August-September 1986 Home   Newsletters

October 1986

November 1986

General Membership Meeting - Oct 4
President's Message (Arlene Ellis)
U.H. Lt. Governor's Candidate Debate (Evelyn Bender)
U.H. Congressional Candidate Debate (Diane Hastert)
H-3 - League Concerns (Arlene Ellis)
New Roster
On Ballot - Convention Center and Planning (Astrid Monson)
Proposed C & C Charter Amendments
Thank You LWV (Frederick Reppun)
Wanted! One Macintosh Computer!
Experience in Washington Internship Program
Statewide Conference on Women - Theme: "Choices"
Oceanic Cable TV
Kudos to Astrid Monson
Membership Meetings
YWCA Lunchtime Programs
Action for Education: A New Era in Hawaii
Channel 20 Productions
League Active in Registration Drives
Speak Out Hawaii
Attention Music Lovers...
General Membership Meeting - Nov 1

On Ballot - Convention Center and Planning

Two planning issues will be on the November 4 General Election ballot. One is a City Charter amendment involving the Planning Commission and the other is an initiative-powered amendment to the Development Plan, prohibiting a Convention Center on the Ft. DeRussy site.

The charter amendment makes more specific the provision in Sec. 5-405 that the Commission "shall have its own executive secretary". Under the amendment the executive secretary would be "full-time" and "shall have had a minimum of three years of training and experience in a responsible planning position."

The amendment was proposed by the City Council to clarify and implement the Charter Commission's stated intent that the CPC should have the "freedom to explore more fully the role of a genuine citizens' group and a fuller opportunity to raise its own questions and express its own views". (The full-time professional executive secretary formerly assigned to the CPC had recently been transferred to other duties.)

League had testified at the Council's public hearing in favor of as much independence for the CPC staff as possible and in favor of the exec. secretary being a professional planner. The P & Z committee re-commends a favorable vote on the proposed Charter amendment as a step in the right direction.

The second issue - prohibition of Convention Center at Ft. DeRussy by a Development Plan text amendment - is more complicated. The present DP states that "the open space character of Ft. DeRussy shall be preserved." The initiative adds the words "and the building of a Convention Center or hotel is expressly prohibited thereon".

League's P & Z committee felt last February that the issue of location was pre-mature since questions as to the need for a center in the first place had not been sufficiently addressed. In the March-April Voter it was stated that the committee had not taken a position on the matter of location and was not ready to do so, both because

its priority policy was to emphasize island-wide issues and legislation, and because it had not researched the matter to enough depth.

League members are referred to the Voter for a discussion of the three basic issues the committee felt were involved:

  1. Whether a large convention center is needed at all on Oahu

  2. How it would be financed

  3. Where it would be located

Council member Patsy Mink recently raised some of the same questions, asking whether, realistically speaking, Honolulu could hope to get more than two or three conventions a year which would be large enough to require a convention center of the size proposed.

To complicate matters further, the City administration has included in the 1986-87 Development Plan review package an amendment to the Primary Urban Center Public Facilities map in the Ft. DeRussy area. The map amendment locates a "government building, site undetermined" within the Ft. DeRussy site. The project title is "Honolulu Convention Center"; the project description is to construct a convention center"; and the project location is "Waikiki - at Ft. DeRussy".

Section 3-405.1 and .3 of the revised City Charter state, how-ever that "any proposed ordinance which is approved by a majority of voters voting thereon shall be adopted ... No ordinance adopted

by initiative power shall be amended or repealed by the Council with-in two years after adoption, except as a result of subsequent initiative or by an ordinance adopted by the affirmative vote of at least three-quarters of the entire Council after public hearing.

It would seem that the proposed DP-map amendment would come under this provision. To say the least, it seems premature in view of the initiative and the forth-coming balloting on the matter.

The Committee hopes that these explanations will help League members cast informed votes on these two issues.

Astrid Monson

August-September 1986 Home   Newsletters November 1986