The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016_0822_AgendaPacketAllan Parachini Members: Chair Merilee (Mia) Ako Michael Perel Patrick Stack Ed Justus Cheryl Stiglmeier Vice Chair Russell Wong COUNTY OF KAUA'I CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA Monday, August 22, 2016 3:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Mo'ikeha Building, Moikeha Room 2 A/B 4444 Rice Street, Lihu'e, HI 96766 CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF MINUTES Regular Open Session Minutes of July 25, 2016 COMMUNICATION CRC 2016-16 Memorandum dated 8/22/16 from Allan Parachini, Chair, to Jade Tanigawa, County Clerk, transmitting the County of Kaua'i Charter Amendment Ballot Questions for the 2016 General Election BUSINESS CRC 2016-10 Final review of Voter Education explaining the County Charter Amendments Proposed in the 2016 General Election (Ongoing) CRC 2016-14 Update on outreach for public education to include distribution points and media outlets (Ongoing) ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting: Monday, September 26, 2016, Time to be detennined, in the Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room location 2 A/B. ADJOURNMENT 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 Adam Roversi An Equal Opportunity Employer 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: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 — August 22, 2016 2 1 P a g c COUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION Board/Committee: I CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date July 25, 2016 Location Mo'ikeha Building, Liquor Conference Room 3 Start of Meeting: 3:02 pm I End of Meeting: 4:49 pm Present Chair Allan Parachini; Vice Chair Ed Justus. Members: Merilee (Mia) Ako; Michael Perel; Patrick Stack; Cheryl Stiglmeier; Russell Wong. Also: Deputy County Attorney Adam Roversi; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Support Clerks Barbara Davis and Darcie Agaran; Administrator Jay Furfaro Excused Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair Parachini called the meeting to order at 3:02 pm with 7 Commissioners present Approval of Executive Session Minutes of June 27, 2016 Mr. Stack moved to approve the minutes as Minutes circulated. Mr. Wong seconded the motion. Motion carried 6:1 (nay -Justus) Regular Open Session Minutes of June 27, 2015 Mr. Wong moved to approve the minutes as "precedence" circulated. Ms. Stiglmeier seconded the motion. Chair Parachini noted on page 7, line 20, that the word should be "precedents". Chair Parachini said on that same page 7`" line from the top something did not read right to him although he thought he remembered 6� Ms. Yukimura phrasing "to the town as a whole", which one would think it ought to be "county". Mr. Justus stated that she did say town. Motion carried 7:0 as amended during the _ discussion. Business CRC 2016-10 Review and discussion of Voter Education explaining the County Charter Amendments Proposed in the 2016 General Election (On- going) V) Mr. Justus asked if they had the ability to amend what was presented to Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION them. Staff said that is what they are there for but the ballot questions have already been voted on and approved by the body. Mr. Justus noted that Ballot Question 6 Purpose authorizes the County Clerk to determine whether a proposed charter amendment is valid but there is nothing that states if he or she finds it invalid that he or she is required to seek a declaratory ruling. It implies that the county clerk is the ultimate authority in that matter and that is not the way the amendment is written. The Chair asked if Mr. Justus wanted to add language further explaining that the "Explanation" and "Purpose" language shown is new (material) but written from stuff previously approved by the body. Mr. Justus suggested adding a comma after valid (at the end of the sentence) and adding "if the county clerk finds a proposed charter amendment is invalid the county clerk is required to seek a declaratory ruling". Ms. Ako asked for a recess to find what the Commission approved and use that as a starting point. Chair Parachini called a recess at 3:09 p.m. Meeting was called back to order at 3:12 p.m. Mr. Wong stated that the Purpose is defined that way, however, the amendment clearly states that the county clerk does not have the complete authority so it will go by the amended charter — not by the Purpose. Chair Parachini agreed that the wording of the amendment was what matters. Mr. Wong said this is to give him, as a voter, an idea of what is being proposed and then he can get the specifics and more detail by doing his research. Chair Parachini's recollection was that there is a copy of the actual language Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION in every polling place. Mr. Wong asked if the concern was that if they left the "Purpose" as is that people would read it and assume the county clerk has full authority to deny a charter amendment and therefore vote against it. Chair Parachini said he did not want to put words in Commissioner Justus .......... Mr. Justus said that was correct because even the way the ballot question is worded it actually implies that the county clerk has the sole authority to say this is valid or invalid and that is not what the charter amendment states. The charter amendment reads that the county clerk is given the ability to determine whether it is a valid charter amendment and if he finds it to be invalid he is required to seek a declaratory ruling from the courts. The ballot question does not state that — it is misleading. It misleads that the county clerk has the power to reject charter amendments and that can be a problem because there are many people who will not want the county clerk, who is not elected but appointed, to have the power to reject a voter petition that thousands of people have worked on. Mr. Wong said it sounded like the intent to provide a means to continue a voter petition getting a charter amendment but to minimize the impact on local legislation and that is why ............ Chair Parachini said the purpose was to define a charter amendment, which had not been previously defined, and then to better layout a process by which a proposed initiative charter amendment gets on the ballot. Mr. Wong was concerned that the more legalese they get into on a ballot the less he is inclined — he likes what has been attempted to explain a very complex issue in a way they can try to get people interested in it and make a decision on it. He did not know if they would ever be able to identify everything that is going on in a charter amendment, but this would give us enough information to make a decision on whether he wanted to approve this or at least make him interested enough to find out more details. Mr. Furfaro said there was dialogue about the county clerk and to remind Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION the Commissioners the clerk and the deputy are reappointed each election with the new Council. Mr. Justus said it was important that if they are going to present a charter amendment they better actually present what they proposed because otherwise they are asking for it to be defeated for a reason that it is not. We did not give the county clerk the ability to determine whether it is a valid charter amendment — we gave theirs the ability to say yes it is valid and we will put it on the ballot or no and we will have the courts decide. That has to be absolutely clear. The whole purpose of why Mr. Justus presented this charter amendment in the first place was to remove the Council out of the petition process — that is how this whole thing got started. Chair Parachini explained that this proposal arose out of the Kauai Rising so called pesticide charter amendment to which Mr. Justus further provided history on the amendment. Chair Parachini said looking at the actual language that they approved the phrase that Commissioner Justus refers to is there — "the county clerk is required to seek a declaratory ruling" and thought Commissioner Justus had a point. Mr. Wong said his concern with a declaratory ruling is the more legalese we get into the more the ordinary voter gets concerned and he suggested they keep it more general. If the concern is the county clerk is to determine whether a proposed charter amendment is valid maybe it can be something to the effect that the purpose of this amendment is to authorize the county clerk to review the proposed amendment for validity; it doesn't say what the county clerk has to do but the charter amendment will say the county clerk has to get some sort of judgement or declaration or opinion from the courts. Mr. Wong's concern is if you give that kind of language to a voter he would be confused and he would have to get an attorney to tell him what the charter amendment is trying to do. Mr. Wong's Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION recommendation would be — and he hears Mr. Justus' concern - that they do not want to imply that the county clerk determines it is valid but state it somehow that the clerk's job is to review if it is valid, and by assumption if it is not valid they will........ Mr. Justus said it would be nice to have a more simple way to say it but he does not know what that is yet. Mr. Perel said the assumption is that the county clerk has the expertise to judge the validity of the proposed charter amendment and not just to technical form but to the actual wording on whether it fits into the charter. Chair Parachini said that is true as far as it goes. Part of the discussion that was had was that the county clerk can call upon the county attorney for legal advice and presumably would do so if he or she felt that was necessary. It goes without saying that the clerk is not without the ability to get an informed legal opinion. Mr. Perel say that brings up a concern he has had and what happens when the opinion of the presenters of the amendment is at odds with the opinion of the county clerk or the administration. Mr. Furfaro said they should then get legal representation which the group two years ago did not get separate legal representation. Mr. Justus said to answer Mr. Perel's concern that is exactly the reason why they did not define in this charter amendment any county entity to have the ability to reject a voter petition — they would have to go to the courts for the courts to determine that. That is already existing case law — if there is a question it gets sent to the courts to decide. Mr. Wong said he, as the county clerk, would be required to follow whatever charter amendment is in front of him so they couldn't decide on their own if something is not a valid charter amendment. They would have to get some sort of declaration from someone that says this is the way it is so if we can phrase it in a manner that doesn't appear to give the county clerk full authority to reject a charter Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION amendment - that would be his preference. But he does not want to have language that says you need to get a declaratory judgement. Attorney Roversi said whatever they approve today will be going to his office for review and feedback and asked if he could make a suggestion that might satisfy both parties. If it read: The purpose of this amendment is to authorize the County Clerk, subject to court approval, to determine whether a proposed charter amendment is valid. Then you have inserted the authority of the court without using unnecessary legalese language about declaratory judgements that the public might not understand. Mr. Justus asked if they were able to amend the Ballot Question to which Chair Parachini said they approved it already. Mr. Justus asked if they could reapprove it — they set their own rules actually; they have the authority. Mr. Furfaro stated they have verbiage from the County Attorney and to have discussion on it they need a motion. Mr. Justus moved to amend the Purpose section to reflect the language used by the County Attorney. Mr. Perel seconded the motion. Chair Parachini pointed out in the next sentence of the Purpose It also seeks to limit a charter amendment which he felt was not quite correct. It does limit a charter amendment to addressing the form and structure of county government — it doesn't try to do that, it does do that. Attorney Roversi said for the clarity of the discussion there should be some action on that motion before they move on to separate items so it is not confusing. Chair Parachini called for the vote. Motion carried 7:0 Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair Parachini asked if anyone cared about the issue "seeking to limit' as opposed to "limiting". Mr. Justus thought "limit' was not the right word and should say "It also defines" to which Staff said the language used seems familiar and must have been included in the language provided to Ms. Blane. Chair Parachini said the actual language is a further argument for why "seeks to" is inappropriate since it does. Any amendment to this charter is limited in substance to amending the fonn and structure of county government. That does not seem like seeking to do that; it sounds like doing it. Mr. Wong said the way he read it was by recommending the amendment it is seeking to limit the ....... it is saying if they pass it that is the point of seeking to limit it. Chair Parachini laughingly withdrew his comment. Mr. Justus again asked if it was possible to amend the Ballot Question. It was pointed out that Ballot Questions were voted upon and approved. The duty at hand is the educational language. Mr. Wong said if there is a substance issue they should address it but if it is just grammatical they need to move forward. Mr. Justus felt it was substantive and thought the question should include the language the Attorney proposed for the Purpose. Attorney Roversi said they did vote on it but if the entire body wishes to make a minor change in language that does not require this to go through multiple layers of re -review then it should not be a problem to amend a question that was previously approved if the board so votes. Mr. Justus moved to amend Ballot Question 6 so it reads "Shall it be specified what constitutes a charter amendment, and shall the processing of a proposed charter amendment via voter petition be revised to enable the county clerk, subject to court approval, to determine whether the proposal is a valid charter amendment? " Mr. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Perel seconded the motion. Mr. Stack said they need to act more in a vacuum. They have an obligation to make necessary and desirable changes. Is this minor grammatical glitch necessary and or desirable? We need to make up our own mind without worrying whether the courts are going to overturn this. We create a document and push it down the line; if someone wants to challenge it, so be it. We make what we believe to be necessary and desirable changes. Chair Parachini thought what Commissioner Justus is driving at is this is the document by which voters will make a decision on how to vote on the proposed charter amendment. Mr. Justus said the clearer we can make it to them the better job we are doing. Chair Parachini called for the vote. Roll Call Vote: Nay-Ako; Aye -Justus; Aye- Perel; Nay -Stack; Nay-Stiglmeier; Nay -Wong; Aye-Parachini. Motion failed 3:4 As a clarifying point, Ms. Davis stated "comma () subject to court approval comma (,)" would not be inserted into the Ballot Question but it would be inserted into the Purpose to which it was noted that was what was approved. Ballot Question 7, Chair Parachini said "on -going" is one word and not hyphenated. Chair Parachini called for a motion to approve the public education materials as amended. Mr. Perel so moved. Ms. Stiglmeier seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 CRC 2016-14 Discussion of outreach for public education to include distribution points and media outlets (On -going) Chair Parachini asked Mr. Furfaro for an update on the calls and contacts he was going to make. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Furfaro said in a brief discussion with Ho`ike they are more than willing to put something on for us as we structure it, but they will seek some time restrictions for the particular piece. Mr. Furfaro confirmed that the Mayor's show no longer appears on Ho`ike. Mr. Furfaro said it would be a matter of calling in to Ho`ike to reserve some time and said he was not sure how the Commission feels as to who would make the presentation suggesting someone from the Commission or perhaps the League of Women Voters. Mr. Furfaro also has the publication and print pricing for the For Kaua `i magazine and it would be a run that would be printed for the entire month. They would be willing to make some extra distribution copies that can be put in the neighborhood centers and so forth. Chair Parachini asked in terms of what we would pay them would they consider a teaser line on the cover saying proposed charter amendment details inside or something like that. Mr. Furfaro thought Barbara (Bennett) would be very open to that; she has always worked very well with us in the past. And we have already talked about the County website. Chair Parachini asked if anyone had a stroke of genius about the conundrum of how the miscellaneous change section (gender neutrality, punctuation, etc.) and how to make heads or tails out of that with all the details. There was a conversation of offering examples of some of the changes, but would we be set up to be accused of cherry -picking. Ms. Stiglmeier asked what if we present them with examples of the first two or three pages and say for the full compilation of the proposed changes please refer to the County website. Chair Parachini offered that an example of these changes are the ones on pages one, two and three. Ms. Davis said that was how it was presented in their packet two or three meetings ago, which brought up the nit-picking question. Ms. Stiglmeier said we would not be nit-picking because we would not be pulling from random pages but just showing the Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION first two or three pages of the changes. Chair Parachini said as long as it was made clear he thought that would fly. Ms. Davis said (the grammatical changes) would appear in their entirety on the website. Chair Parachini asked Mr. Furfaro if he had a sense of how much copy they could accommodate. Mr. Furfaro said he measures that by knowing how much there is for the budget which will determine how much copy they can get. Obviously an earlier discussion they had was public libraries, the whole contents on the web, maybe one or two examples of where people are referenced to but that newspaper does not put out 64 pages unless it is for a five month period. Chair Parachini asked if it was his impression that we have a full page of the publication to which Mr. Furfaro said yes. Mr. Furfaro's impression in talking with Ms. Bennett was they have both a left and a right page. Mr. Wong suggested they could show an example of changes by noting on the first page there were X number of commas added, X number of capitalizations made, X number of gender neutral changes which are reflected throughout the document. The real issue will be if someone says a comma modified the intent of the document. Chair Parachini said this would go to an editorial decision that the publication would have to make and called for a motion to approve the plan that Mr. Furfaro outlined subject to discussing the actual presentation format. Mr. Wong moved that they direct Mr. Furfaro and Chair Parachini to discuss this with the editor of For Kauai publication and come to an agreement. Ms. Stiglmeier seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 Mr. Justus noted that the email address listed for West Kauai Business & Professional Association is outdated and the president of that association is Eric Nordmeier. With Ho`ike Mr. Justus also thought it should be the responsibility of the Chair to explain the Charter Commission's position Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 11 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION rather than the Chair and the Vice Chair. Mr. Furfaro noted that the League of Women Voters was one option put on the table as people recognize them for their ability to facilitate the middle of the line many times. Chair Parachini said this should be subject to the conversation with J Roberts (sic); maybe it could be a collaboration between the Commission and the League of Women Voters. It was asked if the League of Women Voters was an advocacy group to which the response was no — they are totally neutral. CRC 2016-15 Proposed amendment submitted by Commissioner Perel establishing a 5/2 Council districting_ proposal for the 2018 ballot Chair Parachini made note that there are five scheduled meetings left before the Commission goes out of existence. This issue has been beaten to death but Commissioner Perel has valid reasons to reexamine it. If they are going to consider anything on this issue for 2018 they had better get moving and get through it or decide they are not going there. Mr. Perel asked the County Attorney that if the Commission ceases to exist at the end of its current term and we pass this to go on the ballot who would then be in a position to defend it going into 2018? Attorney Roversi said presuming they went through all of the steps required to put on a ballot initiative and came up with an approved question, the educational language and everything was approved it would presumably fall to the Boards and Commissions in 2018 to follow through on doing the educational material. There would be no other entity in place as long as the Charter Review Commission is not made into an ongoing entity. Chair Parachini called for a motion (to enable discussion). Mr. Perel moved to accept this amendment as Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 12 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION written. Mr. Justus seconded the motion. Mr. Perel said another question would be if there is a new Charter Commission appointed after this one comes to its end would that new Commission have the ability to modify or withdraw this from the 2018 ballot? Attorney Roversi said he would have to do some research but his off the cuff response would be yes — they are then the official Charter Review Commission and if they wanted to reconsider previously approved things that have not already gone to the voters that would be in the scope of their authority. Mr. Perel said then this entire discussion becomes basically a moot point because if the Commission is not reconstituted then they fall upon Boards and Commissions to validate and support it going forward, and if there is a new Commission appointed they may not be in favor of this so it jeopardizes the ability to get this on the ballot. Mr. Perel thinks this is something worthwhile and this type of representation is good for the County. There is nothing like having your representative living next door to you and in reading through Councilmember Yukimura's letter he finds that many of her arguments fly in the face of how the democratic system works — a give and take between members, and the assumption of having horse - trading going on is to the detriment of the County because that assumes the Council is not in a position to make prudent decisions going forward. Mr. Perel's personal opinion is that this is important enough to be on the ballot and to allow the voters to make a decision as to whether they want a constituted board to have a representative that is close by and accessible with 2 at -large members available. Councilmember Yukimura's argument is we have 7 now that will come and hear it. But Mr. Perel said there are none that are guaranteed to be vested in it whereas if it is a person from your Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 13 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION community or district you have a whole different relationship. Mr. Perel said it was worthwhile and valid for this Commission to put something of this nature on the ballot. Chair Parachini said what Mr. Perel was saying irrespective of the potential risk of anything they vote on being nullified by subsequent .......it is worth it? Mr. Perel said yes, it is worth making a statement that we think it is important enough as a first step in revising how government responds to the public. Chair Parachini questioned that they would have to take public testimony and notice this again. Mr. Furfaro said they would have to do all of that and those serving in their second term, should there be a new Commission, would not be reappointed but those that are in the first term could possibly be reappointed to the new Commission if it passes. Mr. Perel noted that Mr. Furfaro had been quite helpful to him in explaining process and in guiding him through this morass. Asked his thoughts on districting and this particular proposal Mr. Wong said there are so many issues on both sides of this — the size of the island, the needs of the island — it is definitely an issue that should be discussed but it did appear that a lot of discussion had occurred prior. His concern with districting is you get more representation of individual communities, but because the voter turnout is so low you have people who can become etected with a couple hundred votes. Is it truly best for an island that you don't have unlimited financial capacity but you have to look at the island as an island. Is it big enough and is there enough revenue collection to support multiple points of view. Mr. Wong said he is all for going through the process but the concern is do they have enough time to get all the input they need. Mr. Wong said not only has the Charter Commission gone Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 14 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION through this but he thinks the Council has also tried to go through this same kind of a scenario so it is a challenge. If they were able to get through everything in their final five meetings and the Charter Review Commission is not approved to be an ongoing Commission he assumes it would then be on the (2018) ballot. If the Charter Commission does go on he would assume there would have to be an affirmative decision to remove this from the 2018 ballot if it gets that far. Mr. Wong said having read some on this and seeing the pros and cons he is not sure the Commission can get that far in five meetings. Chair Parachini said his understanding is if the Commission votes something on to the 2018 ballot while we are still alive it is on the 2018 ballot whether we are around or not unless someone removes it. If there is no Charter Review Commission after January 1, 2017, does anyone have the power to remove this from the 2018 ballot? Attorney Roversi said he did not believe so. He believes that the Office of Boards and Commissions, as the administrative support for this current Charter Commission, would be obligated to follow through on the decision of the Commission. Mr. Stack said if in fact we are sunsetted the whole notion we are talking about (inaudible). There is no one to support it, to defend it, promote it — it is gone. It would be a very, very sad day in this County if we do not approve this Commission going forward. Mr. Wong said they have already recommended it — it is up to the voters now. Mr. Stack said he knows they should not make this personal but this is a very personal issue for everybody who votes for or against it. Chair Parachini explained there was a committee consisting of himself, Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 15 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Commissioner Stack and Commissioner Ako that conducted a Survey Monkey poll, met several times and formulated a version of the 5/2 amendment which was subsequently revised into the form it now is. There was a report of the committee that might be useful for Mr. Wong and Mr. Perel which Staff was asked to forward a copy to them. Mr. Justus said he could summarize what the poll said. Basically it said 27% of the island wants the County Council the way it is. About 70% said they wanted some form of districting whether it was 7 districts, 5 districts or 3 districts. The largest percentage of those district selections was for 5 districts 2 at -large. Mr. Furfaro thought he should hold that thought until they get the report back. Chair Parachini thought Mr. Justus was right in that 5/2 was, by a nose. Mr. Furfaro apologized saying the State districts was the one that got the least. Chair Parachini said the numbers (from the survey) are in the report from the committee. Ms. Ako said if they go back over previous charter ballot questions, districting has failed. If you look at the results (of the Survey Monkey) it is very similar to what has happened in the past. Our island, if you just look at numbers individually — don't lump the districting together — this island is confused but most of the confusion says we would like to keep it as is, which is 7. Ms. Ako said there were public hearings and there were not a whole bunch of people coming but those that did were of the sentiment that the island was not big enough. We went through the vote and it did not pass and it was brought up again because now we have new commissioners. We can go through this discussion and throw it again to the voters, but the question is how many times are we going to beat this horse? Mr. Justus wanted to make a point clear saying it was a bit of a misnomer to say the Commission voted against the charter amendment for districting. If Joel Guy had been here and not had an emergency ............ Ms. Ako said it Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 16 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION was voted down. Mr. Justus said it was voted down 3:3 and Joel Guy was in support of that amendment and he would have voted yes and it would have been on the 2016 ballot. In reality if we would have had a full board it would have been on the ballot, so a majority of the board did support it. Ms. Ako said going back to the statement she just made you can see how we split this island - even in this small Commission we are not in agreement. Mr. Perel said he could see no reason why they would not put a proposal such as this on the ballot for the voters to decide. The distribution of votes for districting to be done as proposed by a commission or committee there is enough data available to come up with a proper distribution of districts. The tool of democracy to put this on the ballot, one shows an intent to address an issue that he has been hearing for the 21 years he has been living on island. Mr. Perel said he does not accept the definition that we are too small to do it, and is not a valid reason not to propose this and move it forward. Mr. Stack said his position has never changed; he is in favor of districting and the population is more than ample to justify it. Necessary and desirable is tattooed in his brain and he thinks districting is necessary at this time and it is certainly desirable. Ms. Stiglmeier said if we are looking at our different populations the individuals she has talked with can't tell her what they think would be ideal as far as how they would break up the different districts. The individuals that were in agreement asked where do they draw that line for the North Shore — would the folks on the North Shore be okay with including parts of Anahola? Would Po`ipu be okay with being lumped in with the West Side? She has never gotten anything that is really definitive or what anyone thought would be ideal for our island. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 17 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair Parachini said the problem that is posed by just how this would have to be done was misconstrued by Councilmember Yukimura. It is to the issue if we put something on the ballot people would want to know what the district lines are, but we can't tell them that until it passes and an apportionment commission can draw district lines based on one person, one vote. A lot of the voters think communities would be identified in these districts — uh-uh — that is not how it would work. It would be a one person, one vote system. Mr. Furfaro said when they did the survey, part of the question was with the reapportionment. Could we use the current boundaries that are set by the State, and that was the confusion, on the 4/3 versus 5/2? If 5/2 passes obviously you would have to do the allocation of residents by the geographic sites. Some of those that responded said they wanted a Hanalei district — a Kekaha district. On the flip side one of the things we didn't survey is the Maui model that lets everybody in the County vote; what determines what district you can run for is where your residence is. Reappointment would require definitely the geographic boundaries of the population. Another option was everybody voting in the County regardless of where they lived. Mr. Justus pointed out that the Maui model is not without its flaws. Mr. Furfaro said he was not there to defend it; he is just very familiar with it. Mr. Justus said he did not know if any of the other Commissioners were aware of its flaws and it would be wise for him to point them out because it could be easily construed that it is a good compromise to have both at -large and district requirements. Mr. Justus went on to explain the instances on both Molokai and Lanai where the popular vote in that district was not the popular vote from the rest of Maui. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 18 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Wong said the duty of our appointment to this Commission is we should be open to whatever is presented to us and then make a decision after we hear the information. What concerns him is where they go in with an objective because that is where we believe it should be. If we go forward with this and hear from people, do our due diligence and listen to both sides with an open mind - then make a decision once we hear it all. He wanted to make sure that is how everybody is looking at this. Mr. Wong questioned whether they have time for this without having to rehash what the Commission has already gone through, but he would like to hear the issues on both sides and then make a decision. Mr. Justus said the easiest way for Mr. Wong to do that is between this meeting and the next is to review the Charter meetings from 2011 to today. Mr. Justus stated he was on the first Permitted Interaction Group and they discussed the various ways of doing districting either 3 districts, 5 districts, council regional committee or neighborhood boards instead of districts. We settled on districts. Mr. Stack was on another committee a couple of years later that discussed this issue and took it to the public so we have had a lot of vigorous discussion on this. The information is there on the County website. Chair Parachini said there was an excellent summary, he believed prepared by Mr. Furfaro, reviewing what was on the ballot and it has been on the ballot 3 times. It was like a spreadsheet that described what was on the ballot and what the outcome was. The margins of defeat were less each time. Mr. Furfaro cautioned the Commission that the Office of Boards and Commissions is subject to a preliminary election on August 13 and there are Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 19 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION duties that come with that in the office along with an attrition of staff. Staffing the various boards and commission monthly meetings make it difficult with going out to staff community meetings or do any kind of research. That is why we relied on the Survey Monkey and he was really surprised by the number of responses received. Mr. Perel said the trepidation he thinks he hears is on the mechanics of how to create the districts and he did not think this was a valid reason not to bring this forward. That mechanism, once put in place, would be subject to public input and becomes a straight forward, if you are going to do a one man, one vote, of where you are going to draw the lines. You still have your one representative and 2 at -large and if the County wants to get anything done they will get together as a group. The representation of democracy will work so he did not know if it was a valid reason not to put this forward that they are worried about the mechanics of how the districts will be created. That becomes a secondary issue towards feeling this is important enough to bring it forward. Chair Parachini said if it was 5 districts elected at -large that takes the apportionment off the table and it is what it is. Chair Parachini said personally he would vote against that every time it comes up to vote for district representatives at -large. Mr. Perel said the prime example is in the State of Hawaii there is a central Board of Education who is basically inaccessible. If there were a local Board of Education and every month the meeting was in one of the 5 districts the parent turnout would shock you. If you want to bring democracy close to home and get greater input from the public this is the number one mechanism to do it - that is how important it is. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 20 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Mr. Justus queried where the Commissioners live and then said generally for the most part the majority of the Council makeup is typically L-ihu`e/Kapa`a residents. For us on the outskirts we seem to understand the need and the desire for district representation. If you break up the 2006 vote in the 5 districts, all the outlying communities voted to approve it. Mr. Perel explained the need for housing development in Waimea ten years ago and the project did not go forward because there was no water and the reasoning given was the water was controlled by Lihu`e. This is a small island and it shouldn't happen like that. Mr. Furfaro said bringing it back to what is on the agenda, is the Chair encouraging a vote to see if the group continues with this for the last 5 months. Mr. Justus called for the vote. Chair Parachini said they are voting on Commissioner Perel's motion to put this particular districting plan on the 2018 ballot. Ms. Ako did not think that was the question — it was whether we move forward. Chair Parachini said the motion was to put it on the 2018 ballot so this would have to be deferred or continued because we can't take the action that the motion requires. We would have to notice it publically. Mr. Justus said it is publically noticed and he read the agenda item and according to their rules they can just vote on it and get a County Attorney opinion back and then do a final vote. Ms. Ako said every proposal has to go through 3 hearings and this is the first one. The second hearing is for public and the third reading is for vote. We cannot put everything together today and vote. Mr. Justus said it says twice in the rules; Council is three times. Attorney Roversi said Rule 2 b requires that matters of substance be Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 21 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION considered and approved at two public meetings. After those two publically noticed meetings at which a matter like this is approved by a vote of the board it would then go through the process you have just been through where it gets referred to the County Attorney for an initial review. It comes back to you for any changes you make and another public hearing then you have to develop the ballot question and the findings and purpose for review and approval. Chair Parachini asked what should be decided today. Mr. Justus said to be clear it says two publically noticed meetings — not two public hearings. Mr. Justus said they can approve it because this is a publically noticed meeting and it then goes back to next meeting which is a publically noticed meeting. We approve it after reviewing the County Attorney's opinion and then it can go on the ballot. Attorney Roversi said his understanding is after their second public meeting it would then go to the County Attorney's Office for approval. Attorney Roversi said he was giving off-the-cuff answers without having been able to review everything. The idea being they would ask the County Attorney for review after their second meeting on the assumption that perhaps changes could be made at that second meeting. You would not ask for County Attorney review after the first meeting with the possibility that amendments or changes are made at the second meeting. It is after that second required meeting that the motion is effectively a done deal and would then be passed to the County Attorney's Office. Chair Parachini said Commissioner Perel's motion was to approve this and put it on the 2018 ballot and asked if Commissioner Perel would be well advised to withdraw that motion and rephrase it. Attorney Roversi believed erha s the correct language would be approve and refer for a second public Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 22 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION meeting. Mr. Justus said in the six years he has been on this Commission we have never had to do two meetings. In fact he can recall several meetings where there has been an item proposed, they approved it for the ballot and the next meeting was when we got the County Attorney's opinion back and then we voted on it to put it on the ballot. By what the Attorney is describing is we have actually committed errors in our rules. Attorney Roversi said he wanted to qualify what he is offering to them is typically the County Attorney will acknowledge their question and get back to them. He is trying now to provide them with information with just a quick review of the rules. If the Commission would like to extend the Attorney fifteen minutes to read through the rules he could speak to their point of exactly when does this need to go to the County Attorney's Office for review. Mr. Furfaro stated that as the County Attorney pointed out there will be at least another meeting as such if the motion is changed and then there will be a time when they get back to us with the particular details. Then there will be questions about how substantive is the definition of what districts there are. Quite frankly we will then be in October or November. Chair Parachini said the Commission would still be alive and kicking. Mr. Wong said something of this magnitude he would definitely want to have public testimony before he would make a decision. Chair Parachini asked if Mr. Wong was not prepared to vote on this today. Mr. Wong said we can vote on it today but his concern is if they vote to move it today and the public comes in at the next meeting to let us know how they feel are we kidding ourselves with the time we have and can we do everything we need to get done before we sunset. Mr. Perel said it seemed important enough to him to start a process, even with the short time left, because it makes a statement we were concerned enough to make a proposal to make a dramatic change in the way Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 23 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION governance is handled in the island. Mr. Perel requested assistance in changing his motion so this can be moved forward to the next step if the board sees fit. A recess was called at 4:36 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 4:40 p.m. Attorney Roversi summarized his understanding of the rules. Rule 2 b provides a generalized requirement that matters of substance be approved at two public meetings. As an example this could be the first public meeting that this matter of substance is considered and approved at. Rule 4 sets out the step by step process of approving something for amendment and Mr. Justus is correct in that there is no requirement that it go through both meetings before being referred to the County Attorney. 4 a regards the introduction and initial approval of an amendment. 4 b specifies that upon the initial adoption it goes to the County Attorney's Office for comment and review as to legality. Back to the practical application if you approve this today it could then be referred to the Attorney's Office for review which would be available at the next meeting which would stand as the second public meeting under 2 b that would be required to approve it and then go on to the next steps of developing the educational materials, approval of the findings and purpose, the ballot question, etc. One slight caveat is that — and it is because these rules are somewhat vague so they are open to interpretation — so if a matter of substance is approved at a first meeting then you receive your attorney opinion and significant changes are made to the matter such as it is not really the same thing as was approved previously then arguably you are still going to have to have an additional two meetings that the public can come and comment on. If insignificant or insubstantive changes were made then you would probably still be satisfying the two meeting requirement — you would not need to start the clock over again. It Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 24 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION would depend on what occurred at the second meeting as to whether that satisfies the second meeting requirement or if the motion is substantively changed you might have to have a third meeting to satisfy rule 2 b. Mr. Justus said in theory if we voted to approve this and get majority approval at this meeting and at the next meeting we get the County Attorney's opinion back and nothing changes in that language and we approve it we are good to go forward with developing educational material. Attorney Roversi said that is his understanding. Mr. Perel said why not (inaudible) the public to speak to this and in the past if there have been amendments that made the ballot that were not a unanimous approval of the board was that stated or was that position of the pros and cons listed anywhere or was the result of the vote put down — what is the process. Mr. Justus did not think they said either; it just says the Commission approved. Mr. Perel said this is a critical enough issue that if nothing else it shows the intent of the Commission to try to make a substantive change in governance. Chair Parachini thought Commissioner Justus' recollection about the vote they took on this to which former Commissioner Guy was unable to attend was correct and that Commissioner Guy would have voted in favor of what was on the table. Personally Chair Parachini said he had some real reluctance about putting something of this import on the ballot by a 4:3 vote. We should be able to come to more of a consensus than that. Mr. Furfaro said they did have a 3:3 vote but they had the opportunity to have a vote to reconsider the vote and do it at the next meeting. If we are making a point about someone not being in attendance there is a way to modify that. Mr. Justus pointed out that meeting was Joel Guy's last Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 25 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION meeting — he would have had no way to reconsider a vote in the April meeting. Mr. Furfaro said Mr. Guy could have asked for a special meeting because of his attendance and the Chair could have considered calling a special meeting before his actual date of termination. Asked if Mr. Guy was made aware of that Mr. Furfaro thought Mr. Guy probably knew the rules well enough that it could have been done as well as the rest of you. Mr. Justus said that is the first time they have ever been told that any of them can request that. Mr. Furfaro said he has covered this in his trainings. Mr. Perel withdrew his original motion. Mr. Justus said he was hesitant to withdraw his second because he would really like to find out what the reasoning is. Mr. Perel said he would like to propose to follow the description of process that the County Attorney gave us to move it on to the next meeting and asked if there was something he had to do to move this into meeting number two or does he leave it stand as is because it is proposed to put it on the ballot. Mr. Justus said what he described is we can approve this here, this is our first public noticed meeting. If that gets approved here we then go to our next meeting with the County Attorney opinion and once we approve that it goes on to the ballot. Attorney Roversi said in light of his summary a few moments ago the only thing to possibly add to the motion is to approve and refer to the County Attorney. Mr. Perel moved to approve (the proposed amendment) and refer it to the County Attorney. Mr. Justus seconded the amended motion. Mr. Justus called for the vote. Chair Parachini stated that the motion is to approve the districting plan and refer it to the County Attorney for review. Roll Call Vote: Nay-Ako; Aye -Justus; Aye-Perel; Aye -Stack; Nay-Stiglmeier; Nay -Wong; Nay- Parachini. Motion failed 3:4 Announcements Next Meeting: Monday, August 22, 2016 — 3:00 p.m. Charter Review Commission Open Session July 25, 2016 Page 26 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Adjournment Mr. Justus moved to adjourn the meeting at 4:49 p.m. Mr. Wong seconded the motion. Motion carried 7:0 Submitted by: Barbara Davis, Support Clerk () Approved as circulated. () Approved with amendments. See minutes of Reviewed and Approved by: meeting. Allan Parachini, Chair Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr. Mayor Wallace G. Rezentes, Jr. Managing Director Jay Furfaro Administrator Allan Parachini, Chair Ed Justus, Vice -Chair Merilee (Mia) Ako Michael Perel Patrick Stack Cheryl Stiglmeier Russell Wong COUNTY OF KAUA'I CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION C/o Office of Boards and Commissions 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150, Lihu`e, HI 96766 MEMORANDUM TO: Jade K. Fountain-Tanigawa, County Clerk CC: Honorable Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr., Mayor Wallace G. Rezentes, Jr., Managing Director Paula Morikami, Administrative Assistant Adam Roversi, Deputy County Attorney Lyndon Yoshioka, Elections Administrator FROM: Allan Parachini, Chairperson, Charter Review Commission VIA: Jay Furfaro, Administrator, Office of Boards and Commissions DATE: August 22, 2016 RE: Transmittal of Proposed Charter Amendments and Ballot Questions Transmitted herewith are the final proposed Charter amendments and ballot questions that were approved by the Charter Review Commission and have been reviewed by the County Attorney's Office. Proposal #1 Relating to correcting gender neutrality, grammatical, spelling and formatting errors. Proposal #2 Relating to expanding the duties of the Fire Chief and defining authority to execute powers and duties Proposal #3 Relating to establishing a Zoning Board of Appeals to assist the Planning Commission in providing due process for appellants Proposal #4 Relating to the Civil Defense Agency Proposal #5 Relating to the percentage of required voters for an initiative petition, referendum petition or a charter amendment, to specify what a charter amendment is and to enable the county clerk to determine what a valid charter amendment is Proposal #6 Relating to establishing a permanent Charter Review Commission An Equal Opportunity Employer d' �� 4 4 /6 - 16 PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENTS 2016 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION August 22, 2016 Charter• Review Commission -- August 22, 2016 2 1. Proposing a Charter Amendment to the Charter of the County of Kauai (2015 Codified Version) Articles I - XXXII relating to correcting gender neutrality, grammatical, spelling, and formatting errors. Charter Amendment. Articles I — XXXII of the Kauai County Charter are amended to read as follows: (to review all proposed corrections to the charter please go to www.kauai.gov/charter) The Charter of the County of Kauai (2015 Codified Version) ARTICLE I THE COUNTY AND ITS GOVERNMENT Section 1.01. Incorporation. The people of the [eaunty of Ka County of Kauai are and shall continue to be a body politic and corporate in perpetuity under the name of [`-`eounty of rr.,ua' " "County of Kauai". referred to hereinafter as the "county[.]". Section 1.02. Geographical Limits. The islands of Kauai and Niihau and all other islands lying within three nautical miles off the shore thereof, and the waters adjacent thereto, shall constitute the [e9unty of rra , :] County of Kauai with its county seat at Lihu`e. Section 1.03. County Elections. A. Nonpartisan [Eleetienr,.] elections. County elections shall be conducted in accordance with the state election laws [^fe-State] insofar as applicable, but all elective county officers shall be elected by nonpartisan elections. (Amended 2012) B. Offices of the [Mayer an4 n„ s,,,,. tin n ~+,.„. ey ] mayor and prosecuting attorney. 1. For the offices of mayor and prosecuting attorney, the names of the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes for these offices in the primary election shall be placed on the ballot for the general election. However, if there is only one candidate for each of said offices, such candidate shall be elected in the primary election. (Amended 2012) 2. At the general election, the candidates receiving the highest number of votes for mayor and prosecuting attorney shall be elected. (Amended 2012) 3. Tie votes. In the event of a tie vote for mayor and prosecuting attorney in the primary or general election, the winner shall be determined by a method of chance as determined by the county clerk. (Amended 2012) C. Office of [ ] at -large councilmembers. 1. For at -large council offices, two candidates for each vacant at -large council office receiving the highest number of votes in the primary election shall be placed on the ballot for the general election. (Amended 2012) 2. At the general election, the candidates receiving the highest number of votes for each vacant at - large council office shall be elected. (Amended 2012) 3. Tie votes. In the event of a tie vote for the last remaining at -large council office in the primary election, the candidates receiving the same number of votes shall be placed on the ballot for the general Charter Review Commission — August 22, 2016 3 election. (Amended 2012) In the event of a tie vote for the last remaining at -large council office in the general election, the winner shall be determined by a method of chance as determined by the county clerk. (Amended 2012) ARTICLE II POWERS OF THE COUNTY Section 2.01. Powers. To promote the general welfare and the safety, health, peace, good order, comfort and morals of its inhabitants, the county shall have and may exercise all powers necessary for local self-government, and any additional powers and authority, which may hereafter be granted to it, except as restricted by laws of this [fie:] state. The enumeration of express powers in this charter shall not be deemed to be exclusive. In addition to the express powers enumerated herein or implied thereby, it is intended that the county shall have and may exercise all powers it would be competent for this charter to enumerate expressly. Section 2.02. Exercise of Powers. All powers of the county shall be carried into execution as provided by this charter, or, if the charter makes no provision, as provided by ordinance of the county council. ARTICLE III COUNTY COUNCIL Section 3.01. Legislative Power. The legislative power of the county shall be vested in and exercised by the county council, except as otherwise provided by this charter. Section 3.02. Composition. There shall be a council of seven members elected at -large. Section 3.03. Terms. The terms of office of councilmembers shall be for two years beginning at twelve o'clock meridian on the first working day of December following their election. No person shall be elected to the office of councilmember for more than four consecutive two year terms. (Amended 1980, 1984, 2006) Section 3.04. Qualifications. A. To be eligible for the council, a person must be a citizen of the United States and must have been a duly qualified elector of the county for at least two years immediately preceding [ems] such person's election or appointment. B. Any [eeune4m-Em] councilmember who removes [his] said councilmember's residence from the county or is convicted of a felony shall immediately forfeit [his] the office. C. The council shall be the judge of the qualifications of its members and for that purpose shall have power to subpoena witnesses, take testimony and require the production of records. Decisions made by the council in the exercise of the powers granted in this subsection shall be subject to review by the Fifth Circuit Court of the State of Hawaii. Section 3.05. Vacancy in Office. In the event a vacancy occurs in the council, the remaining members of the council shall appoint a successor with the required qualifications to fill the vacancy for the unexpired term. If the council is unable to fill a vacancy within [(30)] thirty days after its occurrence, the mayor shall make the appointment to such vacancy. The foregoing provisions shall apply in the event a person elected as [eaune4m-an] councilmember dies before taking office; provided, however, that the vacancy shall be filled by the newly elected council within thirty [k*] days after the beginning of the new term. Section 3.06 Compensation. The salary of each councilmember shall be established in accordance with the provisions of [Axtiele] article XXIX of this [r�er-.] charter. (Amended 1988, 2006) Section 3.07. Organization of Council; Officers; Rules; Employees. A. The council shall meet in the council room at the county building or in the Kauai War Memorial Charter Review Commission - August 22, 2016 4 Convention Hall for its organization promptly after its inauguration and swearing -in ceremony at which time it shall elect one of its members as [fin] chair and presiding officer of the council. Until such time as the [eheinu-an] chair is elected, the mayor shall preside at the council meetings, provided that the mayor shall not have a vote. The council shall also elect one of its members as [view] vice -chair who shall act as the presiding officer in the event of the [eh�] chair's absence. The council shall appoint a presiding officer pro tempore from its members in the event of the absence of both the [err] chair and [viee-ehairmap_.] vice - chair. A majority of the entire membership of the council shall constitute a quorum and, except as otherwise provided, the affirmative vote of a majority of the entire membership shall be necessary to take any action. (Amended 1984) B. The council shall adopt such rules as it may deem necessary for the organization of committees and the transaction of its business. C. The council shall keep a journal of its proceedings. D. The council may, upon an affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of its entire membership, suspend without pay for not more than one month any member for disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. The presiding officer or the council by a majority vote may expel any other person who is guilty of disorderly, contemptuous, or improper conduct at any meeting. E. The council shall meet regularly at least twice in every month at such times as the council may prescribe by rule. Special meetings may be held on the call of the mayor, [mar] chair, or by five or more members. All council and council committee meetings shall be open to the public except as provided for in [Ghapter-] chapter 92, Hawai`i Revised Statutes. (Amended 2008) F. Council Staff. The council may appoint the necessary personnel for the transaction of its business, and such appointments shall be subject to the civil service and classification requirements. The [ehainna-n] chair of the council shall be the administrative officer of the staff employees. (Amended 2008) Section 3.08. Mayor May Appear Before Council. The mayor may propose in writing any motion, resolution, or ordinance, or amendments thereto, but shall have no right to vote thereon. Section 3.09. Eminent Domain. The council shall by resolution determine and declare the necessity of taking property for public purposes, describing the property and stating the uses to which it shall be devoted. Section 3.10. Annual Budget and Capital Program The council shall enact an annual budget ordinance, which shall include both the operational and capital expenditures for the fiscal year and the method of financing same. The council shall provide sufficient revenues to assure a balanced budget. Section 3.11. Adoption of Pay Plan. The [Cel] council by ordinance shall appropriate the salaries of all officers and employees who are exempt from civil service in accordance with the provisions of [Seetien] section 7.05E and [Ar-tiele] article XXIX of this [Chen] charter. All other officers and employees shall be classified and paid in accordance with law. (Amended 1984, 1988, 2006) Section 3.12. Audit. A. Financial [A>] audit. At least once every two years and at any other time as may be deemed necessary, the council shall cause an independent audit of all county funds and accounts to be made by a certified public accountant or firm of certified public accountants. The scope of the audit shall be in accordance with the terms of a written contract to be signed by the [fin] chair which shall provide for the completion of the audit within a reasonable time. If the state makes such an audit, the council may accept it as satisfying the requirements of this section. The audit shall be a matter of public record. B. Performance [Audi] audit. To ensure and determine whether government services are being efficiently, effectively, and economically delivered, the council may at any time provide for a performance audit of any or all of the offices, agencies, departments, programs, and operations for which the county is responsible. The council may exercise its authority to conduct performance audits through the hiring of a qualified in-house Charter Review Commission — August 22, 2016 5 auditor, [Er] through the hiring of a qualified contract auditor, or both. The scope of the audit shall be in accordance with the terms of an assignment referred to the office of the county clerk by the county council or a written contract to be approved by the council and signed by the presiding officer of the council, but may include the following activities: (1) Examination and testing of county offices', agencies', programs', and departments' implementation processes to determine whether the laws, policies, and programs of the county are being carried out in the most effective, efficient,, and economical manner. (2) Examination and testing of the internal control systems of offices, agencies, programs, operations, and departments to ensure that such systems are properly designed to safeguard public assets against loss from waste, fraud, error, to promote efficient operations, and to encourage adherence to prescribed management policies. Said assignment or contract shall encourage recommendations for changes in the organization, management, and processes which will produce greater efficiency and effectiveness in meeting the objectives of the programs or operations carried out by the respective county agencies, departments, offices, programs, and operations[,] and shall provide for the completion of the audit within one calendar year. A copy of the audit report shall be filed with the county clerk and shall be public record. (Amended 2000) Section 3.13. Creation of [a] General Debt. A. The council by the affirmative vote of at least five members may authorize the issuance of general obligation bonds in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the State of Hawaii. B. Each bond authorization shall specify the purpose for which moneys are to be borrowed and the maximum amount of bonds to be issued for that purpose. C. Notwithstanding any limitation contained in this charter, the council may accept and receive participating or nonparticipating federal and state loans for public improvement projects or other purposes, the aggregate of which, together with any bonded indebtedness outstanding, shall not at any time exceed the total bonded indebtedness authorized by the Constitution of the State of Hawaii. D. The council may provide for the refunding of general obligation bonds. Section 3.14. Creation of Special Assessment Debt. The council may authorize the issuance of improvement bonds to finance assessable public improvements in the manner provided by law. Section 3.15. Revenue Bond Indebtedness. The council may authorize the issuance of revenue bonds for the purpose of initiating, constructing, acquiring, extending, replacing, or otherwise improving any revenue -producing facility as provided by law. Section 3.16. Temporary Borrowing. A. The council may borrow money in any fiscal year in anticipation of revenues to be derived from taxes for that year, and for any of the purposes to which the revenues are appropriated. No such borrowing shall be in excess of [twenty five per-, ent (2504)] 25 percent of the amount of the uncollected taxes of that year. B. When any warrants are presented to the county for payment, and the same are not paid for lack of funds, the director of finance shall issue a warrant note, equal in amount to the face value of the warrant or warrants so presented for payment. The warrant note shall be in a form and shall be due at a date prescribed by the director of finance. It shall bear interest at the lowest obtainable rate. The notes shall be a first charge on the moneys of any fund against which the warrants are issued. C. The council upon recommendation of the mayor may authorize the director of finance to obtain temporary loans from the [Sty] state. Charter Review Commission — August 22, 2016 6 Section 3.17. Investigation. The council or any authorized committee thereof shall have the power to conduct investigations of the operation of any agency or function of the county and any subject upon which the council may legislate. In investigations, the presiding officer shall have the right to administer oaths and in the name of the council to subpoena witnesses and compel the production of books and papers pertinent thereto. If any person subpoenaed as a witness[-] or to produce any books or papers called for by the process of the council or committee shall fail or refuse to respond thereto, the circuit court upon request of the council shall have power to compel obedience to any process of the council and require such witness to answer questions put to [him] the witness as aforesaid, and to punish, as a contempt of the court, any refusal to comply therewith without good cause shown therefor. False swearing by any witness shall constitute perjury and be punished as such, and whenever the council is satisfied that a witness has sworn falsely in any hearing or investigation, it shall report same to the county attorney for prosecution. In any investigation which concerns the alleged gross misconduct, or alleged criminal action on the part of any individual, such individual shall have the right to be represented by counsel, the right of reasonable cross-examination of witnesses, and the right to process of the council to compel the attendance of witnesses in [his] the individual's behalf. Section 3.18. Restrictions on County Council and [Couneil Menibe--s.] Councilmembers. The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor. Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under [Seetien] section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor, and neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee or officer either publicly or privately. Any willful violation of the provisions of this section by a member of the council shall be sufficient grounds for an action for [his] the member's removal from office. Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall the charter be amended throughout to ensure that its language is to the greatest extent possible gender neutral and to make changes to spelling, capitalization, punctuation, formatting, and grammar? 2. Proposing a Charter Amendment to Article XII expanding the duties of the Fire Chief and defining Authority to Execute Powers and Duties Charter Amendment. Article XII of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE XII FIRE DEPARTMENT Section 12.01. Organization. There shall be a fire department consisting of a chief, a fire commission, and the necessary staff. (Amended 2006) Section 12.02. Fire Chief. The fire chief shall be appointed and may be removed by the fire commission. [HQ The fire chief shall have had a minimum of five years of training and experience in fire prevention and [eentrel} operations in private industry or government service, at least three years of which shall have been in a responsible administrative capacity. (Amended 1980, 2006) Section 12.03. Powers. Duties. and Functions. The fire chief shall be the administrative head of the fire department and shall: A. Appoint, train, equip, supervise and discipline the personnel of the fire department in accordance with department rules and civil service regulations. Charter Review Commission — August 22, 2016 7 B. Provide [an] for a safer community through effective [program a leadership and programs [fer eounty=:;tee] in fire prevention, [mac—eei trel fire operations, hazardous materials, emergency medical services, ocean safety, rescue operations and all hazards. C. Control, manage and account for all property in the custody of the fire department. D. Execute such other powers and duties as may be prescribed by law [^r assigned by +i .. ,,.ffj Section 12.04. Fire Commission. There shall be a fire commission consisting of seven members. Commission members shall be appointed by the mayor and approved by the council and be otherwise governed by the provisions of section 23.02 of the charter. (Amended 2006) Section 12.05. Powers. Duties. and Functions of the Fire Commission. The fire commission shall: A. Adopt rules necessary for the conduct of its business and review rules for the administration of the department. B. Review the annual budget prepared by the fire chief and make recommendations thereon to the mayor and the council. C. Review the department's operations, as deemed necessary, for the purpose of recommending improvements to the fire chief. D. Evaluate at least annually the performance of the fire chief and submit a report to the mayor and the council. E. Hear complaints of citizens concerning the department or its personnel and, if the commission deems necessary, make recommendations to the fire chief on appropriate corrective actions. F. Submit an annual report to the mayor and the council regarding its activities. Except for purposes of inquiry or as otherwise provided in this charter, neither the commission nor its members shall interfere in any way with the administrative affairs of the department. (Amended 2006) Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall the duties of the fire chief be clarified to include duties currently performed such as addressing hazardous materials, emergency medical services, and ocean safety, and shall the reference to the mayor's authority to assign duties be removed? 3. Proposing a Charter Amendment to Article XIV Establishing a Zoning Board of Appeals to assist the Planning Commission in providing a due process for Appellants Charter Amendment. Article XIV of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE XIV PLANNING DEPARTMENT Section 14.01. Organization. There shall be a planning department consisting of a planning commission, a zoning board of appeals, a planning director, and the necessary staff. Charter Review Commission —August 22, 2016 Section 14.03. Duties and Functions of the Planning Commission. The planning commission shall: A. Advise the mayor, council and planning director in matters concerning the planning program for the county. B. Review the general plan and development plans and modifications thereof developed and recommended by the planning director. The commission shall transmit such plans with its recommendations thereon, through the mayor, to the council for its consideration and action. C. Review zoning and subdivision ordinances and amendments thereto developed and recommended by the planning director. The commission shall transmit such ordinances with its recommendations thereon, through the mayor, to the council for its consideration and action. The commission shall recommend approval or rejection of such ordinances in whole or in part and with or without modifications. D. Hear and determine [pet-itiens] applications for [varying the applieation variance from [e4ke] zoning and subdivision ordinances with respect to a specific parcel of land and may grant such a variance pursuant to [mar-ianee] provisions established by the council [i'^ xxrthe zoning] by ordinance. E. Adopt regulations having the force and effect of law pertaining to the responsibilities of the department. F. Prepare a capital improvement program with the advice of the mayor, complementing and reflecting the [,,]state and [F]federal [g]programs for the [G]county. G. Have the discretion to refer hearings to the zoning board of appeals. Once the planning commission refers a matter to the zoning board of appeals, the zoning board of appeals shall make all Findings of Fact. Conclusions of Law and Decisions and Orders without further review or approval by the planning commission. [G] H. Perform such other related duties as may be necessary to fulfill its responsibilities under this charter. Section 14.12. Zoning Board of Appeals. The board shall consist of five members appointed by the mayor with the approval of the council. Board membership shall be representative of the community, and at least one member should have knowledge and awareness of environmental concerns by way of the person's education training, occupation, or experience: at least one member should have knowledge and awareness of business concerns by way of the person's education, training, occupation, or experience: and at least one member should have knowledge and awareness of labor concerns by way of the person's education training occupation or experience. Section 14.13. Duties and Functions of the Zoning Board of Appeals. In accordance with such principles, conditions and procedures prescribed by ordinance or administrative rule, the zoning board of appeals shall: 1. Conduct hearings in accordance with Chapter 91, Hawaii Revised Statutes regarding the violation of the zoning and subdivision ordinance and the regulations adopted thereunder: 2. Hear and determine appeals alleging error from any person aggrieved by a decision or order of the director regarding the application, interpretation or enforcement of zoning and subdivision ordinances as prescribed by ordinance: 3. Conduct hearings for land -use -related appeals which the board may be required to pass on pursuant to the charter or ordinance: and 4. Adopt rules of procedure for the conduct of the board's business. Charter Review Commission -- August 22, 2016 The zoning board of appeals shall be part of the department for administrative purposes and the county shall provide necessary training. administrative, and legal assistance to the board Section [44.43] 14.14. Appeals. Appeals from any decision of the planning commission or the zoning board of appeals shall be instituted in the circuit court within thirty 1(30)] days after service of a certified copy of the decision of the commission or the board. All commission and board proceedings and appeals shall be in conformity with the Hawaii Administrative Procedure Act. Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall a zoning board of appeals be established to hear appeals from decisions of the planning director and to conduct evidentiary hearing at the request of the planning commission? 4. Proposing a Charter Amendment to Article XVIII Relating to the Civil Defense Agency Charter Amendment. Article XVIII of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE XVIII [ EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY Section 18.01. Wivg Defe s Emergency Management Agency, There shall be [a eivA defense ag ^ - ] an emergency management agency whose powers, duties, functions and organization shall be as provided by law. Section 18.02. Mayor to Declare State of Emergency. The power to declare a state of disaster or emergency is conferred on the mayor. The mayor may declare an emergency when the peace, life, property, health or safety of the community are endangered[, but his failuFe or refusalto make suetacclar-atie.-oxuxxnet prccrcac-tnacvuxvy eauffl-re-i—I fivem finding that an emer-geney eNists providing that the eaunty eounei4 adopt an emer-geney ovdinanee in .a.,nee with the eh to ] (Amended 1984) Section 18.03. Wivg Defense QefAi neN Fund.] Emergency Management Contingency Fund. The council shall provide in the annual budget [a eivg defense eenti gene • fund an emergency management contingency fund of not less than $50,000.00 to be expended by the mayor for public purposes during any state of emergency or disaster. A report containing a complete accounting of all such expenditures shall be made as soon as practicable to the council. (Amended 1984) Section 18.04. Organization. The county, under the mayor's direction, shall provide a county -level administrator or director of the county emergency management agency, and technical administrative and other personnel: office space: furniture,• equipment; supplies: and funds necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter. The administrator or director of the county emergency management agency shall be subject to chapter 76 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall the county Civil Defense Agency be renamed the Emergency Management Agency and its organization clarified consistent with state law? Charter Revievv Commission — August 22, 2016 10 5. Proposing a Charter Amendment to Article NMI and XXIV relating to the percentage of required voters for an initiative petition, a referendum petition, or a charter amendment petition and to specify what a charter amendment is as well as to enable the county clerk to determine whether the proposal is a valid charter amendment. Charter Amendment. Articles XXII and XXIV of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE NMI INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM Section 22.03. Submission Reauirement. 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 ninety-six (96) hours prior to any regular council committee meeting. B. Voters seeking referendum on 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 .,,,,., ent (20,06)] ten percent aQL/o of the number of voters registered in the last general election. (Amended 2012) 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) Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMENDMENT Section 24.01. [initiation of Amendments.] 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 tee the eeimei ] filed with the county clerk, signed by registered voters comprising not less than ffive-pe*ee-at] ten 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 [ale] suggested by the county attorney. (Amended 2012) Upon filing of such petition [with the eeu*6 ], the county clerk shall examine it to see whether it is a valid charter amendment. If the county clerk concludes the measure is a valid charter amendment the clerk shall then examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters. (Amended 2012) Charter Review Commission — August 22, 2016 11 If the county clerk concludes the measure is not a valid charter amendment, the county clerk is required to seek a declaratory ruling. If the ruling finds the amendment valid, the clerk shall then examine it to see whether it contains a sufficient number of valid signatures of registered voters. If the ruling finds the amendment to be invalid, the clerk shall so certifyprovide the reasoning for that ruling. Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall the percentage of registered voter signatures required to start the initiative or referendum process be reduced to 10 percent from 20 percent, and shall the percentage of registered voter signatures required to start the charter amendment process via voter petition be increased to 10 percent from 5 percent? Ballot Question: Shall it be specified what constitutes a charter amendment, and shall the processing of a proposed charter amendment via voter petition be revised to enable the county clerk to determine whether the proposal is a valid charter amendment? 6. Proposing a Charter Amendment Relating to Article XMV Establishing A Permanent Charter Review Commission. Charter Amendment. Article XXIV of the Kauai County Charter is amended to read as follows: ARTICLE XXIV CHARTER AMENDMENT Section 24.03. Charter Review. The mayor with the approval of the council shall appoint, with appropriate staffing, a charter commission composed of seven members who shall serve in accordance with Section 23.02C of this Charter to study and review the operation of the county government under this charter_ [for- a period of eommission 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 2006, 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) Note: Charter material to be repealed is bracketed. New charter material is underscored. Ballot Question: Shall the Charter Review Commission be an ongoing commission? Charter Review Commission —August 22, 2016 12 County of Kauai Charter Review Commission 4444 Rice Street, Suite 150 Lihu`e, Hawaii 96766 EXPLANATION OF COUNTY CHARTER AMENDMENTS PROPOSED IN THE 2016 GENERAL ELECTION Proposed by the Charter Review Commission RELATING TO THE COUNTY CHARTER, ARTICLES I-XXXII — GRAMMATICAL ERRORS AND GENDER NEUTRALITY Question 1: "Shall the charter be amended throughout to ensure that its language is to the greatest extent possible gender neutral and to make changes to spelling, capitalization, punctuation, formatting, and grammar?" Vote YES or NO Background: Since its adoption in 1968, the County Charter has been amended several times, resulting in inconsistencies in word usage and formatting, as well as grammatical errors. Further, the charter refers to gender -specific positions, such as "councilman" and "chairman." Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to correct grammatical and formatting errors in the document, without altering the meaning or purpose of its content. This amendment also seeks gender neutrality by changing terns such as "councilman" to "councilperson" and "chairman" to "chair." RELATING TO ARTICLE XII — FIRE DEPARTMENT Question 2: "Shall the duties of the fire chief be clarified to include duties currently performed such as addressing hazardous materials, emergency medical services, and ocean safety, and shall the reference to the mayor's authority to assign duties be removed?" Vote YES or NO. Background: The section of the County Charter relating to the Fire Department was created before the Fire Commission was formed. Therefore, the current language of the Charter does not specifically identify lines of authority in assigning duties. Additionally, the Department has broadened its scope beyond fire control, to include such functions as ocean safety, hazardous materials, and emergency services, which are currently not reflected in the charter. Purpose: This amendment would appropriately describe the current functions of the fire chief and the Fire Department, as they relate to duties and authority. d-Re, Q 6 /(a/ — / Z) RELATING TO ARTICLE XIV — PLANNING DEPARTMENT Question 3: "Shall a zoning board of appeals be established to hear appeals from decisions of the planning director and to conduct evidentiary hearing at the request of the planning commission." Vote YES or NO. Background: The rising number of contested case hearings has increased the need for the Planning Commission to hire hearings officers. The proposed Zoning Board of Appeals would be a five -member board that would hear appeals regarding zoning and subdivision ordinances and would conduct evidentiary hearings. The creation of a Zoning Board of Appeals would eliminate the need to continuously hire hearings officers. The members of the proposed board would not be compensated and would be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the council. Purpose: This amendment establishes a Zoning Board of Appeals that would hear appeals of the planning director's decisions regarding violations of the zoning and subdivision ordinance, thereby eliminating the need to hire hearings officers to perform this duty. ARTICLE XVIII — FROM CIVIL DEFENSE AGENCY TO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY Question 4: "Shall the county Civil Defense Agency be renamed the Emergency Management Agency and its organization clarified consistent with state law?" Vote YES or NO Explanation: Hawaii State law recently renamed the "Civil Defense Agency" to the "Emergency Management Agency." Therefore, the current language of the Charter referring to the Civil Defense Agency is inconsistent with state law. Additionally, the Charter does not currently assign a department administrator or director. Purpose: This amendment seeks to establish an administrator of the County Emergency Management Agency, and ensures that the Charter language is consistent with State law by renaming the Civil Defense Agency to the Emergency Management Agency. ARTICLE XII, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM and ARITCLE XXIV, CHARTER AMENDMENT Question 5: "Shall the percentage of registered voter signatures required to start the initiative or referendum process be reduced to 10 percent from 20 percent, and shall the percentage of registered voter signatures required to start the charter amendment process via voter petition be increased to 10 percent from 5 percent?" Vote YES or NO Explanation: Currently, the Charter requires that voters seeking to propose an ordinance or referendum by petition be signed by no less than 20 percent of registered voters in the previous general election. A charter amendment by petition must be signed by no less than five percent of the number of registered voters in the prior general election. This creates an inconsistency in the percentage of voters required to change, enact or reject county laws, and to amend the County Charter. Purpose: This amendment seeks to decrease the number of registered voters required to propose an initiative or referendum, from 20 percent to 10 percent of registered voters in the prior election. It also seeks to increase the percentage of voters required to propose a charter amendment by petition from 5 percent to 10 percent. This makes the required percentage consistent at 10 percent for those wishing to propose an ordinance, referendum or charter amendment. Ballot Ouestion 6: "Shall it be specified what constitutes a charter amendment, and shall the processing of a proposed charter amendment via voter petition be revised to enable the county clerk to detennine whether the proposal is a valid charter amendment?" Vote YES or NO Explanation: The Charter currently requires that a charter amendment petition be presented to the County Council. It does not define a charter amendment or its limitations, nor does it specifically authorize a party to determine whether the proposal would be a valid charter amendment. Purpose: The purpose of this amendment is to authorize the County Clerk, subject to court approval, to determine whether a proposed charter amendment is valid. It also seeks to limit a charter amendment to addressing the form or structure of county government, and not as a vehicle to adopt local legislation. ARTICLE XXIV — CHARTER AMENDMENT Question 7: "Shall the Charter Review Commission be an ongoing commission?" Vote YES or NO Explanation: The Charter establishes a seven -member commission, called the Charter Review Commission, to study and review the operation of the county government. The current language of the charter states that the Commission will expire on December 31, 2016. A new commission can reconvene in 10 years, with members to be appointed by the mayor and approved by the council. Purpose: This amendment seeks to remove the expiration date of the Charter Review Commission and eliminates the 10-year intervals between the creation of the commissions, thereby establishing a permanent Charter Review Commission. For complete information or copies on Charter Amendment proposals, please go to www.kauai.gov/boardsandcommissions and click on "Charter Review Commission" or contact the Office of Boards and Commissions at 241-4919 or the Elections Division at 241- 4800 or 241-4924 (tel/trs) during normal business hours. Charter Amendment — Drop Off Areas Public Library (100 copies) Hanapepe —Karen Ikemoto Kapa'a — Greg Nitta Koloa — Ed Thorp Uhu'e — Carolyn Larson Princeville —Jennifer Relacion Waimea —Susan Remoaldo Parks & Recreation - Neighborhood Centers (100 copies) — Give to Cindy Duterte Klauea Kapa'a Lihue Koloa Kalaheo Hanapepe Kaumakani Waimea Kekaha Polling Places — check with Elections KCC (100 copies) Student Government —John Constantino Library —Bob Kajiwara (Regina) (2016-under construction) Miscellaneous areas — Lana Spenser, secretary to Chancellor Member Organizations Kauai Chamber of Commerce — carol@kauaichamber.org Kaua'i Economic Development Board — stai@kedb.com Kaua'i Visitors Bureau—skanoho@hvcb.org PoVpG Beach Resort Association — jody@poipubeach.org Kaua'i Planning & Action Alliance — dzachary@kauainetwork.org Uhu'e Business Association — patgriffin@hawaiiantel.net West Kauai Business & Professional Association Eric Nordmeier North Shore Business Council—typaguv@vahoo.com Hawaii Hotel and Lodging Association—Jolene.ogle@marriott.com Kaua'i Filipino Chamber of Commerce — filipinochamber@aol.com Rotary Clubs Rotary Club of Hanalei Bay - anncorr@hawaiiantel.net Rotary Club of Kalepa Sunrise - marynavarro59@yahoo.com Rotary Club of Kapa'a - dschneck@nationalsecurities.com Rotary Club of Kaua'i - decosta2004@hotmail.com Rotary Club of Po'ipu Beach - bprinzing@hawaii.rr.com Rotary Club of West Kauai - rgt6568@vahoo.com Mass Media All Kaua'i Radio Stations as PSA Midweek or For Kaua'i or The Garden Island "Tegether IAFe Can" - W^*k^ TV c"^Ho'ike (chair) KIUC Currents Magazine Kauai County Website (includes link on Elections page) and County Facebook Office of Elderly Affairs — RSVP County Employees State Building —Information desk 081516