In February this year the Kaua‘i Charter Review Commission established a Committee on Governance to consider a county manager proposal and named Carol Ann Davis-Briant chair and Jonathan Chun a member. At that time, no other commission member was willing
In February this year the Kaua‘i Charter Review Commission established a Committee on Governance to consider a county manager proposal and named Carol Ann Davis-Briant chair and Jonathan Chun a member. At that time, no other commission member was willing to serve on the committee, but at the May meeting Barbara Bennett agreed to become a committee member.
In September, Ms. Davis-Briant and Mr. Chun resigned, leaving Ms. Bennett the sole member of the committee. At the October meeting of the Commission, Ms. Bennett offered a three-page update to correct “misleading statements” in recent months and to advise of new committee plans.
The initial part of the update set forth set forth her version of the committee history and her views that the claims by Ms. Davis-Briant given in her resignation letter that there were barriers to her efforts were erroneous. Apparently, Ms. Bennett does not consider that the establishment by the Charter Commission of a separate committee to consider the manager proposal was a form of barrier (the Commission has not done this for any other proposal being considered).
Similarly, she seems unaware that the failure to inform Ms. Davis-Briant about the opinion being sought as to the legality of a manager proposal or the denial of the timely request by Ms. Davis-Briant to have the commission receive and make public the opinion received from the Office of the County Attorney might be barriers, but with considerable justification Ms. Davis-Briant did.
Ms. Bennett made no comment on the impact on the committee made by the resignation of Mr. Chun. Despite Ms. Bennett’s sharp comments, Ms. Davis-Briant graciously wrote and wished her success in her program.
Ms. Bennett’s update then discusses the plans she says were made by the committee beginning in March (she was not then a member). She notes that the initial step of the plan was the June open meeting on the “merits” of the county manager system and then to have a second meeting on the “merits” of our existing county government. Not quite. The first meeting was carefully limited to be “informational” in nature about manager systems as they existed elsewhere in our country without efforts to argue the merits of these systems.
Then Ms. Bennett’s update announces the scheduling of a presentation to be held on Nov. 18 at which three panelists will discuss state and county government in Hawai‘i, the role of county government and the process for changing county government.
The two meetings are not parallel. The first meeting properly sought to acquaint our citizens about a system of which few were familiar. The need for the second meeting is dubious. We all are or should be well aware of the operations of our current government.
Ms. Bennett in her update lastly promised, as the sole remaining committee member, to make a final recommendation to the commission this month. Although her update did not disclose the nature of her final recommendation, in remarks reported following the October meeting about the county manager system she stated that “I am totally for this proposal” and Commission Chair Shiraishi said he was comfortable about placing the proposal on 2010 ballot if it “passes legal muster.”
In its opinion, however, which the County Attorney’s Office gave to the committee in July, the form of manager proposal offered last year by Walter Briant was found to be violative of state law. Subsequently, a deputy of the office is reported to have stated the legality of the county manager system is problematic, but a proposal could be legal if it met certain requirements, including giving the citizens the right to vote for their leaders and maintaining checks and balances between government branches.
While as Ms. Bennett has noted that there are at least 100 manager systems nationwide, despite variations, the common thread is that the manager has the duty of administering county affairs and is appointed by and responsible to the County Council. The county attorney seems to be holding onto the view that a manager proposal must maintain checks and balances between branches. The mayor-council form separates the two branches and the council-manager form unites them.
A mayor is selected because of popularity, a manager is chosen because of education and experience. These are the main reason I am among a goodly number of citizens that has consistently supported the manager system. This system exists in 45 states and its form has not been found to be legally defective. But our county attorney has tried to escalate a policy issue into a legal requirement without any citation of authority. His position is in a lonesome minority.
The commission at its October meeting voted unanimously to release the July opinion but deferred doing so pending receipt of a proposed procedure to be established by the county attorney for waiving attorney-client privilege by the commission. A deputy said the procedure would be released soon, but the county attorney said the same thing a number of months ago. Since the procedure could hardly make a greater requirement than the unanimous vote to release (which has happened), it is difficult to see why the opinion has not already been made available for public review.
The next meeting of the Charter Commission is scheduled to be held on Nov. 23, five days after the announced public meeting. It will be interesting to see if Ms. Bennett makes, as promised, her “final recommendation” when despite the existence of many different manager systems in use neither she nor the commission has studied the specific terms of any proposal. But then Jay Furfaro’s classic remark about how our county government operates — “Ready, fire, aim” — seems applicable to how the Charter Commission is likely to handle the county manager issues.
• Walter Lewis is a resident of Princeville and writes a biweekly column for The Garden Island.
