• Rejecting resolution was responsible
choice • Paleozoic Era
• Accommodate drivers • Bad dog, worse owner
Rejecting resolution was responsible choice
Monday’s front page article, “council questions legality of salary resolution,” does not get to the heart of the matter.
Two weeks ago the council rejected the Salary Commission’s Aug. 5 salary resolution, mainly on the grounds that the resolution violated the charter because it was five months late. It was the first time in more than four years that the council acted with integrity in response to a salary resolution.
Now Councilman Chang is asking the council to agree that it was wrong when it rejected the resolution.
The Aug. 5 resolution was created because on July 15 the mayor, affirming that the commission has sole authority over his salary, asked the commission to take unspecified measures to defer his July 1 salary increase to an unspecified future date.
The council’s rejection of the resolution meant that the resolution adopted by the commission last November remains in effect. The November resolution made administrative raises that had been deferred since 2009 effective July 1, 2011.
The November resolution also contained a provision that violates the charter by purporting to authorize the mayor with council approval to lower the salaries of all non-elected officials through the annual budget process.
The Aug. 5 resolution tacitly admits that this provision violates the charter by deleting it.
When the council rejected the Aug. 5 resolution it chose the lesser of two evils. It chose by a 6-1 vote not to knowingly agree to the Aug. 5 resolution that violates the charter and to leave standing the November resolution containing a charter violation that the prior council unwittingly but still irresponsibly approved.
There is no perfect way to clean up the mess created by these two salary resolutions. However, by refusing to approve Chang’s request for reconsideration the council can get on with correcting the flaws in the salary process.
There are ways to get around the charter violation in the November resolution. There is no way to get around the charter violation connected with the Aug. 5 resolution. Rejecting the resolution was and is the council’s only responsible choice.
Horace Stoessel, Kapa’a
I have no disagreement with your basic idea, Mr. Shioi. Cyclists must obey the rules, not engage in dangerous behavior, and make themselves easily seen. Again, were this not Mayberry, perhaps the police would do something about these infractions.
Understand this, though, it’s the automobile driver who has the far more dangerous piece of machinery. It is heavier, it moves faster, it takes longer to stop, and it gives people a false sense of security.
Too many people on Kauai’s roads drive in a manner that indicates they do not have the requisite level of respect for what they are doing to bear the responsibility that comes with the privilege of driving a motor vehicle.
But let’s keep on focus. Glenn Mickens is completely out in Paleozoic Era left field when he tries to suggest that the existing bike lanes are safe for public use, and tries to suggest that the non-use of the existing bike lanes should be taken as a sign that more appropriate bike lanes should not be constructed.
Michael Mann, Lihu‘e
If Michael Mann has a valid grievance beyond his view that the existing bike lanes on state highways are not safe in his Sept. 14 TGI letter it is not discernible.
Mr. Mann refers to “bike routes on Kaua‘i’s roads”. Kaua‘i has many roads and streets but bike routes only exist on state highways. His observation that such routes are unsafe may well be reasonable, but repair of this risk should be addressed to the state Highway Department.
He then embarks on the erroneous claim that I am enamored with my vehicle and seek to discredit alternatives to vehicular transportation.
In no way do I criticize anyone who uses their bike or takes the bus.
Along with 95 percent of the population here on Kaua‘i I use my vehicle as the mode of transportation when traveling and I expect that such usage should be given the respect it deserves.
Maybe Mr. Mann you will tell The Garden Island readers what other more convenient and cost efficient means of transportation is now available or will become available in the identifiable future to take the vehicles place.
My basic message in my Sept. 12 letter was to urge the construction of supplemental roads to accommodate the vast proportion of our people who commute by car.
Glenn Mickens, Kapa‘a
Bad dog, worse owner
My friend, my little 10-pound dog and I started for a nice stroll on Anahola Beach when out of nowhere five large pitbulls attacked my dog.
The owner couldn’t control them, I had to reach in and pull my bloody dog out of the frenzy. If I hadn’t they would have killed her for sure.
Uncontrollable aggressive dogs should not be tolerated. How can we come together as a loving aloha community to keep our small animals safe?
This could have been a child as well. I saw a person with a small dog walking on the beach with a baseball bat.
Has it come to this? Very sad and very scary.
Desiree Hoover, Princeville