Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015_0427_AgendaPacketJan TenBruggencate Members: Chair Ed Justus Allan Parachini Joel Guy Patrick Stack Vice Chair Cheryl Stighneier COUNTY OF KAUAI CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA Monday, April 27, 2015 4:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2AB 4444 Rice Street, Llhu'e, Hl 96766 Oath of Office for new member Cheryl Stiglmeier CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Open Session Minutes of February 23, 2015 BUSINESS 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 (Deferred 2/23/15) CRC 2014 -06 Discussion and possible decision - making 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; (On- going) b. Charter Amendment Proposal for Article XXIV (On- going) EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes § §92 -4 and 92 -5 (a) (4), 92 -9 (a)(14) (b), the purpose of this executive session is to receive and approve Executive Session minutes and to consult with the Commission's legal counsel on issues pertaining to the Commission's and the County's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities as they may relate to this item, deliberate and take such action as appropriate. ES -005: Regular Executive Session Minutes of February 23, 2015 ES -006: Briefing from the Deputy County Attorney on confidentiality of County Attorney Opinions and Executive Minutes RETURN TO OPEN SESSION Ratify Commission actions taken in Executive Session for items: ES -005 and ES -006 ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting: Monday, May 18, 2015 at 4:00 pm in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/B (Special Note: Meeting is the 3'd Monday due to the Memorial Day Holiday) An Equal Opportunity Employer ADJOURNMENT EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §92 -7(a), the Commission may, when executive session on any agenda item without written public notice if the anticipated in advance. Any such executive session shall be held pursuant limited to those items described in HRS §92 -5(a). Discussions held in Exec the public. Cc: Deputy County Attorney Philip Dureza deemed necessary, hold an executive session was not to HRS §924 and shall be ;utive Session are closed to 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 testimonto: Charter Review Commission Attn: Barbara Davis Office of Boards and Commissions. 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150 L-1hu`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 — April 27, 2015 2 1 P a g e COUNTY OF KAUAI Lz a a T3 ra 1"" r Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee: CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date February 23, 2015 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2A/213 Start of Meeting: 4:04 pm End of Meeting: 5:44 pm Present Chair Jan TenBruggencate. Members: Ed Justus; James Nishida (in 4:41 pm); Allan Parachini; Patrick Stack (out 5:31 pm) Also: Deputy County Attorney Philip Dureza; Boards & Commissions Office Staff: Support Clerk Barbara Davis; Administrator Paula Morikami Excused Vice Chair Joel Guy Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair TenBruggencate called the meeting to order at 4:04 pm. with 4 Commissioners present Approval of Regular Open Session Minutes of January 26, 2015 Mr. Parachini moved to approve the minutes as Minutes circulated. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 4:0 Business CRC 2013 -03 Review of Recommendations in Ramseyer form from legal analyst Curtis Shiramizu on identifying and proposing grammar, punctuation, revisions and to bring in line the previous amendments approved by the voters to the Kauai County Charter (Defer to September 2015 Deputy Attorney Dureza explained this item has been deferred to September subsequent to a meeting with Council Services Staff, County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask and Boards and Commissions Staff in which it was W determined that the 2014 unofficial Codified Charter would be sent to '� •.. Council Services Staff to compare with the official document for discrepancies. Once that process has been completed the County Clerk will � certify it as the official version which incorporates all charter amendments to date. That certified version will be given to this Commission for incorporation of gender neutral, grammatical, punctuation, etc., changes for Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION possible placement on the 2016 ballot for adoption of all changes by the voters. Mr. Stack moved to receive the item. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 4:0 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 (Deferred 1/26/15) Deputy Attorney Dureza noted most of the information had been covered in the previous month's executive session and asked the Commission if it would be appropriate to go into executive session now in case there are overlapping questions. Chair TenBruggencate said this can be moved into the executive session agenda and be taken up when the Commission goes into executive session. Mr. Stack questioned if a footnote would be considered as a substantive change to the Charter. Deputy Attorney Dureza said without having done any legal research, he thought a footnote that explained a provision would not be considered as a substantive change, but more research would need to be done to be sure. Mr. Justus asked if instead of a footnote it would be possible to change the title of the article to clarify what that transitional provision is, perhaps using the dates it was in effect? Mr. Justus was informed that changing a title would be a substantive change. Chair TenBruggencate asked for a motion to move this to the executive session agenda. Mr. Justus so moved. Mr. Parachini seconded the motion. Motion carried 4:0 CRC 2014 -06 Discussion and possible decision - making 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, Charter Amendment Proposal for Section 24.01, Initiation of Amendments b. Charter Amendment Proposal for Section 24.04, Clarification of What Constitutes a Charter Amendment c. Charter Amendment Petition Guidelines & Exhibits, Instructions for Voter Amendments On- oin Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION (Items deferred 1/26/15 Deputy Attorney Dureza noted this was covered in the minutes and asked if it needed to go into Executive Session. Chair TenBruggencate said it was not clear there were issues that justified an Executive Session and would hate to get in the habit of easing things into an Executive Session without good cause, and would not be sure this fulfills the legal requirements to take items into Executive Session. Deputy Attorney Dureza thought it did because it overlaps with the legal opinion request which is covered. Chair TenBruggencate agreed the legal opinion certainly did but he was not sure the whole issue needed to be taken into Executive Session. Mr. Justus said he did read the Executive Session minutes and there were things he would like to talk with the Commission about, but feels barred since it was discussed in Executive Session. Mr. Justus moved that these items be taken into Executive Session. Motion died for lack of a second. Chair TenBruggencate asked that they proceed on this item, but to avoid references to the Attorney's opinion. Mr. Justus asked to address the preamble first and stated the question he proposed to the County Attorney's Office for an opinion is not the actual question that he wanted an answer to. His actual question should have been was the preamble that was printed in the Garden Island Newspaper after the charter was approved presented to the voting public at the 1968 election, and if so was it approved by the voters? If it was in the original language of the charter, why was it not in any of the other versions of the charter and can it be included now. If it was not part of the original language presented in 1968 would it be worthwhile for this Commission to include that preamble as part of the actual charter. Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 0 = . I SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Deputy Attorney Dureza said he is not sure how much of a legal question this is, but he would have to assume the preamble did not make it in the 1968 charter. Based on the focus of this Commission to improve government operations, does it improve government operations by adding a preamble and would it be prudent to add that language going forward? Deputy Attorney Dureza said he was not sure how much weight the preamble would add to the efficacy of our government. Mr. Justus said if he were to do the research and find the preamble that was printed in the newspaper is part of the original language of the charter that was voted on would it automatically be folded into the charter or would it have to be presented again. Deputy Attorney Dureza said the issue was addressed in his opinion. Mr. Parachini asked if this was important to Mr. Justus for historical accuracy or is there some other level of meaning. Mr. Justus said neither; it is more about making sure if the people voted to have it included in the charter that the charter is not incomplete. Mr. Justus said he would do further research on the preamble. Chair TenBruggencate said the preamble does not change the function of County government in any way so whether it is officially a part of the charter it is not a law in the sense that it directs anyone to do anything. Based on Mr. Justus doing further research Chair TenBruggencate asked that the preamble be listed as a separate agenda item next month. Section 24.01, Initiation of Amendments. Mr. Justus explained that in observing how the last charter amendment that was presented to the Council and how the Council chose to deny the charter amendment he did some research in which it seemed fairly obvious that the people who framed the charter designed the voter initiation process to circumvent the other branches from squashing something put out by the people; this would help in preventing measures from not being put on the ballot. Routing it through Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION the County Clerk's Office keeps it all in one package and helps avoid confusion. Chair TenBruggencate stated the 3 ways of getting something on the ballot is through the Council, the Commission or the public through a petition drive. Mr. Justus added that the Council had an opinion that said they had the power to veto it because it was not a valid charter amendment, but the 2004 court opinion from the `Ohara amendment stated very clearly that only the courts had the power to decide what is valid or invalid with charter amendments; not any other branch of government. With that in mind the language of the proposed amendment clarifies that issue and brings it in line with case law. Mr. Parachini was not sure it brought it in line with case law. Two of the cases cited, both of which had identical language, was in turn taken from the decision by another court who had an . obligation not to allow something that was clearly not a charter amendment. Mr. Stack asked to revisit the item on the preamble noting a preamble is very definitely necessary. It is the headline, the introduction, the abstract for the document itself. The seventeenth word of the United States Constitution speaks to "We the people of the United States in order to forma more perfect union, establish justice....." That is why the preamble for the United States Constitution works because it electrifies the Justice Department to a justice process. For us to do away with this preamble would be wrong as it states what our goals are and is the shining light on what we are trying to do. Chair TenBruggencate said that Commissioner Justice has volunteered to study whether in fact the preamble is part of the document that the voters voted on back in 1968. When he comes back with an answer the Commission can then decide on whether they want to do something about it or not. Mr. Justus said the only way they will find out is what was printed in the newspaper of that time because there is nothing in the County records. Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 • SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Returning to the proposal for initiation of amendments, Mr. Justus referred to the language that was in the County of Kauai vs. Baptiste. The final decision says "initially we acknowledge that oral argument the County through its attorney conceded that the charter amendment was valid however the validity or invalidity of the charter amendment is a question of law for this court to decide" and then it states a case. Mr. Justus thought that statement alone said that any decision on validity or invalidity is for the courts. Chair TenBruggencate said he was hearing that the courts establish that they have the authority, but that line did not establish that the County Council didn't. Mr. Justus said it clarifies that the County Council was wrong in saying whether it was a valid charter amendment or not because the final conclusion in the case says "based on the foregoing we reverse that portion of the circuit courts May 20, 2005 final judgment wherein the circuit court ruled that the Charter Amendment violated the revised County of Kauai charter. In all other respects, we affirm." In reality anything that is presented as an amendment to our charter and is passed is a valid charter amendment. This simple proposal changes it from being presented to Council to being presented to the Clerk and eliminates the question of someone else having to decide whether it is valid. While Mr. Justus did not support the petition itself, he does support the reality that it was a violation of the process. Chair TenBruggencate pointed out that Mr. Justus said that if a charter amendment is presented with sufficient signatures that says chickens are ducks, no one can take that off the ballot — it has to go to the voters. That is not what the County Council did but what Mr. Justus is arguing, and the intention of this amendment is that any language no matter what it is which has a petitioners committee and enough signatures must go to the voters. Mr. Justus said no, not at all; that is what the court states.. The court ruling stated that the amendment that was passed in 2004 did violate the County charter; the reason why is because there is nothing in our Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Charter that defines what a Charter amendment is. That is a problem that is worthwhile for the Commission to fix. The other issue was about Council believing they have the authority to decide what a valid or invalid charter amendment is even though the court language says otherwise. Mr. Parachini said there is different language in the Nakazawa case and the sense he got was when the charter is ambiguous as it is currently, case law takes over which was what the County Attorney was seeking to articulate. There were two sites that concurred with what was in that County Council opinion. What did not happen was that the creators of that initiative were certainly free to ask for a declaratory judgment of the circuit court to tell the County Council or the County Attorney that they were wrong. They did not challenge the County Attorney's opinion. Mr. Parachini agreed that Mr. Justus' booting process has something to be said. Mr. Justus noted his concern is with abuse and the easiest way to remove that abuse is to have voter initiated charter amendments that go directly to the County Clerk, Chair TenBruggencate asked who would have the authority to say something was bogus. Mr. Justus said the County Clerk. Mr. Parachini asked if the County Clerk by definition does not serve at the pleasure of the Council and is essentially an employee of the Council. The Clerk could be given direction by the Council to do something and would be compelled to Mr. Nishida entered the meeting at 4:41 p.m. do so. Mr. Parachini was not sure the proposal achieved what Mr. Justus would like for it to achieve and was not sure the County Clerk is any different than the County Council. Mr. Justus thought it important to find a way to make it absolutely clear that voter initiated amendments are designed to circumvent the approval from the legislative function. Mr. Parachini did not know if switching it from the County Council receiving it to the County Clerk receiving it solves the problem. Mr. Justus said the Council is not defined to have any clearly stated instructions, but what is clearly stated is the County Clerk's actions. Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Justus said his understanding is when you present something to the County Clerk for a charter amendment it is their responsibility to make sure it gets on the ballot at the proper time, and more in line with the elections division rather than acting on behalf of the Council. Chair TenBruggencate felt that if there was anyone in the County with the authority to say an amendment is invalid then that power should be clearly conveyed. If that authority is to be conveyed to the County Clerk then perhaps the fifth paragraph of Section 24.01 should say: Upon [filing] presentation of such petition.........Ahe clerk shall examine it both to see if it has sufficient signatures but also whether it constitutes a valid charter amendment......... Mr. Parachini referred to Section 22 for the Initiative and Referendum process which begins with what an Initiative is. If the Commission is considering how to define a charter amendment then making it the final paragraph of Section 24 makes it look like an afterthought. Mr. Parachini suggested moving the language to the first paragraph, 24.01, and use the language as presented to become 24.04. He further distributed his suggestion for Section 24.01 in which language was added to the second paragraph in Subsection B which should take care of what Chair TenBruggencate articulated on regarding presentation: Upon [filing] presentation of such petition with the council, the county clerk shall secure from the County Attorney an opinion on whether the measure proposed is appropriately classified as a charter amendment. Proponents may challenge the classification by petition to the Circuit Court. if the County Attorney concludes the measure is properly called a charter amendment, the clerk shall see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters. It also has the advantage of taking note specifically that the proponents of a charter amendment are not powerless in the face of an opinion by the County Attorney. Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Nishida said the County Attorney has said they did not want to issue opinions on petition amendments because it was not clear who the client was. It was not their client who was presenting the charter amendment. It was the Council who sent the request to the Attorney for an opinion. Chair TenBruggencate suggested that one of the benefits of this proposal is it solves a problem in each of the previous charter amendments in that there was no clear mechanism for deciding if something was or was not an amendment. If the mechanism is there it will not be an issue. Chair TenBruggencate said if they combined Mr. Justus' proposal with Mr. Parachini's proposal to put it into the hands of the clerk subject to an opinion from the County Attorney it takes the Council out of the picture. Mr. Nishida did not think the public was being served by not having the Council look at these questions which is why he thinks the process works. Ms. Morikami pointed out that Section 24.01 B the first concern or question was "petition presented ". It was not clear what the term presented meant. Also the last line says "which may be made by the county attorney" which was also non -clear language. Does that mean the Council can look at and evaluate it or is it just submitting it? Chair TenBruggencate said he had that conversation at the time with the Council because they were arguing that they needed to put it on their agenda and approve it. Looking at the language of the charter Chair TenBruggencate did not think Council had that authority; all they have to do is accept it. Mr. Justus asked if the Commission felt it was warranted to separate the issue of process from the issue of defining what a charter amendment is so there are two separate issues that are presented to the voters. Chair TenBruggencate said he was thinking the opposite in that it is important to craft a really good charter amendment section that has all the pieces we Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 Page 1.0 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION want to fix including what has been proposed and the definition so that we present a bullet proof charter. Mr. Stack moved to defer this item for further discussion. Mr. Parachini seconded the motion. Chair TenBruggencate asked if a member would draft a proposal for the next meeting incorporating both proposals presented today. Mr. Parachini agreed to take this project on. Motion carried 5 :0 c. Charter Amendment Petition Guidelines & Exhibits: Instructions for Voter Amendments (On- going) Staff explained that the County Clerk has requested that any questions the Commission has be put in writing to allow them time to research the information. Mr. Justus said if they are going to do a massive charter amendment for Article 24 the process also has to be clarified. Mr. Justus questioned if any of the information provided needs to be included in the charter. The process is really clear in Article 22 but it is not clear in Article 24. Chair TenBruggencate agreed with Mr. Nishida in that the system works and was not sure they needed to burden the charter with a lot of procedural language if there already is a system that is functioning. The areas that are not functioning have been identified and we are dealing with Mr. Justus moved to receive this item. Mr. those. Parachini seconded the motion. Motion carried 5:0 Executive Mr. Stack moved to go into Executive Session at Session 5 :11 p.m. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Motion carried 5:0 Deputy Attorney Dureza read the Hawaii Revised Statutes to take the meeting into Executive Session as fully described on the posted agenda. Charter Review Commission Open Session February 23, 2015 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Return to Open Ratify Commission actions taken in Executive Session Mr. Justus moved to ratify the Commission's Session actions. Mr. Parachini seconded the motion. _ Motion carried 4:0 Announcements Next Meeting: Monday, March 23, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. Adjournment Mr. Parachini moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:44 p.m. Mr. Nishida seconded the motion. Motion carried 4:0 Submitted by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk O Approved as circulated. O Approved with amendments. See minutes of Reviewed and Approved by: meeting. Jan TenBruggencate, Chair D 7 it OR ...• • Section 26.04. Status of Departments and Transfer of Funds. A. All departments, the status of which are not specifically changed or abolished by this charter, are hereby recognized, continued and established and shall have such powers, duties and functions 'as provided by law. Members of the various boards, commissions and committees holding office at the effective date of this charter shall continue in office unless they resign or until their terms of office shall expire. 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. C MORRIS S, SHII&TO 1972 1983 The Kauai County Charter was adopted by the people of Kauai in 1968 and the Charter became effective.on January 2, 1969. The Kauai County.Charter represents the basic foundation upon which our County government stands. Instrumental in the creation of the Charter was Morris S. Shinsato who served as Chairman of the original Charter Commission which began-in 1967, Subsequently, over the succeeding. years, there were numerous amendments to the County Charter and as County Attorney, Morris S. Shinsato had considwrable influence upon thi evolution of the County Charter in that he rendered advice and recommendations on virtually bll amendments. The latest mandatory charter review was completed in 1.984 and again Morris S. Shinsata played an integral part as- Chairman of the Charter Review Commission. The people of Kauai, through the official action of the County Courril, would like to dedicate this revised edition to Morris S. Shinsato for his selfless and indispensable service to the people of the County of Kauai and in particular for his indalible contribution to the Kauai County Charter. ao/ y -o 6 a. I. _.) ( f ( • .4 - `!.W . it lr.l t.t kd•� f ,_ I. #I.I , 'f , t �Z A.T.Q. fir/ :µ +�^t' S) 1 rrY,bjr(iz.`�L -ll � - I. t - `f i ii t `� :: o- 4 J'<<i � 4K f} , . AIa, ,-.-Iw I. ,H4 +a- `Y' -..c -p M , IT (( r ,( r .. t.• L, i f -K c t... � iai!Tjr 1 J.<.y ,{ ♦ i r r � v 1a..�/r'.�f•1 " LiL,p ,i� #1 1. . y 3.1� 't'.a Y�ty,-� � ,t.S S{n ot; ..tom ,[,y 'rt, fx .,.are . a -.A .. �r - I. s.c -3`2"'6�[ijr,o 4. I. (ay�.'d V� I ' r 1 r �1� •A`' vxw. ,.. I. a .(�'µ:L t 1( `Y4• } ny (5, • {w,y,}cf<1i7wf k r Y. - 4-Nr '�• r ` t '..ilYr,p+y.. LL, LLI 'C ,Z>a'.. 1y t t .I if , , I Y` 4,r• .Q 1).r t ���. tL1 yi., + 2 ( .h bt t• -}S i, t11` t i� ., , , :. 1 . a ! „% .:i LL ILL r'. Tr y,Y . {' III CC ^', ' r 4 ;"`�•" C. J ,� i.� , _ r rtt 1, .. tit.ry 4 J.. _ r. {S 5r µ) . k- r T1! tt a tC rt :; >t#,.: ' ,a�<�it, A j 4- ,ti a j (I t , I. I C. }}ll ` I. -� ( l r rl., T. ,, ly 0 t NI ILT` a 4ti; i ( a Mf rJ °I r. - L :w(..` f:. v4 !);, t1. ,U:', ,_ _ .t - 'Li-Arl: wI, rj. " 1. y.. 1 ; ( > : fir .e. 'y+,41 I I. i a ` r 1 < • -> 4 `� 4 1 . J. ,y -r 4Yr ,� �tr� , \., i' i.% J hl. 1 ! �'i�, 1?t� -Y �.'�.1 ~ate •.. *I f: • ya f 9^ r 4 A, ttlr f r� a t tl� 1 %. r r.a 1` S 1 L '' • a �l i \, j'. 1' ii y' i t Y 4 ' ..lI , i s Y r Yt'. > f ^'f r.. I. ' ..Al �t w as r r ,s11 -.,.', SrT 1 :, ra ILL I N '� 1 G • atf fY �.J 1�� i ' f ri t iV '.fT 1 i -ly,�J1 t.x� ^1t Y f , It y' f!. i'. 1. t Ill I I, r ,'f ♦"., ! /: -4?. .Yr� ♦) I.Cv 1...`1" Y4`6•). -. ♦I4.T •i; i .. ILL + -LIZIy . i � J-� "`� L (L • r W /-- ta+'�Y ari 1 f r.R. 1'' ry C } 4 �; rit ..r 'r•;Y i. � y 't in ,� %" i 1r % "4 •r + }tsfiy •1. .� � .! , r - r a 4n :r t' L -.>t d „i a.f ))kt' k a ±' •, . : r r' 1 k , '. r. •i i � 1 . it t "•; I �: �, f 'rt( t t a'� t LA r i t .1 , l _Ca r ( J< t y, r . kt t . °' .. , ?'4 Fit <,k :4F'..y.r . '� r ' S:I4'+Ch. 1.. I r .r A i 1 t� y rQ1• � .,• i, r. ft It / 4 �Ie a 5 •G , M< t'. , 4 'I �, ( y.,. Vf. �': th .rti %,L J. a',ytL I. - III t ' l S 1 . •'.rr a. A, 1 4( \ \�� ./, i y('y rti t"�S'�i�, ay'~ i Imo Y 4 - Iat ., Ft i tvrt .. -f r•a4 t.j, r J '..j,f h ,c,.16 p vaF. :.,` \. 4.� a �>f+a •1.fi' ,. tIf 4l IT-, Y.I • ...:r I,1 L. r M e r .1 ri; . {.' IT ... (1 r} , 'Z �t ra .qy ,: ILL _'tii a, - rfy i:A,I t WL '. ALL I i , e < ter' {1-- I1Z, ILL I } F,l ? t I r 4Y 4 :t'. ` ,. '1 j. r ✓ �>�r!!t Y Y ,. :l7 I .. L.F., 1. tit .I f,i..'yy r. r' :•,. y'-L . r r / •,,,,:I 4"tR \j1 r'� _` 4 try ..} i . } a., i, . 4I- iL ( 4' tia C `,y f.:_I. C..,,.41 \ r �.rt \ .,r•. iA '%`T} (,w� <, \ \'''' .. YY T -i A , ki ) ..Y . t6 `. It ;.i y'� t�- . 14,t'• �41 1. ,j •, f.1' iI f L7 A) `•,4.7 r ...l:� ). 4 . T 118 'm \y - > ;,Tt nib,. 4 w t" a - j + t'.rl'�: � '" Lil-LLI, J�.'h• J' C ,' q 5:, t1 t:I• �0 • ri ? At t,. IT", *i , } ♦ : L r >i \?. 1(tw Lr�a +v { ", tArz,f » � �l� fi N1 tS I "s'kH C n r }..(ru.�7 M a� : t » 4 i. r $ i.:. �!_.;: -ctir jAA � k. •_. '' ;.(� tYa, ' �), r 7 ., 2T V.T `!I SC r<' 6;L,,L_w,xt}� . I. 1 ITT I ~ _ Cv -4 i• '4fkJ 1 +r%a �3*p,tt di r-L< aS� 1 �. , ` < ,4' .5 /�rA . + I �j �3�.7 4t +; K,iCr.:� MI V�d < r f�. h }) <F, Ly. a l `'a1• i'vn.y. ti �•. :� ,jZ'L 1 ^' i �i f �•Tt {.+C, ILL I % Li .a 'rr .�'4a.v. i V )iS' �:��F L(,r�t ti/�- t �r. 'Z `"+ Y ry j Sl .r nd,.T(y . >r` , ALITToLk (� •., i �•' '1' • „. Y 'Tw }! t`l, , 11 �r it :t•.� r a. -"L .T",'C�"f aY�(= r•,,,1Jy III .1 I ' t.!: . rt~ f rrT L yt t4 <i .r ;A2 y t 1 ,yA,. y� �l�T Kx I AL a N 1/�l' a It ,I '�..+hL 4i 1r1{r rY� r .,2�ry'T r,� tj t . `I ILL - +•T rrr. T. y {..��• %A A. 7 k tf " r ,{�r IF4a} .7' }- -y ,''. p =hr, tLt L . �11r,,pyy a • f �r� Wit' ,�}.a,, TC 1� c. y.'(. F,.{ fir �' ' r Al M• ra tt'Y ,,? IN, ILLt�1 , >'�'C A,.iv.� {..4%'�''II ,fI IR. _Kvi j4i';.�•)'. 3 ?s •.1 - a M- (�rte kz�j '}r �. ids t 4 rt.1 JA '. ¢2 1�.4 tr. ,� ty ^�y]�'.r��" ' 6! `I. j�r��M % III %y r"f +t S'+ •1, yrL r:T '%+rki Y r 1 t.. 1 ,Fi• i w ��'•aa .•� 4"' ut- "t t •� '1'h,Y ♦.< wj�, ��A -yA s''aM1't �Jt �- '.:�J' i .Ja ,. I. LL I I'll. mm •1( ti 4 Y p _ y i 15 � -, �(� LR'I" �y'rje! � �° e,�� {�Q t }� T1Y �' _ rC4, r J ,'• J� (tl A V. 'G'•i LL ^ vt ^i j f.. r - �4� a Kr ny t fii. 1 k` t ' y � 12 x < "I i s '1..�. -*L I t % [ e� ygp4R�°, .. s a •�~.'` .a( -Qy!.. t a (?� r. `_ �,�;ff,.;�p .wxi" •',}Y•j1t: Lr y I ', r , tx> .��?'r IA atY . d ) I an �.4C�.a , -; =f Im, L. IV. Ly l',dto b`: rt} i'•�� iF. tt NA try aAr i 11 .gyp /� ro. .. y� r'`.�Y y (t♦ `�• qp. ♦�. C.r >Fi t. �" =,�j Xr.%4r �{ {�. • " . e :.:� [ it 1' i`, tT4 )'. ', r a �4• L + 7 ♦. J >'+! i"� `� `'- r r ' I 7` 1. �5.. K" t'tiit K kr4 :' • A,r, r 'Y+ {.T3..r tir .# d - +r_"jr. 1 ALL ' . t. • - w'► ,,^ ' �� w ,''{ r .r Z. 3 YI Y �y ; y I'l',n wl`r. `*YI a. Y •t'gy. r I -a�li � .� f ,r "V. ,,�, L� 9. avl%'• >. I.. rY kt 4A I Pr "r M1 •i . K' .. r .'.S Yom"`' ' 7':t' <I: �• •` 'Pr I-I rr+ (s� j4 S (L•4 j t r � }Si rr .i '' I >'; . µ �`t * E `l I t '4t. Y^ I Y�L 1. . 1�h a L ^ 1 t,�f h ��. ♦ ; �.. . h l" I ♦ 11 ,ted� i� r� i� tf 4trr1 L t�Fr + NI = r! T y'�I.V `.. 11'. blt/�AV•R.ry <�„ fF,Y+ 4 �,;.�{* J(r'[,. IL a R� Y �'C:. +,1 s 4' ILIL a�II , 1y. -.y .� }� .,idi��{ war' %I ILL r •_ � a ;9,i r. f 17 • -V;?• 3 G11 t`.: r � ' <-0'- 11f s rXr7 2. 4r ( � t ' f 1 Y (? it, � Y \ .r. yi irHSh��fy. ,j[> tf.rs. f .I r. il[ ?.h, it. fit': I rte»( q►}3,yr, ,. tiv ..4+;E 1 II -,t. / �+ ) k�1;.-:r�F`r�� I. `� ' (key r !ME III Nr '• •.'LI .. �, st t � r+.R +Stir• \� '�R 11 ILL, t '1M` "r)'�Il 10'"�i('sr•_t� -�4.� . " ( ILL .t,.,, .`r. �t `�•'`:•T' 4r t a .. 1' f -y `o* r(f �±.t n .s..4r [ Y -i. t, x i lt4 ��_.� • � ': �,'a * -%A t! ) _` . "�.t1 t.� ' y4' ,1t+t -j•-4- r i t''' I .1•r ".+. i It k S1 Ili I L' • T' : > L ' .T `r t;,'•"''41r' t`� :�i�.))., 1.y 4. , .. (` 1 _ .:.. `r . "il ' '1 L' ' f'r'`.''' �'s '� ..,L -.tt, t ^ a aI Ill - t ( l c:•._ .. > l l).r. t I I 'k ' -! S `Ar,h Z a V. .+` . w• 1 r [At 1. ILL .1 I r r t 1 r* 'i, i� f(7 _I' �}f.4 •' r •M 'r� .,r4( A ILL ,) ,:' 1 >•tf CI N , 7 :.1i1 t < -:L. y � '\1? /"'SIll ff�.. .. I � L, LT' 1.; . �ry ,. �rl 4illtw�i ►`r`„ LL I It 4r .•`,'r 05A ,L n1r --I, ar ',�..'. f ;it. L I.. r+iw t: .. ,' ',,�w•.- +, j�st`�ti4 ,4-a, i.L I It . IAp `lt vl �'J / i r ,} ;1:I ,r�4 ^�2 W. ''t .�.,,.,` tl.. wI t+rr i` r.<1F err Q .' Ar s`' i yyet y q) iY* i:.' i , a.. r _( ., t t Y +, .. i r . Y1' .. � Y,':"( Ili ILL I y }�t1 t S }\ yr j,' �z s + } j(y� riw5�±`G s[�Krl.( LLI ' I i � 1( 4 ". f < Z -'n b - '1 )'vwt Fes. t .(h 4 ILL_ ti�!i a�,. C('�% l(( a, �'rt.La�.. + ;t+.'. i a �Y�1 >4 ifSr I. +M r Yr4 ''.y .riSG [%F.:�1 ti.' .1tr Yf. -Sy.f: 1. I -ILL .bf SrtCl`.'t't+>- a < -v> f'� .t'' �' '.II ),.1 ?,. 4 vt it .lL I5 <�C f`'�{+r i i-.ttIt C ALI .i•,tt '`�.��i /A `F -�}.� r-,;`'},rh 1'•tfY ty >':i 1"t•( ._n.t+aTf1C Air'. r SXY k4 I Ka'1iU p'. a - (r•f•Pt n'IQ�4tf Mi rrtilt y V .L}�:,t 'Ck� )Y:.Y f'S�' X t. 4 '.>1r ♦!4. nIt41f .�� t'"'... ,>r wJ, y' :i•(�' 11f If ILL t-' a• s .'r S H V tJ +ea,(.•.., f ;I I 13. ♦: f 4. ttita'. 1,7 � . '♦. ti jM r. 1) AI rrjd r; •..,.• ti y.,[,. yy�, tµ Ai. .a4 T4 1f .,' _ 'F, ty1>y. F LI i :.t.. rl ra L `.hY A- .>?+l '` : a +,f'`••'t ._tr 3 !* y, ..I t, ? 1. w. .'l..i �'t `'.r•. {,iAL - .e ?1�.. . 'r. 4 r 1 it r. t A�� ,,,rl'i1f�' C� , ya,G -.1 •. . :4 Ir"��]C Y.I 1. t,.?.. a l;ti,: yt ';'�,:t,, , i .1 N>" `lit c,�.,`?f ,aft 1•,,v M �5 a . `h.o� �C' ttr.. Yev ar,. .'�y, vt4• •� - 11 .(jj.' J 'r. V 4 I I . y" . t t1.f ,.,-. .d -tt;' 1 ti i �aTiti'1 -fir' ,.L , y, TA tij , r `4Y' x,.,:`* ) c '� .ti .f<i .4 Y. a W nn } ��it -yt{ . . 4 y� .' d!y'Yrq IT •nn j;? Jr. t V [ Y'` + i -S.fi �F,�� ^L v"' t ) 1,y,4 ., `i '�.. rY :'1! . t - nl y.' C., Y•.. r ry['-'[l`^' •, ,r pA�'- -it, rI 37. [ �Nl- �7! 1 - 1 `< ..n ..1+`..�), r =�: +: . :Y_. A`1 :T•,S['..1 •'3 "'tt :'t' i,7. r3'. ''!rrA !�7 iI r » ' - -.0 ,-) I. '�r-t 1 ,,�,kkl�jr y�{��-ya��+s0. ,_. r,. �..Ur, ., t_ ('y "h��,>ld�t�a-�', •� Al -g+.. k_{"�.t r.. .r it a . iY', \ ,• 1 , If l2( .v L• .Y`:� lrli` 3'� ✓ialbll�A �t �.J'(`1'.*�1: t� r -� }♦ •: 1'<y .,y t,. f-l:'t t ' III t Z.. IT I OIL ,• P Q`.; #r' ,; _ I .4.Vr « a' �!'.i!1f'',ru,f},1.. '`.T -Tr7 :ti,`�°ry,'i �'t`'• str� t 44; ! ♦ -. ..y -.•;C I i. 1 yyr .. y ! # :a' ( T ` tt n,-i y � .'' � i }' 4.+ -� roc , .' � y�[[ ac a>, �a . •�t Ow OW A fl d 11 a'1S "Olt e Sm 10 dya se r - `paztme� MiL`' {�� .}lf1 � >�. � TF •�� �l^.-�_��Fr �� • a I �� �e� twit � ' �"" .. � • Y _ �c* *I,Tr!— TVNI'�>f 6°5.*e• 'TS °} f t .t `ww`�__�.��'' \ - If I fox le soft T\ L .t huts, Whe*W etotta or eLs a for days► �o ot'utn t a" " (S) tticbitt't� Kawakami suam to pw, vii ojw, �0 or_* re IateaR s (s) lio aft Ku ftnura on Bu And tranw cil� _. sub without It W4 the CO (s) Masao i5utakn i a teti safyce expense buds and Member capi k rogz*n based on the reve�nuea sa ts) C�ir� e�fenning tict during said period. Until the Adopp-r em"lyez tioi'of suck porary current expense bts� mstk and 146ihdr' nmaram the *rfarinQ 1 (s) Toshio Kabutan Sectim 0 *09. Pendb Probnedin All vv- County Attorw 4 beforep any .. �P1al � board on of Vbtisird 4W (a) Joao W YAm o . fir J T•��TY�A 'i'rT jj!���: rw''?41I��"taae ��eQy'�yJ. ♦ J _ ' I _y y Section 24.01. Initiation and substance of Amendments. Any amendment to this charter is limited in substance to amending the form or structure of county government. It is not a vehicle through which to adopt local legislation. Amendments to this charter may be initiated only in the following manner. A. By resolution of the county 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] filed with the council, signed by registered voters comprising not less than [five] XX 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] suggested by the county attorney. (Amended 2012) Upon filing of such petition with the council, the county clerk shall seek a timely county attorney opinion on whether the measure is a charter amendment as defined in 24.01 above. If the county attorney concludes the measure is properly called a charter amendment, the clerk shall then examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters. (Amended 2012) If the county attorney concludes the measure is not appropriately called a charter amendment, the county clerk shall so notify the proponents, and the clerk shall not undertake signature validation. The county council shall take no action to prevent a petition - initiated proposed charter amendment comports with the definition in 24.01 from beinq placed on the ballot. Section 24.02. Elections to be Called. A. Any resolution of the council or valid 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 and the entire text published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai at least thirty (30) days prior to submission of the proposed amendments to the voters of the county at the next general election. (Amended 2014) 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. Summaries of any charter amendment shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county and the entire text published by electronic -or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai within thirty (30) days of the effective date of such amendment. (Amended 2014) 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 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 summaries of any such amendments or new charter not less than thirty (30) days before any election at least once in a newspaper of general circulation within the county and the entire text of the amendments or new charter by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai. (Amended 2014) 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. Summaries of any new charter or amendment shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the county, and the entire text published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the County of Kauai not more than thirty (30) days after its adoption. (Amended 2014) Ballot Question: Shall it be clarified what constitutes a charter amendment and shall the processing of proposed petition charter amendments also be clarified? 031215 Parachini