Under the County Charter the system for determining the chair of the County Council every two years involves his or her selection by the council members-elect. Although perhaps less-democratic than the choice depending on which candidate receives the most votes,
Under the County Charter the system for determining the chair of the County Council every two years involves his or her selection by the council members-elect. Although perhaps less-democratic than the choice depending on which candidate receives the most votes, the process allows the members themselves to decide who they want to preside over their sessions.
This year the members-elect held on November 22nd, about a week before their terms officially begin, for the first time an open meeting and chose Jay Furfaro to serve as council chair. They also established at this session JoAnn Yukimura as the vice-chair and the various committee assignments. The decisions were ratified officially on December 1st.
This choice of the chair, although anticipated, was unanimous, and is generally regarded with approval.
There are likely to be significant differences in the operation of the council under Furfaro leadership compared with that of his predecessor, Kaipo Asing, as chair. Both men have survived many years of service on the council and are capable. In the final years of his service Mr. Asing, however, had sought increasing control over the council procedures and agenda. His methods were often abrasive. Mr. Furfaro is more graceful in his interpersonal relationships, but it remains to be seen if his penchant for power is comparable to that of Mr. Asing.
In an unexpected twist Mr. Asing completed the remarks he had scheduled for himself on its agenda and then departed the last meeting of the old council before its conclusion and Mr. Furfaro ascended to the chair prematurely.
Two issues have presented themselves that will offer guidance as to the future operation of the new council.
At the November 22nd gathering of newly elected members the subject of the council rules arose. An interpretation of a provision in the current rules by the chair which gave the chair the exclusive prerogative to determine the items that would comprise the council agenda had generated some heated differences. Members Tim Bynum and Lani Kawahara had objected vigorously to the use of the rule to block matters that they wished to have on the council agenda. At the November 22nd session the issue was somewhat papered over by an implicit understanding that the existing rules would be adopted for the new council, but a committee would be established to review the rules and consider amendments to them. In my view, any council member should have the unrestricted right to present proposals for council consideration without screening by the chair by virtue of the fact that members are elected to represent the interests of our citizens and entitled to offer their views. It will be informative to observe the reaction that Mr. Furfaro has to the establishment and the constitution of the proposed committee and the treatment of its recommendations.
In 2008 a citizens’ initiative to have new rules set for the processing of applications for construction of accommodations for transients was overwhelmingly adopted as an amendment to our county charter. In essence this measure transferred the authority to issue permits for such accommodations to the elected council rather than leaving such power in the hands of the Planning Commission. The measure also allowed the council to transfer the power back to the Planning Commission if an ordinance were adopted limiting the quantity of new transient accommodations. At the final meeting of the last council Bill 2386 appeared on its agenda introduced by a member who was leaving the council. This bill would reassign transient accommodations permitting to the Planning Commission ostensibly as specified in the charter amendment. Sponsors of the amendment, however, testified at the meeting and noted their concern about the infidelity of the bill to the requirements of the amendment. After first reading, the bill was referred to the Planning Commission for its consideration. As the commission can only administer what the council enacts, it would seem that the defects in the bill should have been examined by the council before seeking commission commentary. Furfaro, now acting as chair after Asing’s departure, made some unconvincing remarks about the bill having been vetted by the County Attorney’s office, but failed to address the concerns made. Action on the bill after its return from the Planning Commission will be a guide to what can be expected from the new council chair, who has had 30 years of experience with hotel and developer’s interests.
Another index of analysis for council operations will be the openness of its proceedings. During the past eight years mostly under the chair of Kaipo Asing the volume of executive sessions used by the council skyrocketed. During the period preceding the 2008 amendment limiting the restrictions of Charter Section 3.07 E citizens questioned the validity of many of the executive sessions and Mr. Furfaro said he would provide publicly the legal justification for the meetings. Some observers believed that his failure to do so was indicative of his lack of commitment to the openness required by our charter and an inherent unwillingness to acknowledge errors.
It is not always profitable to dwell on the past. What is urgent is that our council function effectively. It is vital that the operations of our council should be efficient, open and having due regard for the rights of its members. It is crucial for the welfare of our county and its citizens that Mr. Furfaro should be committed to these objectives.
• Walter Lewis is a resident of Princeville and writes a biweekly column for The Garden Island.
