The Kaua‘i Charter provides that the mayor is the chief executive officer of the county with the duty to appoint most of the major county department heads, including the county attorney, the director of finance and the county engineer. He
The Kaua‘i Charter provides that the mayor is the chief executive officer of the county with the duty to appoint most of the major county department heads, including the county attorney, the director of finance and the county engineer.
He supervises these positions and has as well the authority to terminate persons holding them. The mayor also appoints the members of the charter-authorized boards and commissions. The heads of the Police. Fire, and Planning Departments, the personnel services director, the Liquor Control Commission manager and the Water Department manager are currently all appointed by the applicable board or commission.
The mayor appoints all seven members of each board and commission, and while subject to confirmation by the County Council, the council regularly confirms appointments made. There are over 100 board or commission members.
This appointing power allows the mayor to select persons he believes will conform to the views and policies he supports. Persons becoming members of boards or commission must make application for their appointment and give information as required by the charter about real property owned, certain income and interest in firms which contract for county business. The applications do not disclose whether the candidate sought the appointment or whether the proposed service was requested by or on behalf of the mayor.
The significance of the mayoral appointment power can perhaps be best observed with regard to the activities of the Charter Review Commission. This commission is empowered to study the operations of the county government and to propose charter amendments deemed necessary or desirable.
The county government exists to promote the general welfare, safety and health of its residents. The commission is the principal gateway for measures submitted as proposed charter amendments to the voters which will affect the governance of our county.
The Charter Commission is unique among the boards and commissions in its potential to increase, alter or diminish the power of the mayor. An insight as to the importance of the mayor’s influence on the functioning of the commission can be observed by considering two proposals that have recently been on the commission agenda.
In November of last year a proposal was given to the commission nominally by one of its members but rather more likely from a mayoral assistant to strengthen the mayor’s authority by adding five department heads who are now appointed by boards or commissions to be among the department heads that are directly appointed by the mayor.
It is of interest that this proposal was made despite the fact that at this time state law would preclude the effectiveness of at least three of the changes being suggested. While bills, supported by the mayors of the state’s four counties, to change the law are now pending in the state legislature, whether the bills will be adopted is not known.
Advocates of giving the mayor the additional authority to appoint and supervise the five offices now selected by boards and commissions note that this would give the mayor needed management authority over county operations (except the Office of the County Clerk and the Water Department).
Proponents of the present system point out that the centralization of authority was considered when the charter forming our government was adopted and it was concluded that the benefit of broader mayoral authority was outweighed by the increased opportunities for political patronage and the view that the greater autonomy and lesser politicization of the offices was more beneficial.
The power of the mayor over both types of operations, those where he has direct appointing authority and those where the appointment is made through a board or commission, is evident. In a recent TGI article, the fire chief is reported as stating that although he is now by virtue of a recent charter change appointed by the Fire Commission, the mayor is “his boss”.
A revealing contrast to the prompt embrace of consideration of the proposal to enhance the mayor’s powers by allowing him to appoint directly the five officials now given their position by a board or commission, is the treatment given by the commission to the proposal for a county manager.
That proposal which originated from testimony by numerous county citizens would reduce or change the mayor’s powers. Although the concept for the manager proposal has been around since 2006, this commission has never taken any direct action on it.
When the commission’s Governance Committee recommended continued study of the issue in November 2009, the commission in December listened passively to testimony on the matter briefly and then without any comment by any commission member adjourned without acting and has not considered the subject since. It is as though the manager system concept had leprosy.
While the mayor has endorsed the proposal regarding mayoral appointments, he has never publicly expressed his views on the manager proposal. He doesn’t have to. The mayor has many ways to convey his messages.
The reach of the mayor through his appointments is also impressive. His views on the manager proposal were signaled by his appointment effective in January to the Charter Commission of Jan TenBruggencate who last year served on the panel assembled to oppose the proposal.
However, mayoral control is not inevitable. Believing that a Charter Code of Ethics provision, 20.02D, is not politically advantageous, the administration has used for two years messages from the county attorney with misleading advice to block application by the Board of Ethics of the provision. This month, the board acted to adopt a rule that instates the intent and terms of the provision. Congratulations to the board for its courageous independent step.
Strengthening the mayor’s power may be in the mayor’s interest. However, by the adoption in 2002 of the Power Authority and the adoption in 2008 of the Fire Commission our citizens recognized the compelling public interest need for some government operations to be more autonomous.
The core benefit of the manager system is to have government operations handled by a person qualified by education and training rather than one personally popular. A familiar position exists. Without active citizen involvement such as in the Ethics Board case the future course on these issues is highly predictable.
• Walter Lewis is a resident of Princeville and writes a biweekly column for The Garden Island.
