered repealed upon certification of the election results . (Amended 1976 ) Section 22 . 10 . Upon approval by a majority of the votes cast on the proposal , the charter amendment shall take effect upon all legislative acts not excluded herein enacted after January 2 , 1977 .. (Amended 1976 ) Section 22 . 11 . A referendum that nullifies an existing ordinance shall not affect any vested right or any action taken or expenditures made up to the date of the referendum . ( Amended 1976 ) 2004 OHANA A1►MEN1*1ENT - COURT FINAL RULING (source for proposed new language for section 24 . 02) 1 . Whether the Charter Amendment is Void under the RCCK Consequently , it follows that an amendment to a charter " is a necessarily limited in substance to amending the form or structure of government initially established by adoption of the charter . " Cheeks , 287 Md . at 607 , 415 A . 2d 255 . It may not " serve or function as a vehicle through which to adopt local legislation . " Id . . 13