Maui County voters will have the chance to weigh in on three charter amendment questions in the November election.
The questions are related to the Board of Ethics, commission vacancies, and compensation for top county officials.
To get on the election ballot, charter amendment questions were approved by a supermajority of at least six of nine councilmembers. From there, an amendment passes if the “yes” votes on the question outnumber the “no” votes.Question 1:
"Shall the Charter be amended, effective July 1, 2025, to authorize the Board of Ethics of the County of Maui to hire independent staff?"
This question asks if the Maui Board of Ethics, which offers guidance to employees and investigates ethics violations, should have full-time staff. Currently, the volunteer board manages all complaints and requests for guidance with one secretary and one county attorney who are shared with several other departments and boards.
What does a “yes” vote mean?
It would allow the board to appoint an executive director and other staff, including attorneys and an investigator, to assist the board in performing its duties such as investigating ethics violations and answering requests for guidance. The Maui County Council would set the salaries of the staff if the amendment passes.
Because the board currently has no independent staff and only has access to the county’s corporation counsel, it’s been difficult for the board to pursue ethics investigations. That’s because corporation counsel is a legal advisor to all departments, boards and commissions. That lawyer is currently tasked with explaining to the board what the law is and also bringing to the board the ethics violation case. That could compromise the board’s ability to be impartial.
Having a full-time staff would also allow the board to respond to questions from government officials and staff quickly, instead of having to wait for the board to convene on each request.
The idea would be to make the structure more similar to the Honolulu Board of Ethics, which does have full-time staff.
Question 2:
"Shall the Charter be amended, effective July 1, 2025, to minimize the risk of vacancies on boards and commissions generally, and specifically with regard to dedicated seats for members residing in less populous areas, by allowing the appointment of members of boards and commissions for two consecutive full terms or ten consecutive years, whichever is greater?"
Board and commission terms are five years. In most cases, after their term is over, the board or commission member would need to wait two years to be reappointed to that same board or commission.
This question is asking if that person should be able to be reappointed for a second term without the two-year break. It’s an effort from the council to fill vacancies on boards and commissions.
What does a “yes” vote mean?
Although the wording of the question targets members residing in less populous areas, the question does not restrict the increase in time to just those members. A "yes" vote would allow a person who served their five-year term to be reappointed to that same commission for a second term without waiting two years in between.
Also, for those who fill a vacant position on a board or commission to serve a partial term, there are currently different rules about being appointed for a second term without waiting two years in between.
Those who serve fewer than three years are currently eligible to immediately be reappointed to serve another term. However, those who serve three years or more have to wait for the two-year cooling-off period. Voting "yes" would eliminate this clause and allow them to serve for two full terms, or up to 10 consecutive years without the two-year break.
However, Councilmember Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, who introduced the measure, explained that board and commission members will still need to be appointed and approved before starting each term.
“It's not a guarantee or an automatic second term for anyone serving on a board or commission. It would just be enabling someone to have that opportunity to serve a subsequent term,” she said.
Rawlins-Fernandez added that although she originally proposed the change to only board and commission members from Moloka‘i and Lānaʻi, the other Maui council members wanted it to apply county-wide.
Question 3:
"Shall the Charter be amended to require the Salary Commission to determine ‘salaries’ instead of ‘compensation’ for elected officials and appointed directors and deputy directors to maintain consistency with the Constitution of the State of Hawai‘i and remove fiscal barriers to create equity through benefits such as reimbursement of travel costs?"
The Maui County Salary Commission determines both the salary and compensation for elected officials, directors and deputy directors. Salary is just base wages for workers, while compensation includes benefits like reimbursement of travel costs.
The Maui County Salary Commission is the only one in the state that decides compensation and not just salary. This question asks if the commission should instead be limited to deciding the salary for elected officials, directors and deputy directors.
What does a “yes” vote mean?
It would limit the Maui Salary Commission to only set salaries for elected officials, directors and deputy directors – similar to the other three counties. The Maui County Council and mayor would then determine benefits such as travel reimbursement.
“A lot of people may use them interchangeably, but legally compensation includes more than one's salary,” said Rawlins-Fernandez, who also introduced the measure. “The salary is just the pay that someone gets, the wages. Compensation includes other benefits which could include travel.”
She explained that because Maui County also includes Lānaʻi and Molokaʻi, travel should be part of compensation to create equity for residents of those islands to serve in county leadership positions.
Councilmembers are already reimbursed for travel because they are required to live in the areas they represent. But that isn’t the case for other positions, like the Department of Agriculture Director who lives on Molokaʻi.
When the Maui County Council tried to approve $1,500 for that director to be reimbursed for travel between Molokaʻi and Maui, they were alerted that because it would be considered compensation, the salary commission would have to approve it. The county council then found that it was the only county where its salary commission would have to approve compensation as well.
“The state and the three other counties, the salary commissions only set salary, so this amendment would make it consistent with everyone else,” Rawlins-Fernandez said.
