Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRC_2021_1220_Notice_Agenda Packet.pdf CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION BRONSON BAUTISTA, COMMISSIONER VIRGINIA KAPALI, COMMISSIONER MARISSA SANDBLOM, COMMISSIONER JAN TENBRUGGENCATE, COMMISSIONER REID KAWANE, CHAIR LORI KOGA, VICE CHAIR REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA Monday, December 20, 2021 3:00 p.m. or shortly thereafter Microsoft Teams Conferencing Information Click on the link below or enter the url in your network browser to join on your computer or mobile app by VIDEO: https://bit.ly/3ykNqBj Or Dial phone number and enter conference ID to call in and join by AUDIO: Phone: +1 469-848-0234 United States, Dallas Phone Conference ID: 556 495 128# This meeting will be held via Microsoft Teams conferencing only. Members of the public are invited to join this meeting by using the link above or calling the number above with the conference ID information. You may testify during the video conference or submit written testimony in advance of the meeting via e-mail or mail. To avoid excessive noise/feedback, please mute your microphone except to testify. CALL TO ORDER APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES Open Session Minutes of November 22, 2021 PUBLIC TESTIMONY Testimony received from Councilmember Felicia Cowden on December 3, 2021, regarding CRC 2020-17. COMMUNICATION BUSINESS CRC 2020-17 Discussion and possible action on proposing a Charter amendment relating to Council Districting. CRC 2021-04 Discussion and possible action on Charter Initiatives of interest. PAGE 2 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION – December 20, 2021 CRC 2021-06 Discussion and possible action on proposing a Charter amendment relating to Ranked-Choice Voting. CRC 2021-08 Discussion and possible action on proposing a Charter amendment relating to Prosecutor Attorney vacancy. ANNOUNCEMENTS Next Meeting: January 24,2022 ADJOURNMENT NOTICE OF EXECUTIVE SESSION Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §92-7(a), the Board 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: Hugo Cabrera, Deputy County Attorney PUBLIC COMMENTS and TESTIMONY SPEAKER REGISTRATION Prior to the Day of the Meeting: Persons wishing to testify are requested to register their name, phone number, and agenda item via email at asegreti@kauai.gov; or by calling 808-241-4917. On the Day of the Meeting: Persons who have not registered to testify by the time the Commission meeting begins will be given the opportunity to speak on an item following oral testimonies of registered speakers. Each speaker is limited to a three-minute presentation on each item. WRITTEN TESTIMONY Prior to the Day of the Meeting: Testimony may be emailed: asegreti@kauai.gov, or mailed: County of Kauai, Office of Boards and Commissions, Board of Ethics, 4444 Rice St., Ste. 300, Lihue, HI 96766. PAGE 3 CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION – December 20, 2021 SPECIAL ASSISTANCE IF YOU NEED AN AUXILIARY AID/SERVICE OR OTHER ACCOMMODATION DUE TO A DISABILITY, OR AN INTERPRETER FOR NON-ENGLISH SPEAKING PERSONS, PLEASE CONTACT THE OFFICE OF BOARDS & COMMISSIONS AT (808) 241-4917 OR ASEGRETI@KAUAI.GOV AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. REQUESTS MADE AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE WILL ALLOW ADEQUATE TIME TO FULFILL YOUR REQUEST. UPON REQUEST, THIS NOTICE IS AVAILABLE IN ALTERNATE FORMATS SUCH AS LARGE PRINT, BRAILLE, OR ELECTRONIC COPY. COUNTY OF KAUAI Minutes of Meeting OPEN SESSION . Board/Commission: CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION Meeting Date November 22, 2021 Location Teleconference Start of Meeting: 3:00 p.m. End of Meeting: 4:00 p.m. Present Chair Reid Kawane, Vice Chair Lori Koga. Commissioners: Virginia Kapali, Marissa Sandblom. Also: Hugo Cabrera, Deputy County Attorney. Boards & Commissions Office Staff: Administrator Ellen Ching, Administrative Specialist Anela Segreti. Testifiers: Jonathan Jay, Bert Lyon, Councilmember Felicia Cowden. Excused Jan TenBruggencate Absent SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Call To Order Chair Reid Kawane, called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. Roll Call Roll Call: Commissioner Kapali-present Commissioner Sandblom-present Commissioner TenBruggencate- excused Vice Chair Koga-here Chair Kawane -here Quorum: 4 commissioners present Agenda Vice Chair Koga moved to approve the agenda. Commissioner Kapali seconded. 4 Ayes, 0 Nays Motion carried 4:0 Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 2 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Minutes Open Session Minutes of October 25, 2021 Commissioner Kapali moved to approve the Minutes of October 25, 2021; Vice Chair Koga seconded. 4 Ayes, 0 Nays Motion carried 4:0. Public Testimony Written public testimony received by Jonathan Jay (on file). Jonathan Jay provided verbal testimony on CRC 2020-17 proposing a Charter Amendment relating to Council Districting. He also submitted written testimony and stated that he feels that districting will be good for Kauai. He stated how some districts (North Shore & West side in particular) of the island do not feel represented because the people they vote for do not get on. He feels it isn’t always the case, and feels that all that run have a good heart, but each region that gets to send a representative to the Council than whenever decisions are made everyone is represented if have properly designed districting representation. He noted that in 2006 a districting proposal was on the ballot and it lost by less than 1%, and since all the counties have some kind of districting. His proposal takes in considerations, questions, concerns and objections. His version is based on the three districts that the State has already created for the State Legislature because the lines are already done. Bert Lyon provided verbal testimony on CRC 2020-17 proposing a Charter Amendment relating to Council Districting. He stated that districting is used in every election of State and Federal legislative body, as well as other islands. He noted that Maui allows all voters to vote for all district candidates, but Oahu and Hawaii Island are single member district. He prefers seven-districts since Kaua’i falls into seven distinct geographical areas. He noted that the Planning Department has six planning districts, they do not have seven because they lump Kapa’a and Wailua in one, and they have twice as many residents as each of the other planning districts, and a County Reappropriation Committee No Action Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 3 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION could produce district boundaries based on the 2020 Census. All previous proposals have included at large seats which he feels makes it more complicated and may be why they failed. He went on to explain that having seven districts you would only vote for one candidate but would be assured that the candidate would be a representative from your area. Candidates would only need to campaign in their district and it would be less expensive for campaigning and more would be encouraged to run and island-wide name recognition would not be such an important quality. He believes more people would be encouraged to run, especially younger people. He asked that a districting proposal would be considered and adopted for this upcoming election. Councilmember Cowden provided testimony on districting and council structure. She noted that she sent something a few commissions back and perceives that it would be good to have four at-large positions to be four years and full-time. She feels it’s hard to do a part-time job at it, especially when you are looking at younger people with a two- year position you can’t even get a loan. She believes that the County has gotten more complicated and expensive since the Charter was written in the early sixties. She believes four of the positions to be four-year, full-time positions alternating two years at a time getting elected. Then the other three positions to be two year part-time, which could be districted, with Districts 14, 15, and 16. She noted that she previously sent a description of this idea in a previous year, but could not locate it and could look at it. She stated that the change would not affect her, so it is not about her, but would help Councilmembers do a better job, it would be less divided and more focused. Commissioner Sandblom clarified with Mr. Lyon that in his testimony he shared that Maui County has district candidates but that everyone can vote for all candidates, and that he would prefer to vote for only the candidate in his district. Mr. Lyon confirmed that Maui has a residency requirement that insures that people represent each district and that he would give up voting for six other people to be able to vote for someone in his district, and he will know that someone from his district will be represented. Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 4 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Commissioner Sandblom stated that there are two different schools of thought, one that everyone can vote for everyone regardless of district and voting within your district only. Mr. Lyon confirmed the clarification. Mr. Jay added that the Maui model has residency requirements for the candidate, but no restrictions on the voters. He noted that an example from Commissioner TenBruggencate noted that the candidate for Lanai did not win the votes from Lanai, but he had enough name recognition across the rest of the county that he was voted in anyway. Philosophically for him, he believes that communities should be able to choose who they want to represent them. In his version, what he believes is important is that there would be a residency requirement for the candidate or the voters. He feels that the important thing is for the voters to be required to be in the district, and that the island of Kauai can choose whomever they want as long as they have an island wide residency. Vice Chair Koga asked Mr. Jay to explain the 3x2+1 proposal that he submitted before the meeting. Mr. Jay explained that three is the 3 Districts, 13 on the North Shore, 14 the Central Area, and 15 the South and West side. Two is the top two vote getters from each of the districts. Three times two makes six and then everybody can vote for everybody and the one who gets the most at-large votes, gets the at-large position. He went on to note that one of criticism he has heard regarding having three representatives from each of the three districts is that it would be extra expense for salaries and retirement compensation. This is an effort at keeping the seats at seven, and not increase from seven to nine, and get the benefit of the three districts that the State has created. He noted that the State has already created, so would not have to go through re-districting. Commissioner Kapali asked Councilmember Cowden to share more about her thoughts on changing the terms. Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 5 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Councilmember Cowden responded that if there were three two-year positions that are districted, so someone who is up and coming in their area, they would not need to get their voice out to the entire island and they could get the two-year position, learning the job, and if strong, the next time they could run for four-years. She realizes that there could end up being a ten-year term, but she believes it’s easier for someone to get into office if it’s just their area, and what’s troubling for her with seven districts, is that island is not that big and far, and she appreciates representing the entire island and what is learned when they reach out. She has four at-large people, everyone is able to vote in a super majority, so there is only two that they do not vote for. She feels that people need to have a solid job, and it’s a lot to focus on. She sees a younger person going in for a two- year position and then go for a four-year position. The four-year positions would alternate, and you would elect two at a time, there would never be a risk of not having experience on the council. In theory you could shift your council substantially, and eight years is not enough time to be good at what you’re doing, so at the eight year point you lose your strongest council people. She thinks with alternating four-year piece you are never left without experience on the council, there will be someone with a minimum of two years. Commissioner Kapali believes that we are looking at the environment and how do we encourage the younger group. She asked Mr. Lyon the population of Kaua’i in 1982, 2003, and 2006, because he said in 2006, we were just 161 votes short of the amendment passing. She believes it may have to do with the make-up of the residences. Mr. Lyon did not have the information at the top of his head. He’s sure that she is correct. She has heard from other’s that Kaua’i is still small enough that everybody knows everybody and we’re still small enough why do we have to do districts, we should be able to vote for all on Kaua’i. She’s not sure, but is very interested in looking at the term, because it’s the longevity and the experience that gets better and quality work. Commissioner Sandblom stated that the question of what happens if someone moves is intriguing in districting and asked if there were any thoughts from the testifiers. Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 6 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Councilmember Cowden thinks that with her view of four at-large and just one each for the two-year regional, if someone moves in the middle of their term, no problem they just finish their term, they’ll still have a connection to wherever they were elected from, but then next time they have moved so they could run for the new district or at-large position, two years isn’t very long and even it had seven districts, or two each in each district, they get to finish term, and then next time run in new district. Commissioner Kapali stated that her reservation with districting is Kapa’a/Wailua is the most populated and they would only have two representatives and how do you determine that. Councilmember Cowden stated that Districts 14, 15, and 16 are evenly divided by the State. Mr. Jay commented that Councilmember Cowden is correct, and that there must be equal representation in terms of the population. The area can be different, but number of people that live in District 14 is roughly the same as District 15 and then District 16, equal population is critical, where you draw the line is not simple. Using the State’s district is already done and why he proposes it, already constitutionally valid, and equal populations. If you create new districts need to educate voters. Commissioner Kapali asked why we need seven, just go six, two each district. Councilmember Cowden responded that you need seven, an odd number so that you never stalemate. Mr. Lyon spoke to reapportionment, that the other Counties have done it every ten years, and he hasn’t heard that it’s been a big deal. He thinks it can be done as long as a non- partisan commission is appointed. Also if you only have three districts, the same thing will happen, that the candidates from the smaller areas will never get elected because the larger areas will elect from their area, for example Hanalei/Kilauea will be outvoted by Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 7 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Kapa’a, because it has a larger population. Chair Kawane thanked the testifiers for their testimony. Communication Email received November 22, 2021 from Jonathan Jay to the Charter Review Commission regarding CRC 2020-17. Chair Kawane entertained a motion to receive for the record. Commissioner Kapali moved to receive testimony from Jonathan Jay. Commissioner Sandblom seconded. 4 Ayes, 0 Nays Motion carried 4:0. Business CRC 2020-17 Discussion and possible action on meetings regarding proposed Charter amendment relating to Council Districting. Chair Kawane stated that they had a lot of discussion on this item and much to think about. He entertained a motion to defer this item. Commissioner Kapali stated that she would make a motion to defer to the next meeting however she believes the Commission may need to ask for assistance from staff to take testimony and put together a drafting of possibilities. Administrator Ching clarified that perhaps a table of the different proposals, so that the Commissioners can see the proposals to prepare. Commissioner Kapali affirmed what Administrator Ching stated. Mr. Jay stated that he’s available to provide additional information, and thanked the Commission. Administrator Ching suggested contacting the Office of Elections and Council Services to provide input. She’s not sure they are available at the next meeting, because of Special Election, but she feels that they can provide information and input. Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 8 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Chair asked for Administrator to go forward with making the contacts and to invite to meeting. Commissioner Kapali moved to defer CRC 2020-17 to the next meeting with staff drafting a comparison table of proposals that have been presented by public testimonies as well as other information about what would be best for our island as we go forward. Commissioner Sandblom seconded. 4 Ayes, 0 Nays Motion carried 4:0. CRC 2021-04 Discussion and possible action on Charter Initiatives of interest. Chair Kawane asked Administrator Ching if anything had been received. Administrator Ching stated that we have not, but by next month she should be able to run through all of the Commissions and where they are at. She can confirm that they have all received the communication and some of them have decided that they have no proposals, some are in the middle of considering it. They all asked that information on the Charter be sent, which she did, and no one has com back with anything. Chair Kawane entertained a motion to defer. Commissioner Sandblom moved to defer and keep on agenda CRC 2021-04 for the next meeting. Vice Chair Koga seconded. Ayes-4 Nays-0 Motion carried 4:0 CRC 2021-06 Discussion and possible action on proposing a Charter amendment relating to Ranked-Choice Voting. Commissioner Kapali asked to be reminded on this item. Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 9 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Vice Chair Koga stated that Commissioner TenBruggencate had proposed this, but then took it back. Administrator Ching stated that she did discuss this with Commissioner TenBruggencate and he wants to withdraw it, but can defer till the next meeting so that he can withdraw at that time. Vice Chair Koga moved to defer CRC 2021-06. Commissioner Kapali seconded. Ayes-4 Nays-0 Motion carried 4:0 CRC 2021-08 Discussion and possible action on proposing a Charter amendment relating to Prosecutor Attorney vacancy. Chair Kawane noted document in packet. Administrator Ching noted that there has been a lot of interest and discussion relating to the cost of a special election. She noted that Commissioner TenBruggencate worked on the document submitted with this item. Chair Kawane asked how to move this along. Administrator Ching stated that it can be deferred to when Commissioner TenBruggencate is present to have more discussion on it or can go ahead and ask to work with County Attorney to work on more technical questions regarding this. Chair Kawane suggested to wait and discuss with Commissioner TenBruggencate. Administrator Ching suggested to get input for Office of Elections and Council Services as this impacts them as well. Chair Kawane asked Administrator Ching to make contacts. He entertained a motion to defer. Vice Chair Koga moved to defer CRC 2021-06. Commissioner Kapali seconded. Ayes-4 Nays-0 Motion carried 4:0 Charter Review Commission Open Session November 22, 2021 Page 10 SUBJECT DISCUSSION ACTION Announcements Next Meeting: TBD Chair Kawane asked if they should meet in December or wait till scheduled January meeting. Staff reminded Commission that they had decided to not schedule a meeting in December because it would fall on the Monday after Christmas, but they might want to look at another Monday in December to meet. Commissioner Kapali suggested that they meet on December 20, 2021, and asked if the other Commissioners if they are available. Commissioner Sandblom may have a conflict, but as long as there is quorum. Administrator Ching stated that there will be a new Commissioner joining, and she will invite Office of Elections and Council Services to the December meeting. Chair Kawane confirmed next meeting for December 20, 2021. Adjournment Commissioner Kapali moved to adjourn the meeting at 4:00pm. Commissioner Sandblom seconded. Ayes-4 Nays-0 Motion carried 4:0 Submitted by: __________________________________ Reviewed and Approved by: _________________________________________ Anela Segreti, Administrative Specialist Reid Kawane, Chair ( ) Approved as circulated. ( ) Approved with amendments. See minutes of From:jonathan jay To:Anela Segreti Subject:testimony for CRC today for CRC2020-17 regarding "3 x 2 +1 districting" for county council Date:Monday, November 22, 2021 2:43:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside the County of Kauai. Do not click links or open attachments even if the sender is known to you unless it is something you were expecting. Aloha Ms. Segreti. I was recently informed the CRC would be again be taking testimony today for CRC2020- 17 regarding districting proposals for the county council, and that my testimony was requested. I have carefully reviewed the minutes from the last CRC meeting (October 25 2021), with great interest. Excellent comments and discussion - particularly from Chair Kawane, Vice Chair Koga, Commissioners Kapali, Sandblom, TenBruggencate, and Administrator Ching. After much reflection, I feel confident there _is_ a sound solution "3 x 2 +1" that satisfies the valid concerns raised re: efficiency, cost-control, effective regional representation, that can successfully foster a new generation of candidates to participate in the electoral process while maintaining the uniquely Kauaʻi tradition of island-wide voter engagement: voter choice: continue island-wide voting for _all_ candidates, districts: simply adopt 3 existing state-designated constitutionally valid, equal-population house districts _for voters_ representation: maintain 7 seats on council; the highest islandwide vote recipient being elected at-large, and then top 2 vote recipients - by each district - elected to fill in the other 6 seats. How would this work in practice? By adopting the constitutionally valid (and vetted!) equal-population districts the state has already provided, Kauaʻi has the excellent opportunity to leapfrog the expence and potential headaches of political gerymandering, and simply "plug & play." Voters can continue to the Kauaʻi tradition of voting for (up to) a full council of candidates, but only the lone island-wide top vote getter would be elected at-large. Each of the top-2 vote-getters as determined by voters from the 3 seperate districts would be seated for a total of 7. This would require no change in total from present, no increase in # of salaries, and no increase in future pension expenses. This balances the desire to have a council that is selected by the whole island, while ensuring equal and balanced representation from every corner of the island will not just sometimes, but _always be present_ when considering issues that come before the entire council. Equally important, this arrangement will ensure that no one region of the island can ever ʻvetoʻ or choose another district's representatives; each district shall _always_ choose their own CRC 2020-17 representatives. Vice Chair Koga asks if candidates moving would effect their ability to serve? No. By maintaining the existing island _residency_ requirement for all candidates, but only requiring a _district_ residency requirement for voters in each district, voters in each district will be free to choose their representatives from the entire island-wide slate of candidates. But each district will always control their own representation, unlike other types of districting rules, such as in Maui county. I believe Commissioner Kapali is correct in noting that election by district will foster a wider group, and encourage and promote a new generation to engage in representational politics by greatly reducing campaigning expenses. Commissioner TenBrugencate is also correct when he states districting has come closer and closer to passing each time — failing in 2006 by only 161 votes _less than 1% of the vote_ (9,396 44.3% NO 9,557 45.1%). In the decades since that time, all the other island counties have created some form of districting. The time for districting for Kauaʻi Couny Council has come — it is simply up to this CRC to make a choice about which form of districting to bring before the voters. Many forms of districting exist — please choose one for Kauaʻi & Niʻihau that has: • minimal expense, • enhances democratic engagement, • preserves Kauaʻi voter tradition, and • ensures that every election produces a Kauaʻi Council that equally and fairly represents the populations of Kauaʻi & Niʻihau. I believe this "3 x 2 +1" Districting Proposal does exactly that. Thank you so much for taking the time to consider my testimony, and your broader service to our island communities. warm regards, Jonathan Jay -- warm regards, Jonathan Jay JJKauaʻi Design 808.212.7686 jjkauai.com From:Scott Sato To:Ellen Ching Cc:Anela Segreti Subject:FW: Charter amendment proposal comments Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 4:07:53 PM Ellen, Please see below from Councilmember Cowden. If there is an applicable agenda item, Councilmember Cowden welcomes the opportunity to provide testimony. Thanks, Scott From: Felicia Cowden <fcowden@kauai.gov> Sent: Friday, December 03, 2021 4:06 PM To: Scott Sato <ssato@kauai.gov> Cc: Jade Tanigawa <jtanigawa@kauai.gov> Subject: Charter amendment proposal comments Aloha Scott, I can testify at the next meeting charter review commission but am not submitting my recommendation. Please send my thoughts along to the charter review commission. I shared my ideas with our county clerk who also runs the elections division. Our new election system would NOT be easily able to handle the qualifying structure that I have proposed with 4 4-year positions at large 3 2-year positions with one each for district 14,15 16 - where the highest votes place candidates in the top 4 and the votes 5, 6, 7 or slightly higher would fill the regional positions She did have support for the idea of 4-year terms, as two years is not ample time to build and complete comprehensive policies. As a councilmember, I value representing the entire island(s). I believe it strengthens my ability to represent the north shore’s interests as I actively engage the needs of all the communities. I prefer at-large to districting. My observation is eight years is an inadequate amount of time for skilled execution of the job requirements. Felicia Cowden CRC 2020-17 Councilmember, Kaua‘i County Council Public Safety & Human Services Committee Chair Public Works & Veterans Services Committee Vice Chair 4396 Rice Street, Suite 209 Līhu‘e, Hawai‘i 96766 Cellular: (808) 652-4363 Telephone: (808) 241-4092 Facsimile: (808) 241-6349 E-mail: fcowden@kauai.gov Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts ARTICLE I THE COUNTY AND ITS GOVERNMENT Section 1.03. County Elections A. Nonpartisan elections. County elections shall be conducted in accordancewith the state election laws insofar as applicable, but all elective county officers shall be elected by nonpartisan elections. B. Offices of the mayor and prosecuting attorney. 1. For the offices of mayor and prosecuting attorney, the names of thetwo 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. 2. At the general election, the candidates receiving the highest numberof votes for mayor and prosecuting attorney shall be elected. 3. Tie votes. In the event of a tie vote for mayor and prosecutingattorney in the primary or general election, the winner shall be determined by a method of chance as determined by the county clerk. C. Office of [at-large] councilmembers. 1. For [at-large] council offices, [two] up to six candidates for eachvacant [at-large] council office receiving the highest number of votes in the primary election within each council district shall be placed on the ballot for the general election. 2. At the general election, the three candidates receiving the highestnumber of votes [for each vacant at-large council office] within each council district shall be elected. 3. Tie votes. In the event of a tie vote for the last remaining [at-large]council office within each council district in the primary election, the candidates receiving the same number of votes shall be placed on the ballot for the general election. In the event of a tie vote for the last remaining [at-large] council office within each council district in the general election, the winner shall be determined by a method of chance as determined by the county clerk. CRC 2020-17 Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts 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] nine members elected [at-large] by the qualified voters of their respective council district, with three members elected from each of three council districts. Council districts shall correspond with Hawai‘i state representative districts as apportioned under Article IV of the Hawaii Constitution. 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] their district for at least two years immediately preceding such person’s election or appointment. B. Any councilmember who removes said councilmember’s residence from [the county] their district or is convicted of a felony shall immediately forfeit 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 Hawai‘i. 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 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 councilmember dies before taking office; provided, however, that the vacancy shall be filled by the newly elected council within thirty 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 article XXIX of this charter. (Amended 1988, 2006) Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts 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 Kaua‘i War Memorial Convention Hall for its organization promptly after its inauguration and swearing-in ceremony at which time it shall elect one of its members as chair and presiding officer of the council. Until such time as the 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 vice-chair who shall act as the presiding officer in the event of the chair’s absence. The council shall appoint a presiding officer pro tempore from its members in the event of the absence of both the chair and 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, chair, or by [five] six or more members. All council and council committee meetings shall be open to the public except as provided for in 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 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. Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts 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 council by ordinance shall appropriate the salaries of all officers and employees who are exempt from civil service in accordance with the provisions of section 7.05E and article XXIX of this 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 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 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 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 auditor, 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 Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts 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 General Debt. A. The council by the affirmative vote of at least [five] six members may authorize the issuance of general obligation bonds in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the State of Hawai‘i. 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 Hawai‘i. 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 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 state. Proposed Charter Amendment Relating to Council Districts 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 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 the individual’s behalf. Section 3.18. Restrictions on County Council and 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 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 the member’s removal from office. Email received 6/29/2020: Chair Sandblom and Commissioners, I appreciate the opportunity to offer testimony on CRC 2020-17, regarding the Charter amendment relating to Council Districting that is being proposed. District representation has been in effect for thirty (30) years with respect to every single elective office within the State of Hawaii except for the Kauai County Council. It has been in effect for much longer regarding every Federal elective office (except President/Vice President). Why do you think that is? Does Kauai know something the rest of the State and Federal governments do not know, or have the rest of the State and Federal governments merely come to realize that “district” representation works better than “at-large” representation? I strongly suspect the latter. Only three of the many proposals for Council Districting on Kauai have been put before the voters on the general election ballot, and all have been defeated (partially due to opposition from the Council incumbents at the time, all of whom had been elected at-large). 39% voted for the 1982 proposal, 47% for the 1996 proposal, and 49.6% for the 2006 proposal (falling short by only 161 votes), indicating that the number of voters favoring Council Districting is increasing to the point where such an amendment will likely pass the next time it appears on the ballot. Several other proposals were introduced during the intervening years, however, neither the Charter Review Commission nor the County Council voted to include any of them on the general election ballot, leading us to the current Council Districting proposal. Every other County Council in the State is made up of nine (9) councilmembers elected from nine (9) separate districts within their County. The current proposal also envisions nine (9) councilmembers, however, these would be elected from only three (3) districts, with three of them from each district, thereby defeating the purpose of having single-member districts in the first place. (Whenever a district is allowed to have more than a single member, that election effectively changes from “district “ to “at-large.”) Instead, this proposal would effectively hold three “at-large” elections within each of the three Council Districts rather than having bonafide single-member “district” elections for all nine (9) districts, as has been done on Oahu, Maui and the Big Island for the past thirty (30) years. As a result, the customary pattern on Kauai whereby most previous Councilmembers resided in those areas of Kauai with the largest densities would likely continue, meaning that all three councilmembers elected from the Northeast district would likely reside in the Kapaa area, while those elected from the Wailua-Lihue district would likely reside in the Lihue area, and those elected from the Westside district would likely reside in the Kalaheo area. (See attached worksheet containing various districting scenarios based upon 2010 census data.) Furthermore, previous Council Districting proposals considered by this were comprehensively researched and studied by a committee prior to becoming eligible for a vote by the full Commission (e.g, 1990, 1996, 2016 & 2014). I am unaware, however, of any such committee research having been performed regarding this proposal prior to its becoming eligible for a vote by this full Commission. For these reasons, I must oppose this proposal. Rather than proposing the nine (9) single-member districts used by the rest of the State as an alternative, however, I instead propose seven (7) single-member districts. I sincerely believe most Kauai residents would probably agree that Kauai “naturally” falls within seven (7) geographical areas, all of which distinguish themselves in such a way that they would likely prefer someone from their own area/district to represent them on the County Council, since they would likely share similar experiences and outlooks. These seven distinct districts are the following: 1. Haena-Hanalei-Princeville-Kilauea-Moloaa-Anahola 2. Kapaa-Kealia 3. Wailua Houselots-Wailua Homesteads 4. Hanamaulu-Lihue-Puhi 5. Koloa-Poipu-Kukuiula 6. Kalaheo-Omao-Lawai 7. Eleele-Hanapepe-Kaumakani-Waimea-Kekaha-Niihau Any reapportionment commission, which would be required to implement any number of Council districts other than three (3), should be able to produce acceptable district boundaries according to the census tract data provided by the 2020 Census. I believe that any additional expense required in order to implement a 7-district Council election would be well worth the cost, by creating districts that clearly represent those issues concerning each community. As a result, at least one Councilmember would live near the area concerning any issue coming before the Council, so he/she would then likely be familiar enough with that issue to better explain it to the full Council. Furthermore, having smaller Council districts would make it easier and cheaper for new candidates to campaign for a Council seat, likely resulting in more candidates. Accordingly, I ask that you please reject the original proposal for three (3) districts of three (3) councilmembers each, and instead consider my proposal for seven (7) single-member districts. Sincerely, Bert Lyon 2010 CENSUS DATA NUMBER OF DISTRICTS ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (1990)(1990)(1990) A B Kauai Hawaii Maui Oahu Tract #Name Population 3 4 5 6 7 7 9 9 9 9 401 Haena-Hanalei 1,344 1,344 401 Princeville-Kilauea 6,484 7,828 7,828 9400 Anahola 3,715 11,543 11,543 3,715 10,199 3,715 403 Kapaa 8,385 19,928 19,928 8,385 8,385 8,385 402 Wailua Houselots 5,047 13,432 13,432 402.1 Wailua Homesteads 3,845 8,892 8,892 8,892 404 Puhi-Hanamaulu 8,740 17,632 12,585 12,585 8,740 8,740 8,740 405 Lihue 5,943 23,575 406 Koloa-Poipu 2,544 8,487 8,487 8,487 406 Omao-Kukuiula 3,139 11,626 11,626 11,626 3,139 3,139 3,139 407 Eleele-Kalaheo 8,403 8,403 8,403 8,403 8,403 408 Kaumakani-Hanapepe 3,771 409 Kekaha-Waimea 5,561 412 Niihau 170 23,588 17,905 17,905 9,502 9,502 9,502 9,502 TOTALS 67,091 67,091 67,091 67,091 67,091 67,091 67,091 67,091 120,317 100,504 836,231 Average district size 22,364 16,773 13,418 11,182 9,584 9,584 7,455 13,369 11,167 92,915 Max variance - over 5%7%33%20%?6%19% Max variance - under -11%-31%-14%-25%-18%-13%-58% Election Proposed Charter Amendment Proposed by Proposed by Proposed by Passed by Rejected by Year Council Charter Comm Petition Electorate Electorate 1982 Shall Council members be elected by districts, with one member residing in and elected from each of three districts which shall be established by a reapportionment committee, and four members elected at large, and shall 1983 and every tenth year thereafter be a reapportionment year? X X Yes 5541 No 8682 1990 Effective 1992, shall Council members be elected by districts and shall 1991 and every tenth year thereafter be a reapportionment year? X Pending decision set forth by Ninth Circuit Court 1996 Effective 1998 shall Council members be elected by districts, with one member residing and elected from each of 5 districts, which shall be established by an apportionment commission to be appointed in 1997, and 2 members elected at-large, and shall 2001 and every tenth year thereafter be apportionment year? X X No 9589 44% Yes 8456 38.8% Blank 3729 17.1% Other 6 0.0% 2006 Effective 2008, shall three of the seven council members be elected by districts, with one member residing in and elected from each of three districts that shall be established by an apportionment commission to be appointed in 2007, and four of the seven council members elected at-large, and shall 2011 and every tenth year thereafter be a reapportionment year? X X No 9557 45.1% Yes 9396 44.3% Blank 2247 1.6% Other 12 0.1% 1982-# of registered voters = 22,563 # of votes cast = 18,222 1990-5 single member districts 3 single member districts Yes 3528 16.?% Yes 1566 7.?% Blank votes 5349 24.?% No 2282 10.?% No 874 4.?% Over votes 7966 36.?% Kauai County Charter Review Commission Special Committee on County Districting Report to the commission, Jan. 25,2OfG Members: Commissioners Allan Parachini (chair); Mia Ako; Patrick Stack The committee was charged with identifying what districting proposal, if any, should be accepted by the Charter Review Commission and placed on the November, 2016, general election ballot The committee opted to alter the approach for this review and to explore public opinion survey techniques that could be easily and quickly accessed by the public and that would produce a reliable cross section of Kauai County residents'views on whether County Council members should run by district, at large or a combination of both. At the present time, all seven County Council members are elected and serve on an at large basis. Between Friday, Dec.4,2015, and Wednesday, Dec.30, 2015, the committee, with the support of the County lnformation Technology Department, conducted a survey using via software on SurveyMonkey.com. This was a poll of Kauai County residents to assess their attitudes toward various options for instituting a district-based election system for the County Council. SurveyMonkey.com software is routinely used by Kauai County and hundreds-if not thousands-of other government agencies, media organizations and other concerns and enjoys a favorable reputation in the pollinB ind ustry. The survey was programmed to reject more than one response from any individual lP address. No member of the committee saw anY survey response data while the poll was still online. The SurveyMonkey software package includes a calculator that permits computation of margins of error. Calculating margin of error based on Kauai County's population (approximately 69,000) and the number of the county's registered voters (approximately 42,OOO), the calculator result was the same for total population and registered voters. At a confidence level of 95 percent, the margin of error is plus- or-minus five percent. At a confidence level of 90 percent, the margin of error is plus-or-minus four percent. CRc Jo/5'1) 1 The committee reviewed procedures followed by previous committees of the commission that have considered the districting question. The committee felt that public meetings, while useful, reached fewer than 90 members of the public when they have been held in the past. Those choosing to attend those meetings may have had agendas for districting that did, or did not, reflect those of the broad community. Before recommending any districting scheme, the committee wanted to be reasonably certain that Kauai County residents wanted to enact such a system and, if so, which particular design they would favor. CRC 2020-17 The margin of error quantifies the degree of accuracy that the survey results should provide, so a five percent margin of error means that the percentage responding a certain way to a question might vary by as much as five percentage points higher or lower than the data themselves show. This is a common attribute of all legitimate opinion survey methodologies. The survey results were: Question 1: Would you be in favor of a County Council that is composed of: 7 members, each with a district? 23.3 percent 108 votes 3 districts,4 at large? 7.8 percent 36 votes 4 districts, 3 at large? 15.3 percent 71 votes 5 districts,2 at large? 24.2 percent 112 votes No change from current at large system? 29.4 percent 135 votes Question 2: lf the County were to adopt a form of County Council districting, should voters be able to: Vote for all 7 candidates, regardless of voter's residency? 34 percent 158 votes Vote only for at large members and one member representing voter's district? 55 percent 305 votes question 3: Should district County Council candidates be required to live in the districts they represent?: Candidate must be required to live in district 90 percent 419 votes Candidate may live anywhere in the county 9 percent 44 votes question 4: Are you registered-or eliEible to register-to vote in Kauai County? Registered voter or eligible to register in KauaiCounty-YES 96 percent 448 votes Registered voter or eligible to register in Kauai County-No 3 percent 15 votes DISCUSSION: While participants supporting no change in the existing at large election system for the County Council represented the largest single bloc in this poll, the data also show-perhaps more significantly- that slightly more than 70 percent of participants want some form of district election. Support for five districts and two at large seats was only sliShtly higher than for having all seven county council members be elected by district. lt is important to note that no change; 5-and-2 and 7 districts are all clustered within the poll's calculated margin of error. 2 1) The Commission could vote onto the ballot a proposed Charter Amendment changing the County Council electoral system so the council is made up of five members representing districts and two serving at large. District members would be required to live in the district they represent and would be chosen only by voters in that district. 2) The Commission could decline to propose any Charter Amendment and leave the stotus quo in place. The committee is mindful that the 5-and-2 option has been on the ballot before, in 1996, and failed. Voters have also been asked on two different occasions-in 1982 and 2006-if they wished to adopt a a system in which three County Council members would be elected by district and four at large. Both of those proposed amendments also failed. The survey results may shed light on these previous ballot failures, since voters may have been confused by the complexity of the Charter Amendment they were asked to vote on, they may not have felt they had enough information to make an intelligent voter decision, or they might have favored districting but not the particular scheme proposed. lf the Commission moves forward with placing a districting Charter Amendment on the ballot in 2016, an organized effort to explain the proposal to the public may be in order. The committee did not select the seven district option for two reasons. First, while no change, 5-and-2 and 7 districts are all within the poll's margin of error, the 7 district plan had the least support-albeit by only a small number of votes. Second, and perhaps more important, the committee was m indful of the fact that the County Council may itself place a county manager Charter Amendment on the ballot that would substantially alter the powers of the Mayor and could perhaps make the mayor the presiding officer of the County Council. While the committee takes no position on whether this county manager amendment is in the county's best interests, it seems very unlikely that the presiding officer (mayor) of the County Council could serve credibly on anything other than an at large basis-thus making it impossible to adopt a seven district system. Accordingly, the Special Committee on County Districting recommends to the Charter Review Commission that it consider and choose between taking no action to institute a districting system or to approve, for inclusion on the 2016 ballot, a Charter Amendment to institute a system in which five County Council members would represent districts and two would serve at large, effective in 2018. An apportionment commission would have to be created to draw district lines and this process is provided in the draft Charter Amendment we present to you. Under a new district election system, those members representing districts would be required to reside in those districts. Only voters living within a particular district would be able to vote for the County Council member who would represent that district. All voters would vote for two at large members. lf the commission chooses to pursue placing a district system on the 2016 ballot, the commission's February meeting should include a public hearing at which written and in-person testimony could be received from any member of the community. 3 The committee is proposing that the Charter Review Commission choose between two courses of action: '1. "Section 3.02.9S!o.Eig.U There shall bea council of seven members [elected atlarge]. Two members shall be elected at-laroe bv all reoistered voters inthe countv. Each of the other five members shall reside in and shall be elected from a seoarate council district bv reoistered voters residino in that seoarate council district. Section 3.03. @. The terms of office of [councilmembers] 991ry!!ggg!91gshall be for two years beginning at twelve o'clock meridian on the first working day in December following their election. No person shall be elected tothe office for morethan four consecutive two year terms. 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] IcqisleredJqlelof the county for at least two years immediately preceding his @election or appointment. lnaddition, those candid tes for the council who intend to reoresent one of the five council districts must state which district thev intend to reoresent and that lhev have been a reoistered voter of thatdistrict for the orecedino ninetv davs. Should a council member move from. or be removed from. anv of the seven council oositions from which that oerson was elected. anv reolacement aopointee must meet all reouirements of a candidate forthat oosition. Section 3.19. District Election and Reaooointment. C. An initialcouncildistrict aooortionment commission shall be constituted on or before the first dav of Aoril. 20'17. A councildistrict reaooortionment commission shall beconstituted on or before the first dav of Julv of each district reaooortionment vear or whenever district reaooortionment is reouired bv court order. The commission shall consist of seven members. The members of the commission shall be aooointed bv the mavor and confirmed bv the council. The initial council district aooortionment commission shall be responsible for desionatino the oeooraohic boundaries of the council districts orovide for above. The council district reaooortionmenl commission shall be resoonsible for the reaooortionment and redistrictino of those districts. Countv Council- Partial Districtino (Five District/Two At-Laroe) B. Any [councilman] council member who removes his gftqresidence from the county or district from which elected, or is convicted of a felony, shall immediately forfeit his q@office. A. The first election bv seoarate council districts shall be inthe orimarv election of 20'18. B. The vear 2023 and everv tenth vear thereafter shall be district reaoportionment vears. The commission shall elect a chairfrom amono its members, Anv vacancv inthe commissron shall be filled in the same manner as for an orioinal aooointment. The commission shall act bv the maioritv vote of its membershio and shall establish its own procedures. No member of the commission shall be eliqibleto become a candidate for election or aopointment to the council inthe initialelection held under anv aoportion ment or reapoortionment olan adooted bvthe com m ission. E. Anv reoistered voter mav oetition the orooer court to comoel.bv mandamus or otherwise. the aoorooriate oerson or oersons to oerform their dutv or to correct anv error made in the district aooortionment or reaooortionment olan. or the court mav take such other action to h f on as it ma deem aoorooriate- Anv such oetition must beeffect r l a tet eo UT noses o hi s secl filed within fortv-five calendar davs after the filinq of the olan F. The commission's tenure shall end uoon the filino of its plan." (Deleted material is bracketed; new material is underlined) 2 Ballot Question- Effective20l 8, shallfive of theseven council members beelected bydistricts (North, East, Central, South, West) and two of the seven council members be elected at-large, with a commission to be appointed in 201 7 to establish district apportionment, and shall 2023 and every tenth year thereafter be adistrict reapportionment year? PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE KAUAI COUNTY CHARTER SECTION 9A, REGARDING FILLING A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEY SUMMARY The Charter Review Commission proposes an amendment to Kaua’i County Charter regarding the seating of the prosecuting attorney if that position becomes vacant. Three alternatives are considered for review. Each of these proposals would avoid the cost, inconvenience and disruption of special election held outside the time of regular elections. Each would provide for an orderly transfer of authority. Proposal One is preferred, since it ensures a voter-elected prosecutor for the second half of a term in the event of an early vacancy, as occurred in 2021. Proposal Two would allow the first deputy to serve out the entire term of the elected prosecutor; It provides for an orderly transition but reduces the involvement of the electorate. Proposal Three would provide for the mayor, with council approval, to fill the vacancy for the entire unexpired term; An alternative to Proposal Two, it provides indirect electorate involvement, as it allows the mayor and council, who are elected, to fill the seat. PROPOSAL (Provides for first deputy to serve until the next scheduled election; Provides for mayor/council appointment in the event the deputy cannot serve. Ensures an elected prosecutor for the final two years of a prosecutor’s four-year term if vacancy occurs early in the term.) Section 9A.05. Vacancy in Office. A vacancy in the office of prosecuting attorney shall be filled in the following manner: A. If the vacancy occurs more than three days prior to the closing date for filing of nomination papers for the mid-term election, the position will be filled with a special primary election and special general election held in conjunction with the mid-term election. The first deputy prosecutor shall serve until the winner of that election is seated as prosecutor. If the first deputy position is vacant or if the first deputy is unable to serve, then the mayor, with the approval of the county council, shall, within 30 days of the vacancy or as soon thereafter as possible, appoint a qualified prosecuting attorney to serve until a new elected prosecutor is seated. B. If the vacancy occurs later than three days prior to the closing date for filing of nomination papers for the mid-term election, the first deputy prosecutor shall serve for the remainder of the term. If the first deputy position is vacant or if the first deputy is unable to serve, then the mayor, with the approval of the county council, shall, within 30 days of the vacancy or as soon thereafter as possible, appoint a qualified prosecuting attorney to serve until a new elected prosecutor is seated. CRC 2021-08