LIHU‘E — Along with picking their elected representatives, voters will have the chance to decide on the fate of four ballot proposals this election season. The Charter Commission put forward the questions, which they have described in detail below:
Question 1: Relating to Prosecutor Vacancy
Shall the County Charter be amended to require that future elections for Prosecuting Attorney occur at the same time as the County’s regularly scheduled elections?
Currently, a special election will be held if there is a vacancy in the position of prosecuting attorney for 18 months or more, or the prosecuting attorney dies before taking office or is unable to qualify for office. If a vacancy is longer than 18 months, a special election would be held.
This measure would allow the county to avoid the high cost of conducting a special election for the sole purpose of filling a vacancy for prosecuting attorney and instead allow the first deputy to serve as prosecuting attorney until a regularly scheduled election. The recent resignation of the prosecuting attorney triggered a special election, which cost the county approximately $500,000.
• Voting yes would allow a first deputy prosecutor to serve as prosecuting attorney until a new prosecuting attorney is elected in a regularly scheduled election.
• Voting no would continue to require the County of Kaua‘i to hold a special election should a vacancy occur for prosecuting attorney if a vacancy lasts between one year and 18 months.
Question 2: Relating to an Electric Power Authority
Shall the Charter be amended to remove Article 30, which allows the County Council to create an electric power corporation?
Article 30 was approved by voters in 2002 in response to a proposed sale of Kaua‘i Electric to the Kaua‘i Island Utility Cooperative. The sale was approved in 2003, and KIUC has managed and operated Kaua‘i’s electrical power system since that time. Had the sale not occurred, the amendment would have allowed the County Council to establish an electric power authority corporation, similar to KIUC.
• Voting yes would repeal Article 30.
• Voting no would allow the County Council to create an electric power authority — a separate, independent unit from the county government that would be responsible for Kaua‘i’s electricity — if the need arises.
Question 3: Relating to the Salary Commission
Shall the Charter be amended to give the Salary Commission the authority to establish the maximum salary for elected and appointed officials?
Kaua‘i’s Salary Commission conducts extensive research and analysis on salaries of department heads and deputies. However, it is not authorized to independently change caps on salaries.
Currently, Kaua‘i is the only county in the state in which the Salary Commission does not have the authority to establish maximum salaries of elected and appointed officials. This creates a situation in which County Council members vote on their own raises. This amendment would allow the Salary Commission to use its expertise to implement a long-term strategy.
• Voting yes would allow the Salary Commission to establish the maximum salary for elected and appointed officials, including department heads and deputies.
• Voting no would continue to allow the County Council to reject all or portions of recommendations and findings made by the Salary Commission.
Question 4: Relating to Surety Bonds
Shall the Charter be amended by removing the portion of section 19.17 that requires surety bonds for certain officers and employees?
Currently, certain officers and employees are required to be bonded and insured. Removing a portion of section 19.17 would give the county the flexibility to purchase surety bonds, insurance or both for specific officers or employees. Surety bonds generally provide a financial guarantee against loss, specifically that the official duties of an office will be faithfully and legally performed during a specific term. Insurance can provide similar coverage. The goal of this charter amendment would be to provide the best coverage to employees and better manage overall costs.
• Voting yes would give the county flexibility in purchasing insurance and/or surety bonds by eliminating a provision that requires the purchase of surety bonds.
• Voting no would require the county to purchase surety bonds for certain officers and employees.
•••
Guthrie Scrimgeour, reporter, can be reached at 808-647-0329 or gscrimgeour@thegardenisland.com.
