all i am the chair michael vick do we know and i will be introducing the members in a moment but i'd like to call upon everyone in the chamber including the members that maybe myself also to turn off your cell phones or nose making devices be to put  on silent or turn them off in tire greta for being here this morning at this time i would like to check to make sure our district offices are connected because we had some problems this morning and actually we using our cell phones this morning our system is not we hear members can you hear i'm not sure how much louder we can make it hang on hang on a second testimony is limited to the items on the agenda sign up at the desk located in the eighth floor lobby or at one of the district offices testimony is limited to three minutes at two and a half minutes the light will turn yellow and at three minutes the light will br  red at three minutes i will kindly ask you to stop please state your name and who you are representing we have established a connection to the district offices and to be fair we will rotate chair our first person in the existed started off as sort of like a show and tell what county government is and it kind of grew into its actual purpose which is you know how do you deal with the efficiency of government and versus what it costs the government anything i thought was a waste of their time and energy i will not say that about this commission in the last ten years is really improved and you and possibly because if they get good people on there that really really made made a difference the report on  it to be tied to the auditor i don't think so i think that's been appropriate and should be able to get the need from the council requests for opinion from the council and from the administration  from private entities if appropriate in relationship to the government and the auditor when i was on the charter commission and then for the two thousand and twelve charter we actually thought about the cost of government commission as a watchdog over the auditor in case they got politicized that hasn't happened to their daughters stayed away from that but this it makes it this is takes away purpose really because the auditors not conundrum that that's basically the legislators in this state at least that ought to my knowledge i think every council faces in it in the legislatures faced it you know and it's a balance of power you don't have that concerned about the some of the appointments that happen recently we're talking structure here is a reasonable structural change that gives more more oversight of appointments and it to some people's mind mine there's been inappropriate appointments and this would give chance for that to be reviewed now a little caution is that you know that this is a power that can be abused as well for political personal purposes but on balance it makes sense and it's a reasonable a reasonable step in the direction tour what some of the some of the folks who are looking for reform of government would want that i few that you said were a little premature which ones were those i think the number five and number seven the attorneys are pretty mature yeah a situation where the governance issue gets put on the ballot and these two get put on the ballot they are mutually exclusive but it could be mutually exclusive exclusive but if the government gets voted down do you think it would be prudent to have these available what happens of all three going to what we can so we can set the wording i believe we can set the wording that you know if one gets approved in the other two you can set it up as an either  of conflict legal conflict within the government ok the one to the one and i agree with the approval of mayors appointment of department directors so far from what i've heard so far  should the government issued not pass you know it goes on the ballot and doesn't get passed i would think we'd want to have this in our back pocket if there's no rush you can do it next time and  no members of the committee thank you very much for allowing me to speak with you this morning there are two items that i wanted to address here the first being resolution four hundred seventy regarding the cost of government commission which i am the chair and the second being communication fifteen three o five regarding the appointment approval of appointments through the county council and we got a resolution fourteen seventy i went in and spoke with our county auditor last week felt that we have a relatively good relationship that largely we work to align the investigations that we provide as the cost of a commission so that there is no duplicate effort which i know was an issue agreed that there was minimal interference if any interference between the casa government commission and the county auditor in fact lancing i won't say it but i'm fairly certain he doesn't like showing up to our at all and he takes very seriously his independence as the county auditor which i highly respect i think the last point in regards to this is that our commission provides value to this county and i think if i couldn't say that i would be with you guys in abolishing our commission however i think that given especially a look at the last report that we've done previous reports that not only have our reports led to some changes operationally within this county but also with all our commission information relevant information substantive information evidence based objective information would not have been found or report goes along with county communication fifteen three o five our item that was which is i don't over seventy on your agenda the report that we made in the last week essentially stated that our recommendation that's very similar to this item here essentially allowing the county council to have more oversight over merrill appointees now the recommendation that we provided was not to allow a of refusal on the point from the county council rather to give an advisory notice of whether the ability to to vet the appointees themselves either way the alignment and the movement towards one or the other we see as being a movement in the same direction which is to allow the county council to have more influence or rather some say as to the appointees that the mare provides in both regards we see those as being recommendations that meet a lot of the values that were expressed by a lot of the stakeholders that we interviewed and because of that we see that as being a primary charter amendment that could be used definitely in lieu of a county manager form of government which we do not recommend it is our hope that the recommendation in the value that our commission provides can be something that is presented before some committee as we had stated in our letter to chair white when we had put in our reports but ultimately our hope is that the kind of objective and evidence based analyses that we and the county auditor try to do continue here in this county thank you county council would then have the ability to approve or disapprove of that but without the right of refusal of that appointee essentially allowing the county council to say we don't like this person or we do like this person and make it very clear and eviden why or why not that that may pass now the reason why we decided to go in that direction and we debated both i mean we looked at both was mainly due to the very same debate that occurred a year and a half ago in this very same body when a very similar resolution was being looked at concerning the approval council approval of the managing director fund and other specific appointees an argument made by many people on this very council was that the merits should have the ability to choose people that he can work with for those key vital positions arguments made by individuals in this room that was one of the reasons why we decided to go for a vetting process without right recommend says we agree that a movement towards the county council having more hand in that appointment process looks at some of the values that people express which is that they fear that their appointees aren't being put there for the right reasons and by having the additional bodies looking at it we see that as being a solution to that as opposed to a movement towards a council manager form of government can i take it one step farther and then it is would you also think that maybe we ought to have some kind of qualifications in the charter we looked at that as well and in our commission report we provide incidents where we look at qualifications existing both only in job descriptions and also as part of the county charter in the county charters or ordinance county ordinances that we looked out there were very few counties that provided very specific job descriptions and when we were talking to individuals about executive search agencies that was something that was done pragmatically mostly because what if we can't find a guy that fits these descriptions what do we do then  and it allows the county council or whoever it is that's hiring to choose the best person that fits that there is flexibility that's allowed by doing that and that flex and you can always put in very specific job descriptions but it doesn't have to be in charge or t there is rather graphic yes would a good compromise be a two thirds vote right of refusal because really we're looking at nuance here ok yeah i mean ultimately it's your body that would decide on that movement towards having more people look at it having more transparency in the job descriptions and the appointee resumes is ultimately what we see as being the good thing ok if that transparency exists we see that as being in many ways sufficient  to allow that kind of a debate to occur and you can always say we don't like this person for whatever reason you already have the ability to do that all right and you also mentioned the you know the cost of government and the something happens or whatever then i understand completely that a big reason for this is because of past experience right i understand that completely and i can't see into the future what could or could not happen i think setting a precedent and i think an action that our body will take is to codify to some degree what our relationship is with the county auditor and i don't think that's something that happens has to happen in charter in the charter amendments and i think that's something that can occur  negotiations in alignment between our body and the county out county auditor ok last but not least right now cost of government and the auditor can investigate different departments and that's correct right yes what about the cost of government being the watchdog for the auditors fars auditing them if they feel something's going on because right now who audits the auditor very dangerous question mr idea i'm not going to put you on the spot i'm not going to ask you to answer that question with the coach that may become premature that's some discussion we can't fear but you putting the cost of government commission chair on the spot saying what do you let me see this about it's the county council appoints a county auditor that's occurred the county council has the review of the county auditor the county council has that ability to look at what the county auditors doing until we have ok all right anything any other questions for that there's the fire scene and thank you thank you again for being here i get an extension a fireplace and yes chair our next testifier is and the all for otto to be followed by rosemary robbins good morning everyone morning thank you so much for allowing me the privilege of speaking before you here is an individual citizen but just for the record i do serve on the cost government commission is wild and i'd like to introduce yourself so we know who you are i say i'm annie alvarado ok thank you here is a private residence but just for your information i do sit on the cost of government commission and like to echo what the chair has just given that we do have a good working relationship with lance and i do agree with the concerns that you raise i think the chair addressed your concerns very nicely we have a good group of people which of course all of you are as i know it's the same process i went through also approved so you got to vet all of us this is as we got before we got approved and so i thought that was a really great process scary for an individual like you but i think that you know the sunshine and the querrey is a really good thing we get along really well with lance i and i know the leadership from paul and myself we will always try to make sure that we don't conflict that we communicate we don't try to impose do anything that's out of the boundary of what we are supposed to do i think personally as a resident here that it's a good situation and you go he said made changes before when you saw things going south basically and so i think that because of your leadership that we're aligned again and i could talk to lance you know i have a question i have a lot of ideas but before i move forward i will always talk to him and ask him what is it how does this interfere with your work do you think it's you know just probing questions in my out of line to do this how will it will it help us hurt us because my personal reason for being here before you is because i care right along for do but very new in the system and so i think as time moves on we will see the working relationship again depending on the makeup of the cost of government commission that could changes in the way the ordinance reads so i think i agree with you at this point you know there's not a lot to be said you know we need to work it out a little further and we can learn from it but let's move forward and see how it all evolves together this body took care of the issue that's correct and that's what i applaud you all for doing so again i thank you so much for your time and for all your dedicated work and it's a privilege chamber is rosemary robbins our community and in the global reality is water kindness that we're hearing all about it in rio we're hearing all about it right down to our local area it's been said a number of times concerned citizens that if we don't have a bone knowledgable in their fields they shouldn't be taking on the responsibilities and the payments  hundred sixty two i've had a lot of time to watch what has happened on a number of our islands particularly here and on some of it has been great some of it has loads of room for improvement and the particular thing that we need to be addressing is about water where up to our eyeballs in debt or i don't know sins of omission and commission as far as water is concerned in all of these proposed amendments there's nothing in there about the fact that the director and or deputy director for the water deprived and should have a background in some way or water it's just as an engineer we've asked here over and over again does that mean if somebody is heavily background in aeronautical engineering she is meant for the work doesn't add up so i would ask that the recommended issues in this particular communication for the policy and intergovernmental affairs committee not be considered complete until there is and i'm talking about pretty darn quickly the presentation of the water directory and or deputy director be a person who has a background in water and not be just an engineer to all the people who are engineers in their fields applying that in the field that they're not so for being here today i know you've been trying to get together and it doesn't work but i totally understand what you're saying you know it's interesting when you read that charter how it is that management experience  experience and one of them has to be vigilant engineer about it doesn't it what kind of engineer so you're thinking that maybe we need to take that a step further and mention some experience with water  training and water yes you're absolutely getting that correctly and i'm teen people out there in the community concerned citizens walk into the hardware store walk into safeway and get met by people in the community who say how the blank com if they don't have any they don't have answers for them so we're asking well i'm excited that we had this issue before us and i know there's going to be a healthy discussion but thank you again you  anyone wishing to testify mahalo denise on the money office do you have one anyone wishing to testify more look i e do you have anyone wishing to testify will give one more chance anyone in the chamber who has not testified and wishes to testify please come forward seeing none then with no objections i will close public testimony notations thank you very very much again members we have a very heavy agenda so let's get started right off wit p i thirty six which is the alarm system fun i will ask for your indulgence and to have this deferred hopefully  been able to set up their alarm system a lock box has proven to be a bigger challenge than they had dissipated they're still working on that they also have some other issues in how to upgrade their i catch  i should say that i capture program which is a method of tracking the alarms that went off and you know that they need also some funding for that and they believe realistically according ramos they realistically need two to three more months to implement this system and to get it up and running so with that being said and another factor today is they had a large meeting for which all district commanders were requested to be at their travel schedule the meeting was starting at nine am and running to sixteen hundred hours of four pm so with those factors assistan asked if they could have this deferred and hopefully they would have promised that they'll do their best to be back in about two to three months with a complete program ready to be improved implemented so without any objections i will deferral on item p i eight thirty six any objection thank you very much at one question on that i'm not going to take any questions because we don't have them here to answer questions ok so i prefer not getting it because i have all these other issues i want to cover because they've requested it i'm going to grant it and hopefully in two or three months they'll be back i will be publishing them to get them back here to get those questions or to get this completed ok thank you mis to enter in an intergovernmental agreement for a joint training agreement between on to fire and rescue from the state of washington and the county of mo am both departments today i have assistant chief here to explain the program to us and from what i understand it is not the cost costing on there's no cost involved in doing this if i'm correct but i'll as assistant chief times to please explain the program also like the revised the attendance of corporation come to council geoffrey or yoko who is also present at this time assisting cheap to share and committee members dave time assistant chief with department of fire and public safety as i know you folks are very busy i did want to introduce this by giving a little bit of foundation for you as i hope that solutions are found to address the fellah fields but we do have some grave concerns with the potential for large scale fires on those on those lands well these are immediate concerns facing us in the near future  our departments responded to over a thousand wild land fire incidences over the past five years in an effort to continually improve our readiness to respond to emergencies within our community we are proposing that training agreement before you today the purpose of this training agreement is to provide our personnel and potentially other assisting and cooperating agencies in the discipline awhile and firefighting consistent with national standards the standards are set by the national wildfire coordinating group and they provide national leadership to develop and maintain and communicate interagency standards guidelines and qualifications for training and other capabilities that enable interoperable operations among federal non federal government and non government entities in the wild land fire fighting environment we currently train our personnel to follow and ational levels in this system but are limited our ability to provide additional levels of certification due to the costs of  in from the mainland and also difficulty certifying our members due to the lack of large scale fire responses to achieve and maintain sort of occasion so as with most certifications there demonstrated proficiency is to achieve and maintain us achieve and maintain a certification in the end of the c g typically it's requisite knowledge which is demonstrated in the classroom and requisite skills which are typically achieved through demonstrating this is currently one of our sixteen training programs in the department so therefore a minimum cost will be it will be a minimum cost as personnel will be on duty like any other mainline course i e the national fire academy  for domestic preparedness or other training facilities that we have ten on the mainland typically our personnel requests that are placed on forty hour week and then they go through the training there because they can report for duty after the training so but it should also be noted that pursuant to this agreement we will not be required to send our personnel of this department has any sort of response at all merely create the avenue to take them up on the opportunity but it's not required that we send people so it'll be basically based on if we have the funding available in our budget to send people to these types of assignments we also look to support this agreement through grant funding as fire management suppression is one of the store thirty two core capabilities identified in the national preparedness school and therefore qualifies us to at least up ply for state homeland security grant funding to support this program so a couple of different options there that we can promise you will get but we will certainly apply for and we have in the past and it's supported our efforts on molokai when we could prescribe for our training there as well as this last year and so in summary we are proposing this agreement because it will allow us to provide our county with a department that is trained and nationally credentialed in the discipline a while and firefighting which will then lead us to be able to provide training and certification to our members in the halls at a cost savings to our department and as well as to the colony so please consider this agreement as it will allow us to move our while and training program forward and we appreciate your support in providing us the opportunity to better serve the communities we are dedicated to protect thank you members and share thank you seized in chief and i apologize for my statement had been on the assumption we had discussed this there are no additional funding but i understand what you see no additional funding you'd use whatever you could get to do this training that was available to grant and i apologize for that mistake ari truly teacher i guess one of my first questions would be why the state of washington i know you've mentioned that it's part of the pacific rim but there may have been other  guzman yes we do have the opportunity if others present themselves to enter into agreements but this particular chief of this department has done probably three or four years of training with us and has done the prescribe f training i mention on molokai as well as the two events we did in west mali sole he offered to work with us on this agreement we would like to work with others as well but this is the only one that we've been able to a get on the same page with up to this point they do as you probably know had a lot of large fires this past season in washington state but we some home the paperwork didn't get across to you last season however we looked forward to you know putting this in place this year pending the approval of this body and then look towards other places like under region five of the forest service we're actually attached in northern north ops of a region five of the forest service however california is a very complex governmental system and we haven't been able to really pursue anything with them that would be the natural fit as far as how they divide our reg up in the forest service but they haven't moved anything along we've tried several different times over the years to try to get into agreement so so i basically i guess a long story short is is this is an opportunity that was presented to us where others haven't been amicable about creating any opportunity to train with them so i think share richard thank you any other questions the if so where and what is the agreement pretty much the same word for word so i'm going to make it brief because it's pretty complex but it's related to our all hazard incident management team training that is done through the state homeland security grant there is no ill like this this training agreement it is merely that we are able to use we negotiated this with on a false and the mayor's office primarily to allow us if the opportunities present themselves to through the national interagency fire center nipsey they call it the kind of cordon and all large fires there is an opportunity for us to go out and work as incident management team trainees we are able to utilize the grant funding through all has an incident management team training program that is primarily funded through the state homeland security ground as far as for situations like this over the past three years we have and we have gone up and trained as incident management team trainees this is different than that in the sense that it's related to wildfire coordinating group qualification so it's a bit different in that sense into responses across the state across the region even into oregon is well so ok thank you a couple of technicality technical things when the if this was signed over a year just about a year ago by the mainland department so that still valid as far as you know i don't know how long the signature will be valid just a technical it is member  it is valid he actually called me we talked last week ok and i said we finally were able to get in front of this body i believe it was a paperwork issue on our part i think we set it up last year to the wrong or through the wrong process and talking with with corp counsel so we submitted it and we appreciate the opportunity to have it hurt so it is still valid sir and the other is usually a terminations is thirty days notice written notice and this one is nineteen the reason for the difference no i just checked with corp he was side by side with me on this work and with their attorney so then you're ok with ninety days as far usually if you want to get out of it an agreement it's thirty days and let's go yeah that's fine that's fine with us but that's if you're asking me i'm sorry ok thank you chair this basically follows to take the opportunities and based on what i'm not sure exactly at this time what chief is going to plan to cut back on this may be one of the programs but i think with again the concerns with the fellow fields and what's happening with h c n as this will probably be a priority however a lot of our programs are purty so but the main thing is and what we when we first started discussing this agreement with our counterparts on the mainland was that neither department should feel the obligation and it would be merely the opportunity to attend and participate so same thing for them if they can come down and we do prescribe fire training or any of our training they're not obligated to come down it merely creates the avenue to to currently in in a grant and we would reapply as the as you know what ground state they term all it and then you reapply and so we are currently in the state homeland security grant that was in a program because we didn't have this agreement it wasn't a program that was applied saying firefighters to support you know it's very interesting that you bring that out because i've been proposing to iron that out specifically what that means what i've been told there's agreement amongst the fire chiefs having worked with this particular agency on what exist for washington state i proposed a agreement to our counterparts at my level a chief level and had got some welcome comments back and forth but i am unaware of an actual agreement that i can present to you or or have sent to you but perhaps the fire chief would have more e that would all be ironed out but i think what we looked at is there's six potential instructor positions and i have basically presented chief a draft  improvement to our existing while in training program like i mentioned we already have a while in training program we train two foundational skills we'd like to provide the opportunity to get more advanced skills in the sense of for instance there's a saying resource boss is called in the system one is an engine boss another is a crew boss so you run a crew of people or you run a crew of engines like if you're a strike so there's different levels so you just say we canot that of a sum which potentially it's going to cost as to do a training with this washington state well not even a range between twenty and fifty of them well no because like i said it would come down to the opportunity if it's available in the budget which as the budget so going through its process so i'm not exactly we haven't had the meetings on where we're going to cut back and where we're going to trim however the only cost incurred in support of this program would typically be the travel to and from the incident because again they would be on forty hour week so they would work on monday through friday with the weekends off so if it is a rank person on of the current plan rank for rank would be available to a certain amount of hours based on their rank for rank program if it is on ran person then i would be a position that could be filled if it's a shortage on overtime potentially or if manpower permitting they would be located people to cover those positions at this point like i said we're looking at basically about six people to put through the various levels so that would be around figure as far as the number of people so can be expensive og and based in funding is the opportunity to either take the opportunity or to say we're going to send one person or two people or we don't have the funding available so at this time we're not going to go out on this assignment certification and then the requisite skills could be demonstrated prescribe fire is considered an incident however with the concerns of the community with putting smoke in the air and stuff like that i know this body is well aware of those type of arguments and things when we do prescribe fire we have to be very cognizant of the air quality monitoring that we do and so you know we typically keep it away from communities that are going to be impacted obviously for their sake and ours and so you know we typically do prescribe for once a year so this would allow them to come down in and work with us as well and they be justified on their and on sending their personnel here to work with us because they can train in the off season as well so typically that's what their benefit is because when it's raining up there they can come down so i got no problem with your narrative chief or i think your objective is in our very i can be very supportive fair and thank you for being here i thought i recall some type of discussion you folks have done this type of training previously if you've been doing training with washington state already as i  mentioned to member college we have been going up there primarily to washington oregon also to california on incidents on homeland security grant funding for the all hazards team that's correct ok but i'm just in relation to this agreement so  have don't have an agreement and yet you've been going in and doing training with these different states that and that's through the all hazards incident management team training program so that's a different discipline if you will it is typically while  fire because that's when they have these big type incidents right we have on occasion had the opportunity to go up to oklahoma for instance for a tornado response but by the time you start working through those  different entities if you will it's difficult to get the permissions the system in support the forest service in support of all hazards program has allowed teams to come up like us and honolulu as well to go up and just basically shadow the large teams on incident so this is different in the sense that he'd be working with the fire fighters at that level and not only these large fires it would typically be even smaller fires that we would typically deal with acre fires fifteen hundred acre fire as again pursuant to the opportunities presented to us and the funding available we're not required to go like they said it's just opportunity for us to go ok and the collets is that the name of the department thank you chair i've never actually thought about it that way the agreement itself will stay in effect until terminated by the parties  that way i'm not sure how that would functionally work but i'm sure the fire department if the council strongly oppose this or put probably been budgetary provisions control participation in these types of events but i'm sure they would counsel if the council strongly oppose this process later at that but there's nothing in this agreement saying the council can terminate three of all thank you very much the other question is was  have i haven't heard anything like that i'm not sure i wouldn't know that for sure i believe they do some training you know obviously with the department in a state potentially the sheriffs and federal folks but i'm not really sure another jurisdiction on file the story of the chair i'm not familiar with that what the police department does i apologize thank you so technically this could possibly be the only one that we have question please i think one of the differences here is for though one chief for the all hazards team that's a grant we receive as part of a program so it's a good it's gran funded it's not necessarily a direct agreement this intergovernmental agreement is a direct agreement with another governmental entity that's why we need to come through in our government agreement process so it's a little different where we are specifically signing onto train and whatever reciprocal training with another department in another state so that's where it is a little different i'm not sure if how the other ones work on all of n p t like she said they do train with other organizations but it might be on their grant funding or you know like height of funding or something those types of things so this is those are differently funded and through grants this is just a direct agreement where we want to work with another entity thank you can't wrap my mind around why we need to as i understand if it's trigger if this triggers or allows us the capability to apply for  grants then i that's one thing i get that but it appears it doesn't does it is this attached to do we have to enter into this type of an agreement in order to apply and i guess apply utilize the grants from the state on security ground the past in support of the prescribed fire but what it allows us the opportunity for the purpose and the main purpose in reason for it is again we have the ability now to have our members train to a national of because we won't be able to achieve certification in the wild and firefighting cordoning group which is the national standard unless we demonstrate these proficient skills on an incident typically it can be done with prescribe fire but you have to renew every year so basically unless we do a lot more prescribed fire or training live fire training in the while an environment year it's almost impossible so what this will allow us to do is be able to have our full purchase our people credential primarily in the beginning and also allow us not to become instructors within the program to teach this internally as opposed to bringing fire fighters from the mainland that are certified to that capacity to teach us and instruct so will save us money in that area as well so it's it's centered on qualification certification but it also is a cost saving measure in the long run because we will be able to train and  people to national standards in c g here on the island as opposed to either not being able to or bringing in people from the mainland to credential us so that's the two reasons primarily that it  in maui so you're going to send some of our personalities to washington to learn some of those skills is that what you're saying and then there is there's a vested prosody there would be washington would send some of their personnel here to train for proficiency or certification under some of their disciplines that they are weak in or need more training and so what is the  what's a quid pro quo here are they getting a free trip here to maui to vacation or what is the proficiency that they want to learn from us well primarily it provides and the opportunity to train in the off season because as you know washington state it's raining from a bo i'm not even sure why but they have a limited amount of training time for a while on fire because they go from rainy to dry and now they're in fire season so they have a limited amount of training opportunity in washington state and that's why again this chief that we started talking about this agreement with it was his idea because he said you guys can train almost all year round here and we all know that that's dependent on where you're looking at i mean obviously in haiku or i live it's almost as rain washington state sometimes but when you talk about west ma and other places there's a lot of opportunity to train year round so they have the ability to come down and train in their off season with us which is typically when we train because like them are busy season for wildfires is typically in the summertime soul and as far as proficiency it is a different feel type typically but they also have the high desert which i never knew about till i started going on these big incidents and they have grass fires and buffel grass and fuel types that we have similar to fallow fields basically and then they also of course have the big evergreens and whatnot so but we fought a holy pally fire a few years back and that was in the big timber sol i it's not every day that's going to happen but at least we have we will have training and knowledge of the type of fire setting as well so you know i understand where the department is coming from from that state i guess my concern is this being used later down the road in budget saying ok well now since you've agreed to this now it's within the fire department budget and we are  obligated to find whatever it may be they need to complete this training or at least this training agreement that they've executed so that's my concern you know just just being able to have that flexibility to say no we don't have the funds and if you if you need the funds you're going to have to go out and get it the department needs to get it on their own you know federal grants or what may they have resources to do it in so that's my concern that if you're in the other concern is if this is going to be the only i guess known agreement that we're entering into  i'd like to at least have that information on m p t do they do similar agreements that that would make me a lot comfortable if i knew the other department was also o i think i would feel comfortable if there was a fall on you know information gathering from n p t to see whether they do it as well because this this could be something that could open up the door for  was here and when they came to me and i said ok but i don't have anything we have to go to a whole re redo of the corporation council i feel there's two things that are very important and  correct me if i'm wrong first of all this is not a required training it is an agreement that we have available to us if and when its funding can be made available whether it's through grant or other means and sicken me this is something that because of the way i'm always changing and prevalent followed and that we have all over this county and will continue to grow in the near future you feel that this would be something very important to have this aspect to have this kind of training to have our personnel certified so that we need now not bring in somebody but we can do it here as a program locally instituted and have our people sort of fight to do the training here in my that's correct chair and i think there are some valid concerns here that we would come back and say well we need money now to support i understand that and that you know you represent your communities and if we end up having some major fires and we need to you know the training program away and we justify that to you folks and that's addressed there there's no underhanded on my part and the department's part trying to say that this is part of a program now we've got to support it we all understand we just want the opportunity to take the opportunities if they present themselves that's that's really all it is and there's no promise of staffing their engines or we're sending twenty people there's none of that on the table it's just creating a conduit and them coming our way as well because they've supported out of their department without even having agreement up to this point the one time that we've done it and it was a huge cost for them and without an agreement the fire chief on his end had to go before coming in like you folks on and say that know where we're proposing an agreement and we want to show you the benefits of it type of thing so we appreciate it and your right chair and thank you for giving us finally the opportunity to talk about it so  well that is there's a memo you with national park i believe there's a variation of what the coast guard as well as department of forestry and wildlife so we invite them when we do the training like for instance prescribed fire we invite them to come out see the crash rescue guys don't always deal with that but on their airport property they may and so they've taken us up on the opportunity but it's it's a portion of the overall animal you i should i should put it that way that memorandum of understanding just for one another on an incidence so that that would be more correct in saying it that way it's not specifically a training agreement it's a it's a clause within the animal you are in a way finalized it has been a little bit longer maybe three or four member covello and now we're looking at doing other parts of the island and what it does is identify hazard areas and i'm sorry not only the eye on the county remember oklahoma but that's what the li h as she may have been talking to you regarding the newly because out so we just had a meeting this past saturday to the public or ranch regarding can you in measures that they can take to increase their safety on their properties out there  it would seem to me that this kind of training it is relevant to being able to implement a plan if something happens so i was just wondering if you're signing on for their standing off in your plan or putting in put whatever assets a critical infrastructure then look at the type of resources or and or the training available and and they also then identify that this is the plan they sometimes make recommendations but oftentimes it's not centered around what level you currently have it's more you meet up to handle b c g standards which which again it won't say that they won't do a plan for you if you don't have that but it will also increase the effectiveness of your fire response organization so you know i'm looking further on down the road it's been mentioned on the video that we might look for grants and you know when you're looking for grants grants and mentors and looking certification and training if they want to give you money so does the reason i brought it up but thank you and i have been a part of that and i've gone through a few of the meetings that this was done and i've seen the participation agencies that are part of the implementation of the various plans for which small way and other areas so i can say that is very intense and part of it is training and having qualified training available for these various incidents which will come chairman i speak in support of the motion and i would just ask you to consider in your community report that you consider language that maybe in one year they come back with a status come and we'll add that and put that as part of the committee report and i would think that an annual status report i would like to put in in a manner if you don't and you push whoever the chair is of this committee it should come back every year i think that's  very important to see what they're doing anything the money's being expended and what results are we getting from it so i have no qualms with it thank you very much any other discussion seen on all those in favor signify by saying i for you know we've got a lot of things to do so you know the problem with a break is that i don't get everybody back but everybody but if you do back by ten thirty i mean you know i really got to get moving on some of these issues and we're going to be stuck in a mud for a long time fourteen deaths seventy is to place on the next general election ballot question with charter section three dash nine point three should be amended to state that the cross the government commission  it by the charter commission in two thousand and twelve in two thousand and fourteen this particular version of resolution was recommitted on second and final reading we are now two years later the audit office is the full if the mayor would like to appoint continue to ministry of bodies for specific purposes i think them are still allowed to do so but good enough for me it's very clear now with  people's decision that it is within the office of the auditor to assist in the oversight and accountability of the county government and so for me it's what i believe is continued areas of advice meant to this council and to the mayor's office and you feel that the audit to should be the one to be able to conduct all of those same issues or that the may have set up another whatever you want to call it off she wants a quality commission to handle areas of that nature these are not investigative these are more areas of what i'm calling proficiency looking for efficiency and coming back with recommendations to the departments as they have well i've sat here in this team over the last ten years for me chairman i have had this thing where we are in our governance moving from a board of police commission civil service commission public works commission fire commission i mean we have a lot of commissions to take if you take their responsibilities as a stablished by charter there's a lot of things we wouldn't you know for me term and i want to i appreciate this discussion because i think it's worthy to have a discussion especially with the question of the governance issue that may come forward i myself am disturb the panel chose to go beyond what the council had requested them to provide back to the council i didn't think we asked them to prepare a child a question that was not to me my understanding of their task had you know by their approach they have created some issues for me that to me would have been avoided by staying within parameter of  responsibility that they're supposed to respond to and not exceed but most requested of them was just ok my as i said earlier i don't want to get really get it i get it and i right to stick with the subject matter at hand and this is what you're bringing forward has really big work to do he has major financial things to take a look at where as to me this body looks more in depth at operational things and where they see pockets of maybe some possibility of saving money i bring up the idea that we got from them and it has turned out to be wonderful when they looked at their use of cars twenty cars and as that as a result of that we have a wonderful policy and i know works because the other day i heard on t v one of the county employees saying oh i can't rush because they're going to get me with the g p s in my car which is wonderful you know it not only is saving money but it's also keeping people safe because now we can pick if you're speeder in a county vehicle and this is a kind of work that cost of government you know the government auditor will do an audit plan and you bring it to us for approval and he selects of course what he wants to audit and i think that keeps him busy enough but i have no objection to the idea of having a citizen body that is looking at depth in depth and thinks and i think i'm really proposal is really just what it already says in the charter the commission shall be advisory to the county auditor so perhaps i'm trying to understand it do we just cut it shocked there  i think in recent years the cost of government has stepped up quite impressive in more ways than one and yet they still the charter the charter does say the commission shall be advisory to the county auditor so i think there's there is that kind of collaboration and or or working together debt does come about  i don't know if there is any kind of duplication as stated by my con the but an audit is very very specific if it's management or or or financial i believe i think i'm hoping that the cost of government commission makes recommendations to how we can how it can affect us in making are working down one path and these folks can work a different set of departments and one thing that is here in the current language in the charter that says that the commission show the power and study the power and duty to study and investigate the organizations and methods of operations of all departments commissions boards offices and other instrumentality of all branches of the county government is not as specific in the powers and duties and functions of the county auditor and i think  the vision of the constituents thought that you know the county auditor does the financial audits and a process audit of the big departments where as these folks can do the boards and commissions if there's a new issue with them you know these guys can fill in the book that the auditor either doesn't have time to do or mainly time or staff to do so i think it's a good adjunct to the county auditor i think i understand where mr a whole com is coming from as far as duplication of service i don't know that this is discussion i appreciate everyone's comments and point of view one for me one of the things that i've heard regarding the potential benefits of the commission is what i feel is already direct responsibilities of the council and that lead to sleep branch that's our job to do the audits that's our job to do those assessments and budgetary and now this requirements it's should remember that these are key responsibility on the countability of public financing the role of the legislative branch and so for me it's very black and white mr chairman there's not much agree and how i look at governance in th  if if that were the case then we could actually leave in there applied to decent powers but changed the language of the first sentence and possibly have read upon the approval of the auditor the commission shall have the power and judy two point two three so basically if they wanted to do an investigation they would have to get the approval of the auditor and if the auditor approved it then they would have the powers and duties under one two men three that's an option i'm proposing ok and again i think let me let me let me think about that but before i commit to one change or another or even any kind of change we haven't even got the two boys are making a motion so that's the first one you know i believe like my just getting its wings under them and i believe this cost of government commission has done yeoman's work in many areas at many in many different aspects you know not only investigation but also sizable change at this time however what i would say is this in with your approval i would like to defer this matter so that the county auditor can be here at our next meeting requests to have him here at our n part of this i think this is key to what we're going to decide on again agreed mr okama you know we are the legislative body we make those decisions but i think we need all the facts on the table and before we make a of this nature so with no objections i would like to defer this manner before you differ and i just want to did i just point out that if we're look if i agree with you should be supplemental and in doing so aspect so the commission would serve as supplemental by receiving an approval by the auditor so that whatever the auditor is working on he could either approve or disapprove the request of the commission and so group work on things that are needed not always just audit but other efficiencies that they have brought forward to this council in the past so it'll bring bread bring them forward and any other ideas anybody else has and i will try to schedule this at our next meeting because i think this is very important and with no objections i'd like to defer this matter thank you very much for the discussion thank you paul thank you very much for being here in our next meeting hopefully you'll be able to attend thank you and thank you all moving right along we i would like with your permission to defer item number five and that would be the proposal county clerk if i could bring those two items together so that we king complete those two and would least the county clerk and the deputy county clerk so they can get back to day duties with no objections very much soon we will still do number five we're go material present and pretty conacher here and i will open the floor to them to discuss this matter and then turn it over to you mr white since you were the proposal of this resolution thank you and members good morning thank you for this opportunity the resolution in front of you that requests both charter changes are pretty straightforward in text essentially  focus of these proposed amendments is to provide clarity to the existing language and of the charter of section eleven dash four relative to the initiative process is one that our office has experienced more directly we dealt with an initiative in the last general election and we are currently dealing with another initiative currently the issues that come up in the review of those initiatives does in fact warrant clarity in charter language in section eleven dash for for example one of the more minor changes  committee of the correct citation should be eleven dash three with the sake of clarity we are asking at that particular item be corrected in addition to that  the supplemental petition the supplemental petition does not provide for any individual who have signed the petition to request that their name be withdrawn should they choose us would be the amendment that would now put language into the charter that would provide and recognize that process where the ten in fact requests the clerk's office to remove their name from the signature unless the biggest problem we're experiencing in relative to this is the initiative process has been initially set up so that there's two submission process this the first submission is on all right if not then i will make my recommendation i recommend that we move to pass on first reading the proposed resolution enti v initiative we got in that timeframe to review the supplemental petition signatures the purpose of the proposed resolution to police on the next general election ballot the question with chapter thank you for letting us present to you guys today the clerk pretty much summed up this amendment as well regarding the amount of signatures that we receive on the supplemental side so what this amendment does is change it from ten days to twenty days we did draft this up and work with corporation council roughly the ending of twenty fourteen beginning of two thousand and fifteen we believe the intent of this whole process the initiat process with regards to a supplemental petition was that groups would use the full hundred eighty days on the initiative petition portion of that submission and collect a significant amount of signatures and submit it to the county clerk's office what we've been experiencing in two thousand and fourteen and this year is that the groups are using you know a very relative short time period of one hundred eighty days so i believe they used probably about forty to sixty days of their time period this go around in two thousand and fourteen it was somewhere around sixty days as well so they're not collecting a huge overage of signatures needed and thus when they turn in the supplemental to make up the difference they're turning and just as much if not more signatures on the back end and this provision in the charter in no it's it's you know we believe the intent was just to collect a few additional signatures to make up the difference and not to have a second full submission of signatures to the office with with regards to the ten days right now our staff in two thousand and fourteen will work every day of those ten days including on the weekends or holidays if they're runs over that and typically they'll be leaving here about ten o'clock at night on each of those days so we are incurring significant amounts of overtime as well as on the saturdays and  we feel that extending the time frame given what we've experienced in two thousand and fourteen and two thousand and sixteen would help reduce those over time costs as well as help us to ensure that we have enough time to accurately review the petition counsel services attorney to service legal advisers to and legal representation representatives of the council and the members in addition to in addition to the department of corporation counsel attorneys we this resolution there was a another resolution that i had proposed prior to this so this one and that resolution was regarding the corporation council and allowing the our council a county council to have the ability to terminate i brought those two items of this and on this and the one i just mentioned subsequently purely because i was hoping that the first resolution ajah having the ability of the council to terminate a corporation council would pass would be considered first so i don't know where that item is that and alternatively i propose this resolution which has the same language as honolulu's county council in their ability to utilize their council services attorneys to be able to give legal advice and to sign off on some of our which apparently they don't have to they don't seem to have an issue with allowing their attorneys the ability to sign off on ordinances and to give legal opinions  this has a little bit of a language difference in that a corporation counsel would still serve as the county representative or the county attorney but brief comments provide a little bit of history and background on this proposal first so c s doesn't have a position on the matter but for you it is a policy question we do appreciate the concerns raised by the current and former corporation counsel but our research and analysis show the proposal before you again would authorize o c s attorneys to provide legal advice and representation is defensible and workable of the council chooses to submit it to the electorate and it gets approved in this council member because one mention it it's not a novel proposal it's new to our county but it does this type of framework does exist in some other jurisdictions and the proposal would have been processed by o c s if we didn't think it was legally defensible some of the concerns raised by corporation counsel if this were to move forward probably could be resolved by ordinance or by o c s management directives some of the other concerns seem to raise policy questions which again is it's the function of the council to be the policymaking body for the county ironically i can't say that it's our office is opinion that the proposal workable because o c s attorneys aren't currently recognized in the charter and therefore can't provide legal opinions just research and analysis whether that's a problem is for the council and ultimately the electorate to decide i do know that our attorneys and other personnel in o c s are trained to work with corporation counsel to reach common ground when there are potential differences of opinion on legal issues and i commend the corporation counsel and his staff for being open and willing to take a look at our research and analysis on most issues we do work very closely with core council attorneys on a daily basis on legislative drafting and other matters of common interest and we've been invited by core counsel to a statewide municipal l conference in hawaii county this summer and we look forward to standing o c s staff to that event and fostering an even greater level of partnership there are times of course when differences can't be resolved during the past couple of council terms there have been a few bills and resolutions that o c s is prepared for council members that core council didn't feel comfortable signing including that the resolution it's before you under this item when differences reach a critical level executive versus legislative branch litigation is possible as one example twenty years ago the executive branch hired outside council without county council approval or council at that time authority to do so and staff attorney conducted research that tended to show council approval was required based on the expressed charter language so the council ended up hiring special counsel to file a lawsuit and the council lost in second circuit court and there was a lot of pressure on the council to not appeal the case further but with the assistance of research and analysis from the o c s attorney the special coun convince the county council to take the case up to the screen court where the council won in a unanimous opinion so that some of the history in context relating to underlying issues for this  all finally i would note the corporation counsel stated the council has a compelling need for a second legal opinion a special counsel can be retained of course that can be a time consuming and expensive option in recognizing the difficulty with hiring outside counsel a proposal was floated by a council member years ago to simply adopt a resolution and designate o c s attorneys this quote special council under the charter that's a creative option but our office ra concerns that such an action could be seen as an end run around the charter if the council wants that status for o c s attorneys we would recommend that a charter member it be pursued as a more direct approach so thank you mr chair for that of o c s and that doesn't all have to be contained in the charter we can suggest ordinances the council consistent with the charter that would set up a workable framework or in some cases we might be able to work with whoever the council chair at the time and and just have o c s management directives that adjust our framework and structure as necessary ok because and i don't know what the designation of office of council services and its legislative attorneys would have to change and number ten legislative attorneys acting as legal advisers and legal representatives must be supervised if at all by an attorney admitted to practice and in good supervision by an attorney having a license attorney supervised by another attorney is probably a point well taken honolulu c s for instance in their most recent hire of a director  services they hired a non attorney for the first time in many years but at the same time they hired a new position of deputy director of o c s who is an attorney and has the ability to supervise staff attorneys in their office so they counsel in court the way i read the portion is says the council may authorize attorneys within the office of counsel services to represent it in court litigation where the dispute is with  the executive branch and where the corporation counsel may read present the mayor or officers of the executive branch in the event that the attorneys within the office of council services should be authorized to represent the city council those staff attorney shall be deemed to have the status of special counsel so it sounds like if there's a disagreement then they can hire staff especially least the city and county is that you reading of it as well thank you for pointing it out that is interesting language that they don't have the status of quote special counsel in a lesson until there is an executive versus legislative dispute that goes to litigation but they have  ume that because they have that status in the charter and that potential ability to go into it court that allows their attorneys to offer full fledge legal opinions give legal advice which again in my comments we don't feel may how would you or how would you envision a committee meeting such as this happening would it no longer be staffed by corporation counsel we would now have to have an o c s attorney here sitting where mr coo sitting right now thank you mr share that that could really be decided on the basis of the councils of body or individual committee chairs i mean are our current structure right now for you sitting here in the chamber for committee meetings could be changed without changing the charter and at the will of committee chair or council chair the full body is i understand lulu city council's committee structure they function the meetings on t v or sometimes out in the gallery of the think they're going to be needing to speak whereas in their horseshoe table they have the counsel chair is in the center or the keys make you a chair is in the center attorneys and have a supervising attorney and i don't know we are already having a hard time with our current budget so increasing it i think it would be cheaper in the long run to if we need a special counsel then get special counsel and move on for a second opinion i understand where mr guzman is coming from there are times we do need a second opinion i think it would be cheaper to hire folks in constant service is there there there and they're wonderful they're attorneys with great attorney and so of course you want to talk to them but you're always given some caution that there are limits on what they can and what they do for us and kind of fascinated with the idea of having them you know be able to get advise us like our cooperation council does but then i see all of the conflict and mix and this is to put on the upcoming ballot pretty much to put forward to the community for a vote this what this is asking also ok and i'm ok with that to see what the general consensus is of this community but sitting here and in reference to our legal advisers there's many many times numerous times that i would wish there was someone here giving legal advice other than the existing corporation counsel and so i kind of like this idea and i don't know if it's going to be put a burden as mr ca just seen higher more and build even bigger than it is could be problematic budgetary wise and then it seems to be adding more i guess it could add more responsibility and work to existing so it's kind of a hard when to to call but i do recall many times as i stated earlier that i would wish there was another type of avenue for us to get advice if not and not have to go and seek special counsel this whole entirely new you know person step into the scene but have our existing people who  a hold in high regard and know they do their due diligence and give biased opinions and what have you here their knowledge and skills as attorneys so i'm i'm ok to seen what this community walk on a very fine line as to how they interpret their role and how corporation counsel would have to be such so i would i would like to see something important for us to take a look out how often this option would be utilized because i think for the most part it makes a lot of sense for our legal questions to go through cou el and they do a great job as everyone on this floor has stated over and over you know work very well served by corporation council my view of this is this is something that would if passed would allow us a little bit of flexibility when we question or have a difference of opinion with cork counsel and in the five years or so that i've been here and happened more than maybe once every six months or so but when it does happen it's nice to have the ability to depend on staffing because i think it's something that the current staffing would be able to handle at least to the degree where we get the answer that we we feel we need then if if it's decided that we need to go a step further that's when we would take the step of of hiring special counsel but i think and i do you know very much worth considering and so i still have my concerns some have been expressed by others so i'm not going to repeat there but i can point out that i've had the occasions to see it here when i had corporation counsel legal analysts and i couldn't get the same answer once from all three of them and talking about the same issue i have said this many times and i will put this on record attorneys to give you what they feel is their best show pinion or their best resolve on the law or audience or whatever issue you're discussing based upon their opinion discussing but they all have their opinions will this add another layer of opinions in this chamber i'm afraid it me but i agree too much the way it doesn't happen very often so do we really need this i agree with you didn't ever agreed with every attorney i've always had my o p m which is non binding and not legal so bad went out the door real fast so i i really believe at this point something like this  and i guess the other ngs i have with this is you put it out there as a charter amendment and how will people interpret this how people feel about this you know i got to be honest i brought this subject up last night on the table with this attorney  others and the others on the table looked at me like i thought that's really important you know again you know do we need we have more charter amendments that we're going to be looking at in a next couple of months and so i'm afraid to say that continue to work on the way we have worked in the past and again you brought it up mr white and i agree i've only had in the ten years i've been here half a dozen times and i recall that it's been really a strong challenge between what cooperation council and the council itself and the chair were talking about and that's tenuous you know so i don't see that as being a major influence happening every other month a full five times a year maybe then i would say yeah this is something that's ten seven the committees receive of correspondence dated april twenty first two thousand and sixteen from the department of corp consultations meaning a revised proposed resolution entitled proposing  understanding that the special committee on county government has voted on recommendations we believe in to the manager of management form of governance council does not yet have that recommendation i wanted to place this on comments or community regarding the ability of directors to what manage department to direct its employees and the mission at the army as as well as to also instill confidence in the ability of those that take the high responsible positions to perform on the public's benefit and not a political opportunity in its review it's bettman to ask the appropriate questions to see if the person as their ability to fulfill the responsibilities of the office then i would see in hindsight certain positions while it would be nice to have specific decrease and i can tell you especially if you look at the state department of transportation we've had had directors with engineering requirements they were the worst administrators and managers of people ok so you didn't work although well versed in the subject matter i mean let's look at our own fire department which hired them as firefighters initially not to manage your partner look at d o t know they have a director who knows how to manage administer went to a grilling processor or with the state senate came through on their visitor industry but if you look at d o t today it is a department that is on hum control it's humming along because you have someone who knows how to administer manage and direct personnel to achieve the objectives of the responsibilities that is part of a process of confirmation chairman and i believe this council has done its part regarding cooperation responsibility of the mayor's office that i think needs to be vetted and allow the people to have the confidence in a government that shoots certain situations arise that the next people in succession are duly qualified to handle those responsibilities and perform on behalf of the county and its citizenry that is part of our job as a legislative branch during that moment of confirmation and advise and consent so i propose this again you know i've made my position clear where i stand on governance  consideration and i would hope that the members can see enough merit to move it forward thank you chair thank you much of a crime when you do that so eloquently and well so well that i think the only thing you it and again i don't know if i make a decision today but you know if that's the case and that the feeling of the body is very strong in that respect we can put some kind of language whichever entity recommends these the buy me needs you know public wants is to have department managers that are qualified and are going to do the hard work on behalf of the people i think this is one way of director would be the one that would would be doing the hiring and be responsible for terminating if the person was not doing the right job and i believe that the way th should this should move forward as we have a vetting process that is not just left up to the mayor for through the appointment process but one that is done by evaluating somebodies prior work value where they're their educational background and so we're coming up with directors who and everyone on this list has significant responsibilities so we're coming up with directors that have significant experience and are going to be able to hit the road running i think the other thing that  i feel is a bit of a challenge with the changeover every four years or every eight years to pay them and whether the mayor is in place for four or eight is that when there's a turnover of staff you know we lose a significant amount of of knowledge just walks out the door and this is this first came to me a couple years ago when we had the two hurricanes coming at us and part of our standard operating procedure is we call we leave a message in all the guest rooms asking if you're a medical professional that you please call this number if you're willing to help out in the emergency well during that process i got a call from a deputy manager from a coastal community in maryland with a population of about five hundred thousand people and he said you know i'm not a medical professional but i'm more than happy to assist because my job is hurricane preparedness and after you're participating with him he came down and took part in our meetings and and helped with some suggestions of how to put there i was very valuable but that it struck me that here's a gentleman who's been doing this for a number of years and when the mayor changes his level of understanding and his and his work doesn't simply leave with the mayor only to find a new person that may not have the same level of training may not have the same level of experience who then begins the learning process all over again so that's one aspect the other aspect is that we have a lot of people in the in various positions that have significant experience in the various departments but whom have no ability to move up into the director or deputy positions because they're appointed and i know that that happens from time to time and they have return rights but there's no clear path for these folks to to gain by having the ability to continue carroll that maybe we need to work on the on the wording just on the chance that this may be you know the the form of government may change we don't know so they can they hear him and i agree but i also think that i would like to see something like stay there whether what i don't do it on what kind of form of government we have so i think the council should have that right so that the tell the charter is changed order of succession from mayor tear managing director to finance director and tell that is change i would like to see that we have this language in for those specific positions because those are the i guess the personnel that's going to be in the mayor's position if in fact he's gone so i would like to have added additional language which would have been by the by the mayor with their approval of the council and maybe removed by the mayor issues that may come up so the ability to terminate is important for those positions i might add also that it's although it's not in this resolution the other positions i would like to have that link playing which in is for a corporation counsel to the fact that he serves both the administration and the counsel and we still do not have the ability to terminate his position as well as the prosecuting position which we are the only jurisdiction in the entire state that still points the other jurisdictions aleck that position so we as representatives of the people should have the ability to move  ahead prosecutor by two thirds vote and so those are my justification is for those positions being able to have the authority to remove other than that i'm ok with the other language presented you thank you chair based on let's speak for us this morning i do support the approach that we confirm if that's the right or at the appointments of the before us as far as the other form of proposal for the county governance i guess so i'm just basing on what's before us i believe that this approach  observed and we have some pretty good people that stepped up to the plate to serve and that's basically what they do because you can't compare the kind of salary with what the private sector there what other forms of governance may be out there i do recall the discussion we had what three or four years ago mr obama about the man at the that time i think was just a managing director and financ director comments now being here few more years taking a look at it yes it's the mare's  derogative to to see who he or she would like to be their assistant you know they're there managing director and their finance director as well as all the other directors however we do appoint or confirm the appointment of the prosecuting attorney the corporation council in the water director per charter so adding the other departments is not i don't think it's that bad of an idea i think it's a fairly decent idea the only kaviak i would have on that is that potentially because it is again the mayor wanting to have his or her philosophy known i think the council would have the right of refusal as opposed to what the cost of government thought but i think it might be a tooth might be better to have a two thirds right refusal kind of thing on the more on more important well they're all very important departments so i think a good compromise here might be a two thirds vote to refuse not confirm i guess but other than that i believe and if you take out the air then out of all this language then what happens to the you know fire chief police chief and the director of personnel services now we're getting into those are appointed positions do we also have the ability to but they're not a you've seen how how we've been on the three positions that we're looking at i don't know how many people might be scared off a little bit from  from coming in and taking a lower paying job and wanting to serve the people if we if they have to go through that trouble fire if you will potentially i don't know there are some people who have told me  if i had to go through that i wouldn't even think about saying yes so that's something to consider i'm not saying it's a it's a deal breaker but i think mr obama's suggestions what else is out there potentially a good compromise at this point thank you and again i repeat did those treated you mention has specific language in the charter who does appoint them and who does hiring also the discussion in a different type of governance is on the table so what's in front of me as written for me i like the language and i think mr okama for bringing this back and that's begin everything is a matter of timing and i think it's difficult for us to try to make a decision on this because we know that there is another proposal out there which we have to deal with and again it's looking at the two possibilities and saying well if that other one doesn't exist then this may be a good alternative and as mr coach keeps mentioning a compromise i do have some concerns i like the idea of the vetting i think it's great that we would have the opportunity to meet the candidates and question them and talk about them i'm not sure that approval is our home but i think definitely it be nice if we could meet them and ask them questions the public could see what's going on and i think if that process were open to you know with the t v and everybody else what i think we'd be a little careful about who we recommend but i do place however with that being said we need to vent a little more in the near future we have i think i have like another i mean ten fifteen  may have to look for a full day and have a day when we just sit here and vent every day and so it didn't look forward to that because i want to look for a full day where we can go to the next thirteen or sole of amendments that are being propose many of whom i don't agree with and i will do my utmost not to support it but others that i agree with but it's not my place it's your beliefs you nine of us then make the decision and we still promise it that in the many times it's not my budget it's our budget well this is not my community it's our community so we need to work on all of this so with no objection i'm going to defer this matter and this one i'm not going to bring immediately back to the next meeting the last two i said i'd bring back this one i will not i want more time to look into all the areas you and bringing the other thirteen that we have to be working on in the next back counting backwards sequence to get to a certain date so your charter amendments would have to pass first trading on july fifteenth and second reading on august fifth ok so now we know what the timeline is three still hanging in there we've got a lot to work on so if nor actions i will adjourn the meeting and thank you all for being here and thank you staff thank you cooperation council everyone for being a part of this i think we've had some very healthy discussion and look forward to more healthy discussion this reading of the policy in the government affairs committee will now