Difference between revisions of "Template:Nhsc-v1-6"

From GrassrootWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 56: Line 56:
 
* Preface: unanimously approved
 
* Preface: unanimously approved
  
* Approach and Methodology:
+
* Approach and Methodology:-approve (Shipley, Anderson,
-approve (Shipley, Anderson,
 
 
Dinkins, Handley, Morales,Schleede)<br/>
 
Dinkins, Handley, Morales,Schleede)<br/>
 
-disapprove (Kamali'i,
 
-disapprove (Kamali'i,
Line 68: Line 67:
 
Beamer, Betts)
 
Beamer, Betts)
  
* Conclusions and Recommendations:
+
* Conclusions and Recommendations:-approve (Shipley, Auderson,
-approve (Shipley, Auderson,
 
 
Dinkins, Handley, Morales,
 
Dinkins, Handley, Morales,
 
Schleede)<br/>
 
Schleede)<br/>

Revision as of 18:55, 14 February 2006

Interest in the Draft Report was great, and the Commission received numerous requests for an extension of the deadline for public comments. To accommodate all of those who wished to comment, the Commission announced in the Federal Register and through its office in Hawaii that it would extend the comment period for an additional sixty days—to January 23, 1983.

By the end of January, the Commission had received almost one hundred written comments on the Draft Report from individuals, native Hawaiian organizations, State government agencies, Congressmen, and Federal agencies. The Commission's Draft Report was revised based on all these comments, as well as on the new information that had been collected by the Commission since the publication of the Draft Report. Because of their importance, the written comments received considerable attention as the Final Report was drafted. As a result, the written comments received by the Commission on its Draft Report appear in the Final Report in three different ways. First, as required by statute, all written comments received by the Commission are reproduced in full in the Appendix of the Final Report. Second, some of the comments were used to revise the text of the main Report and these comments are referenced in the text where they are used. Finally, there is a summary in the Appendix of all written comments that are not specifically referenced in the text of the Report.

The revised Draft Report, including draft conclusions and recommendations based on the Report and the information gathered by the Commission, was sent by the chairmen of the two committees for review, prior to the Commission's meeting in March 1983. At this meeting, the Commission reviewed each section of the Report and voted on whether to approve and accept each chapter. The results of these votes are as follows:

  • Preface: unanimously approved
  • Approach and Methodology:-approve (Shipley, Anderson,

Dinkins, Handley, Morales,Schleede)
-disapprove (Kamali'i, Beamer, Betts)

  • Executive Summary:

-approve (Shipley, Anderson, Dinkins, Handley, Morales, Schleede)
-disapprove (Kamali'i, Beamer, Betts)

  • Conclusions and Recommendations:-approve (Shipley, Auderson,

Dinkins, Handley, Morales, Schleede)
-disapprove (Kamali'i, Beamer, Betts)

  • Part I

—"Demographics": unanimously approved
—"Health and Social Services": unanimously approved
—"Education": unanimously approved
--"Housing": unanimously approved
—"Ancient History to the Reciprocity Treaty":
-approve (Shipley, Anderson, Dinkins, Handley, Morales, Schleede);
-disapprove (Kamali'i, Beamer, Betts)
—"Native Hawaiian Culture": unanimously approved —"Native Hawaiian Religion": unanimously approved

-p6-