• Small claims bill still alive? • Goodbye county manager system • Approve of cautious approach Small claims bill still alive? You would think that all Hawai‘i legislators should wholeheartedly support a bill that makes sense and can save money
• Small claims bill still alive?
• Goodbye county manager system
• Approve of cautious approach
Small claims bill still alive?
You would think that all Hawai‘i legislators should wholeheartedly support a bill that makes sense and can save money to thousands of consumers, tenants, landlords and small business owners.
Well, maybe.
Bill SB2474, which would raise the Small Claims Court maximum amount from $3,500 to $5,000 (allowing more people to settle their disputes directly in small claims courts), passed last month in the Senate — quickly and unanimously.
All Senators seemed to agree that it was time not only to adjust the $3,500 limit (set in 1992) for inflation, but also to bring the state of Hawai‘i more in line with the rest of the country (36 states have dollar limits higher than $3,500).
On March 6, however, that bill was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Since then, I have lost track of it. Nobody working in (or for) that committee can tell me whether Bill SB2474 is still alive, waiting to be heard, or is already dead.
All I know is this: Unless that committee schedules a public hearing before Thursday, March 20, that bill is history (no matter how many Hawai‘i citizens could benefit from it).
But does it really need to be so? Is it really true that we, common citizens, can do nothing if our legislators don’t have the time (or refuse) to hear such straightforward, no-brainer bill?
I hope that the answer is “No.” And I am sure that some of your readers would like to join me in support of SB2474, by calling Rep. Tommy Waters, the House Judiciary Committee chairman, and urge him to schedule a public hearing before the March 20 deadline.
You can see the latest status of SB2474 on the Hawaii Legislature Web site.
Giuseppe Leone
Kaneohe, O‘ahu
Goodbye county manager system
A recent The Garden Island article (“Voters unlikely to see county manager system amendment on ’08 ballot,” A3, March 16) stated that the Charter Review Commission is most unlikely to place a proposal on the 2008 ballot to allow a voter determination for change in government to a county manager system. The commission chair and one other member were mentioned in support of this conclusion.
This brings to mind that many years ago Kaua‘i’s finest consumers’ advocate, Raymond Chuan, said, “This county looks for 10 reasons not to do something constructive rather than one good reason to do it.”
Last year’s Charter Commission had two visionary members who strongly supported a managerial government and favored putting it on the ballot. The overwhelming majority of the public who spoke, when the commission held neighborhood meetings, wanted the measure on the ballot. However, other commission members vetoed the measure and it was never seen by the voters.
The article does not mention that at this February meeting commission member Walter Briant supported the county manager concept and would plan to submit a proposal for consideration by the commission.
The statements attributed to commission chair Jonathan Chun reflect his bias to maintain the present strong mayor system.
One technique that Chun and his ally Sherman Shiraishi are using is to claim that the “issue” is too complicated and complex. He says that the county manager system is something we have to understand completely and it could be “suicide” to put the matter on the ballot this year. This really means that the measure will be delayed by whatever means it takes.
Chun elaborates saying that the commission must “weigh” its “good sides and bad sides,” study the financial aspects and educate the voters. He also urges holding workshops and meetings. These comments appear to mean to cause hinder and delay.
The correct role for the Charter Commission is a simple one. It needs to recognize that the people of the county should be entitled to determine how they wish to be governed and then provide the opportunity for the voters to decide. It is not the function of the commission to “weigh” the merits of the system, that is for the voters.
Some 60 percent of communities across the nation now have the manager type of system. If the commission is to act in the interest of Kaua‘i’s citizens all it needs to do is consider a text that essentially empowers the county manager with the powers the mayor now has as to administration of the county’s affairs, and gives the council necessary powers to employ or terminate the manager. Other lesser points may be involved, but they are quite manageable.
Can we not have the commission act in the interests of the public rather than in protection of the status quo that has caused many of us to believe we have a seriously dysfunctional government? Should we not seek what Abraham Lincoln urged “a government of the people, by the people and for the people”?
Glenn Mickens
Kapa‘a
Approve of cautious approach
I don’t know Charter Commission Chair Jonathan Chun, but I certainly approve of his cautious approach to the strong mayor versus city manager question.
I probably have more experience with strong mayors than most people. I was director of Civil Service for the City and County of Honolulu for 12 years under Mayor Frank Fasi and director of Personnel Services for mayors Herbert Matayoshi and Dante Carpenter on the Big Island until I retired in 1987.
In my opinion, a strong mayor, who is elected, is a superior system compared to a city manager who is a hired hand, usually selected by the council. The secret of success for an elected mayor is to carefully select his managing director, who is responsible for day to day operations and members of his cabinet who are thoroughly qualified and in tune with his philosophy of government. Among the most important of these posts are the directors of finance, budget, public works, recreation and personnel. The lawyers are prosecutor and corporation counsel, posts which require the best available.
In Mayor Fasi’s case, cabinet meetings were held in the mayor’s office every Monday morning. It was a coat and tie affair with the mayor presiding. Department heads reported on their activities of the previous week. Mayor Fasi knew most of what was coming, because he drove the mayor’s bus all over O‘ahu, observing things for himself. My first cabinet meeting on the Big Island with Mayor Matayoshi was a bit different. I appeared in coat and tie, only to discover that the mayor was the only one similarly dressed.
Everyone else wore an aloha shirt. I didn’t do that again.
I don’t know Mayor Bryan Baptiste, except for what I read in The Garden Island.
Willie Crozier, the sage of Honolulu, once said, “Some people say that the voters get what they deserve. That’s a damn lie. They deserve a lot worse.”
I can’t say that I agree with Willie, but with due diligence, we can make a difference.
Harry Boranian
Lihu‘e
