HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/16/2011 Regular Council MeetingCOUNCIL MEETING
November 16, 2011
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai
order by Council Chair Furfaro at the Council Chambers, 4396
Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kauai, on Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 9:16
following members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Tim Bynum
Honorable Dickie Chang
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Honorable Mel Rapozo
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura
Honorable Jay Furfaro, Council Chair
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
was called to
Rice Street,
a.m., and the
Mr. Chang moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kuali`i, and unanimously carried.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
Special Council Meeting of October 25, 2011
Council Meeting of November 2, 2011
Public Hearing of November 2, 2011 re: Bill No. 2419
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kuali`i, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Before I move on to the Consent Calendar, I would
like the group to know that it is the intent of the Chair to solicit a period of time to
have the Police Department speak on item 304, the Cold Case Grant, and I'm going
to ask the staff to make a call over to the Chiefs office. And it is also my intention
on item 303, I'm going to request the county attorney be present for an executive
session in two weeks to revisit the legislative process associated with the framework
of that particular bill and help us understand the legalities associated with it. So
on that note, the next item that I'm going to ask for is, is there anyone willing or
wanting at this time because of restrictions to speak on any item on the agenda
including the public hearing notices that are scheduled for 1:30 p.m. today? Is there
anyone in the audience that would like to speak on the Consent Calendar? And
please note, again, if you speak now for the purpose of acquiring some time, the
facts will prevent you from speaking directly on those items when those items come
up later in the day. May I see a show of hands if anybody wishes to speak on the
Consent Calendar? Let the record show that no one wishes to speak on the Consent
Calendar.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2011 -297 Communication (10/20/2011) from the Chief, Building Division,
transmitting for Council information, the Monthly Report on Building Permit
Information for the Month of September 2011, which includes the following:
1) Building Permit Processing Report
2) Building Permit Estimated Value Summary
COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - November 16, 2011
3) Building Permits Tracking Report
4) Building Permits Status
Ms. Yukimura moved to receive C 2011 -297 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang,
and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: I'm going to take a three - minute recess. Please
stay in your seat; I have a technical issue I need to address.
There being no objection, the meeting was recessed at 9:20 a.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 9:21 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much for allowing me that short
recess. I had the numbers inverted on 303 and 304. So we had those items
corrected and we are sending over a request for the police chief or Lieutenant Asher
on 304. Okay, let's go to communications, please.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2011 -298 Communication (10/24/2011) from the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee Chair, requesting that Proposals to be considered and
included in the 2012 Kauai County Legislative Package be submitted and discussed
at the November 16, 2011 Council Meeting:
a) Communication (10/24/2011) from the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee Chair, requesting that the Administration submit
legislative proposals for inclusion in the 2012 Kauai Legislative
Package for discussion.
b) Communication (11/10/2011) from the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee Chair, transmitting the following:
• A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act Relating to Energy
Resources (To align Chapter 196 -6.5, Hawaii Revised
Statutes, with the stated intent of Act 155, SLH 2009 with
respect to variances in the law (proposed by Councilmember
JoAnn A. Yukimura;
• A Proposed Draft Resolution requesting the Legislature of
the State of Hawaii to amend Chapter 188, Hawaii Revised
Statutes, by adding a new section to be appropriately
designated Prohibiting the Sale of Aquatic Life for Aquarium
Purposes, and amending existing Section 188F -4 regarding
the West Hawaii Regional Fishery Management Area Plan
and Section 189 -11 regarding Receipts in Duplicate; and
requesting the Governor to issue a Moratorium on the
commercial take and sale of aquatic life taken for aquarium
purposes from State waters; and requesting the Hawaii
Department of Land and Natural Resources to adopt a rule(s)
prohibiting the commercial take and sale of aquatic life taken
for aquarium purposes from State waters (proposed by
Councilmember KipuKai Kuali`i);
COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - November 16, 2011
A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act relating to Prohibition on
Sale of Aquatic Life for Aquarium Purposes (proposed by
Councilmember KipuKai Kuali`i).
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: I'm prepared to make a motion. I guess I would ask
that we take this up ad seriatim because we need to ... it looks like communication a)
will be a receipt and communication b) would more than likely be an approval. So I
would ask that we separate the items so that we can address each one individually.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is my intent to look at the items individually.
But as we go forward on item a) in communication 298, I would like to suspend the
rules and ask Mr. Heu from the administration if he would like to come up and have
some narrative with the council. Mr. Heu, the rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GARY HEU, Managing Director: Good morning, Chair and Members of the
Council, for the record Gary Heu. You should have in front of you a communication
that I put together and the reason I put it together was we have some newer
councilmembers who may not be familiar with the history relative to the
development of the Kauai County Legislative Package. So I thought it best to just
put my thoughts and recollections down on paper and although I don't want to
necessarily read through the communication, I did want to spend a little time just
having a discussion about the Kauai County Package.
As far back as when I first came onboard in 2002, the Kauai County Package
basically was comprised of two different components. One component dealt with
proposed legislation which would either create a new law ... the creation of a new law
or the amendment of an existing law. The other component of the package
historically has been our capital improvement program funding request of the
legislature. And for those of you who were around then, you recall that the bills
that were put forward for consideration came both from the administration as well
as councilmembers, and there was discussion and a vote by the council as to
whether it would be included in the package. Likewise, what the administration
would do is come over with a listing of potential CIP projects for which we would
request funding from the state legislature either in totality or at a 50% match
against county funds. And if you recall, sometimes we'd come over with a package
of CIP projects that contained maybe 10 different projects and what we found was
that year over year for the most part we might get one of those projects funded at
50% funding with the help of the state legislature. And so we started to modify how
we approached the CIP request and number one, we cut down on the number of
requests, and then as we went through the years, we started to look for a nexus
between state and county interests because we felt that if we could show that there
was that sort of connection that we could get greater buy -in from the legislature for
funding of those types of projects. The last request that we made, some of you
recall, was funding for the Emergency Bypass Road out along the Wailua stretch in
front of the golf course to the tune of $950,000. So you've seen in the CIP budget
that we have $950,000.00 budgeted for that against the state's match of
$950,000.00. That was the last one we made. In the past ... last year we did not
submit any requests for CIP funding from the legislature and that was primarily
due to the fiscal condition of the state. And as you folks well know, the number one
thing that we look for from the state relative to funding is our transient
COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - November 16, 2011
accommodation tax or TAT. You know that that's a very significant component of
our revenues. It goes to our general fund and I believe the strategy was and is that
we would much rather retain that level of funding and protect that funding versus
asking for CIP moneys at a much lower level. And we just felt that it showed on the
part of the county our acknowledgement that the state is in a very, very difficult
financial situation and we just feel that it's probably not an appropriate time to
continue to ask for CIP funding. That doesn't mean that as things make a
turnaround we won't once again begin to engage the state in partnering with us on
some of these capital improvement projects.
Relative to the submittal of bills, currently the administration has no bills to
either create new laws and/or amend existing ones that we are inclined to put
forward.
As you folks know, HSAC is a very mature and established organization and
there's a lot of merit behind what comes out of HSAC relative to a proposed
legislative package.
In recent years, the mayors of the various counties have come together to
form a coalition, which is known as HCOM or the Hawaii Conference of Mayors.
And the intent of bringing that body together was so that mayors from the various
counties would have a forum to discuss common types of issues, problems and
solutions to those problems, sometimes in the form of proposed legislation. So in
recent years what we've seen is we've seen a shift of submitting proposed legislation
up through HCOM and if HCOM approves the proposed legislation for inclusion in
the HCOM package, we don't come and separately propose that to be part of the
Kauai specific package. Now, if we take a proposal to HCOM and there's not an
agreement that that should be part of the HCOM package, then we would come
before this body to propose that particular bill to be part of the Kauai package. I
think that's why in recent years you have seen fewer and fewer proposals coming
from the administration to be part of the Kauai specific package because, again,
we've got another venue to raise those concerns and those requests for consideration
relative to proposed legislation and the feeling that like HSAC does a very good job
of advocating for the HSAC bills, we have found that HCOM, likewise, is another
venue that can be very effective with the four mayors being proponents of the
proposed legislation.
So given all of that, again we have no bills that we're proposing to be part of
the Kauai package this year, nor do we have any recommendations for CIP that we
would offer up for state legislative consideration at this point in time. That's not to
say that we don't have CIP projects that need funding. It simply means that we're
choosing not to advance them funding -wise through this particular process. In
short, I mean that's a really drawn out way of saying, we don't have anything to
submit as part of the Kauai package. But, again, I just wanted to provide that
background and that evolution for the sake of some of the newer councilmembers
who haven't been around to see that take place.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo, I recognize you for some questions.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Gary, I guess for the benefit of the
newer councilmembers as well, I think we should inform them that the purpose of
doing a county package is to show the legislature that there is mutual agreement
with the administration and the council for specific actions that we would like them
to see. And although I appreciate what HCOM does and I appreciate what HSAC
does, I think it's very important and I guess I'm disappointed we won't have any
items on the county package because I know we're going to discuss some today for
COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - November 16, 2011
the county package, but it appears that we won't get any kind of suggestions or
proposals from the administration, but I think it's important. And I guess my
question is wouldn't you agree that we should come out with a county package,
collectively so that when we go up as a county... because obviously HCOM has
different agendas. HSAC has different agendas because HSAC is more concerned
with our individual counties as a legislative branch. HCOM is more targeted
toward the administrative branch and that's perfectly fine. In fact one of the
proposals that we were making with HSAC is to actually have in the next session
the bylaw changed that would at least put a new seat on HSAC that would include
the mayor, a county mayor, so we would have that collaboration between the
administration and the counties. I think that's a good idea. But I think to forego
that opportunity to lobby as a county because I know as ... with HSAC for so long
and meeting with legislators at the state level, one of the first questions they'll ask
is, is your administration in support. And we won't have that this year. I guess,
I'm assuming we'll have a couple of bills in the county package, but we won't have
any... again, I think I talked about this last week that I would have at least hoped to
have seen something relating to the TAT that we could collectively go up to the
state legislature and say, the administrations and the councils agree that in fact we
believe... whatever it is, whether it's to leave it as is...I know some of the counties at
HSAC in fact have some discussion. We do have a TAT bill in the package but one
of the counties had suggested that we ask for more. And HSAC immediately, the
three other council people immediately told him, you're crazy. You're not going to
go ask for more. They're talking about cutting. So we agreed collectively, the four
counties agreed that the best position to take as the counties is, hey, at least keep it
where it's at, but we don't have that and was hoping we could at least get that out of
our council or our county package. So we'll move forward with what we have, but I
don't think it's too late. I think we still have an opportunity before the session to
come up with... and I agree with you. I know a few administrations ago or a few
years ago we'd see county packages with a ton of stuff and I know for a fact that
legislators will just toss that straight in the rubbish can because it was
unreasonable. But I thought we had changed that where we're going to pick certain
items that we feel are in the interest of public safety, public health and we would
work together to get that across to the state legislature, and I'm hoping we can still
do that. We still have some time. The session doesn't start for a while, so we would
be able to put together something, I believe, in the next month and get it passed so
we can collectively have a county package, not just a Conference of Mayors and an
HSAC package, but one that is collective with Kauai County that we can say, yes,
the council and the administration agree that these are priorities; we want you to
do this. I think we need to do that and I think we need to do that together and not
just a few individual councilmembers putting up some proposals, and I'm hoping we
can work toward that end.
Mr. Heu: Just for clarification, are you speaking
about... because I heard you mention public safety and that sort of thing, were you
referencing CIP or (inaudible)?
Mr. Rapozo: Whatever it is. It could be a CIP bill proposal. It
could be a joint resolution. It could be ... like I said, I think the one that we should
definitely do at the very minimum is the TAT. I think we need to send a message to
the state now before they get it ... because you know how it is up there. They'll be
processing probably 3,000 bills this year and we kind of want to get a head start and
say, hey, before you guys start digging through your piles, Kauai County and
hopefully Maui County, and Hawaii County and their respective mayors all agree
that we probably should start focusing on the TAT. That's just one. I mean if there
are any other projects out there, CIP projects ... you know I think we have some
issues with roads. It's unrealistic to believe that we'll be getting any influx of state
COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - November 16, 2011
money. I agree with that and I think it would be foolish to go out and ask them for
unreasonable funding. But I think to set a policy statement for this county, I think
it's very important that we get a county... not a council, not an administrative, but a
county legislative package that was agreed upon by the administration and the
council so that we can target our efforts of lobbying in that direction versus ... I can
vision it now. When the state starts to talk about cutting the TAT, I can see all the
press releases about the mayors all flying up and testifying. I'd like to see all the
four counties go up collectively as counties, not mayors, not county councils, but as
counties. The mayor would be the appropriate spokesperson. But at least going up
there and saying this is part of our county package. I just think that's the wisest
path to take with my experience with the legislature because one of the things
they're concerned about is, is there collaboration between the councils and the
administrations because if not why fund something that the councils want that the
administrations cannot live with and vice versa. That's all, I guess, my point is. I
think there is some time that we can work. There is ... I didn't see a TAT proposal in
your HCOM package. It's not here. You have things pertaining to ERS, employee
union as well as some stuff with personnel directors, but there's nothing in the
HCOM package for TAT. I'm surprised. You can look at the one at HSAC. Feel
free to copy that. I noticed that your ERS proposal and your employee -union
proposal are identical to the HSAC proposals. It's identical.
Mr. Heu: Right, this was from last year.
Mr. Rapozo: So somebody was talking story, which is good. But
I wish at least for TAT because I think we all know how important that is and I'm
very concerned about TAT this year and like I said to our HSAC representatives at
our last meeting, we're going to have to make a very disciplined, strategic, careful
plea to the state in a way that's not offensive like what was proposed, like we want
more, that's not the way to go. But I believe that in order for us to preserve that
fund, it's going to take the efforts of all county councils and all mayors coming
together and if that's the only thing we do, I think that we should probably focus on
that.
Mr. Heu: Your points are very well taken. And just to add to
that in terms of how the Kauai Package has been viewed by the state legislature, I
think historically we have been the only county that has submitted a package that
was a result of collaboration between the administration and the council, and that
fact was not overlooked by legislators. And I think they've always been impressed
that Kauai has been able to do that. Relative to the discussion on the TAT, there's
no doubt, it's absent in the HCOM package and we have submitted nothing. But
there has been a tremendous amount of discussion about the TAT and the need to
protect and retain our share of that. I guess it's a matter of strategy in terms of
how you approach that and I'd be more than happy to have maybe an offline
discussion in terms of some of the thoughts that we've had. Again, just because it is
absent in the HCOM and the administration's proposal does not mean that it's not a
high ... it's probably the highest priority for us as we enter into this legislative
session. We feel that if we do nothing else at the legislature, this coming session to
protect and retain our portion of the TAT is the highest priority. Having said that,
in our last department head meeting this past Monday, we once again reminded all
department heads that they each need to be vigilant in their own areas of
responsibility for any effort during this legislative session of a state counterpart, a
state entity, department agency, attempting to shift financial responsibility from a
state agency to their counterpart at the county level. We've seen those types of
efforts happen in the past. I would expect that some of that activity may intensify
given, again, the state's critical fiscal position. So again, outside of the TAT, we
want to make sure that we are not ... that the counties are not unfairly treated
COUNCIL MEETING - 7 - November 16, 2011
relative to transferring of any financial obligations or responsibilities from the state
to the county. So, again, Councilmember Rapozo, I'd be more than happy to have a
discussion with you and at least share some of those ideas in terms of how we were
considering approaching the TAT issue because, again, like you we do think it's
very, very important.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay and I do want to highlight what you said
earlier about the state legislature commending the county of Kauai. I had a
discussion with Marcus Oshiro, the Finance Chair, and really if we don't have a
county package, the chances of it getting the attention that it should are very, very
slim. And I just want to, I guess, say that I believe that we should be and I would
assume and I shouldn't assume, but I would just guess that because it's not on the
HCOM package that there is a strategy that you folks are considering that is not
going forward with some kind of legislative package and maybe working somewhere
else. I just know that in a very short time we are going to be faced with that same
discussion and we're going to have people running around this county like chickens
without heads, like oh, my god, oh, my god, we're not going to ... they're going to cut
our TAT. Because that discussion is going to be had, we know that.
Mr. Heu: Absolutely.
Mr. Rapozo: And believe me from the discussions I've had with
some of the legislators, it does not look good. So we're going in, ninth inning
trailing, two outs, full count. That's how I look at it. And I suggest we bring our
best batter up there to take one out. And I don't think, my own opinion, hanging
back and waiting and hoping something good happens may not be the right
direction, but that's just my own opinion. So we'll leave it up to the body. Thank
you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. I want to recap what I'm hearing from
you and Mr. Heu before we go any further. So I think Mr. Mickens would recognize
the fact that the St. Louis Cardinals did a great job from coming from behind this
year to become the world champions and I think that's Mr. Rapozo's comment. We
have to wind up with our best hitters and what I'm hearing, we still have in our CIP
the $950,000 for the bypass and we're still strongly lobbying for the state's share so
we can work on the bypass.
Mr. Heu: That's correct.
Council Chair Furfaro: And I do have for the members a reminder that on
the December 14 meeting I do have Ray McCormick lined up to chat with us about
that piece.
I'm also hearing and in my meeting with you yesterday, if I have to stay
beyond the opening of the session with the mayor, I will also make myself present to
work with him and our four legislators on making sure we really convey the
importance of the TAT component in such a way that our legislators understand its
importance to the neighbor islands and the hotel association's contribution to that is
an understanding also for us that a lot of investment went back into our hotels for
the purpose of having a real high quality experience for the visitors to make sure we
tie that market to a repeat customer.
And then I also think I'm hearing that we all have to have our eyes and ears
open here on any items that might be pushed our way because whether it's a repair
and maintenance item such as the shoreline piece in Kekaha and so forth, we all
have to have our ears to the ground to make sure that those issues, if they come up
COUNCIL MEETING - 8 - November 16, 2011
or if there's any preliminary discussions with that, that we're on it right away. And
that's pretty much, I think, what I'm hearing from the administration's position. I
thank Mr. Rapozo for the questions to the administration, but let me see if there are
any more and we want to show a very uniformed approach with our needs being
heard with aloha, I guess. So, are there any more questions at this point of the
administration? Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Gary, why is not the TAT reflected in the mayors'
package? I didn't get that because you said it's the most ... maybe the most
important.
Mr. Heu: Yeah, again, we do think it's very, very important
and as Councilmember Rapozo said, it will appear. I mean there's no...
Ms. Yukimura: The issue is going to come up, we know that. But
why aren't the mayors taking a stand and joining with the councils?
Mr. Heu: Well, again, I think... it's not currently in the
HCOM package. The HCOM package currently consists of...I believe it is five bills
that have been carried over from the 2011 session. I know that HCOM is going to
be scheduling a meeting if not by the end of November, sometime maybe in early
December.
Ms. Yukimura: So what you're saying sounds to me like, well, we're
going to wait till the mayors meet. But aren't the mayors free also to take positions
on various issues? Like the counties have their legislative package and then where
they can all agree, they have it as part of their HSAC package.
Mr. Heu: Absolutely.
Ms. Yukimura: So wouldn't Mayor Carvalho say, yes, TAT is part
of our Kauai County Legislative Package or do you have to wait for the mayors'
organization which then to me defeats the purpose if it's going to slow down or
interfere with a clear stand as a county?
Mr. Heu: I know exactly what you're saying and yes, Mayor
Carvalho could come out and make a statement about how strongly he feels that the
TAT should be retained, that's how he feels. That's how we are positioning
ourselves relative to approaching the legislative session and the lobbying that will
take place during that session. There is no piece of legislation that we're putting
forth that would speak to that.
Ms. Yukimura: But it's a position on an issue that will be
addressed by the legislature and could very well be part of our legislative package,
the county's legislative package, which is the item on the agenda today. So, I mean,
I don't feel like there is a lot of thinking or strategy in terms of a county package
and I think Councilmember Rapozo has pointed out that we have been lauded in the
past because we have had that kind of dialogue and then also collaboration between
the two branches of county government. So I guess my request is that the
administration take a second look at the possibility of creating a very vibrant Kauai
County Legislative Package and where it overlaps with the mayors' package, then it
is even stronger. But it seems to me we shouldn't lose our county voice in the
process of trying to work with the other counties. Is that something you think the
administration might be willing to do?
COUNCIL MEETING - 9 - November 16, 2011
Mr. Heu: Well, again, like I stated before, if in fact we had
developed a piece of legislation that we thought was very important to Kauai
County and the other counties, we would take it up through that channel before
HCOM. If HCOM says, you know what, we're just not interested in that. Certainly
that would have appeared on this agenda as an item that we wanted to take forth
as part of the Kauai package. So basically what we're saying and putting the TAT
aside just for a second because I think we're all in agreement that's a critical issue
for us this session, so what we're basically saying is that we have nothing to offer
relative to either a Kauai specific legislation that we feel strongly should be
introduced as part of a Kauai package this particular year. If we did, we certainly
would put it before this body. I think it is also important to remember that just
because something doesn't show up in the Kauai County package doesn't mean that
there aren't other entities that aren't promoting certain pieces of legislation. As an
example, there's a statewide fire council, which is made up of all the fire chiefs
across the state and they have their own paekage specific to public safety and fire
related as with the Hawaii Law Enforcement Coalition.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, but we're not talking about those packages.
We're talking about a county legislative package.
Mr. Heu: Right, but there are ... what I'm saying is there are
pieces of legislation in those various packages that are relevant to Kauai County.
Ms. Yukimura: Then to the extent that they are really important to
the county, we could include them in our county legislative package as well. So it's
not just the fire department's lobbying, but it's the council and the Mayor saying,
these are important to us, right? So, why are you not asking the council to support
these bills that the HCOM is supporting?
Mr. Heu: I think we had that discussion last year when then
Councilmember Kawakami, I believe, held the position of the Intergovernmental
Relations Chair and in fact as Councilmember Rapozo pointed out, there are a
couple of bills that are reflected in the HSAC package that are the same as HCOM
and it is because of that discussion that took place that it appears that way. So I
think that if I'm not mistaken... and so I think there was that type of discussion and
people seeking mutual support for those packages. And so these are merely
carryover bills from last year for which yes, we would hope that the council would
support that. I know that, again, in working with Councilmember Kawakami last
year, there was support for that package.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, but we're this year and we're talking about a
new package. So is it a request of the administration that we support these bills?
Mr. Heu: I don't think we are formally asking for as a body
that you support it. I mean as individual councilmembers if you feel that there are
certain pieces of legislation in there that you would like to support, we would be
more than happy to ... I am sure HCOM would be more than happy to have your
support. But we are not here formally asking for this body's support of that
package. We are providing that information merely because they are carryover bills
from last session and we are providing it for your information.
Ms. Yukimura: I'm a little puzzled because if these bills are really
important to the county, then why wouldn't we put them as part of our Kauai
legislative package as well as the HSAC legislative package?
COUNCIL MEETING -10- November 16, 2011
Mr. Heu: Again, Vice Chair, these are not new bills. These
bills were presented last year. These bills worked their way through the legislature
last year. Again, if councilmembers would like to support that, if you feel that you
would like to make that proposal that it become part of the Kauai package, you
have the ability to do that.
Ms. Yukimura: We're talking about... when the Mayor makes a
request, it's a form of leadership and asking... that's why I'm asking. But if...I mean
I'm just very puzzled. So of course we can propose it, but it's a different matter
when the Mayor says, we would like to have your support because this is really
important to the county. And then if we can go in united, it really carries a lot of
weight. The legislators have given us that feedback that it does. So I mean I feel
like it's an exciting possibility to work together to put a package together and I'm
just not feeling that from the administration. It is certainly the administration's
choice to take a position like that, but I think it's also my job to ask the questions
why that are not coming forth if, in fact, as you say these bills are important to the
county.
Mr. Heu: Well, I mean, you know, I don't want to prolong the
debate. I mean I could turn around and ask the same question of...we've not
received a communication from HSAC asking for support of those bills. So
historically I think we have to step back and look at historically how this has been
done. What we're talking about is we may be at a point of transition and that is
what I was trying to identify. Years ago there was no such thing as HCOM. I think
having HCOM created has created a new dynamic and so I don't want to say that a
county package is not important and like I said if we have specific pieces of
legislation that we thought was very important to Kauai, Kauai specific, we would
be putting that forward. I am just saying that this particular year, we do not have
anything to offer.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, members, I want to say to you I don't plan to
prolong this. I think I said it in my own subtle way that if I have to be there longer
this time to lobby for our support, I plan to. I think the council has voiced their
concerns and I think another piece that came out and I think I'm hearing from
Mr. Rapozo as President of HSAC that they are still formulating a plan to see if
they couldn't have a representative in HSAC from the Conference of Mayors. I
think those are all good points. But I don't want to prolong this debate any longer.
We've heard the position. I plan to be there to help for Kauai and let me just see if
there are any new questions from other members. Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Good morning, Gary. Thank you for providing this
information and it is good to see what was submitted previously that didn't get
approved and I think all of them seem like very worthy requests from the counties,
especially appointing the liquor commissioner, having the authority to appoint our
personnel director; I think all of those make a lot of sense. My question has to do
with the CIP project list and in the past we have submitted. I was just wondering,
are the other counties also choosing not to submit a CIP request this year?
Mr. Heu: I don't have any specific knowledge, but I know
that last year... the years kind of blend together because over the last two sessions
there has been varying degrees of requests from the other counties. I want to say
two years ago I think that maybe only one county put forward any type of request,
although there had been discussion at that point in time along the mayors that
COUNCIL MEETING -11- November 16, 2011
there probably wouldn't be any submittals. I quite honestly cannot recall what
happened last year, but I tend to believe again that if there were any, they were
very limited. Certainly we did not submit any request last years.
Ms. Nakamura: I recently saw in the paper that the State of
Hawaii is issuing a very substantial bond issue for CIP projects and that's why I'm
raising the question because we have a lot of state facilities on this island and
although they may not be county projects, we may provide some input on what some
of the priorities might be.
Mr. Heu: That's a good point and in the past we have gone
out and supported fully projects that were fully funded by the state, state projects.
We do take a certain amount of our guidance from our state legislators in working
to create packages and CIP submittals because it does not make a lot of sense to put
in a submittal that does not have the support of our own legislative team.
Ms. Nakamura: Sure.
Mr. Heu: And so even in regards to the wisdom of submitting
or not submitting during these time has been vetted informally with some of our
legislators.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Just to get clarification, though, we are still
pursuing the state's share for the Wailua Bypass?
Mr. Heu: We are still trying to shake that loose.
Council Chair Furfaro: Because that's what I heard earlier. Okay, any
other members that haven't had a chance to... Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Just a quick question. This upcoming session, we
will have a lobbyist at the state legislature?
Mr. Heu: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: You know last year, this council never had a report
from that individual. So over the last couple years, the track record has been one
year we were totally informed and at one point the administration had it at an
executive level person that was keeping us kind of routinely informed. The next
year it was like ... I never heard anything. So hopefully this upcoming legislature,
and that's for us to deal with too, right, that we get kind of a before the legislature
recap that this is what I'm tracking for the county, here's the county's position and
kind of updates. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: I'll come to you, Mr. Rapozo, then I'll come to you,
councilwoman, but I want to first see if there is anyone who hasn't spoken has any
questions for the administration? Okay and Gary, under the current chairmanship,
I just want to re- emphasize Mr. Bynum's question because I will be pursuing an
agenda item for an update on the lobbying effort, just so you know that.
Mr. Rapozo, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. So I guess, Gary, a follow up to
Mr. Bynum's question is that lobbyist will be lobbying for what? If we don't have a
county package, what is he going to lobby for? Is he going to lobby for HCOM? Is
COUNCIL MEETING -12- November 16, 2011
he going to lobby for our HSAC package? That's the purpose of having a county
package. That's why we hired a lobbyist to lobby for the county's package. But if
we don't have a county package and this discussion right here was really, item a) is
your, the administration's proposals which is none. But the second one, these
proposals that are being proposed by Councilmember Kuali`i still have to be
approved or we have to get the support of the administration for it to make the
county package. But I guess my question is what will that lobbyist lobby for? Is he
just going to be our eyes and ears? I don't think that's what lobbyists do. It was my
intention when we funded that was so that that person would lobby for the county's
legislative package. So I guess my question is what will that person be lobbying
for?
Mr. Heu: I think that's a good question and yes, that
lobbyist, in part, kept us informed and did a certain amount of lobbying on some of
the proposals on the HCOM package last year. But I think the real value of having
a lobbyist on the ground is having somebody who is roaming the halls every day
during the legislature to keep an eye on what's going on with that TAT and just as
importantly as I discussed the directive given to department heads is looking for
that exposure that's created by bills that are popping up during the session. And as
you folks know, that stuff moves fast and furiously. I mean it is incredible how
quickly things take place and so to have somebody there on a daily basis after hours
is very, very helpful. Other counties have created positions, I think it was at a
minimum Maui and I'm uncertain about the Big Island, but Maui had an executive
assistant to the mayor who during the legislative session basically lives there, and
so that is their connection. We don't have that capability and instead we rely on our
lobbyist to be that person in the halls to be able to make that kind of contact and to
provide that kind of information to us and give us a head up when necessary.
Council Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair Yukimura and then Mr. Bynum.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. So have we already contracted for
services of the lobbyist?
Mr. Heu: I know we were in the process of (inaudible). We
are in process right now.
Ms. Yukimura: And will we be using the same contract language
because I'd like to see a copy of last year's contract and the proposed contract for
this year, if there are any differences.
Mr. Heu: Okay, we can probably send that to you.
Ms. Yukimura: Could that be made available?
Mr. Heu: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: And then could the lobbyist be available —it sounds
like the Chair is thinking of that — before the session begins, so sometime this year
so that we're ready for January?
(Inaudible.)
Ms. Yukimura: If we could do it in December so we're ready for
January because the lead time once January comes is so short.
COUNCIL MEETING -13- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Well, we have our first session on January 4 and
we already have three special sessions in December, so.
Ms. Yukimura: I was just thinking at our committee meeting in
December, maybe?
Council Chair Furfaro: Well, I appreciate you recognizing my intent and
we'll work out the details later. Let's proceed with the administration.
Ms. Yukimura:
Council Chair Furfaro:
meeting?
Ms. Yukimura:
Council Chair Furfaro:
Okay, all right, great.
I'm going to step out. Could you take over the
Okay.
Mr. Bynum has the floor next.
The Chair was noted as excused at 10:09 a.m.
Ms. Yukimura: All right, thank you. Okay, so I think it would be
useful for us to speak to the lobbyist prior to the start of the session and to be clear
about the process and procedure and the communication. Thank you.
Councilmember Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I just echo that. I hope that we ... and it's
Mr. Pacopac, right?
Mr. Heu: It was last year.
Mr. Bynum: It is this year as well?
Mr. Heu: I think we're still in the procurement process, if I'm
not mistaken.
Mr. Bynum: I mean I think ... I appreciate your answer because
he's got his finger on the pulse of what is happening there and he needs to alert us
to things that happen. When he comes here, I want to speak to him about homerule
issues. You know, the legislature can put something in as an amendment that
basically takes the county out of the equation or keeps us from taking care of our
own business here. That's come up repeatedly since I've been on the council and
sometimes we wouldn't be aware of that if we didn't have someone like Mr. Pacopac,
who really is in tune with the day -to -day workings. So I think that service is
invaluable not just for legislating for our agenda but for keeping us informed and
alerting us to something that could have a really big impact on the county in the
future. And you're right, sometimes that all comes down in 48 hours or even less.
So I concur with the members here that last year I'm sure he was out there doing
that, but we didn't have any front -end talk; we didn't have any on the (inaudible)
kind of updates and maybe we didn't make that clear because he was kind of new to
that to working for the county, not new to having his finger on the pulse, right?
And so I know he's an extremely knowledgeable person that can be of real
assistance to us. You agree with the things I'm saying?
Mr. Heu: Absolutely and you know, I think, again, lobbyists
have a very targeted specific role. And for those of you who have gone down and
testified before house and senate committees, that does make an impact. Having a
COUNCIL MEETING -14- November 16, 2011
lobbyist represent the county position on the floor of one of those committees just
doesn't resonate with committee members the way it does to have the finance
director or the mayor or another department head for the appropriate committee
discussion. So that's not necessarily part of what we would see as the role, although
they have done that in the past. It just doesn't appear to be as effective as having
someone from the county, whether it be a councilmember testifying or a member of
a particular department.
Mr. Bynum: Right and an individual who is that familiar with
the legislative process can give us an alert and then give us counsel about how we
can have our testimony be most effective. You know, what is it that this committee
needs to hear from the County of Kauai so we don't go up there and talk about a lot
of things that really are not going to be decision making points, right? So I really
highly value that. I just want to increase the amount of dialogue we have had in
this coming session. Thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: Any other question of Mr. Heu? Yes,
councilmember.
Mr. Rapozo: Actually I just wanted to clarify something because
Mr. Heu mentioned that HSAC doesn't seek the administration's approval for our
package and that is true because HSAC's package is HSAC's package, HCOM's
package is HCOM's package. So obviously the HSAC package is really in its
essence that's what it is, it is the councils' package. But I think it is important that
the county ... if in fact an issue does not make the county's package, let's say this
aquarium fish proposal, the administration may come back and say we don't
support it. Then it doesn't make the package. But the council always has the
ability to do a resolution to send up. But I think it needs to be perfectly clear that
the county's package is a joint package between the administration and the council.
That's the only package that is a joint package of the councils and the
administrations. HCOM and HSAC, that's their own thing. But it's nice to funnel
some of these things down. Like in fact, I don't understand, I think, JoAnn, you
asked earlier on the two bills that are identical, the HCOM proposals that are
identical to the HSAC, that should be in our county package. I mean obviously the
mayor approves it; it is on HCOM, so that should be one that is on our county
package period. But I guess, Gary, I don't know if maybe I heard wrong, but it
sounds like HCOM, is it a policy that the individual mayors cannot support outside
of anything that HCOM doesn't unanimously support?
Mr. Heu: Oh no, no, not at all.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, that's good. So the mayor is free to support
individual proposals at the county level that may not be supported by HCOM.
Mr. Heu: . Absolutely. You know as I said, if we took
something to HCOM for inclusion in their package and they said, nah, we don't
want it, then we would definitely put it before this body.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay. But let's say on the two bills that are
identical to HSAC, the ERS bill, basically all it is then we'll talk about it later, but I
would assume that Mayor Carvalho is supportive because it is on the HCOM
package.
Mr. Heu: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING -15- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: So I would ask the IGR Chair that ... and I'm
assuming this will be referred to the committee, Mr. Kuali`i. I would assume
because we still have to get the feedback from the administration on these
proposals. But I would ask that we immediately add those two that are identical to
HSAC to our county legislative package. The other two that's on HCOM, we do
what we want with it, but as far as the two that are identical, obviously
Mayor Carvalho supports it, so I would ask that we include that.
Ms. Yukimura: You're referring to the ETUF representative, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: And which is the other one?
(Inaudible.)
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah.
Ms. Yukimura: The ERS representative?
Mr. Rapozo: ERS and the employer health benefits trust fund.
Right now we have no county representation on those bills.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. In terms of process, since we're taking this
ad seriatim, we can today as a council approve and I was going to propose that all of
the mayors' package be made part of our county package, and then we can send it to
committee or whatever we want to do.
Mr. Rapozo: That's fine. I can tell you there are two of these
that I would not support as far as a county. But that's fine. It can be added onto
the package to have the discussion in committee, but I think also, Mr. Kuali`i, we
need to send over a communication to the administration requesting their input on
the other bills, understanding that we need their support or it doesn't make the
county package. I don't know what happened in the last two years. I don't know; I
wasn't here. But it sounds like it kind of went different; I don't know. It just
doesn't sound like it was done in the old days. But in the old days we were
complimented by the state legislature, which is kind of where we want to stay. If it
ain't broke don't fix it. So that would be my proposal and I guess, JoAnn, I would
definitely support the addition of these four because we do have the approval of the
administration and then we can have the individual discussions as we get it into
committee. Thank you very much.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, we'll come to that. All right. Any other
questions of Mr. Heu? If not, thank you very much.
Mr. Heu: Thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: I want to now ask if there is anyone from the public
who wishes to testify on this matter. Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, JoAnn. For the record Glenn Mickens.
I just have a short testimony. First, I want to agree with Jay and Mel that we need
a clutch hitter like Freese from the Cardinals to step up in the 11th inning and hit a
walk off homerun as the World Series proved and I guess we're still looking for such
a clutch hitter. I completely agree with Mel that there should be collaborative effort
between the council and the administration to keep our TAT tax. Send the
COUNCIL MEETING -16- November 16, 2011
legislature the strongest message possible and if the issue is on the agenda, I don't
believe there is a too early time to start our lobbying effort for it. I believe if we are
going to send a message to the legislature, we do need the voices of our council and
the mayor speaking as one and being in total agreement. That's basically all I have
to say, JoAnn, but I agree with what you and Mel are saying. I don't understand
what the problem is with the administration putting this package together because
it doesn't seem as though they are including whether it is the mayor's people or
whether it is the council's thing, I think it should be one agreement. Thank you,
JoAnn.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to
testify? And I'll hand the gavel back to the Chair.
The Chair was noted present at 10:19 a.m.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Vice Chair. Okay, so I would like to
acknowledge that this item a) we should probably have a motion to receive this
particular piece. But before we do, I would like to have some dialogue from the
members and then as this is one agenda item in 298, I want to share with you that I
will be going into the portion of this agenda 298 next with dealing with aquatic
resources and Councilmember Kuali`i has asked me for time for a presentation.
Subsequently after that we will go into items dealing with other listed summaries
including the energy piece as well as the resolution on aquatic life. Now, I'm going
to call the meeting back to order for a moment.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Members? Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, Mr. Chair, while you were absent, we had
some dialogue about the mayors' package, the HCOM, the Hawaii County of
Mayors package, and there is some desire to include some or all of those as part of
our county legislative package. So possibly in addition to a motion to receive the
communication, we might also make some motions to approve and maybe take it
one bill at a time and thereby find out where we have a majority of the council
agreeing to include these bills as part of our legislative package.
Council Chair Furfaro: Sounds fair and reasonable to me and when we get
to that point, I will let Mr. Rapozo handle that portion. Mr. Rapozo, do you want to
speak?
Mr. Rapozo: I was going to suggest the same thing, that we
really make the motion to accept the HCOM proposals into our county legislative
package for discussion and then whatever passes out of council with the majority
vote would become part of the county's legislative package because we already have
the ... it is obviously being composed by the administration and I'm not sure if that
was the intent of the administration because I heard him say earlier that they were
not going to submit anything. But I think at the end of the day whatever our
county package amongst us is agreed upon, we still would need to get a formal
acceptance of the administration on the individual packets just because that's what
county packages are. And it is not a council package, it is a legislative package.
And then again anything that is not passed into a county legislative package would
obviously be placed into a resolution from this council to the state legislature urging
them to do whatever we want them to do. So I just want to make sure that we all
understand that process and we all agree to that process. I don't know where it
COUNCIL MEETING -17- November 16, 2011
changed, but that is how it has been and that is how it is done at HSAC and I think
that is how it is done here because when that package gets to the legislature and we
need to get this done before the opening. And I agree with the Chair that I think we
need to really make a strong effort this year at the capitol individually and I think
the opening of the legislature is a good opportunity for us to be there as a team
along with the mayor and to meet as many of the key legislators as possible. This is
going to be a tough year.
And the other thing HSAC will be doing, we'll be hosting a little luncheon on
the issues. On the proposals that make the package, we will be meeting with the
key legislators in the committees that in fact will determine whether or not some of
these things even get on the floor. And I would extend that invitation to the
administration as well as this council that we could include in that meeting the
county package as well. So that is an opportunity that has been very successful in
the past. I cannot say again how it was done in the last two years, but it was done
that way and we were very, very successful. That would be my recommendation,
Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Mr. Chair, my only concern is that these five
carryover bills were really not on the agenda and if the public wanted to have some
say on this to us as councilmembers, they would not have known about it and so I
really think that we shouldn't talk about these and vote on these today and that we
should talk about it next week in the Intergovernmental Relations Committee and
they'll be happy to hear that.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, I think that is a very sensible approach and
we could look at posting that on the agenda and I would so approve it to be in your
committee next week. I'm sorry; let me go to Vice Chair Yukimura. Vice Chair
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: I think Councilmember Kuali`i makes a good point.
What we could do is just move to refer this communication from Mr. Heu for
consideration of inclusion in our legislative package and have that discussion and
recommendation vote in committee next week.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay.
Mr. Kuali`i: I think as long as we list the details to the five
different carryover bills.
Council Chair Furfaro: Let me recognize Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. You know a lot of our
discussion this morning was about hopefully getting together as a team. I do want
to say that a big part of this discussion was being able to retain our TAT, which is
also known as our Transient Accommodation Tax. I want to take this opportunity
to thank our legislative team Representative Morikawa and of course
Representatives Tokioka and Kawakami, and our Senator Kouchi, as I think many
of us know three of the four were past councilmembers. And I believe along with
other neighbor island councilmembers, I think they shared the importance of
Honolulu to understand what we are as counties and how much we depend on this
Transient Accommodation Tax, and I think they have done a great job educating
Honolulu representatives that represent certain districts in Honolulu when in the
case of Kauai, our representatives understand that we as councilmembers
COUNCIL MEETING -18- November 16, 2011
represent the whole island. So I just wanted to say aloha and mahalo to our
legislative team because I think that they can also deliver along with our mayor and
with individual councilmembers the importance of retaining our Transient
Accommodation Tax, which does so much for the island as well as our visitor base. I
also just do want to say I don't know who our lobbyist is going to be. I know our
present lobbyist, but a lot of work has been mentioned about running around floor
to floor to floor to floor, but they are pretty much after hours still jockeying and a lot
of this business sincerely is entertainment and relationships. And a lot of things
are discussed and done after hours. So I do believe that we do have a very effective
team.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you on that note. I wanted to have
discussion regarding the actual process of the referral, Mr. Chang. I appreciate
your comments, but it wasn't reflected on the team. It was more reflective on the
discussion about the motion to consider a referral to the IGR Committee. That's the
subject now.
Mr. Chang: Okay, well I waited for the meeting to come
together so I thought this was an open discussion regarding...
Council Chair Furfaro: Well, it is an open discussion. I just wanted to
make my point, I wanted to hear pieces about do we want to reconsider this in
committee, but you continue to have the floor.
Mr. Chang: Okay, that is fine. I think I stated what I wanted
to say so if I got out of line, I apologize.
Council Chair Furfaro: I did not say you got out of line. I wanted to talk
about the subject matter about the referral.
Mr. Chang: Okay.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, is there any more discussion on the referral?
Council Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Chair, I'm just thinking procedurally that a motion
to receive and to refer Gary Heu's memo would be appropriate with itemization of
each bill on the agenda in committee.
Mr. Rapozo: Second.
Council Chair Furfaro: It has been moved and seconded. Staff, did you
understand the particulars? The five items from the administration that are
carryover will be itemized in the Committee of IGR next week. All those in favor,
signify by saying aye.
Ms. Yukimura moved to receive C 2011 -298 a) for the record and to refer
Mr. Heu's memo regarding the 2011 Hawaii Council of Mayors bills to the
Intergovernmental Relations Committee, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Mr. Kuali`i, I had
mentioned that as a continuation of 298, it is my intention to deal with the aquatic
life piece, then the energy piece, and that will be the item. So, do you need time to
set up?
COUNCIL MEETING _19- November 16, 2011
Mr. Kuali`i: I think we can do it very quickly.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, let's take a three - minute recess for you to get
setup. Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 10:29 a.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 10:40 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, everyone. We are back and we are on
item 298. We are dealing with the communication on the upcoming resolution
dealing with aquatic life as well as having a presentation from Councilmember
Kuali`i. And after that, at this point I have three registered speakers on this item.
If there is anybody who wishes to speak on this item, please see that you are
registered. Councilmember Kuali`i, you have the floor. I'm going to move to the
front of the audience.
There being no objection, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to say that this
presentation and I assume the remarks from the public testimony will have to do
with both proposals, yeah, the two bullets, one for the resolution and one for the
proposed draft bill.
So our presentation begins with a slide here protecting Hawai`i's coral reef
ecosystem and the aquarium trade ban. And of note is the website
FortheFishes.org. In Hawaii it is illegal to take rocks from the ocean. Corals are
fully protected as well, but our coral reef wildlife is taken in limitless numbers and
their populations are collapsing. To give you a brief history, in 1953 aquarium
collecting permits were required and the trade was focused on Oahu. In 1973
concerns about the impacts prompted the administration to issue a moratorium on
collecting. However, that moratorium was lifted two days prior to commencement
to allow for studies. In 1997 the Environmental Quality Commission and DLNR
were asked if an environmental impact statement (EIS) was required. The
Environmental Quality Commission stated it may be appropriate, but DLNR said it
was not necessary. So in the 1980s to 1990s on Oahu, three major storms and over
collecting led to commercial collapse and the collection shifts to West Hawaii. Late
1990s in West Hawaii, studies show detrimental effects, thousands call for a ban,
and a compromise leads to 35% area closure beginning January 1, 2000. In 2002 to
2010, in West Hawaii the Yellow Tangs increase in the fish replenishment areas
(FRAs) but decrease further in open areas, and common species become rare.
Healthy coral reefs are essential to the socio- economic well -being of Hawai`i's
residents. As far as the benefits, there is educational, social, recreational, cultural
and spiritual, biological and ecological, physical (protecting coastal areas, food) and
for future generations and economic. The annual added value statewide for reefs,
for reef wildlife viewing, which includes snorkeling and diving, it's $306 million and
thousands are employed. For the aquarium trade, it is $1.2 million and less than a
hundred fulltime collectors.
As far as the total economic value, Americans placed the value of Hawai`i's
coral reefs at $34 billion annually, equal to the market value of ESPN and the Bill
& Melinda Gates Foundation (according to Forbes magazine). People also believe
that Hawai`i's coral reefs are worth protecting and restoring for future generations.
COUNCIL MEETING -20- November 16, 2011
Healthy coral reefs are imperative to the socio- economic well -being of
Hawai`i's residents. According to a 1998 DLNR report, the aquarium trade is a
major source of coral reef degradation in Hawaii. It significantly alters the
ecosystem. It takes essential algae and parasite eating fish. It damages and breaks
coral. And it focuses on Hawai`i's most beautiful and unique species. And it
depletes populations of targeted species. According to that 1998 DLNR
Management Status Report, the aquarium trade is a main cause of coral reef
degradation and the major impacts are especially noticed in Hawaii Island and
Oahu. The aquarium trade threats to the ecosystem are it disrupts the food webs
and it interferes with a complex ecosystem: the Cleaner Wrasse removes parasites,
and the high biodiversity is key to stability, and herbivores keep algae in check.
What happens to the reefs that lose too many herbivores? Eighty percent of
fish collected are herbivores. The herbivore removal can result in algal overgrowth
of coral and catastrophic shifts in the ecosystem. The harm to reef structure: coral
is broken and damaged when nets entangle it when set or retrieved; when material
is laid over it to block access to refuge; when sticks are hit against it to herd fish
into nets or out of hiding; when collectors kneel, kick, and lay equipment on it; and
also when collectors break it apart to get at hiding fish. So in the photos here, you
see a collection vessel that's anchored in the Kohala Coast, the coral there, causing
damage on February 15, 2011. And then in the other picture, a collector's bucket
and scooter is also in the coral causing damage.
The most collected Hawaii endemics or fish that are unique to Hawaii,
there's a list there, including the Potter's Angelfish, the Saddle Wrasse, and the
Psychedelic Wrasse, and the Hawaiian Dascyllus. There is no replacement pool for
many of the targeted species should over collection or habitat shift occur as a result
of the marine ornamental trade. So targeted endemic species once common are now
rare in West Hawaii: the Blue - striped Butterflyfish, the Bandit Angelfish, and the
Hawaiian Lionfish. Both the Angelfish and Lionfish are also being taken from
Kauai. And other species taken from Kauai since 2007 include the Bandit
Angelfish, the Potter's Angelfish. The Masked Angelfish here, the white one on the
bottom left, is one of the rarest fish in the world and the wholesale value is
$6,500.00.
Now practices contributing to the early death of these fish include swim
bladders pierced for faster surfacing, fins and spines are cut to avoid packing in
layers, and the handling removes the protective mucous coating. And then
exposure to air for just a few seconds takes 30 days for full recovery. Fish are also
starved for two to ten days prior to shipment and the starvation continues
throughout the chain of custody.
No wonder high mortality rates: they have short captive life spans and they
are "unsuitable species." Fifty percent of Hawai`i's top 20 species are so difficult to
keep alive that they appear on the trade list of species unsuitable for the average
aquarist or the hobby, in general. The term "unsuitable species" means species that
are unlikely to survive shipment or captivity for a considerable proportion of their
potential lifespan.
So what drives collection rates? Premature deaths. Up to 40% of Hawai`i's
wildlife die before reaching the hobbyist. Fifty percent of Hawai`i's top 20 fish are
not guaranteed to arrive alive when purchased through online retailers, and
hobbyists tend to drop out. The average hobbyist drops out within a year and
deaths caused by beginner hobbyists are astronomical.
COUNCIL MEETING -21- November 16, 2011
How long can fish live? On a reef, Yellow Tangs can live for 40 years, Blue -
Spine Unicorns can achieve 58, parrotfish at least 33; in the Waikiki- Aquarium, the
Potter's Angel 14 years; the Sailfin Tang 15 years, and the Raccoon Butterflyfish
22 years. Wildlife taken for the hobby, 20 years ago virtually none or less than one
percent lived more than a year in captivity. In 2009 these numbers have improved
slightly in the last several years.
So as far as the cultural and ethical conflicts with regards to Malama aina
and even sustainability, we know all about kuleana and the kapu system, you know
asking permission prior to fishing and taking only what you need and sharing your
catch with extended `ohana or community and having respect for the sacredness of
the process. The other thing is needless deaths and waste are justified by the trade:
the livestock necessary to drive purchases of lucrative dry goods.
For public benefit and policy conflicts, there is a very high cost and no public
benefit. Numerous harmful impacts employs 30 fulltime collectors and generates
$30,000 in excise taxes. The Department of Land and Natural Resources' policy
states that the highest priority should go to the conservation of the resource. Only
if an activity can be done in a way that does not unduly damage the resource,
should it be allowed. If use or activity by the public can be done without undue
damage to the resource, it should be the next priority for the general public. And as
far as commercial activities, commercial activities should be considered only if their
impacts do not impinge on the resource or use by the general public.
Environmental and legal conflicts: trade's environmental harm is well
documented. The trade's environmental impacts was never assessed by the Hawaii
Environmental Policy Act and in 2010 DLNR sought the Hawaii Environmental
Policy Act Exemption and they are stating that the environmental assessment is
cost prohibitive.
So Protect Our Wildlife and Reefs Progress Report: from 2007 through 2009,
statewide legislative efforts were blocked. In 2010 to 2011, Maui County passed two
landmark laws: one of them requiring a county permit, in addition to the state
permit, and the other prohibiting harmful inhumane practices. And in February
2011, the bill to ban the trade statewide is blocked, but there is overwhelming
community support for the ban and the call for the ban continues. Just last month
Hawaii County Council passed a resolution to support the ban. And for more
information you can go to Forthe Fishes. org and I want to thank Forthe Fishes. org
and their Director Rene Umberger for helping us out with this PowerPoint slide
presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: We will do the lights now. Thank you very much
for the presentation. If I can ask members to come back to the table, I would
appreciate it. It seems I might have seen this presentation before with my
mo`opuna. I think it was called "Saving Nemo" done by Walt Disney. I also
appreciate the reference to Hawaiian sustainability and the kapu system, take only
what you need, so mahalo, councilmember. And what I'd like to do is just ask the
members, you have a print out of the presentation, but to take public comment first
on your presentation, Councilmember Kuali`i. So on that note, I'll suspend the rules
and I believe I have three speakers: Rene, Robert and Maka`ala. And I'm sorry if I
used your first names. Umberger? Very good. Okay, Rene.
RENE UMBERGER, For the Fishes Director: Thank you. Thank you,
Council Chair Furfaro and Councilmembers. I'm Rene Umberger. I'm the director
of For the Fishes based on Maui. I'm just going to go ahead and read this. I
thought I only had three minutes and then elaborate a little bit afterward.
COUNCIL MEETING -22- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Actually, you have three minutes. I can give you a
second three minutes and I do plan to do so. So please go right ahead.
Ms. Umberger: Thank you. For the Fishes is a project committed
to protecting and restoring Hawai`i's native coral reef species by ending their
exploitation by the aquarium trade. Thank you for this opportunity to voice support
for the legislative package draft resolution and bill relating to this issue. Our
campaign is focused on the need to keep reef wildlife where it is needed most, right
here on our reefs for the benefit of all, not in mainland hobby tanks for the benefit of
a few. There is large and growing support from fishers, families, communities and
the visitor industry as the results of failed management efforts become evident and
the trade's cruel and inhumane practices are exposed. As Councilman Kuali`i
mentioned in the past year, Maui County has passed two landmark laws protecting
its reefs from the trade. If jurisdiction allowed, they would have banned it. And
again last month Hawaii County Council passed a resolution urging the legislature
to enact a statewide ban.
The importance of statewide versus island -by- island approach cannot be
overstated. Though our islands appear to be separate, our reefs are connected,
right? They are connected to the ocean, they are connected through the currents
that run between them. It is evidenced by the spread of Taape, an invasive species
that was introduced off Oahu in the 1950s. By the 1990s it had spread through the
entire archipelago all the way up to Midway, had become a very abundant species
and in Hanalei Bay it is the second most abundant species. So clearly these waters
are connecting all of our islands. In turn we must consider that as reefs are
emptied of species, the ocean currents are emptied of species as well. The
disappearance of heavily targeted aquarium species on the Big Island and Oahu
reefs surely is affecting these reefs as well.
Much is at stake, including food security. Fishers tell us there are fewer and
fewer fish to feed their families with. Favorites like pakuikui and kole are
vanishing. The state reports that aquarium collectors take 80% of Big Island
pakuikui living in the 30 to 60 -foot range.
Council Chair Furfaro: Rene, that's your first three minutes. I need to give
you notice. You have a second three minutes.
Ms. Umberger: Thank you. It is unacceptable. There are not
enough fish to feed Hawai`i's families. It is time to stop wasting them as ornaments
and the profits of a mainland trade. Let us harness their values, their true values,
keeping reefs clean and balanced, feeding families, delighting snorkelers and divers.
Please support these measures before you as drafted.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much, Rene. Let me see if any
members have questions for you. Members, do you have questions for Rene?
Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Rene, thank you for coming and I want to especially
thank you because I guess you came in from Maui?
Ms. Umberger: Yes.
Mr. Chang: So, you know I notice you are from the Kihei area.
You know the areas of like Makena and La Perouse, the fish sanctuary, marine
sanctuary out there.
COUNCIL MEETING -23- November 16, 2011
Ms. Umberger:
Mr. Chang:
yourself?
Ms. Umberger:
•:1M
Yes.
And/or Molokini island, the tours? Are you a diver
Yes, yes, I've been diving on Maui since the early
Mr. Chang: So like in La Perouse fish sanctuary or Makena
along the visitor related coast, Wailea and of course Molokini island, have you since
the 1980s or the 1990s, I mean is it visible out there like?
Ms. Umberger: Well there is a tremendous difference between the
protected areas and the open areas. So in areas that are protected, we see species
and abundance of animals that we do not see in the open areas. So it is really about
where the no -take versus the take is happening.
Mr. Chang: Have you had any problems like with poachers or
people maybe trespassing? I mean because obviously they could do it at night or
people can be...
Ms. Umberger: What happens is that they end up ... you know only
one percent of the state's waters are protected, right? So the vast majority are open
to collecting. A permit gives a person ability to collect on every unprotected reef in
the state. So they have open access to it and really it would be the taking so much
in the open areas that would be having a negative effect in the protected areas.
Poaching, we know poaching of turtles, I don't know if there is poaching of these
animals in the protected areas, except for two Masked Angels, which are those fish
that were ... a pair of them sold for about $30,000.00. We had two at Molokini, the
only two I've ever seen. They were there for just about a month and then they
disappeared.
Mr. Chang: So in a previous testimony, we have a testimony
that apparently the person that collected those two had actually died from diving
because the depth was between 200 or 300 feet or so. So obviously the fish sold
prior to someone realizing what the value of the fishes...
Ms. Umberger: We don't know what happened to the person who
took those fish. The person who died was collecting here and he was collecting... he
was going after those species. He had come in August and found one or two and
sold them. He came back a month later to get more and he passed away from going
to those depths.
Mr. Chang: Thank you. So have you been snorkeling within
like the resort Kaanapali area or Black Rock?
Ms. Umberger: Oh yes.
Mr. Chang: So is there any visible decline that you can notice
over the years?
Ms. Umberger: The species that are missing are the ones that are
targeted by the trade. The species that we see more of are the brown ones and the
gray ones, the fish that are not beautiful, bright yellow that the trade does not
target. So that is the sad thing. There is a real shift in the natural state.
COUNCIL MEETING -24- November 16, 2011
Mr. Chang: So of all your years diving, remember we used to
have the wrist band with the nice waterproof plastic that people could dive to
identify the fish. So some of those fish obviously are less seen.
Ms. Umberger: Oh absolutely. The Butterflyfishes, the Moorish
Idols, the very charismatic beautiful obvious fishes are noticeably missing.
Mr. Chang: Okay, thank you, and thank you for coming to
Kauai with your testimony. Thank you, Chairman.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Chang. Any other questions for
Rene? Rene, we have another question for you from Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Hi, thank you for your testimony. I wanted to find
out do you know how many aquarium collectors there are on Kauai?
Ms. Umberger: Yes. I just got a report yesterday, in 2010 three
collectors reported that they took animals from here. That does not mean that they
live here as was the case with the person who died. He lived on Oahu. So some
Oahu collectors are coming from here or coming from Oahu to here, but they report
to the state where they took the fish from, not where they live.
Ms. Nakamura: Do they also report the number of fish taken and
the value of the fish? So do we know from last year what those numbers were?
Ms. Umberger: Yes, yes. Last year what they reported amounted
to about $15,000 worth. Now what we know is that because no one is checking, no
one ever checks what they report versus what they take, so under reporting is
expected to be two to five times higher than what is actually reported. And that's
another form of poaching.
Ms. Nakamura: Do we know how many, in terms of numbers of fish
collected?
Ms. Umberger: Yes, but I do not have that in my head.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay, that is all right.
Ms. Umberger: I could send that to you.
Ms. Nakamura: Just curious. Thank you.
Ms. Umberger: It is focused on ... it was in the actual slide. It is
focused on the most expensive species and the most rare species.
Ms. Nakamura: Right.
Ms. Umberger: That is what they are going for here, the species
that have been wiped out. On the Big Island, for instance, those are the animals
that are being heavily targeted here.
Ms. Nakamura: And it is, as you say, self - reported. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Any other members? Vice Chair
Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING -25- November 16, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Of course the first thing is to make it illegal and I
appreciate all the efforts that you and others have been doing. Can you tell us how
you see the enforcement happening?
Ms. Umberger: The wonderful thing ... what happened statewide, a
statewide ban triggers the federal Lacey Act. The federal Lacey Act prohibits
interstate commerce in wildlife that a state chooses to protect. So in that case, the
feds would step in with assistance on enforcement, meaning if an animal was sold
here or purchased on the mainland, enforcement would be triggered there. So we
would actually end up saving the state's precious resources at least for the
Department of Land and Natural Resources, which is so underfunded and having a
very difficult time enforcing laws that are on the books right now.
Ms. Yukimura: So the enforcement would also come in transport of
these fishes and that's a pretty well defined inspection system too, right?
Ms. Umberger: Yes, the only thing is that, of course, animals that
are leaving Honolulu port for Asia or for Europe, those nations may not necessarily
be honoring our Lacey Act. It would be up to the sale that happens here that would
trigger that.
Ms. Yukimura: So it does not cover inspections of trans...
Ms. Umberger: If they are inspecting. I don't know how many fish
and wildlife agents are in Honolulu. Maybe not too many.
Ms. Yukimura: Why wouldn't Homeland Security and everybody
else be involved in this if it is contraband, so to speak?
Ms. Umberger: Yeah, it would become contraband.
Ms. Yukimura: All right. Well, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Any more questions of Rene before I call up the
next speaker? Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. You know, Rene, I had an
interesting question. So if I am a hobbyist and you are the collector and you sell me
fish for $6500, wouldn't most hobbyists ... I mean when you buy something you get
kind of like a warranty, like a one -year warranty. And so it is interesting because
wouldn't they know that the chances of transport with any animal, needless to say a
fish. We hear that without air, they die or they starve or what have you. So what
drives the industry? Wouldn't I ask you for a refund if I don't get the fish back? Do
you now have to refund me or is that tough darts or...
Ms. Umberger: Well, in the trade, automatically it is expected that
5% of the animals are going to die every time they are shipped and so they won't
charge back for that. That's in the wholesale side and they expect 5% to die, to
arrive dead and then another 4% or 5% to die within a few days. So if more than
that die, they won't be paid for that. But a $6500 fish, that is a very different story.
That animal is going to get very different treatment than a Yellow Tang, which
wholesales, the collector gets $4 for a Yellow Tang. One of the biggest wholesalers
in the world was giving our Yellow Tangs away for free last month to its customers
who were buying a thousand dollars worth of other fish. He was going to give
COUNCIL MEETING -26- November 16, 2011
Yellow Tangs away. So it is based on the value of the animals. But many of them
are not guaranteed to arrive alive and if they are given any guarantee at all they
stay alive, it is for 7 days or 14 days, that's it.
Mr. Chang: I am just trying to understand because as a
hobbyist, you have your...
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, Mr. Chang, gentlemen (referring to
Mr. Mickens and Mr. Taylor), this is the second time. Your voices carry in the
microphone. If you have conversation going on while we are entertaining questions
to a speaker, I ask that you leave the room to have your conversation. Thank you
very much. My apologies, Rene. Mr. Chang, you have the floor.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. I guess the point I'm
making, we all marvel at the salt water tanks that you see and then whoever goes
there to replenish. But doesn't the owner of the tank or the hobbyist, doesn't the
water need to be changed in a special way or somebody needs to come in and clean
it, unlike a fresh water aquarium, where we can do that ourselves with just, I guess,
changing the water. But this is a different process.
Ms. Umberger: I have never owned a tank myself, but what I read
and what I understand is that the hobbyist who are buying the animals are doing
their best to keep them alive. They try very hard to keep them alive. They do not
understand that the animals are doomed to die no matter how hard they try
because it is a very difficult system, as you say, to maintain. It is a completely
artificial system requiring different levels of chemicals, salts and water
temperature and a simple failure of electricity shuts down everything and all the
animals die. Salt water tanks are... because 98% of the animals are taken from the
wild, they are much more difficult to keep alive than fresh water animals, where
98% of them are captive bred and captive raised. We understand how to do that, so
it is much easier to keep them alive, not so with wild animals.
Mr. Chang: And Rene, in the presentation, I thought I saw that
there were hundreds of hobbyists, but they drop out after about a year or so
because maybe they quit or they realize this is not easy. Is there anything out there
that educates potential hobbyists that this is not cool or...
Ms. Umberger: Well, education is always given as an option. Let
us try and educate the hobbyists so that they will only take animals that they can
care for. But it is sort of like a trophy thing. People see that amazing fish and they
want to have it and they want to try and keep it alive. But the mainland trade is
shrinking and there are about 600,000 or 700,000 hobbyists, but the majority of
them get in and out within a year. They do not stay in the hobby, so they never
learn how to properly take care of the animals.
Mr. Chang: Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Others members? Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Aloha and mahalo for being here Rene. Just a
quick question. If you could tell us about the West Hawaii Fish Replenishment
Area and why that is not working, and how much protection or preservation that
accounts for, and what the Hawaii County Council has done so far.
COUNCIL MEETING -27- November 16, 2011
Ms. Umberger: Yes, the 35% of that shoreline is set aside as a no-
take area. So obviously inside that no -take area, some species are increasing
tremendously, especially the Yellow Tangs. Their numbers have gone up by over
50 %. But in the open areas, the numbers... so many of the animals are being taken,
their populations are much worse than they were before these no -take areas were
set aside. It sort of makes sense if you have got all of this effort and now you are
focusing it into a narrower area, of course it is going to have a much stronger effect
in those smaller areas. And despite the set asides, species are disappearing.
Species along the entire coastline are disappearing despite the set asides. Yellow
Tangs are up in the protected areas, but they are down by an additional 45% in the
open areas and last year the state biologist there said it is unsustainable. It is an
unsustainable level of take.
Mr. Kuali`i: And so the County Council of Hawaii has passed
(inaudible).
Ms. Umberger: The County Council has now passed a resolution
urging the legislature to ban the trade all together. It is too much of a sacrifice
going on and there are no benefits coming in, so they really are asking for the ban.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Kuali`i. Having no other questions
for you, Rene, I'm going to call up the next speaker and that speaker is Robert
Wintner.
ROBERT WINTNER, Snorkel Bob's: Aloha Councilmembers. I made copies
of my testimony in case you care to follow along.
Council Chair Furfaro: We have it. Robert, before you go any further, it is
our rules that you need to introduce yourself for the record first.
Mr. Wintner: Okay, I'm Robert Wintner with Snorkel Bob's and
thank you for taking up this issue that is so vital to Kaua`i's future. The aquarium
hobby is like many hobbies in its quest for exotic specimens. Rare species in
captivity provide status for the hobbyist and more profit for the aquarium collector.
A young man died last year. We have made reference to that from compression
sickness in pursuit of Masked Angelfish on Kauai. He found these fish at 250 to
300 feet and dove there on consecutive days. A pair of Masked Angels sold for
$30,000 just prior to that man's death.
Nearly all reef aquarium fish die in a year. Many die in capture and
transport. Dead aquarium fish require replacements. That is not a scientific fact; it
is a law of the marketplace. You don't need a degree to know that taking rare
species will cause those species to vanish.
Aquarium collectors target Kauai for endemic and rare species. The hub of
commercial aquarium collecting in Hawaii is the Kona Coast. Scientists use a
disturbing phrase to describe species that are disappearing or gone from those reefs.
They call them "species of concern." The aquarium trade now hunts these big
money, big status species on Kauai. The Bi -color Anthius, a remarkably beautiful
fish vital to reef balance, is also sacrificed to a short life in a glass tank far away.
Aquarium collectors traffic in wildlife for the pet trade, a mistake that lingers
in these Hawaiian Islands. As a single tourism business, Snorkel Bob's payroll is
greater than the entire Hawaii aquarium trade reports in revenue. Tourism
COUNCIL MEETING -28- November 16, 2011
supports thousands of Hawaii families. Rare species are greatly diminished or
gone from the Kona Coast. Among those species is the Bandit Angelfish, unique to
these islands. Kauai is now targeted for Bandit Angelfish that retail up to $800
each. High dollar, exotic species characterize the Kauai catch.
But Hawaii tourism is only worth the pono values behind it. Two species
showing more aloha in their fins than the entire aquarium trade put together are
the Potter's Angelfish and the Hawaiian Cleaner Wrasse. Potter's Angels are reef
gems delivering color, grace and beauty every day on Kauai reefs. Hinalea or
Cleaner Wrasse are endemic, charismatic, and vital to reef function. They pluck
parasites from the skins, scales and gill plates of other species. They die in 30 days
of captivity without 30 to 40 other fish to clean, yet they ship out every day. The
Kona Coast is now seeing an increase in parasite loading.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, Robert. That is your first three
minutes. You may continue with another three minutes.
Mr. Wintner: Thanks. Kauai is also targeted for Zebra moray
eels. Hawaii Lionfish and Long -Nose Hawkfish were collected to the point of
concern on Kona and Maui. Kauai is now targeted for Hawaii Lionfish and Long -
Nose Hawkfish.
The resolutions before you reflect Kauai County's identity. By banning the
aquarium trade, you identify Kauai as a place of pono values, a place of kuleana for
its blessings. A most frequent question at Snorkel Bob's is, where are the fish. We
explain about shoreline development, runoff, injection wells, and the aquarium
trade. We make apologies. If you pass this resolution or these resolutions, the news
will reach millions with immediate effect when the world sees that Kauai cares; the
world will take notice. Pono is not only doing the right thing. Pono is doing the
smart thing. The reef aquarium business has run renegade across Hawaii. It
targets Kauai for a few dollars more at the peril of our reefs and people. Please
rein it in. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: So, Robert, I referenced you as the sign -in sheet
Robert, but are you Snorkel Bob?
Mr. Wintner: Himself.
Council Chair Furfaro: Himself. We're very pleased to have you here, Bob.
Mr. Wintner: I'm honored to be here, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Are there any questions for Snorkel
Bob? Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: I just want to thank you for your work because it
must have been seven or eight years ago when you first approached me and
educated me and you've been trying to get this passed for those many years at least.
And the arguments, the facts are so compelling, and it is amazing that it is still not
accomplished. But I know it is not from lack of effort on your part and on people
like Rene's part, but thank you very much. It is really appalling to hear the stories.
Mr. Wintner: Well, thank you and just for those who don't know,
when JoAnn was first introduced to this issue on Maui —and I can't remember how
many years ago, but it was a few —I said, I can show you a reef with beautiful coral
and no fish and she said, fine, let's go look. And she brought her snorkel gear and
COUNCIL MEETING -29- November 16, 2011
her wetsuit, and we went. It was at an HSAC meeting on Maui. So here's a game
gal willing to get in the water and take a look for herself. And I also would remind
you that all these efforts we go through, there are no failures. Every time we go
through this exercise, we open more eyes and hearts.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you for that commentary, Bob. I can also
give you testimony when it came to the Coqui frog, she also recruited all of us to go
look for frogs at night, so. She is pretty good at those excursions. Do we have any
questions for Bob? Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. I was trying to think about
a question, what I could pose because I was, like the Chair, wondering if Robert
Wintner is the real Snorkel Bob. So I just have to say, it is an honor to get to meet
the real Snorkel Bob, being in the industry for many years. I can see the cat
underwater right now with the scuba goggles and so I'm going to pose this question,
and it is an honor to know Snorkel Bob. Do you talk to the tour operators that do
snorkeling in the mornings and the evenings that go up to the Na Pali Coast or
those that venture off to Lehua Rock and outskirts of Niihau? Do you communicate
with these mariners about the importance of this law or this potential ban?
Mr. Wintner: I don't directly, but we do book those businesses
and we always are diligent that people run their business, their tourism business,
with respect and etiquette. It is something that we were discussing earlier,
Maka`ala and I, that it can easily get away from us. But when it gets away from us,
it is by mistake. There is kind of a different breed of tourism now, and it is, I think,
because there are more people, the world is changing and all that. And so a lot of
the tourism businesses are operated from a mindset of I don't know and I don't
mean this disrespectfully. I thought Don Ho was iconic, but his aloha approach to
tourism is what many of them still maintain, whereas now many tourists are
seeking to know, how can I help, what can I do to help. Those of us of a certain age
grew up with a subliminal fear of a nuclear exchange before 1989 when the
(inaudible). That subliminal fear has been replaced now by the death of nature and
I think it is with everybody who visits anyplace of beauty and they want to know.
They feel helpless. What can I do to help? I always say, I don't do this work
because I'm a good guy —I think I am a good guy —but I do it because it is smart
business. The best advertising we do is conservation work and this is our number
one issue right now, it is keeping this wildlife where it belongs in Hawaii reefs.
So in specific response to your question, do we speak to those tour operators,
some of them are more conscientious than others. You know this. We do keep an
eye out for infractions of what we think is the difference between right and wrong.
And we think a pretty good representative program.
Mr. Chang: And I am glad you stated that because if I'm not
mistaken, when Rene did her testimony, she said there were approximately
600,000 collectors nationwide. Hobbyists, 600,000 throughout our nation. I was
thinking, wow, that is a large amount, but I am hoping that many of them obviously
are visitors to the Hawaiian Islands and when they understand what we are doing,
they might realize that that is not the hobby that they want to get into, certainly
because that is not, as you say, what is pono and the right thing. And when the
world sees that Kauai cares, then they might understand that, you know, let us
support the fish and the habitat because like for a lot of the local people, everybody
that comes up says, where's the fish. And we have this topic of Lydgate where there
used to be a lot of fish and now you have to wait until it is summer so you can make
COUNCIL MEETING -30- November 16, 2011
reference to Ke`e or Tunnels or I always try to support the Na Pali Coast, but the
only way to get there is obviously with the tour boats. But even at this time now,
this summer, you look at the water now it is so calm without any wind that it is
perfect diving conditions, but there is really not a whole ... you know, Po`ipu Beach in
front of the Marriott there at Po`ipu or of course Lawa`i Beach Resort right in front
of the Beach House, in and around that area. So we have to make sure when we
ask people to get involved with activities that we can point them in the direction
where they are going to see things.
Mr. Wintner: Right.
Mr. Chang: You not like what it used ... this is what is used to
be, but now it is so sparse.
Mr. Wintner: And you are correct. I will say an elaboration of the
point on the world seeing immediately is this: In this campaign, we have two
fundamental focuses. One is the demand side. That would be the hobbyist that
Rene is referring to. And you like to think that these people will listen to our plea,
please stop. Most of them think that ... they just assume these fish are captive bred.
You go into any shopping mall or subdivision across the mainland, you say where do
you get aquarium fish for saltwater aquariums? Well, they... somebody grows them
somewhere. And these are smart people and that is not the case. And so when we
put the word out, we hope to affect the demand by saying this is not correct; it is
causing big problems in Hawaii, please stop. Now, the other focus we have is not
the demand side, but the supply side. Hawaii is the most important hub of the
aquarium trade. It is a multi - billion dollar trade worldwide. Fish from Hawaii
reefs are pennies on the dollar, but they drive the sale of the tanks, stands, lights,
filters, hoods, you name it, and when you get a few people committed to shutting
down a multi - billion dollar business, you are going to get some backlash. And that
is why we need help and support. It is one kuleana and we are all in it. And so we
appreciate this council giving a listen.
Mr. Chang: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: And again, members, because I've given the
speaker 6 minutes to cover the .... please, if you pose a question, it is a question you
pose to the speaker. We can't have additional summary, Bob.
Mr. Wintner: Right, right, I'm sorry.
Council Chair Furfaro: No, it is fine. I'm reminding my colleagues that
they have to pose a question. Any additional questions? Councilmember Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Aloha and mahalo, Bob. So in another handout I
have from Hawaii Reef Wildlife Not For Sale, it says natural beauty is Hawai`i's
most valuable asset. It talks about how 40% of Hawai`i's visitors snorkel and scuba,
and that it is an $800 million annual marine tourism business and that the
aquarium trade is a $5 million business. You have been working at this for a long
time. Thank you for all your efforts. And you just made a comment earlier that it is
not just about the fish, it is a multi- billion dollar business because of what is
happening elsewhere with the tanks and the equipment and all of that. In your
efforts at the legislature, what do you find to be the objections that we need to
overcome and what would be your approach in this next legislature?
COUNCIL MEETING -31- November 16, 2011
Mr. Wintner: I think we have come a long way. In past
legislative sessions, the opposition used the argument of the slippery slope and they
used that to ... it was kind of a scare strategy on fishermen and fishing interests,
both recreational and commercial. It was kind of like the gun lobby saying, if you
ban AK -47s, next it will be your handguns, and then you will not be able to have
any guns at all. And so they have used this thing if you ban the collecting of
aquarium fish —and they like to call themselves fishermen; I think there is a
distinction —then it will be a slippery slope and any other species can be banned at
their whim. And in fact, banning the aquarium trade will boost fishing, both
commercially and recreationally. These guys...the aquarium trade is removing a
vital link from the food chain. That is number one. Number two, it is kind of a
scurrilous means by which they operate. They throw anchors and nets and chains
on coral. There was a recent event on the Big Island that you may be aware of
where a guy had his chains and anchored his nets in the coral. This was about a
month ago. A scuba diver came and took pictures of him and turned the pictures in
to DLNR and she was arrested for harassing a fisherman. He has not yet been
cited. She went to arraignment and the case was dismissed. That is all DLNR bias.
Some of that still exists. We are sure of that. We have met with the governor and
we've discussed these issues. We have been assured that he is giving this
consideration. We think that public support is building. The resolution on the Big
Island, I think, was huge because the aquarium trade there makes ... let me put it
this way, their lifestyles look far better than the reported numbers indicate. The
Kona Coast is unique. It is 135 miles of uninterrupted coral cover. It used to be
called "The Gold Coast." Now people assume that is because Michael Dell and
Charles Schwab are buying lots there that are $25 million each and they are buying
a bunch of them. The real reason it was called "The Gold Coast" is because when
the waves would break, you would see Yellow Tangs there. You do not see that
anymore. It is gone. We believe that those reefs can still support those populations.
We believe that Kauai can also rejuvenate and rebound. I think there are reefs
here that are now showing zero Yellow Tangs that once held thousands. We have to
be careful not to blame all of this decimation on the aquarium trade and when we
do hear opposition, they usually rant and rave and say, it is not our fault. But if
there is other cause for reef degradation like effluent runoff, injection wells and the
like, that does not mean the aquarium trade should have any reason at all to go and
pluck what few fish can survive those hardships.
I personally focus on the ... I'm advised not to use the word "moral," although I
do believe it is moral. I am advised to use the word ethical. I am not sure what the
difference is. But when we talk about kuleana and all those spiritually based
Hawaiian culture approaches to things, it just feels wrong. And is there any logic or
rationale to explain what you feel in your heart? Well yeah, you can reach for it,
but what it comes right down to is either you know the difference or you don't. And
I think that most people ... I know that most people in Hawaii want it to end. I
think sometimes what if the aquarium trade was banned in Hawaii. What would
they have to go through to reestablish it. It would just be a non - starter. People
would just say, are you crazy? We are not going to let you guys come in here and do
that. Would you let them come in and take the Nene geese or any bird species?
Anything else that you could see underwater tends to be under the radar. If it was
banned, they would never get to restart it because people do not want that. People
live in Hawaii for a reason because they love it and they love the different parts of
it. Sorry.
Mr. Kuali`i: I just want to thank you. I think you made some
really ... it is what I wanted to hear too about the ecosystem and the food chain and
about subsistence and culture and that it is not taken away from our fishermen, but
in fact helping it when you help the ecosystem and our food chain.
COUNCIL MEETING -32- November 16, 2011
Mr. Wintner: More of the fishermen are coming onboard now. It
is the ones that have seen what is going on.
Mr. Kuali`i: Good, it is all about education. Thank you so much.
Mr. Wintner: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much, Bob. Maka`ala, you are next
on our agenda.
MAKNALA KA`AUMOANA, Vice Chair of Hui Ho`omalu I Ka `Aina: Aloha
Council. Mahalo, Councilman Kuali`i and good staff for helping us pull this
together and bring it to you today. I am Maka`ala Ka`aumoana, Vice Chair of Hui
Ho`omalu I Ka `Aina, and I submit testimony today in support of this county
resolution requesting the Legislature of the State of Hawaii to amend Chapter 188
of the HRS by adding a new section to be appropriately designated prohibiting the
sale of aquatic life for aquarium purposes.
Hui Ho`omalu I Ka `Aina is a taro root organization founded in the early
1980s by traditional practitioners of moku Halele`a to address threats and impacts
to the natural cultural resources of Kauai. Founded by farmers and fishermen,
weavers and hunters, we seek to provide context for issues related to the ecology of
our ahupua`a. The organization is an active advocate for those native things and
ways that are disappearing. We are not a non- profit. We are an activist
organization. We do not whine and wait. We act.
Our reefs are vital to our wellbeing as individuals and communities. They
depend on the small fish that live there to keep them healthy. We depend on them
for food and the role they play in the ahupua`a.
We thank Councilperson Kuali`i for listening to this issue, respecting our
concerns, and responding with this resolution. We also thank council staff for their
thoughtful and thorough work in preparing this resolution. We thank "For the
Fish" for their guidance and support and appreciate them and Robert Wintner, who
had championed this issue for many years, for being here today.
We do not play with our food. For years we have protested the term
"recreational fishing" because to us it is not a game. We fish for food. We actually
do not understand why you would remove anything from its habitat to put it in a
tank or cage. It is not what stewards of the land do. But since apparently this is a
huge business, again, we must respond with rules to provide guidance for those who
do not know or do not care about our kuleana.
We will leave it to those who know the numbers to paint the ugly picture and
they certainly have today. We appear today to provide a Kauai context for this
resolution and to advocate in the strongest terms for those creatures without a voice
and without whom our oceans will die and so will we. Mahalo.
Council Chair Furfaro: Does anyone have any questions for Maka`ala?
Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. Maka`ala, thank you for
your testimony. I am looking and I am not sure, did you pass out your testimony?
COUNCIL MEETING -33- November 16, 2011
Ms. Ka`aumoana: No because you read it while I am talking instead
of listening to me. So I will hand it in now.
Mr. Chang: Okay.
Ms. Ka`aumoana: You have taught me a lot. I am learning the
process.
Mr. Chang: Thank you very much.
Ms. Ka`aumoana: You are welcome.
Mr. Chang: No, I just ... I appreciate your...
Ms. Ka`aumoana: I will give you a copy.
Mr. Chang: Thank you and all the members, of course.
Ms. Ka`aumoana: Yes.
Mr. Chang: Thank you very much.
Council Chair Furfaro: Scott will get your testimony from you. Thank you
very much. That completes those that signed up for this item. Is there anyone else
in the audience that wishes to speak? Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, Jay, for the record Glenn Mickens. I
just want to thank Kuali`i for an outstanding presentation, for Bob and Rene; I
thought it was superb. It appears that the only thing you are fighting
here... everybody, I think, is in agreement that they should not be taking these fish
for enjoyment in a tank somewhere that are going to die. But you are fighting
money. As Bob pointed out, it is a multi - billion dollar industry and the slippery
slope that he pointed out, like the NRA. Hey, they are going to take your guns
away. You are going to go to the fishermen that are taking these ... those fish are
not for eating, those little beautiful fish. So anyway, I just want to say how much I
appreciate the testimony and Kuali`i, your fine presentation. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, I'm going to basically thank Mr. Mickens for
his presentation, but we need to take a break and I will not be taking any more
testimony on this. We will call the meeting back to order and take action as a
council when we come back. This is a 10- minute required caption break. We are in
recess for 10 minutes.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 11:35 a.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 11:51 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, we are back in session, and first and
foremost, I want to thank Member Kuali`i for the research and the presentation, a
very informative piece, but I would like to conclude the... and I would like the
County Clerk's office to read these two specific points on page two, the first item a
proposed draft resolution. I would like to take a vote on that and then in the next
paragraph a proposed draft bill on aquatic life. So, would you read the first portion
of this, please?
COUNCIL MEETING -34- November 16, 2011
Proposed Draft Resolution requesting the Legislature of the State
of Hawaii to amend Chapter 188, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by
adding a new section to be appropriately designated Prohibiting the
Sale of Aquatic Life for Aquarium Purposes, and amending existing
Section 188F -4 regarding the West Hawaii Regional Fishery
Management Area Plan and Section 189 -11 regarding Receipts in
Duplicate; and requesting the Governor to issue a Moratorium on
the commercial take and sale of aquatic life taken for aquarium
purposes from State waters; and requesting the Hawaii
Department of Land and Natural Resources to adopt a rule(s)
prohibiting the commercial take and sale of aquatic life taken for
aquarium purposes from State waters (proposed by Councilmember
KipuKai Kuali`i).
Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve that the above proposed draft resolution be
included in the 2012 Kauai County Legislative Package, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and carried by the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, TOTAL — 7,
Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: We may check with our rules. We might have a
silent vote from his attendance at the meeting and make it unanimous, which then
references lokahi na leo, our voices are united on this resolution. Next item.
• A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act relating to Prohibition on Sale of
Aquatic Life for Aquarium Purposes (proposed by Councilmember
KipuKai Kuali`i).
Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve that the above proposed draft bill be included in
the 2012 Kauai Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, TOTAL — 7,
Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: Once again, we have a united vote in putting this in
our legislative package. To those that came to testify, I want to thank you very
much. But we need to move on to additional items on our agenda. I would like to go
to item 308 and in particular read the item and I would like to get through item 3
on agenda item 308.
There being no objections, C 2011 -308 item 3 was taken out of order.
C 2011 -308 Communication (11/10/2011) from HSAC President Mel Rapozo,
transmitting for Council approval for inclusion in the 2012 Hawaii State
Association of Counties (HSAC) Legislative Package, proposals approved by its
Executive Committee as follows:
3) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Food Labeling (Requires the
labeling of genetically engineered food products; County of Maui
Proposal)
COUNCIL MEETING -35- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, we will read the rest of the agendas when we
get to them, on the other 12 items. But that is the topic for discussion right now.
And I believe I will ask the body to let me suspend the rules and I have five
speakers signed up. The rules are suspended and I would like to call Sarah Styan.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
SARAH STYAN: My name is Sarah Styan and thank you for this
opportunity to testify and thank you, again, for moving this item ahead on the
agenda today. Chair Furfaro and Councilmembers, I am here to speak to...my
name is Sarah Styan and I am a scientist at the Pioneer Waimea Research Center
and I live in Hanapepe. I have been connected with agriculture for all my life,
raised on a still thriving plant nursery in Massachusetts, and earning degrees from
Cornell University, Wageningen Agriculture University in the Netherlands, and UH
Manoa. I have been working in agricultural research in the field of plant breeding
and molecular genetics for the last 20 years. I am a past president of the Hawaii
Crop Improvement Association and I currently serve on the Kauai County Farm
Bureau Board. As a scientist, I oppose the inclusion of a requirement for labeling of
genetically engineered food products sold in Hawaii included as item 3) in the 2012
Hawaii State Association of Counties legislative package. It would require an
additional layer of regulation on agricultural products that is not founded on the
basis of scientific fact, but based on feelings and attitudes about agricultural
production methods.
The proposed labeling bill would call for a labeling of many foods, including
products from animals that were fed biotech grain, such as genetically engineered
corn and soybean. Approximately 94% of the soybeans and 88% of the corn planted
by farmers in the U.S. in 2011 was biotech, requiring most meat and milk shipped
to Hawaii to be labeled. Food processors and manufacturers would not label
products just for the Hawaii market, placing a burden on local resources. Labeling
is also more than just the cost of the ink and the paper, but it would have
significant implications in production practices to ensure segregation of biotech and
non - biotech crops. Testing would be necessary at all stages from farm to processor
to distributor to ensure that there is truth in labeling. This would be a significant
regulatory and logistical impact to growers and government agencies or private
sector entities that would be charged with enforcing labeling of any food product.
Some Kauai shoppers may want to avoid eating genetically engineered foods
and can already find products that are labeled organic or GMO -free. Organic
farmers are required to not plant genetically engineered crops and therefore foods
with an organic label can be selected by Kauai consumers. A new label is not
necessary when organic foods are already clearly labeled as GMO -free foods and
labeled by food producers and farmers selling produce in farmers markets.
Scientists as well as federal and state regulatory agencies have consistently
found that biotech crops are a safe ingredient in foods. The FDA is tasked with food
labeling requiring biotech foods to be substantially equivalent to their conventional
counterparts. An evaluation of biotech foods have shown that they are
substantially equivalent in nutrition, composition, and other properties.
Council Chair Furfaro: Sarah, that is your first three minutes. You have
another three minutes.
COUNCIL MEETING -36- November 16, 2011
Ms. Styan: Just to continue on, the biotech foods have been in
the marketplace since 1996 and no negative health impacts have been found to be
due to the development of crops using tools of biotechnology. And again, thank you
for this opportunity to testify.
Council Chair Furfaro: Sarah, let me see if there are any questions from
the group. Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, thank you, Sarah. Are there any jurisdictions
in the United States that have passed laws requiring labeling?
Ms. Styan: Not that I am aware of.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Because what it seems to me that you are
arguing is that if anything, the jurisdiction of the cou ... oh well, it would be the
jurisdiction of the state, state level law is not the appropriate jurisdiction to do that
that if there is a law like that it should be a national law that would require it
across the country?
Ms. Styan: Well, yes, I am certainly not a lawyer, but that
would be my understanding. The FDA is the agency responsible for food labeling
and setting a federal premise. When individual states would have an individual
law that processors are going to have to account to that law and provide the
appropriate labeling for that state, which I do believe would become onerous in that
situation.
Ms. Yukimura: Are there tests that can determine whether a food
substance is GMO or not?
Ms. Styan: Depending on ... yes. There are tests that could be
run, but to have to run tests? I mean I'm just imagining a scenario where a farmer
would have to test all of his product before it goes to a processor because the
processor has to follow this regulation as well. The processor would have to test
their materials before it goes to the distributor and if it comes to feeding grain to
animals, of that 88% of corn that is biotech corn, the USDA shows more than 40% of
that goes into animal feed alone and so that means that the farmer would have to
have a difference between his biotech food or his non - biotech food if we are really
going to track that chain of custody through production, which would be, I would
imagine, very difficult.
Ms. Yukimura: So labeling is important for ... like for me because I
am gluten sensitive. And so it is important to say whether there is wheat or gluten
in a process. So how do you distinguish that from GMO?
Ms. Styan: Okay, in the scientific basis of a GMO, it is almost
like a different variety. So a corn plant that is a GMO, it has some different genetic
information that makes it different than another line that is not biotech. So you
can think of that as kind of like a variety. You know there are different varieties of
tomatoes or whatever you can think of. So a GMO is really just a different variety
of that same crop species. Another way to look at it is that you think of apples. A
Delicious apple, are we going to only label Delicious apples but not label Macintosh
or Jonathan or any other apple that you can think of? To me, that is on a biological
level what we are talking about here.
Ms. Yukimura: So you are saying that it should be labeled by the
food, the generic food, like wheat, rather than by a variety of wheat.
COUNCIL MEETING -37- November 16, 2011
Ms. Styan: Exactly and because, too, look at peanuts. That is
something we know that causes allergies for folks.
Ms. Yukimura: And deaths in some people.
Ms. Styan: And we have labeling for that, the same with
gluten. It is a dietary issue. In the case of... the FDA is charged with labeling food
products. It is not the process by which that wheat was grown or sold in that
growth process. It is that gluten that causes the problem.
Ms. Yukimura: So if the FDA is charged with labeling food, are
local governments or state governments preempted from labeling?
Ms. Styan: I can't speak to the legal matters, I'm sorry.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Aloha and mahalo, Sarah. I just had a quick
question. So when you talk about 94% of soybeans and 80% of corn is all biotech or
GMO. GMO, biotech, that is the same, right? Okay. So much of the products that
are sold in the store have corn syrup. Is that what it is, the common ingredient in
almost everything it seems like? So if the corn from the corn syrup was biotech or
GMO, would it not be easier to label everything that is not GMO? I mean what do
you think is ... is there more GMO or more non -GMO out there.
Ms. Styan: As I pointed out, organic is also equivalent of non -
GMO, right, because that is one of the organic components. But again I don't have
all the statistics, but there is more GMO out there in the grocery store than there is
not. I mean I think that is, again, I am not ... it is not my...
Mr. Kuali`i: And you are saying already that in the produce
section, all the organic that is labeled is GMO -free.
Ms. Styan: Yes, because that is part of the organic standard
that is established by the USDA.
Mr. Kuali`i: Okay, thank you.
Ms. Styan: But again, in terms of as you mentioned, it is
things like corn syrup and things like that. It is not that all of your produce
currently, there are lots of options for all fresh produce, for example, that are
biotech.
Mr. Kuah'i: Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Sarah, Mr. Rapozo has a question for
you. But before I give you the floor, Mr. Rapozo, I only have four people signed up
to speak. If there is anyone else in the crowd that is anticipating to speak but had
not signed up, may I encourage you to do that now with my staff. Mr. Rapozo, you
have the floor.
COUNCIL MEETING -38- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, and Sarah, I don't know if you can
answer this, but I apologize for stepping in late. I had received a call, I had spoken
to someone regarding organic crops and that in fact organic crops to be certified
organic, you are allowed to use certain types of —I don't know what word to use —
not pesticide or whatever it is.
Ms. Styan: Pesticide, yes.
Mr. Rapozo: And that I was told and I have not done the
research and help me if you can. And if you cannot, that is fine. It is something
that I have to get an answer for. And I was told that some of these elements or
some of these items that organic farmers can use and . still remain organic are
genetically modified. That's what I heard. I have not, again, and I just see the PhD
after your name, so I am assuming you are probably the best person to ask.
Ms. Styan: Well, we all know that is not true.
Mr. Rapozo: Is there truth to that statement? And if so, would
that require the organics to have to use a GMO label because they were using
genetically modified materials that are legal and still remain organic. And if you
cannot answer with any certainty, that is fine too.
Ms. Styan: I would be happy to. So I don't know that I am
totally corroborating your story, but there are approved pesticides that can be used
by organic farmers. One of those is commonly referred to as BT. You can also buy
DiPel. It is a chemical name for BT. It stands for beta thuringiensin and I cannot
spell that for you, but I could send it to you. I am a terrible speller.
Mr. Rapozo: That is fine.
Ms. Styan: But the cool thing about BT is it is natural
occurring in the soil. It is a fungus actually and it has properties that kill
Lepidoptera species of insects, so it kills worms, okay.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Ms. Styan: And there is a biotech trait in corn that is called BT
and what some clever scientist did was take that protein that causes that
insecticidal property. It is a little piece of DNA that they put into the corn plant so
that now instead of a farmer spraying his field with BT, that insecticide or the
pesticide is inside of the plant. It is just a protein. So the insect eats the plant and
the insect will die. So that is one of the examples of the current biotech traits that
that 88% of biotech corn that is planted in the United States. It is a very popular
trait for farmers who need resistance to earworm.
Mr. Rapozo: And the organics are allowed to use that.
Ms. Styan: They also use BT. Now you have to understand it
is a different form, but it is the same basic protein. The protein itself is a product of
nature. It is not a product of biotechnology, but the scientist took that product of
nature and figured out a way...
Mr. Rapozo: Right, but that is not ... I guess that is not what I
was told. I think and I do not know, I have to go back and check my notes, but
there was ... I guess organic farmers are allowed to use certain materials that are
actually biotech or some kind of genetically modified process.
COUNCIL MEETING -39- November 16, 2011
Ms. Styan: Well, I cannot speak to all the other. I just know
that BT is an approved organic pesticide and it is also part of biotech corn in that
capacity.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: But the BT that is used by organic farmers is not
genetically modified.
Ms. Styan:
fungus that is purified.
Ms. Yukimura:
Ms. Styan:
organ...
Ms. Yukimura
Ms. Styan:
Ms. Yukimura:
distinction in...
Ms. Styan:
clear.
Ms. Yukimura:
brain. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro
Mr. Bynum.
No, like I said, BT is a commonly occurring soil
It is a naturally occurring...
Exactly. Exactly, but that same protein that
That protein was taken...
...that kills insects is the same.
Yes, I understand. But I think there is a
Oh, definitely. That is why I tried to make that
Yeah, okay, and I was just trying to clarify it in my
Thank you, Sarah. Any questions? If not, oh,
Mr. Bynum: (Inaudible) something Councilmember Kuali`i said
prompted this question. Has the GM industry opposed food producers labeling
items as not containing GMO?
Ms. Styan: Honestly, I cannot speak on behalf of the industry
either or give you that historic (inaudible), sorry.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, that is fine. Thanks.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, is this everybody that signed up now
from that last call? Very good. Councilmember Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Just another quick question. So when you said it
was a product of nature, so if the organic farmers use BT in one form and that is
fine. But now your scientists have put it in the plant, so if it is in the plant and it is
to kill these worms and stuff, that means it is now not just a treatment of the
growing of this corn, but it is in the actual genetics of the corn.
Ms. Styan: It is in it.
COUNCIL MEETING -40- November 16, 2011
Mr. Kuali`i: So is there then scientific proof that it being in
what we eat is safe?
Ms. Styan: Yes, because you could eat the remnant of that
pesticide on an organic ... it is the same protein. So it does not matter whether it
comes in the powder form that is used as a pesticide or if it is in the plant itself.
Because you eat DNA all the time. Every time you are eating fresh produce,
etcetera, so it breaks down in your gut and that is the end of it. So it would not
matter whether you are eating an ear of corn that BT or a regular corn that is
sprayed with DiPel.
Mr. Kuali`i: And there is like years and years of studies that
show that.
Ms. Styan: Well, I cannot speak to the data that is collected. I
am just saying from the basic principle. But I can try and find that information for
you.
Mr. Kuali`i: Yeah, I would appreciate that.
Ms. Styan: Because otherwise also testimony submitted by
Cindy Goldstein, who is really expert on this. I just happen to live on Kauai and
wanted to participate. But she is also someone you could consult with further
questions and I would be happy to give you her contact information.
Mr. Kuali`i: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you for your testimony. I learned that 21
countries and the European Union have some sort of labeling and yet our own FDA
has chosen not to go that route up to now. And I am wondering in the... and I think
Councilmember Yukimura's question is a good one, which does the state and the
county have authority to have our own rules regarding labeling. So I would like to
learn more about that. But I also wanted to find out in the bill that was submitted
by Maui County, do you see if there is any middle ground here? Is it either /or? You
either label GMO or not? Or are there certain types or categories that... do you see
any middle ground in this approach?
Ms. Styan: Again, just based on my background and
experience, I just feel that it is unnecessary to label something that is in effect the
same product and it just does not require that extra level of distinction, again, just
from a biological basis and my understanding of this. I just think it creates a whole
another level of regulatory complexity because truth -in- labeling is also very
important and enabling that is difficult.
Ms. Nakamura: We could recommend passage of the bill, but if the
state is not willing to put up the resources needed to do enforce it and to test it,
then I am not sure what we are accomplishing.
Ms. Styan: And the burden we would be putting on our
farmers to enable this and make sure that they are meeting these regulations, and
especially in Hawaii where a lot of our food is sent in, that we would also be having
that burden, especially on a state basis. Again, this is just that it would have to be
labeled and taken care of.
COUNCIL MEETING -41- November 16, 2011
Ms. Nakamura: I have taken a look at how some of these labels are
written up and it just adds the words GMO corn or GMO ... in the ingredient list. It
is a very simple... it seems like a simple thing, but I think this issue came up when
we were doing the HI 5 program was that the bottles or the cans had to have this
label and I know the beverage companies were all against this additional level of
regulation, but they eventually were able to do that and we see the HI 5 on our cans
and bottles. So I think there is some precedent for doing this in this state. I think
it goes back to the national suppliers of the products that we receive and so I guess
there are a lot of questions for me. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, is there anyone else before I recognize Vice
Chair Yukimura a second time. Vice Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: When you insert the BT protein through genetic
modification, do we know enough about nature and the system of nature to know
what impacts we are creating on the constitution of the organism or you know, do
you know what I am asking?
Ms. Styan: Yes, I think in our world we never know
everything. That is why we have science and that is why we do these things. But
based on the risk associated with that, based on the scientific evidence and
information we do have, I have every confidence that based on our current level of
knowledge that this is safe and we do ... based on what we know about recombinant
DNA technology, even when you develop a new variety of any crop, you are
recombining the genetics as a basis, you know you cross two plants together. And
even when we are doing transformation and inserting a piece of DNA, that happens
at one event. All the subsequent plant breeding involves traditional plant breeding
of taking a plant that has a GMO trait and crossing it to a plant that doesn't and
that is all. You make, you cross the (inaudible) and that is a natural process.
Through those, each generation, you see the plants growing, you measure the
behaviors of the plants and so there is, again, if I came up with a new GMO today, it
would be 7 to 10 years before it reached the marketplace with the number of testing
and research that would need to be done to ensure that it could be marketed and be
safe.
Ms. Yukimura: I mean this testing is focused on human safety?
Ms. Styan: It is on the safety of the product. There is an
example, for example there was a company that wanted to produce a trait. It was
discovered that the protein of that trait had a similarity to a Brazil nut. Nuts are
very allergenic and the project was totally stopped because of that relationship of
the protein structure to the protein that was produced in the plant and the protein
of the Brazil nut. So, again, that is the level of detail that researchers look at and it
has to go through a regulatory process that requires them to become products.
Ms. Yukimura: For me personally, I have a lot of reservations
about eating a product that kills insects. You know what I mean?
Ms. Styan: You eat an organic product that had DiPel sprayed
on it. What is the difference?
Ms. Yukimura: Well that underlies my question about changing
the DNA nature of an organism, you know, and that is why I wanted to know what
the research has been on that because if it kills insects ... I mean, you know, it is the
basic silent spring's accumulation of, you know...
COUNCIL MEETING -42- November 16, 2011
Ms. Styan: Right, but if farmers don't, then they use the DiPel
in the field to kill the insects. Do we not kill the insects?
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah, but it is not incorporated into the food and
arguably you can wash it off. I mean, you know, there are just a lot of issues that
would make me hesitate eating something that kills in ... that when insects eat they
are killed.
Ms. Styan: Sure. Those products have been on the market
since 1996 at huge levels. Last year there was over 300 million acres of biotech
crops planted in 23 countries around the world.
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah, but there are these environmental issues. I
mean in Bhutan breast cancer is virtually non - existent and the question is why?
Can somebody tell me why? And one of the suspects is the multitude of agents that
are in our environment here in a modern society. So whether it is cosmetics or food
or pesticides or whatever, so we do not know all the answers yet.
Ms. Styan: No and that is why nobody does. But that is where
I, again, look at the risk. The risk, to me, of biotech crops is well worth the value of
providing food for people all over the world and increasing agricultural production.
These days farmers ... in the early 1900s with where we were with technology,
farmers were producing maybe 20 -40 bushels per acres of corn for example. These
days with biotech and other advantages, I mean plant breeding, agronomy, lots of
things, lots of science have contributed to this century, but farmers are producing
over 150 bushels of corn on the same acreage. I mean that is...
Ms. Yukimura: Sustainably?
Ms. Styan: Sustainably, yes. And using less inputs.
Ms. Yukimura: I mean year after year and...
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, I am going to ... I am going to get in here for a
second.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: I want the body to remind us, we give specific time
for people to give testimony. Then we allow you to have questions posed, not global
discussions that deal with anything that we make assumptions on. If you have a
question, pose a direct question and we will take it from there. So I am going to ask
you, do you have a direct question? You still have the floor. You are done. Thank
you. Okay. Thank you very much for your testimony. Okay, a housekeeping item
here. It is our intent to have our scheduled lunch break for our staff that is
required by our agreements. So I am going to call up the next speaker, which is
Mr. Ornellas and while he is coming up to the microphone as the next registered
speaker, I also want to remind you, after we break for lunch we have a scheduled
public hearing. We have two scheduled public hearings at 1:30 p.m. that need to be
taken specifically at 1:30 p.m. because in our rules we have two opportunities, like
9 o'clock in the morning you can sign up to speak on any agenda item, if you are
present, as I know Mr. Mickens and Mr. Taylor were. And at 1:30 p.m., if there is a
public hearing, we try to do it on or about 1:30 p.m. So those are two issues in
planning. On that note, Mr. Ornellas, I called you up from your earlier sign -up.
You have the floor. The rules are suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING -43- November 16, 2011
JERRY ORNELLAS, Vice President of the Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation:
Thank you, Chair Furfaro, and Members of the Council. I am going to keep my
comments brief because standing between people and their lunch is a dangerous
position to be in. My name is Jerry Ornellas. I am Vice President of the Hawaii
Farm Bureau Federation, which is the umbrella organization under which the
Kauai County Farm Bureau exists. The Hawaii Farm Bureau Federation
representing farmers and ranchers throughout the islands respectfully request that
you do not pass this resolution for the following reasons: It creates unwarranted
safety concerns. Labels on food imply a warning that these foods are not safe to eat.
This contradicts the Federal Food and Drug Administration's scientific evaluation of
biotech foods, which continues to show that these foods are just as safe as other
foods. Food labeling is already federally regulated. If there is a health safety,
nutritional or allergenic concern, current FDA regulations require a label to address
the concern. I will pose a question to you. How many people do you know that have
been sickened from eating genetically engineered foods? It is unnecessary.
Consumers already have the option to choose non - genetically engineered foods now.
Consumers who prefer non -GE foods can choose certified organic products, which by
definition cannot be produced with GE ingredients. Agricultural producers also
have the option of labeling their food non -GE. Huge cost implications for the state
and Hawaii consumers. Because the U.S. food system infrastructure, storage,
processing and transportation facilities cannot currently accommodate the
segregation of GE and non -GE products. Mandatory state labeling requirements
that differ from FDA guidelines will be extremely costly to food producers and
Hawaii consumers and a huge burden on state resources since substantial
monitoring and enforcement will be required. It is unfair to Hawai`i's struggling
farmers. Requiring a label would by implication create an undeserved stigma for
local farm products, for example, papayas grown from Hawaii farmers that resist
the devasting Papaya ringspot virus. These fruits and value -added products made
from them have been enjoyed by Hawaii residents and others for many years
without problem. You know, speaking personally, I was a banana farmer 15 years
ago and we were hit by the banana bunchy top virus, which all banana plants are
susceptible to and frankly I got out of that business because of that. It would
require increased spraying to control vectors. I decided that was .not the route I
wanted to go. So it is not... oftentimes these arguments have portrayed
against ... you know, giant agribusiness concerns using GE products when actually
there are many benefits to smaller farmers also.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Ornellas, that is your first three minutes. I'll
extend you your second three minutes now.
Mr. Ornellas: Thank you, I will not need those minutes,
Mr. Chair, but I will entertain questions if there are any.
Council Chair Furfaro: Members, any questions for Mr. Ornellas?
Mr. Rapozo: I have a question, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: You have the floor, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Has anyone looked into or explored
what the fiscal impact would be to a GMO labeling bill to the local farmer. I read
your testimony and it is real clear that the way the infrastructure is set up now for
the labeling, it will be difficult, I think, for the manufacturers on the mainland to
separate what is coming to Hawaii and what is not coming to Hawaii. Something
as simple as catsup. Catsup would have to be labeled. So does that mean they
create two separate stocks? One for the mainland and one for Hawaii. I guess for
COUNCIL MEETING -44- November 16, 2011
me I'm more curious, what would the impact be to the local farmer here like
yourself or somebody that is raising papaya or any of those? Really what would
that impact? Because there is definitely going to be fiscal impact, a financial
impact, whether it is to the consumer who goes to the store to buy that bottle of
catsup because of the additional labeling. And I am just curious if anybody even
looked into that. I asked Maui when we had the meeting on Oahu and they had
not. They did not. Nobody actually explored that part. Sometimes we pass bills
that have unintended circumstances or consequences and that is kind of what ... I
kind of want to know and I do not know who to ask.
Mr. Ornellas: I do not believe such a study has been conducted
and I would not have the answer to that, although as you implicated it would be
substantial if not nearly impossible at this point. I mean at 93% of the soybean
crop, 85% of the corn crop and if we are talking about, and we are, animal products
that are consumed that would have to be labeled, how do we know what those
chickens ate? How do we know what those hogs or cattle ate? I mean, I do not
know how we would regulate this.
Mr. Rapozo: That is all I have, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Vice Chair Yukimura, did you have a
question? Any other questions for Mr. Ornellas? If not, Jerry, thank you very
much. I believe our next speaker, Mr. Francisco has left. I do not see him in the
audience. Then we have Scott McFarland.
SCOTT McFARLAND, Kauai Chamber of Commerce: Hi, I am a member of
the Kauai Chamber of Commerce and its Government Affairs Committee. I will be
brief in the aspect of time. I will be speaking today from the perspective of the
Government Affairs Committee of the Chamber of Commerce and want to
emphasize that the Kauai Chamber of Commerce represents nearly 450 members,
700 member representatives and about 6,000 employees. Ninety -two percent of the
membership is comprised of small businesses, many of whom are food retailers.
The intended legislation moving forward through the HSAC process from Maui
County requiring the labeling of genetically engineered food products sold in
Hawaii as contained in the proposed 2012 HSAC legislative package will have
tremendous, impacts for small food retailers here on Kauai and that is the
perspective I wanted to discuss today. The impacts to supply chain, the impacts to
chain of custody, the impacts of actually having to label these at the retail level will
have tremendous impact on shopkeepers and retailers. It is something there are a
lot of unknowns associated with this and there are costs associated with this that
local retailers will have to absorb. The questions earlier about the manufacturers
from the mainland who ship product to Hawaii, that product likely will not be
differentiated. The onus will be on the retailers here in Hawaii to actually stick
some sort of label or designation or sticker that this food product may contain or
contains genetically modified food product or products that were fed genetically
modified food product. I have not seen an example where we have actually taken a
retail food environment and actually stuck stickers on GMO food items from catsup
to meat to produce, but I imagine it would be a significant share of that grocery
store or that food retail store that would have that designation. So therefore, with
the unintended cost and the unexplored cost, we think it is a good time to pause on
this legislation and get more information before Hawaii moves down this path. I
would be happy to take any questions.
Council Chair Furfaro: Are there any questions for Scott? Vice Chair
Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING -45- November 16, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: How does the Chamber decide to take a position on
a subject like this?
Mr. McFarland: You know what we do is we have the Government
Affairs Committee, which is a process that we meet ... we met earlier this week to
understand a variety of issues, from taxes to implications for business to
implications for creating positive operating environments. That is vetted out
through the Government Affair Committee of the Kauai Chamber of Commerce.
We produce written testimony for the membership of the committee to evaluate and
then the written testimony is submitted and then oral testimony is given, is
basically the process.
Ms. Yukimura: So how do you know that you are really reflecting
your membership?
Mr. McFarland: Again, it is the function of the committee. The
committee did have the ability to discuss the legislation in some of the other areas
and the committee... Randy did provide, on behalf of the committee, testimony and I
was simply following up in oral testimony of that process.
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. McFarland:
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. McFarland:
Ms. Yukimura:
Council Chair Furfaro:
thank you very much.
Mr. McFarland:
So the testimony was approved by your committee?
That is correct.
Okay.
That is correct.
All right, thank you very much.
Any more questions for Scott? Scott, we want to
Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Now, as the chairman, I have certain prerogatives.
I will ask, with the exception of Mr. Mickens and Mr. Taylor who were here earlier
when I read the opening statement regarding an open forum microphone for three
minutes, we have come to our lunch hour, but I am willing to give anyone who
cannot come back three minutes to speak now, if you would like. If not, when we do
come back from lunch on or about 1:30 p.m. or 1:35 p.m., we will have the public
hearing and then go on to this item. Is there anyone that would like to use three
minutes now versus returning to the chambers? Come right up. Was that a second
hand I saw? Very good. So we will take six minutes of testimony from two
individuals. And since I have you in here on the form, I will let you just introduce
yourself again.
JERI DI PIETRO: Mahalo, Councilman Furfaro. My name is Jeri Di
Pietro. Thank you so much for hearing this matter today. Thank you, Councilman
Rapozo, for being President of HSAC and putting this into your recommendations.
You know, I think that the consumers deserve the right of choice. The right
to know what is in our food. I just returned from a trip to the mainland. I spent
several weeks there meeting with national groups regarding this issue and many
others. We are not the only state that is looking at labeling laws. So while it may
seem farfetched to label only for Hawaii, many states are moving in this direction.
COUNCIL MEETING -46- November 16, 2011
So I could see that by the time this matter ... you know we should support this in our
state. We should join with other states. These foods that have been in our food
supply unlabeled, it has been a real silent change that has happened to our food.
With the introduction of these foods, we have seen health concerns rise. We have
seen an increase in obesity and heart disease and diabetes, especially with
juveniles. These are not the same types of foods. They are unique enough to be
patented. The example of the BT grains. BT is something that was used by organic
farmers, but topically, and in sunlight it goes away in 24 hours. The BT that is in
these genetically modified ingredients, especially in packaged foods, it is engineered
in the plant. It expresses at a very high level. It has been the thought that this is
the problem that is hurting our monarch butterflies, our honeybees. BT is
expressed at a very high rate in genetically modified crops so that the animals do
not build up immunity. They want one bite and pau to the insect. This is what is
going into our food supply. We do deserve the right to know. Many people have
allergens. Some people have compromised immune systems in these days of new
diseases, like HIV. These foods are different. Labeling should occur. We should
support Maui County and the Big Island County. They have heard this matter. I
am really impressed by the questions that you guys are asking today. It makes me
very happy that you really understand the concerns and a lot of different things
can be talked about in regards to GMOs, but I am trying to keep this focused on
labeling at this point. I think it is a very good thing for us to support this. Let it
get worked out at the state level, but let Kauai join as being educated enough to
understand that this is something that is not just our little island, it is nationally.
The United States is one of the last countries, one of the only countries to not label
genetically modified foods.
Eduardo Topenio, Jr., Deputy County Clerk: Three minutes, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Jeri, your three minutes are up, but I
will give you 30 seconds to summarize because we will not have time for questions.
Ms. Di Pietro: Great, okay. I think this is a reasonable request.
Organic farmers document their practices all the time so that they can prove that
their animals have not been fed GMO, that their crops have not been sprayed with
toxic pesticides. This can be done in the other alternative. Otherwise, it is an
undue burden on the organic farmers to prove their purity when in fact we know
90% of the package foods include these untested and unregulated ingredients.
Much of the genetically modified—the genetically engineered, I should say, because
modification of DNA does occur in evolution, but we are talking about engineering,
a laboratory process...
Mr. Topenio: Thirty seconds.
Ms. Di Pietro: ... that is done with unrelated species. Much of the
research and testing goes into the growing of this. There is no data about eating
these and that matter gets blurred very much in discussion. Show us the data. The
animal studies that have been shown and conducted are very troubling. So thank
you for your time and I will try and come back this afternoon if I can, but I have
(inaudible).
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Jeri, but we will recognize this as time
we allowed you to speak. And we had one more individual that would like to come
up. You may start by introducing yourself.
HARVEST EDMONDS: Hi, aloha. My name is Harvest Edmonds and I am
here today as a consumer. And I would ask you to fully support the choice of the
COUNCIL MEETING -47- November 16, 2011
consumer to know what they are eating and what we are eating. There are many,
many, many questions about GMO products. There has been research done. A lot
of it has been done by the biotech companies themselves and there also had been
testing done by independent laboratories that have found that there are more
questions than not about the safety of genetically engineered products. There are
millions of consumers now who are actively researching genetically engineered
products. I am one of those people and when I started researching it, I realized that
even though I have been pretty much organic for 40 years now that that is basically
the only way you can guarantee... hopefully guarantee that you are not eating any
genetically engineered products. There are many people out there, though, right
now that do not understand that. They do not know how to find products that do
not have genetically engineered ingredients and by labeling these products, then
more and more people will start looking at them and choosing the organic products.
Also, just in case you do not know, in California there is a petition going right now
to put labeling of GE products on their ballot. So that is a very, very active
movement and as Geri stated that most of the countries have some kind of laws
banning genetically engineered products and so some companies will sell their
product to Europe that do not have these GE ingredients in them, but then they will
go ahead and make the same product for the United States using the GE
ingredients. So I, for one, definitely choose non -GMO ingredients for my family and
I am very active about educating people about that option. It would be much easier,
though, to be able to just pick up a product and say there is non -GMO. And the
GMO companies are actively trying to get this not put on the products because they
know that once they are on the products that a lot of people will choose not to eat
the products with genetically engineered ingredients. I think that is all I have to
say.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much for your testimony and for
the general group, again, that was your three - minute alarm. We are going to come
back on or about 1:40 p.m., of which we will go into public hearings on some
planning items. But I will give you an anticipated time that we will continue at
2 o'clock. This council is in recess.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 12:42 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 2:30 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: For the purpose of anchoring our location on today's
agenda, which is a very full one, I want to make note that we are on item 308 and in
particular listed HSAC inclusion item 3. We have some speakers that have been
signed up and we had to break for lunch. Both Harvest and Jeri spoke. I believe
the next speaker is David Martin.
Mr. Topenio: Mr. Chair, we have Mark Phillipson.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is that a new sign -up?
Mr. Topenio: No, that was in our original sign -up.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, thank you. Come right up. Did you have
this? I'm sorry we're going to bring Mark up first. Sorry, Mark. My apologies as
well to David. I got confused at lunchtime, too much kalbi ribs.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING -48- November 16, 2011
MARK PHILLIPSON, Syngenta Hawaii and Hawaii Crop Improvement
Association: Good afternoon. My name is Mark Phillipson. I am with Syngenta
Hawaii and I am currently Vice President of the Hawaii Crop Improvement
Association. It is nice to be in front of Chair Furfaro and the City Council here.
Please excuse my introductory salutation on the written testimony, I thought it was
a committee meeting originally when I wrote the testimony. Syngenta Hawaii and
the Hawaii Crop Improvement Association strongly oppose certain parts of council
resolution C 2011 -308, specifically the provisions of item 3 of the HSAC resolution
and the attendant bill entitled "Related to Food Labeling." The provisions of item 3
and the said bill would impose additional cost on wholesale and retail food sellers
who presumably would be doing the labeling. What agency would follow the box of
cereal or the pancake syrup, amongst the hundreds of thousands of food items and
lot items, back to its origin to find out whether it would be conventional, genetic
engineered or mixed? This would result in an expense for the county and state
consumers and in addition, I think add confusion to the Hawaii consumers why
their food would be labeled here in this state and not in others.
Food safety should be the crux of this matter, not labeling. Contrary to the
claims made in support of this measure, there is no health and safety justification of
such legislation. To date, the public has consumed more than 1 trillion, well on its
way to 2 trillion, servings of foods using biotech agriculture without a single
documented incident of any harm to a consumer.
Indeed, the Food and Drug Administration has considered this fact and other
data related to foods produced from biotech crops and found no significant difference
between these foods and their conventional or organic counterparts. In fact, the
reason the FDA does not require a label is that biotech food ingredients are
substantially equivalent. There is no sellout or nodding or winking by any agency,
the USDA, the FDA, the EPA or other government agencies, to let these products go
untested. Biotech ag products follow a similar regulatory process that
pharmaceuticals do. Food labeling requirements as regulated by the FDA are
intended to communicate information relevant to health, safety, and nutrition.
The consumers that want to avoid buying genetically engineered foods can do
so. They buy organic foods. This market represents about 3% of the U.S. foodstuffs.
These are labeled, readily available and as most consumers know, GMO -free. There
are specialty stores and sections in most supermarkets that feature these products.
If passed, our state and county papaya industry would be required to label,
whereas papaya grown elsewhere would not, another disadvantage to this ag
segment that has already suffered a lot and gone through a fair amount of turmoil.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, on that note I just want to share that
was your first three minutes. You may continue for another three minutes.
Mr. Phillipson: Okay, thank you. What message will we be
sending to the importers of Hawaiian papaya?
I therefore strongly urge the committee to amend the resolution by striking
item 3 and the attendant bill before passing the other items in the resolution to a
full council for a vote.
Thank you for providing the opportunity to testify on this issue.
COUNCIL MEETING -49- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Are there any questions here? No
questions? Thank you very much for your testimony. On that note, I will bring up
David Martin, followed by Mr. Roy Oyama. Could you please ask them to quiet
down out there? Go right ahead.
DAVID MARTIN: Aloha. My name is David Martin. I am a 13 -year
resident of Kauai and active in farming and many other activities. Thank you all
for taking up this, ,what I regard as a very important food and health issue for the
entire community. One of the primary objections that is being raised to passing on
this as part of the legislative package is that there is no evidence these GMO
products actually make people sick. That is not true. I am not a scientist. I am not
going to stand here and tell you the specifics and facts. On October 14
Dr. Lawrence (sic) Pang made a presentation here at the Children of the Land in
Kapa`a. He dotted the I's and crossed the T's in terms of the health effects, the
problems and what needed to be done about it. I videoed that for Ho`ike. It is
available and I strongly encourage you to view the video. To me it is very
disturbing that a corporatized system sort of spews out what I regard as a large
amount of disinformation to keep the product rolling. There is much information
that is contrary to this in terms of its effect on at -risk populations in particular and
pediatric health issues they are taking a very strong look at this. I have been active
in taking care of special needs kids. There is a lot of research about what diet does
to these kids and how it affects them. So I just do not quite get this cloud of fog that
goes over this subject. It is a serious issue. I do not claim to know all the details,
but this is going to air on H6'ike. For those hearty souls that like midnight
television, this Thursday. I will give you the two most accessible, 9:16 a.m. on
Friday and on Sunday at 1:12 p.m.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is that this Friday?
Mr. Martin: Yes, this Friday. And you can go on Ho`ike's
website channel 52, they have a schedule and this will be shown under Lawrence
(sic) Pang, GMOs and Pesticides. So it should be an easy find on the search. But it
is there.
The other point that was raised is about the costs.
Council Chair Furfaro: David, that was your first three minutes, but
please continue.
Mr. Martin: This is my final point is that those costs actually
have been very thoroughly studied from different ends of the spectrum. When you
play the game you have high estimates and low estimates. You have experts that
say it is going to cost hundreds of dollars per unit, others is a few cents per unit.
But there are studies that were recently and I wish I could give you a specific site
on this, but within the last 30 days, there was an announcement of a recent study
that came out on the product cost per unit to label per GMO. I do not know the
numbers, but it is out there. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Before I ask any members if they have any
questions, Dr. Lawrence Pang, is he an M.D.?
Mr. Martin: Yes.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is he a pediatrician?
Mr. Martin: He is an M.D.
COUNCIL MEETING -50- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I was going to actually say Dr. Pang is the District
Health Office over on Maui.
Mr. Martin: Maui County.
Mr. Bynum: And so it is Lorrin Pang.
Mr. Martin: Oh, Lorrin, Lorrin, right.
Mr. Bynum: Lorrin, okay. I just want to make sure...
Mr. Martin: L- o- r- r -i -n, I am so sorry.
Mr. Bynum: We are talking about the same guy.
Mr. Martin: Yeah.
Mr. Bynum: So that is all. I just wanted to clarify that. So
thanks for filming that.
Council Chair Furfaro: Councilmember Chang, then Councilwoman
Yukimura.
Mr. Chang: Thank you. First of all, Mr. Martin, did we get a
written testimony from you and can we get one?
Mr. Martin: No, I will provide you.
Mr. Chang: And also you said you were a small farmer for
13 years?
Mr. Martin: Yeah, various sites around the island. I have been
active in the UH training program with Glenn. I have farmed in several sites
around the island.
Mr. Chang: Yeah because it is very interesting because we had
different farmers here talking about the farm worker housing bill and the need for
additional workers. And being a small farmer yourself, we have had a lot of
testimony from the small farmers telling us what additional costs will be added on if
there is need for labeling and who can monitor it, what is the expertise, who is going
to go about doing what, can we afford it during this economic time. But it is a little
different that you are a small farmer yourself, but I believe from what I heard that
a lot of the small farmers said that this might be detrimental to their bottom line.
Mr. Martin: I understand that, 'but I think to me it is about
information and who has what information, how are they responding to that
information. From the information I have seen, I believe that there are costs
associated with it, of course. But when you look at the health issues that could be
associated without... You see what is happening is the cart is getting put in front of
the horse. These people are putting out products and then they are saying, well,
there is no evidence they cause harm. To me, they have to deal with it on the front
end, you know. Figure it out on the front end whether it is going to cause harm and
prove it scientifically. That has not been done. We are only hearing anecdotal
COUNCIL MEETING -51- November 16, 2011
evidence, well, so far nobody is sick. That to me does not work in a scientific world.
To me it is what I was calling the corporate fog. There are certain interests, a
certain need to keep the product rolling and it is out there. Now you have so much
out there well people just get overwhelmed by it, oh we cannot do anything about it.
I do not think that is the way it should work in our world. I see the reality of what
goes down, but I disagree. I think we have an opportunity to get real. Let us get
real is what I call it. I am not a scientist. I cannot say exactly what the health
effect is, but I know that there are scientists that ... I mean I have a general sense of
it, but talk to a scientist. You guys are going to be deciding what you pass on, so it
is kind of your call and how much you educate yourselves is very important. So I
am just sharing educational information and encouraging it be pursued.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Councilwoman Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Would it be possible to get a copy of that CD in case
we do not get a chance to view it on Ho`ike?
Mr. Martin: Yeah and I can actually... if you have the facilities, I
have a copy with me, but I don't want to let it go. So if somebody could like...
Council Chair Furfaro: We can burn a copy.
Mr. Martin: I can give you the disk, just so I get it back. Okay.
Council Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura. David, Councilwoman
Yukimura has a question for you.
Ms. Yukimura: Are you aware of any jurisdiction in the United
States that has required labeling?
Mr. Martin: I am not. That does not mean it has not happened.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I understand.
Mr. Martin: But I have not anecdotally heard that it has
happened. I just know it is on a lot of people's tables. And that other very
important part is about information. I do not think the United States is on top of
the information curve here. We do not have the focus on food safety like the
European countries have or the Japanese have. There is an intense focus on food
safety there and everybody that puts signs to it says (inaudible).
Ms. Yukimura: I understand the Japanese just cleared the way for
GMO papayas. Is that right?
Mr. Martin: I have heard that, yeah, but it has to be labeled.
Ms. Yukimura: It has be labeled?
Mr. Martin: Yeah.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Martin: It is my understanding that it has to be labeled.
Ms. Yukimura: All right, thank you very much.
COUNCIL MEETING -52- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Rapozo:
Council Chair Furfaro
Any other questions for David?
I have a question.
Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thanks, David. I am hoping we can get a copy of
that because I will not be here to watch that show.
Mr. Martin:
It will run for several weeks.
Mr. Rapozo: But does Dr. Pang make reference to why the FDA
has not made a ruling or a decision or has not determined that genetically
engineered foods are unsafe? Does he address that in his...
Mr. Martin: To me it was not absolutely clear and I cannot say
for sure that he does. I believe he does, but I am not saying, yes, he does.
Mr. Rapozo: - I guess what troubles me is how the FDA has
consistently come out and made the statement that it is not an unsafe process.
Mr. Martin: Yeah.
Mr. Rapozo: And that, I think, is the dilemma that we are at is
why have they not ... is the corporate fog that strong?
Mr. Martin: To me it is about leadership within those agencies.
If you look at the leadership of those agencies that there has clearly been evidence
about the effects of GMOs that have been suppressed over the years. And there is a
lot of finger pointing going on about whether these are appointments of corporate
people to bureaucratic positions to make decisions and off it goes. So that has been,
to me, the real problem is the role that sort of money plays in politics. But I have no
smoking guns. But there is just the general view is that and there is enough
decisions that go against it from directions that I believe have great credibility that
I am swayed. But, of course, it is like when we are in this room, we are all part of
the 99 %, right? Everyone of us in here is part of that 99 %, but we all have different
points of view on the subject depending on the information we have available to us
and the way that we give that information individually. So to me it is just about
getting out as much information as we can and make sensible decisions based on
what we have and if it comes up that there is no harm, you know, there is no harm.
But I still believe people have a right to know what they are putting in their mouth
or what they are putting in their kids' mouths. So one way or the other it comes up
label it for me.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, David, in our rules I gave you the full six
minutes. He asked you a question. I gave you ample time to respond to that
question. Let me see if there are any more questions for you. Any more questions
for David? No. David, thank you very much and the staff is working on getting a
copy of your file. The next speaker is Mr. Roy Oyama, followed by Ken Taylor (who
is not here), followed by Glenn Mickens.
ROY OYAMA, Kauai Farm Bureau: Okay, Roy Oyama once more from the
Kauai Farm Bureau. We have written testimony that was sent in and I think
many of them had described fully what has been said, so I will not read it. But I
just want to make sure that first statement in bold printing, "The Kauai Farm
COUNCIL MEETING -53- November 16, 2011
Bureau testifies in opposition to item 3 on the HSAC legislative package — proposed
bill requiring labeling of genetically engineered food products sold in Hawai`i." So
again we oppose it.
Now I just want to probably give information as to what is happening in the
state. As you all know, Big Island, Maui, Oahu have the PRV virus. That is the
papaya that people consume called rainbow. They are all grown on those islands.
Kauai does not have it. We had it back in the 70s. We eradicated it and the
population dropped down in acreage, so we controlled the virus and we still do not
have it yet and we want to increase our production for papayas, but there are no
farmers because as I mentioned, the population base is below 2 %. I wish there were
interested farmers because we would like to take the challenge and get on with
papaya growing and have it exported throughout the state because there is demand
for it as well as in Canada, but that is another subject. The subject is about
labeling. So again, the papayas that are coming into Kauai, as you know, is way
beyond numbers that and I do not want to repeat it because it is pretty high, you
know 90% area that is imported to Kauai because we do not have papayas. And it
is rainbow. And the markets, you go around, they claim they do not have it, but if
they come from the Big Island it is rainbow because I am associated with the
Papaya Association of the State and I know the growers and they tell me. The PRV
virus is a very hard virus to control and in the scientific area of virus they have
viral levels 1, 2 and 3. And this is not a high viral level, but yet Hawaii has had a
lot of infection because we farm 12 months, everything is growing 12 months, you
have to understand that. What I'm trying to get at is the cost of farming is not as
cheap as we can talk. The life of talking is very easy, anybody can talk. Let us look
at walk the talk, okay. I am very adamant about this position because, again, the
population base of farmers is below 2 %. We all want to be sustainable. Well, help
us get to that level. We cannot be looking at all these arguments. I stop at that
because I do not want to get out of the base of the bill.
Council Chair Furfaro: Fine. Thank you, Mr. Oyama, and we have your
written testimony from the Farm Bureau. Please, all members, please stay in
place. We are going to take a three - minute tape change. Am I correct, BC? Okay,
so we are going to be on break for about three minutes, here.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 2:53 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 2:57 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Council Chair Furfaro: Members, are there any questions of Mr. Oyama
before I bring up Mr. Mickens? Thank you for being patient with us.
Mr. Oyama: But could I make one additional because I forgot
about it?
Council Chair Furfaro: I think you only used the first three minutes.
Mr. Oyama: Okay, if that is the choice, that is all right.
Council Chair Furfaro: No, you have only used three minutes. So let me
correct this and I will give you your second three minutes.
COUNCIL MEETING -54- November 16, 2011
Mr. Oyama: I just wanted to add that with the Big Island
situation and the GMO papaya, as JoAnn knows as she mentioned already, it is
approved in Japan, okay. They have approved for permission for Big Island or any
GMO papaya, rainbow specifically, can be treated to be shipped/exported to Japan.
And at the moment, the association, like I mentioned to you I am also involved with
the state association, they are working on the procedures. It is not legally label
required yet. We are working on procedures to have shipment arranged and the
process of what is going to happen to the stores, to the retailers and all. So there is
no decision in that area. We are working on it. But I will caution you. It took us
over 11 years to get the clearance. So I do not know how long more it is going to
take for this process to have clearance for an area of treatment on the way to the
broker, from the broker to the wholesalers, from the wholesalers to the retailers
because that is what they want us to work out. And that's all I have.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, any questions of Mr. Oyama? If not, sir,
thank you very much.
Mr. Oyama: Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, Jay, for the record Glenn Mickens. I
just have a short testimony regarding what we have been going through. This is
and has been a hot button issue for a long time. I have heard both Roy and Jerry
confirm this, how GMOs say the papaya industry was what he just said here on
Kauai. Thus papaya growers are highly supportive of GMOs. I have heard from
the other side, as you have heard in testimony today, that GMOs are detrimental to
people's health. If, as Sarah testified today, 90% of the foods we eat here have been
genetically engineered, then scientific evidence would certainly be able to prove
what is harming us, but I have not heard that data yet. I would have to hope that if
the majority of foods contain GMOs, then our protective agencies, like the FDA as
Mel was saying, would be there to protect us. With everything we do, we must pick
the best of the worst, whether it is in politics or food. With this GMO issue, I lean
towards what I believe is the best part of it as I have not heard scientific evidence
proving otherwise. So the FDA does make mistakes in some of the drugs they okay.
But as Roy pointed out, they pull these drugs off the market then. They do have
researchers doing this and I do not know whether there is politics, whether there is
money being played there, like in everything it seems there is. But I do not know
whether that in fact has anything to do with FDA okay in certain products like this.
So anyway, this is a tough call for a lot of you, but I think in the one hand I think
we have heard more evidence today, evidence that there is not actual harm with
GMOs. I mean I have listened to this for three years on the Jimmy Torio show.
People used to give him evidence back and forth. It was very educating, but I never
did hear finality to it. So anyway, that is a tough job you guys have. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Our next speaker and I believe our last
registered speaker is Michaela Boudreaux.
MICHAELA BOUDREAUX: Thank you. Hello, can you hear me?
Council Chair Furfaro: Is your blue light on?
Ms. Boudreaux: Yes, the blue light is on.
Council Chair Furfaro: You're on.
COUNCIL MEETING -55- .November 16, 2011
Ms. Boudreaux: Okay, I just want to make sure that I am projecting
enough. And I do not want to take up too much time and thank you, council, for
doing all of this.
The one point that I wanted to make was that...
Mr. Chang: Excuse me, can you introduce yourself.
Ms. Boudreaux: Oh sorry, Michaela Boudreaux and I am from
Kalaheo and I am a concerned citizen. Sorry, I always get nervous.
Council Chair Furfaro: Take your time.
Ms. Boudreaux: At the Supreme Court in 2010 during the alfalfa
issue where the Center for Food Safety and the USDA versus Monsanto, the
Supreme Court actually came out and said that biotechnology is a very big thing to
understand and that they were not really equipped to do it. And the FDA, in an
audit, and I am not sure of the exact date, it was either 2008 or 2009, I could find
that out for you though and I could give you that information, in an internal audit
said that they were over their heads with all of what was going on as well. And so I
just thought that that would be an added part to this.
When Ms. Styan was talking earlier today and when she admitted that
nobody really knows the answers, I decided to think that that is why labeling is fair
to the consumer.
And there was a question that Mr. Rapozo asked about the FDA. And during
that time when they were deciding that it was all right, the person that they hired
was Michael Taylor from Monsanto who made that call. So there is a very big
revolving door that is easy to follow if you look it up.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Ms. Boudreaux: You're welcome.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, Michaela, let me see if there are questions
for you. Members? Thank you very much for your testimony. You did well. Do not
worry about being nervous.
Ms. Boudreaux: Thank you and thank you for your consideration of
the issue.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone else in the audience that wishes to
speak because I did extend to everybody their two 3- minutes portions. Okay, seeing
no one, I am going to call this meeting back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: I want to basically share with you that I had gone
to item 308 because of the number of people that were in audience wanting to give
testimony, but item 308 covers 14 points in the HSAC President's request for
information to transmit to HSAC in the form of our legislative package. So I would
like to, starting with item 1, turn the meeting over to Mr. Rapozo and we will then
COUNCIL MEETING -56- November 16, 2011
have discussion as we go down on the items. But before I turn the meeting over to
Mr. Rapozo, is there any dialogue from the group on the item we have taken
testimony for today? Councilwoman Yukimura and then Councilmember Bynum.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, Mr. Chair, just in terms of procedure, I hope
we take them ad seriatim and take care of each one as we go along.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is what I hope to do.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. I just want to say that in the discussion and
I certainly appreciate everybody who has come to speak on the issue, a pretty
fundamental question arose in my mind, anyway, about whether the state has the
authority to pass labeling requirements. It does affect interstate commerce and it is
possible, although you would think we would have heard already, that states are
preempted by the federal government from passing labeling laws. That is why I
was so interested in whether other jurisdictions, county or state, had passed such
laws. I will be requesting the county attorney to opine on that legal question and so
in one sense we do not have all the information right now to make a decision. So
one option for us is to refer it to the IGR Committee and hopefully the county
attorney can respond in time so that we have at least that question addressed
before we make a decision one way or the other.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. I will have that discussion with the
members in a moment. Mr. Bynum, you wanted to speak.
Mr. Bynum: Yeah, I had wanted to ask Councilmember Rapozo
a couple questions, if I can.
Council Chair Furfaro: Go right ahead.
Mr. Bynum: This came from Maui County?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: And on this list, these have passed Maui County
and the Hawaii County.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, these have all passed all the counties,
except ... oh, I am sorry. This has passed only HSAC, so all the representatives of
HSAC have approved this to get it to the counties. So it has not been heard ... I
believe Kauai is the first...
Mr. Bynum: In the individual counties.
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Mr. Bynum: Thanks, I wanted that clarification. And then,
Mr. Chair, are we having discussion about this item now?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, we can.
Mr. Bynum: I am going to say that I am going to support this
item and I want to say something about why. I meet at least once a year with
people from the seed company. I agree with the premise that most GMO issues are
better addressed at the state and federal level and primarily at the federal level.
And so I have not brought any GM related issues to the county council. However I
COUNCIL MEETING -57- November 16, 2011
also said I would vote my conscience if we were asked to vote on these things. And I
have read volumes over 10 years about GMOs and I have made these kinds of
comments before, but I am going to make them right now. I find the credibility of
the industry and the opponents weak on both sides. The industry basically says,
there is absolutely no problem, we do not need to do anything, everything is fine, it
is just like every other food. Well, when you take genes from another organism and
splice them into a food item that are totally foreign... and they also say, oh, it is just
like what we have been doing all along. We manipulate genes by crossbreeding and
farmers have been doing it forever. That is all true that we have been doing that.
But this is fundamentally different. And so when the industry almost reacted
immediately said there is no problem, do not worry, everything is fine even in the
face of some... and there have been failures in the industry like bovine growth
hormones and others in the past. On the other hand, when you listen to, not all, but
a number of the opponents, they make outlandish claims about Frankenfoods and
the end of the planet. And I do not find those credible either. I have said all along
that my concerns about GMO tend to be more economic than scientific. Economic in
that I have a fundamental problem with the idea of a large corporation owning what
happens on things that grow in the ground. And I have very large concerns about
large corporate entities taking on small farmers and saying, oh, you are growing our
crops and suing them and it may have been from contamination or other purposes.
The state of California had to pass a law to protect their farmers from trespass and
intrusion from an industry that was very aggressive in promoting their patents and
keeping their... You know if we can create a food product that feeds the world, I
want that to be given away, not become an economic thing. And so once you are
dependent on GM crops, you have to pay every year. You do not get to do the
traditions of creating your own seeds and planting them next year. You become
involved in that corporate plan. And in the third world there has been serious
problems. So I have really serious concerns on both sides. But what is before us is
not a ban GMO bill. It is a choice bill. It is a thing that says, I should be able to
choose to not have GM foods. Now that is increasingly difficult because it is
pervasive, but I still I think I need that choice and so if I am asked to vote, should
people have a choice to know what they are consuming, that is an easy choice for me
and that this is a proposal that has passed Maui County at least. I have also seen
what has happened in this state when people went when very well intended and
people, for a lot of reasons, wanted to ban research GM taro. The industry said,
well, we will give you a limited ban, but we are going to pass a law —not the
industry but the legislature said, I do not want to blame improperly —the
legislature said but we are going to ban the counties from ever doing anything
related to this in the future and to have that kind of clout with our state legislature
is concerning to me. So whenever I talk about GM I usually make both sides
unhappy and to me that is saying maybe I am somewhere down the middle. So I
still have no intention to bring GM legislation before the county council. I think
these issues are better addressed at the federal and state level and I can go on and
on because, you know, the question came up today, how come the FDA does not do
this. Well, this is a fascinating story that brings up other concerns that we should
all have national and about the purity of university research for one, which has
become overwhelmingly funded by corporate interests. You know, the revolving
door issue that somebody made that the people that are regulating the industry
worked in the industry go back to the industry, and it is not just the GM industry.
It is many of the industries that we need, as citizens, to be concerned about
regulating properly. But what is before us is saying the Hawaii State Counties
saying we have this proposal to take a position on labeling. Oh and the last thing is
about who goes first. I believe this will be a very big national issue in the next two
years. I think California will probably have an initiative that will probably pass.
And they are a much bigger state than us. But when we passed the plastic ban on
Kauai, we were the seventh community in the nation. We were out front with that
COUNCIL MEETING -58- November 16, 2011
and Maui was ahead of us. Now there are thousands of similar legislations in the
country. And so I do not think being first about choice and health and safety is a
bad thing. So thanks for letting me ramble on and explain why I am going to
support this today.
Council Chair Furfaro: Well, I did not let you ramble. I let you give your
explanation.
Mr. Bynum: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone else that would like to speak on
this item here? Okay, first and foremost, there is a councilmember that is
indicating that they would like some clarity in the form of a question to go over to
the county- attorney while at the same time surfacing this item separately in the
IGR Committee. Is there a second to that motion?
Ms. Yukimura: I will turn it into a motion, but may I ask one
question first?
Council Chair Furfaro: I am very sorry if I just interpreted you wanting to
make that motion. So what I will do is I will give you the courtesy to rephrase what
I just did.
Ms. Yukimura: Oh, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: So you need to get a second, though, so we can have
discussion.
Ms. Yukimura: So the motion would be to refer to committee and
you can have discussion on that. It is not like a motion to defer. So move to refer to
the IGR Committee.
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer C 2011 -308, item 3 to the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee, seconded by Ms. Nakamura.
Council Chair Furfaro: It has been motioned and seconded to pose a
question really on the interstate commerce question to the county attorney's office
and have this item resurface in the IGR Committee. Would you like to add to that
discussion now?
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, Chair. I just wanted clarification from
HSAC President. Maui proposed this for the HSAC package, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: So that means that their council has approved this
as their position in proposing to ... they had to have had that.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, so there is one county that has taken a
position on this and for the rest, Oahu, Big Island, and Kauai, they have gone back
now to their respective councils to get the votes.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING -59- November 16, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, thank you for clarifying the situation. Other
than that, I am thinking that the question posed to the county attorney is pretty
fundamental and would help us to really have that. So I do not have any further
discussion except that I think the motion to refer to IGR is an appropriate one right
now.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, that motion has been made and there has
been a second by Councilmember Nakamura. Is there any further discussion? No.
May ask for a call on a referral of proposed bill, an act relating to food industry
labeling along with an attached question to the county attorney's office. All those in
favor of having this surface in the IGR Committee, please signify by saying aye.
Any nays? Any silent? I am referring to myself as a silent vote as I am not on that
committee, so let the record reflect that.
The motion to refer C 2011 -308, item 3, to the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee was then put, and unanimously carried.
There being no objections, the remaining items in C 2011 -308 was taken out of
order.
Council Chair Furfaro: So now, Mr. Rapozo, I would like for the purpose of
going through the entire 2011 -308. I would like to have an opportunity to turn this
meeting over to you so that we can go through these items starting with 1), a yea, a
nay or any discussion on those particular items, starting with and I am going to ask
the county clerk's office to read the first item, proposed bill for an act.
1) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Traffic Infractions (Provides the
Counties with a percentage of fines for uncontested traffic infractions;
County of Maui Proposal).
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. This is a recurring item. We used to
have it on the package. It did come off the package in the last couple of years, but
we have it back. Basically this is to try to get the state to allow the counties to
recover or to get a percentage of the unadjudicated traffic fines that are issued in
their counties. Right now, as you all know, we do not get any revenue from the
citations and the fines, but this one would be for the counties to get a... and if you
look at the text we left the percentage blank. We are going to let the state put that
in because we learned that when you put a percentage in it is a lot easier for them
to deny it. So it is going to be a blank, but the state will have the flexibility to put
whatever they want. I guess at this point I would entertain a motion to approve.
Go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 1 for inclusion in the 2012
HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded, any discussion? Go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah, question. Do we know how much money is
involved in...
Mr. Rapozo: Well, it depends on the percentage.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, no, but what is the total?
COUNCIL MEETING -60- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Oh no, I do not have that. It did come up; it was
presented at the HSAC meeting; I do not have the number in front of me. It has a
slim chance of passing, but we never know. Oh, I am sorry, go ahead.
Mr. Bynum: If it is all right, I cannot pass up this opportunity to
inform people on Kauai that currently when you get a traffic ticket, the county gets
zero dollars. And so when I read those things in the paper about, oh, they set up
this speed trap because they want to increase the bottom line and bring money in,
the county gets nothing. This proposal is basically saying, hey, a lot of these traffic
tickets people just pay them. They do not go to court, into the state court system
and it is county police officers who write the majority of these tickets and that we
are entitled to a percentage. So hopefully the legislature will hear that some day.
Mr. Rapozo: Well, they are going to hear it this week, I mean
this year, I just do not know if they are going to... Okay, any other discussion? If
not, all in favor say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 1 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
2) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Housing (Increases the time for
review of affordable housing projects submitted pursuant to
Section 20111-38, Hawaii Revised Statutes; County of Maui Proposal):
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 2 for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Rapozo: This is another recurring item. This basically
extends the review period for the affordable housing projects from 45 days to
60 days. Any other discussion? If not all in favor say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 2 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
4) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Agricultural Product Branding and
Country or Region of Origin Labeling (County of Hawaii Proposal):
Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 4 for inclusion in the 2012
HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo: Again, if you have had the opportunity to review
the text, this was a Big Island proposal and it is always struggling to compete with
the marketplace who tries to utilize Hawaii made products or Kona made products
and this basically sets the parameters so that there are minimums in order for you
to use the Hawaii or regional name. So this is a ... we will see how far this one will
get, but it is a good idea. So any other discussion? If not, all in favor say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 4 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
5) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Gallonage Tax on Liquor (Amends
Chapter 244D, Section 244D -4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, relating to
increasing the gallonage tax on liquor; County of Hawaii Proposal):
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 5 for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
COUNCIL MEETING - 61 - November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you very much. This increases the
gallonage tax by a nickel for each of the classes. Go ahead Councilmember
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: I agree with the idea of increasing the gallonage
tax, but I do not agree with the idea of using the money to reimburse the counties
for cost of handling crashes and crash fatalities. I would really prefer to see this
money being used for prevention of underage drinking and other drugs because I
think that will help us get ahead of the problem. I mean not to say that the cost of
handling crashes and crash facilities does not exist, but really I think we would
make better use of the money to address the issues from a prevention approach, so
that perhaps we will not have as many crashes in the first place. So I would like
to ... I do not know if the HSAC process allows for some modification, but I would
love it if Kauai County could go back and say we support the increase in tax, but we
would like to propose instead the use of the tax moneys to be for prevention of
underage drinking and other drugs to keep it flexible and useful because a lot of
prevention strategies apply to all drugs.
Mr. Rapozo: We are not allowed to amend it obviously for the
time reasons and our next HSAC meeting is not until December. And that is fine. I
tend to agree with you on that that in fact the money should go to prevention. I also
wanted to run this and I would be suggesting if you folks want to send it to the
committee so we can get the input from the Liquor Department itself, our county
liquor department. But I tend to agree with you that in fact the moneys... even if
the liquor department was good with it, I would still agree with your assessment
that we should utilize the funds somewhere else. Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Again not disagreeing about where the funds might
be targeted, but my thought on this is this is a county package. If you were sending
the funds to do prevention, it probably would go to the State Department of Health
and I think part of this issue is a similar issue where the counties are burdened
with the impact of a lot of this. It has expenses and so the reason I would consider
supporting it and I hope we do send it to committee so we can have a more
thoughtful discussion is that I believe this proposal has that increase go to the
counties as opposed to going to the state and so that is just the thought I would like
to put out there. But I would encourage us, as long as we are going to have an IGR
meeting about these, it would buy us some time to get some additional information.
Mr. Rapozo: Well, the gallonage tax comes to the counties
anyway. I mean that does come to the counties. That is what funds...
Council Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Rapozo:
It is the use, the question is.
Go ahead.
Mr. Kuali`i: So in the actual language of the bill it says, "Shall
only be used to pay for police, fire, emergency medical services, road clean -up,
prosecution, and may also be used for training, the purchase of any equipment
deemed necessary by the respective county departments, education and public
service announcements utilized to reduce driving while under the influence of an
intoxicant." So it started the move in that direction. Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: Do we know how much money that would bring us?
COUNCIL MEETING -62- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: No, we do not.
Ms. Yukimura: Can we find that out between now and at least next
week when I presume it will come up in the IGR Committee? And I like the idea
that it stays with the counties actually because I do not think ... I mean I think the
prevention areas are getting stronger and stronger in terms of county roots, county
efforts, and I just know that sustaining prevention efforts has been a real problem.
So to have a tax that is focused on that would be very useful. I think getting the
Liquor Commission's position on it would be good and then if it is not possible to go
back with an amended proposal to HSAC, then I would say we not support it as an
HSAC package matter because we are not able to modify it and instead let us adopt
a modified process for our Kauai County Legislative Package.
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah and I did not suggest the Liquor Commission,
just the Liquor Department.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, that is fine.
Mr. Rapozo: Because we can get the response from the Liquor
Department relatively quickly.
Ms. Yukimura: That is fine with me.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Council Chair Furfaro: So I want to make sure I have some clarification
here. The fact of the matter is item 5 we are going to be sending a request to the
Liquor Department to get an idea of the 5 -cent gallon charge, its impact, what that
impact would be, and the data associated with that. We are not asking for a
position by the liquor commissioners, the actual commissioners because they only
meet monthly.
Mr. Rapozo: Right.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, so staff, did you grasp what the question
should be for next week. Thank you, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Okay, so would you want to make that
motion to refer to the IGR Committee?
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer C 2011 -308, item 5 to the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee, seconded by Ms. Nakamura, and unanimously carried.
6) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to the Employees' Retirement System
(Provides the Counties with representation on the Board of Trustees of the
Employees' Retirement System - City and County of Honolulu Proposal):
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 6 for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Furfaro.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. This is simply to increase the
composition of the board for the Employees Retirement System to include a member
appointed by unanimous agreement of the mayors of each of the four counties and
approved by HSAC and of course the counties will ... basically giving the counties a
voice on the ERS Board. This bill was also proposed in the HCOM Package as well,
so it will show up in our county package. Any other discussion?
COUNCIL MEETING -63- November 16, 2011
Ms. Nakamura: Do we know the percentage of county employees
versus state employees in the Employees Retirement System?
Mr. Rapozo: No.
Ms. Nakamura: I am just wondering what percentage that is, but I
think one is a good place to start.
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah. I believe this was on last year as well, but it
never got... Okay.
Ms. Yukimura: And the question that Councilmember Nakamura
asked was for county employees throughout the state, not just Kauai County, but
percentage of county versus state employees. If we can get an answer to that, that
would be some good data to know, although I agree with you that asking for one is
where we start.
Mr. Bynum: Do we have a motion?
Mr. Rapozo: Yup, all those in favor say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 6 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, Mr. Rapozo. I want to make sure we
pose that in two questions. To the staff, one is recognizing what percentage of our
1,088 employees are represented in the retirement fund; two is what percentage of
all four counties' employees are represented in the retirement fund. Just to clarify.
Thank you, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo:
Thank you. Next item, No. 7.
7) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to the Employer -Union Health Benefits
Trust Fund (H.B. NO. 175, H.D. 2 (2011); City and County of Honolulu
Proposal): Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 7 for inclusion
in the 2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo: Similar as the ERS body, this will give the
appointing authority to the governor and one which would be appointed by the
unanimous consent of the mayors and approval by HSAC. Any further discussion?
Yes, Councilmember Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Just procedurally, will HSAC have to go back to all
the individual councils to get approval or is that something that the executive
committee of HSAC approves?
Mr. Rapozo: I would assume it will be the executive committee
that will be approving.
Ms. Yukimura: Because I am just worried about the unwieldiness
of the process. So it seems to me ... I almost thought, maybe you do not need HSAC
approval. But at least it is more streamlined if it is just the executive committee
than to have to go back to all the respective councils.
COUNCIL MEETING -64- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, I would assume that it would show up on the
agenda as a discussion item prior to the HSAC representative going up and
supporting it simply because I do not think the HSAC representative would be the
HSAC representative long if he went up and in opposition or against what the rest
of his or her colleagues agreed to. So I see that as an item on the agenda, but the
executive committee will make that decision.
Ms. Yukimura: And actually it is not, if I may?
Mr. Rapozo: Go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: It is not detailed in the legislation, so it would be
something that HSAC has to address in terms of how it would fulfill the wording of
the law which says approved by HSAC to represent.
aye.
Mr. Rapozo: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, any other discussion? If not, all in favor say
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 7 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
8) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Adult Residential Care Homes
(Requires publication of notice and holding a public hearing for
applications for a Type II Residential Care Home; City and County of
Honolulu Proposal): Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 8 for
inclusion in the 2012 HSAC, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? This
basically will provide or require Type II Residential Care Homes to have a public
hearing before being permitted. Honolulu is having a lot of problems with
complaints against care homes, abuse. They are showing up in residential
neighborhoods and not providing proper care and attention to the clients. And so
Honolulu is suggesting that they go into this additional application process which
will require an informational hearing. Go ahead, Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: I am not going to support this bill and the reason
why is because on Kauai if the Type II ... I just got this definition from staff that the
Type II home under the Department of Health regulations is for six or more
residents. And I believe under our comprehensive zoning code that would require a
Use Permit. A Use Permit requires a public hearing and requires notification of
residents within 300 feet of the boundaries of the property. So I think we already
have it covered here and it would add to just another level of public hearings that I
think that if through the way you arrange your land use code, you could address
this issue, that it does not have to go this route. So I think it just adds to the time
and resources of everyone and it is redundant on Kauai.
Mr. Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, then Councilmember
Bynum.
Ms. Yukimura: I appreciate the research that Councilmember
Nakamura has done and if it is the case that the problem is effectively addressed by
our existing county requirements, I too would not be in favor of this because what
COUNCIL MEETING -65- November 16, 2011
that means is that the other counties can address it through Use Permits and other
processes. And based on the justification that is stated here, actually the issues are
not management and abuse of patients in the care home. It is more impacts on the
surrounding neighborhood that seems to be an issue. I think the issue of proper
management and potential abuse is a whole other arena. So to me it is not clear
here what the purpose of this particular state bill is and I think it needs to be
redone if in fact the target is abuse of care home residents. So I think I am going to
join Councilmember Nakamura in not supporting it.
Mr. Rapozo:
Councilmember Bynum
Mr. Bynum: To be honest I had questions about this that I do
not know the answer to and maybe you do. Has this bill come before the legislature
previously?
Mr. Rapozo: No. This is the first one.
Mr. Bynum: And has the Health Department taken a position
on this bill, do you know?
Mr. Rapozo: I do not know; I do not know.
Mr. Bynum: And so, but I also want to point out that this has
passed the county, is before HSAC, and if any one county says no it is not part of
the HSAC package.
Mr. Rapozo: Correct, correct.
Mr. Bynum: So out of courtesy to our City & County colleagues,
if we are going to have an IGR meeting, that would buy us a week to get some of
these questions answered. I would encourage us to refer this one to the IGR
Committee as well because I would like to have those questions answered because I
share the concerns that have been expressed. You know, part of this is... and then
our experience on Kauai to try cite any kind of care home whether it is an adult
care home or an adolescent treatment program, shelter for kids that are in foster
care, there is a NIMBY component to that. And so to put more obstacles in the way
of some of these issues that we have to deal with as a society, I am uncomfortable
with. But I would like to know /understand more about why the City & County feels
like it has to be state legislation and what the Health Department's position would
be. And those questions, I just do not have answers.
Mr. Furfaro: Mr. Chair?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, as being a planning commissioner 10 years ago
or so, this is covered for us clearly through the application in front of the
commission and it triggers a public hearing. I believe Honolulu has the opportunity
to change or incorporate it in its own CZO to address their problems. So I will not
be supporting this.
Mr. Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: So did the City & County propose this particular
piece?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING -66- November 16, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay and I just want to point out that in the bill
itself it attempts to address the overlap between county and state in paragraph C,
but it does it by inviting the county's attendance to the hearing and that would not
substitute for our Use Permit hearing, which would allow commissioners to ask
question, to require information, and so forth about the parameters that our law
requires the planning commission to consider. So I just wanted to point out there
was a kind of feeble attempt to reconcile the overlap, but it does not really do it.
Mr. Rapozo: No, what it does is it requires Kauai County to
have two informational hearings.
Ms. Nakamura: Exactly.
Mr. Rapozo: It requires the Use Permit's public hearing and
then the state will tell us when their informational ... it will require two hearings.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, so that is additional bureaucracy that I do not
think we need.
Mr. Rapozo: And just so that we understand, to vote an HSAC
proposal down is not a bad thing. It is really ... when I saw 14 proposals, I almost
had a kitten. We normally do not have 14 proposals, but when that final package is
done, it needs to be proposals that benefit the entire state. So if a proposal does not
benefit or in fact really affects any individual county, then that bill or that proposal
should not be on the HSAC package anyway. So just so that we understand, it is
not a bad thing. If we do not think it works for Kauai, we can definitely say no.
That is just that... do not think that our colleagues in Honolulu and Maui and the
Big Island are going to be upset. So I just wanted to put that in. That is fine if you
guys want to get it to the IGR Committee, that is fine. If you want to call for the
question, we can do that as well.
Council Chair Furfaro: I am ready to call for the question now. I do not
think this needs to go to committee.
Mr. Rapozo: Well, let us ... the motion was...
Ms. Nakamura: Is to approve.
Mr. Rapozo: There was a motion to approve?
Ms. Yukimura: But you advised me to do a motion to refer to
committee. So we could just vote down the motion to approve?
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, the motion was to approve. Well, we will call
for the question. All in favor say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 8 for inclusion in the HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and failed unanimously.
Mr. Rapozo:
Okay, item No. 9.
Motion failed and so item 8 will not be advancing.
9) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Collective Bargaining (Creates a new
bargaining unit for Water Safety Officers employed by the State or
COUNCIL MEETING -67- November 16, 2011
Counties - City and County of Honolulu Proposal): Mr. Chang moved to
approve C 2011 -308, item 9 for inclusion in the HSAC Legislative
Package, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Let me just say that
according to the introducers and I believe this was Oahu as well, they informed the
HSAC body that they had met with HGEA and UPW and all the other bargaining
units and that they were in support. I had asked that they forward their supporting
documentation to the other counties so we would have some written testimony. We
did not receive anything. I personally have not made the attempt to contact the fire
department, the lifeguards, the unions, so I obviously am not ready to vote on this
today because there are a lot of questions that I do have and this would be one I
would suggest getting to the committee so we can have some discussion because I
think it is a good thing on the surface, but I ... what I do not want to do is pass bad
legislative attempts to the state legislature. That is embarrassing for the counties;
it is not good business. I want to make sure if we have a package together that
when we send it to the state capitol it is in a form that questions are answered. So
that is all I am asking. But we can definitely have some discussion here today. Go
ahead, Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I would encourage a referral to committee because I
wonder if Dr. Downs knows about this. For instance, you know currently and
because this creates a Unit 14 in HGEA and I know locally we have talked about
them being part of the fire union. But I do not know if lifeguards are connected
with the fire departments on other items and so I just would concur with referring
this one.
Mr. Rapozo: Is that a motion? Oh, I am sorry, go ahead,
Ms. Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, for sure we should get feedback from the
lifeguards themselves. I know there were many problems on the issue of furloughs
and essential workers and I know there were... at least some of the lifeguards felt
that they were not adequately represented in those discussions. So I can
understand the desire to have another collective bargaining framework for them.
But what is the best framework and whether this has been thought through and
has the support of the lifeguards is certainly something we should verify before we
vote on those issues. So I am ready to make a motion to refer to IGR, but there
might be some more discussion.
Mr. Rapozo: Is there a second?
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer C 2011 -308, item 9 to the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Rapozo: Any further discussion? Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, I have queried the lifeguard unit and I think
Councilmember Yukimura made reference to issues dealing with the past furloughs
and so forth, but there is support within that lifeguard unit to actually have a
separate bargaining unit for those reasons. I just wanted to share that, but if you
want to refer it to IGR, I am fine with that too.
COUNCIL MEETING -68- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, okay and just so staff can note if you have
any questions, get it over to staff as soon as possible so we can get the responses as
soon as possible. This has to be voted on next week and it has to be voted out of the
full council in two weeks to make the package. Okay, all in favor say aye.
The motion to refer C 2011 -308, item 9 to the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee was then put, and unanimously carried.
10) Proposed Bill for an Act Relating to Liability (Provides the Counties
with liability protection for natural conditions on or near public beach
parks - City and County of Honolulu Proposal): Mr. Bynum moved to
approve C 2011 -308, item 10 for inclusion in the HSAC Legislative
Package, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? This
basically just removes the sunset date of our liability protection. Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Committee Chair, that was my question. I just
want to make sure this is to address what will be a sunset issue with the current
coverage we have. So thank you for visiting that. I am fine with this.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you and this was one of the package items
that I think HSAC was greatly responsible for years ago, moving this thing forward
so we could get the liability protection. So any other discussion? If not, all in favor
say aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 10 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
11) Proposed Resolution urging the United States Government to reimburse
the City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii County, Kauai County and
Maui County, for all costs relating to the Asia Pacific Economic
Cooperation Leaders meeting (City and County of Honolulu proposal).
Mr. Rapozo: This is not a proposed bill. This is a resolution.
This was introduced by Honolulu. Honolulu has supposedly spent over $37 million
for APEC. Remember when I talked about earlier when HSAC passes things it is
really to benefit the state? That kind of was a hint. But anyway, Councilmember
Yukimura. Let us have a motion, let us just have a...
Ms. Nakamura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 11 for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Councilmember Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: (Inaudible.) It does seem more like an Oahu bill
than a statewide concern and so it does not seem appropriate as an HSAC bill. So I
urge voting against it.
Mr. Rapozo: Although they did mention that they would like
Mr. Obama to reimburse the counties. I do not believe that this county has any
excessive expenses for APEC. But I know that Oahu sure does. My concern at
HSAC, and again out of courtesy of the other members of HSAC, I did approve it at
the state meeting so we could get it to the counties. But my concern was, you know,
there was a competition to bring APEC here. There was a lot of negotiations and
Hawaii was successful in getting it here. Yes, the President did have a lot to do
COUNCIL MEETING -69- November 16, 2011
with it, but so did the City & County because they had the venue, they had the
facilities. My concern is that if we go back and ask the federal government or do a
resolution that would encourage them to reimburse us, us meaning whoever, the
next time we go out and bid for an event, I think people will say, do not go to
Hawaii because they will come back afterwards and ask for the money back.
Mr. Chang: No aloha.
Mr. Rapozo: No aloha. Ms. Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: I think City & County of Honolulu bore the brunt of
expenses to host this event that benefited the entire State of Hawaii. And I just
think this is a show of support. We are not probably going to get any
reimbursement from this effort but as a sister county just to support that request
and it may not go anywhere. It is up to the state to determine to decide what they
want to do with it. But it is just a message of support.
Mr. Rapozo: Ms. Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Arguably, though, the bulk of the benefits went to
Oahu too, you know. I mean I think the neighbor island counties had to work
really hard to make sure we were not left out, and to credit the leadership of APEC,
they did try to find ways to include the neighbor island counties. But while the bulk
of the cost went to Oahu, I think the bulk of the benefits also went to Oahu.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: This is an interesting discussion because I do
remember when I first heard about APEC and the organizing committee talking
about what a great shot in the arm this would be both short -term and long -term,
short -term in terms of filling the hotels, long -term in terms of exposure for the
state. On the other hand, similar to what I said earlier, the counties' work on this, I
want to provide deference to those counties and make sure that we give each one a
serious consideration. So I have mixed feelings about this, but I would tend to
support it because it is a resolution and just to kind of honor the work that our City
& County colleagues are doing. Because when we have something that is important
to us, I want them to give it serious consideration.
Mr. Rapozo: Anybody else? Okay, the motion was ... oh, I am
sorry, Mr. Chang, go ahead.
Mr. Chang: Thank you. I believe we should support the City &
County of Honolulu. I believe they did a great job. I think for the most part
everything that was televised outside of the traffic was nice weather. And I do also
believe indirectly when travel agents perhaps were advising their clients to stay
away from Waikiki, I think a lot of people had plans to come to Hawaii and I know
that during that time the numbers on Kauai were surprisingly a little higher than
everybody else expected. So I would hope that those visitors that were hoping or
planning to go to Waikiki did not change their vacation plans except to change their
vacation plans to destinations within the Hawaiian Islands. I think in the long
run most people would agree it was successful and we will see what kind of
momentum we get thereafter. So thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Ms. Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING -70- November 16, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: I mean I do not know that this is questioning the
success, but it says Kauai County is going to ask for reimbursement. Do we even
know what amount we are asking for? I mean maybe it is more honest to say we
support Oahu in asking for reimbursement of their expenses, but I am not sure we
want to ask for reimbursement of our expenses. I do not even know if we know
what that may be or if we do not think that that is a normal part of promoting our
islands, so we would not be asking for ours anyway. It does have a tinge of ..I do
not know whether ... I mean the question is are we really going to ask for
reimbursement for Kauai County. If not, then let us take it out of the resolution
and support O`ahu's request for reimbursement of theirs.
Mr. Rapozo: Any other discussion?
Ms. Nakamura: I thought that we could not amend the resolution.
Mr. Rapozo: No.
Ms. Nakamura: So it is either an up or down vote?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Again, to go back to my comment I just made
a little while ago about sending over good legislation. This is not a Honolulu
resolution asking. This is HSAC asking the state house and senate to create this.
What you are reading here is a draft of a concurrent resolution that Honolulu is
suggesting that HSAC support. So it is not a Honolulu resolution that says we
support Honolulu's request. We are asking the state to introduce a house
concurrent resolution which would mean a senate resolution urging the United
States government to reimburse. So I just want us to keep in mind ... I am not
trying to influence you one way or the other. I am not going to support it simply
because I think it is a stretch. I mean, again, earlier today when we had the
discussion, there was a time we threw a whole bunch of stuff at the state and
hopefully something would stick and I always wanted to see our HSAC package, as
long as I was the President, to be down to five items. We are obviously going to go
over that this year, but that is fine. So I just kind of wanted to like a trump card,
we want to make sure when we go to the state we are going with issues that they
can relate to and they may, I do not know. They may totally support something like
this. Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: Given that scenario and I think in terms of
priorities, this is not high of a priority. So given that, I would agree with you.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Any other discussion? Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will not be supporting this. You approached this
from a standpoint of when we solicited APEC, the State of Hawaii. I mean
obviously in a business program you understood there is a cost to doing business. I
cannot sit here and tell you that for all of your travel that you went over to I would
expect a reimbursement. I cannot say that. I think it was a good exposure for
Kauai County to be there, economic development. Did we send any police officers
over to help? Do we plan to reconcile the payroll of that police officer? You know, I
think that was all done in the spirit of kokua. But I would think at some point in
time here, the state is going to benefit from 20,000 room nights that paid a TAT tax.
Has that been calculated yet? Is it net of the room nights and business? I mean you
are going to go on and on and on with questions over here. I would think the State
of Hawaii could find themselves in a position that they may already have some
understanding of the reimbursement cost for public safety. I just have a hard time
supporting this and my vote will be no.
COUNCIL MEETING -71- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Any other discussion? If not, the motion was to
approve. All in favor say aye. All oppose.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 11 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously failed.
Mr. Rapozo: Unanimous, motion fails. Somebody is going to go
to the HSAC meeting next month for me to let them know.
Mr. Bynum: You want us to go and say, Mel talked us out...
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair, we are very confident in your ability to
justify and you have 100% support from us.
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, it is unanimous.
Council Chair Furfaro: Here is the narrative as I just said. We appreciate
everything they did, but what Kauai County did was based on the value of aloha
and kokua. We do not expect reimbursement.
Mr. Rapozo:
Anyway, item No. 12, please.
12) Proposed Resolution urging the United States Department of State, the
Department of Homeland Security, and the United States Attorney
General to ease Visa restrictions for the People's Republic of China (City
and County of Honolulu proposal): Mr. Chang moved to approve
C 2011 -308, item 12 for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC Legislative Package,
seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Discussion? Go ahead,
Councilmember Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: I think I am going to vote for this. I just want to do
some long -range thinking on this because I heard a public radio news article about
how the luxury real estate market is now showing a lot of signs of Chinese people
wanting to buy property here...I guess it is on Oahu right now. But it just heralded
to me the potential of the ... you know, like in the 80s, the Japanese buying frenzy
and what it did to land prices and housing prices on our island. I mean they said
the Chinese love that we have clean air here and is not that understandable? But
there is a double -edged sword to this issue of bringing more visitors in and what we
have to do and this will come up in our housing committee, we have to insulate our
housing from the market in certain respects. Otherwise, our families will be in very
difficult situations if our real estate market starts going back up again. So, it is just
an understanding of what some of this long -range dynamic is of having visitors,
especially with our laws that allow foreign investment. You know, in Bhutan they
do not allow people other than Bhutanese to buy land, that sort of protects them in
a certain way. We have a different situation here. I am not proposing a change, but
I am just trying to point out the consequences that we need to anticipate in our
plan.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Does anybody know if I
decided to go to China I would need a visa?
( ?): Passport
COUNCIL MEETING -72- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo:
Mr. Kuali`i:
90 days.
Mr. Rapozo:
reciprocal benefit for
know. Mr. Bynum?
Well, this is asking that we waive that.
Just for tourism or business related purposes for
Right. I guess my question is will there be a
us? And I ask that because I do not know. I just ... I do not
Mr. Bynum: I am not 100% certain, but the way I read this is we
still have restrictions on China based on ... that they would not have, say coming
from Japan or Indonesia, based on past political tensions. We still have political
tensions. This morning I watched a thing where the President is in Australia
saying we are going to have a permanent Marine presence in Australia starting now
and from now on as a message to China, hey, we are still players in this. So on one
level we have those tensions. On the other level, it is a quarter of the people on the
planet that can be a market for Kauai. I had not thought of JoAnn's perspective,
well, there is a downside to that. But I think the motivation here is to say, let us
let the emerging people in China who have much more freedom than they did in the
past be travelers that come here on the same par as other visitors from other parts
of the world. If I have that all right, I intend to support this.
Mr. Rapozo: Go ahead, Ms. Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: So yes, I am just curious because I am very
ignorant in this area. Korea, do we have the same...
Mr. Rapozo: South Korea and Japan have waivers. They do
qualify for waivers, in addition to many other countries. But China does not. If you
look at page three on the bottom, one of the conditions for entry into the waiver
program is the rate of refusal of a country's visa applicants must be 3% or lower and
currently Chinese visa applicants, their refusal rate is 13.3 %. So they have a very
high refusal rate. I do not know what that means. I mean that tells me that we
have a lot of Chinese people that are not being granted visas. For what? I do not
know. So is there a reason for that? Is there a safety, security issue? I do not know
what that is. This really is asking the department to not look at that condition and
really just say, hey, you know we are going to exempt that condition and we are
going to allow this waiver program. So I would ask, because I do not know, I am not
ready to vote on this. But when I heard Councilmember Chang from Honolulu
explain it and the fact that the economic benefit or potential economic benefit is
substantial for America or for Hawaii, it makes sense. But I guess my concern and
one of the things that we would probably ask Honolulu to provide to us is why are
the refusal rates for Chinese people so high and why would we ignore the waiver
program condition? I do not know. Go ahead, Ms. Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, you know, and it is 13% of what?
Mr. Rapozo: Of applications. I mean it is relative.
Ms. Yukimura: But with 1.3 billion people, how many applications
are there from China and what does it mean in terms of volume, which in one sense
it is good because we want more visitors. But, again, it is just a lack of information
and data to understand it. I mean if it does not hurt, perhaps we should refer it to
IGR so that we get more information and then we will still have a chance to vote on
it next week without delaying the position of support ultimately.
COUNCIL MEETING -73- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: I was asking the Vice Chair if she was going to
make a motion.
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer C 2011 -308, item 12 to the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Mr. Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Any further discussion?
Ms. Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: We should clarify the questions since it is only one
week away. What is it that we want to ask staff to do or is it possible to get
Councilmember Chang from Honolulu to do a conference call? I am not sure if that
is possible in a meeting.
Ms. Yukimura: It is not possible under our rules. We could change
our rules and we should look into that.
Mr. Rapozo: But you can individually call Councilmember
Chang. He is very well versed in this area and he is very accessible as well.
Ms. Yukimura: Or our staff could call and try to get answers so
that it is consolidated and it is not six of us calling. So per Councilmember
Nakamura's suggestion, I mean at least one of the questions is why is the refusal
rate so high and the other is what is the volume of applicants, and what other Asian
countries have this waiver, and what are the reasons the Department of State and
Homeland Security have cited as the reason for visa restrictions. That is just off the
top of my head at least those questions.
Mr. Chang: I think another question we can ask is who is flying
there and how many seats? What is the lift? Because we have had our previous
Governor and I believe our current Lieutenant Governor, various contingencies
have been to China and planting seeds for years and they are starting to come. So
this was something that was long- ranged planned and I believe it was an
understanding with our state, our country and their country that Hawaii is going to
be the next stop. So I do not really know offhand how many airlines are flying, but
you know, they are also doing China to Tokyo and then other airlines flying from
there. So I think a good question is what is the lift, what is the capacity, how many
people are coming? And maybe vice versa, how many people from Hawaii are going
to China? And do we get those kind of waivers or what is our, what is the
reciprocation?
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, which one of our staff members is taking the
notes before we go too far here. Okay, you have four questions so far, including the
lift capacity, which I believe was announced which is China East Airways. So just
want to make sure before we go any further we have that reconciled, so we do.
Thank you, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I think Councilmember Chang makes a really good
observation that this is probably ... in fact I am sure it is the result of a long -term
strategy to try to develop this market. It is not often we get to talk about
international foreign policy here at the county council, but you know, again, the
President this week, APEC was fascinating because they were talking about the
COUNCIL MEETING -74- November 16, 2011
Asian Pacific Region and the President two days ago was kind of scolding China
saying, okay, you are a grown up nation now, you want some of these advantages
from the United States, quit messing with the currency exchange, right, and play by
the same set of rules. And so clearly China has become a political thing in the
national election, you know, what should our posture be to China. But this is
Hawaii. We are trying to develop these markets and this is just a resolution
saying, hey, from Hawai`i's perspective, this is a good thing; it gives us this market
share. But I am sure the President and the congress is going to take all of these
things into consideration. Just this last week has been really intense on the
international stage with basically the western countries saying, okay, China, you
guys are an economic powerhouse, but you need to start playing by the same rules
that we play by, things that impact our balance of trade and stuff. This is a Hawaii
centered kind of thing, but that is where we are and this is our big industry.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. So the motion is to refer to the IGR
Committee next week with questions to be sent off. Just keep in mind that this
resolution is intended to be sent to the Honorable Hillary Clinton. So we want to
make sure that it is what we want to do. Okay, all in favor say aye.
The motion to refer C 2011 -308, item 12 to the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee was then put, and unanimously carried.
Mr. Rapozo: Motion carried. BC, I believe we are overdue for a
caption break. I apologize. I just looked at my clock, Mr. Chair. Is it okay for us to
take the...
Council Chair Furfaro: I was hoping we would get to item 14, but you are
correct. We need to take a caption break.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, let us take a 10... go ahead.
Council Chair Furfaro: Ten - minute caption break.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 4:09 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 4:21 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, we are rolling.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, thank you very much. The next item is item
No. 13.
13) Proposed Resolution urging the legislature of the State of Hawaii to
provide funding for any activities mandated to any of the Counties by
the State of Hawaii (City and County of Honolulu proposal)
Mr. Rapozo: We all know the term unfriendly mandates. This
resolution is basically telling the state that if in fact you mandate us to do anything
that you will fund it.
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 13, for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Rapozo: If you look in paragraph 5, it says the Attorney
General and Corporation Counsel of the City & County of Honolulu both provided
testimony expressing the concern that the law does not provide funding to the
COUNCIL MEETING -75- November 16, 2011
counties for the expansion of their current program of highway safety and traffic
code enforcement and that such an unfunded mandate may result in a violation of
Article VIII, Section 5 of the Hawaii State Constitution. So discussion? No
discussion? Okay, we are going to take a vote. Go ahead, Ms. Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Do you have any sense of what the... has this ever
been introduced to the state before?
Mr. Rapozo: No, no.
Ms. Nakamura: Do you have any sense of how this would be
received by the state.
Mr. Rapozo: Not very well. I believe it would be not well
received by the state.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay.
Mr. Rapozo: You know it is a problem not only in state
government but in federal government as well. They will impose all these
requirements for state governments and local county governments and there is no
funding. I am hesitant with this one simply because I think, again, HSAC
legislative packages happen once a year and we really have to make the best of it
and you do not want to upset and I do not want to say this because typically it does
not really matter to me because I have a position one way or the other. But on the
HSAC package, again, for me it is ... I will not say it is sacred, but it is very
important and vital. And we have one shot at this every year and I want to make
sure that what we send over ... one of the questions I asked the introducers is do they
have a legislator that is going to introduce it. That should be a requirement.
Maybe we will do that in a bylaw amendment because I believe just to toss it over
there can cause some relationship problems between the county and the state. So
that is just my position. I think that unfunded mandates, I do not like it at all. I
think it is wrong, but it is the nature of the beast. That is the business we are in
and we can always, again, share our frustrations with the state via personal calls,
emails, as far as a council resolution, so anyway. Ms. Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: We have had this many times in the HSAC package
too with no real positive response, right. So it just like kind of a broken record.
And, you know, actually when it comes down to safety, somebody has to do the job.
I mean it seems like it is part of our job to do safety enforcement no matter what.
So I can see the value in not putting it forth.
Mr. Rapozo: And this is not specific to safety programs or safety
mandates. They used that example. There is definitely a few different mandates
that we fund and yet the constitution says that if in fact the state orders us to do
something that they should share in the cost. That is in the constitution. That is
not a secret. So there is some validity to the resolution, no doubt about it. But any
other discussion? Go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: But just for your information I have the wording
from the State Constitution. It is pretty explicit. It is entitled "Transfer of
Mandated Programs" and it says, if any new program or increase in the level of
service under an existing program shall be mandated to any of the political
subdivisions by the legislature, it shall provide that the state share in the cost.
COUNCIL MEETING -76- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo:
yeah, it is very clear.
Ms. Yukimura:
Council Chair Furfaro
That is in the first paragraph of the resolution. So
Oh, okay.
There is nothing wrong with us repeating it.
Mr. Rapozo: That is true.
Council Chair Furfaro: It exists.
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah, well, so did the provision in the Constitution
mandating the designation of IAL or Important Ag Lands and that was ignored for
40 years. So I guess it is not surprising that this one is sort of ignored too, but that
is pretty crazy to ignore a...
Mr. Rapozo: It is pretty clear.
Ms. Yukimura: Because we do all take an oath to uphold the State
Constitution.
aye.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: The motion is to approve. All those in favor say
Council Chair Furfaro: Do a roll call.
Mr. Rapozo: I think we are going to have to do a roll call. And
you can follow the normal order with the Chair going last.
The motion to approve C 2011 -308, item 13, for inclusion in the 2012 HSAC
Legislative Package was then put, and failed by the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Bynum, Kuali`i, Rapozo, TOTAL — 3,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Chang, Nakamura, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
14) Proposed Resolution urging the Governor and the Legislature of the
State of Hawaii to preserve the Counties' share of the Transient
Accommodations Tax (City and County of Honolulu proposal).
Mr. Rapozo: We have had some discussion on that today.
Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2011 -308, item 14, for inclusion in the
2012 HSAC Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Chang, and unanimously
carried.
Mr. Rapozo: Motion carried, thank you very much. So as a
result of that discussion, item 3, 5, 9 and 12 will be referred to the committee.
Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: And I would also like to point out, items 11 and 13
failed.
COUNCIL MEETING -77- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Council Chair Furfaro: And do not appear on the reconstructed...
Mr. Topenio: Eight.
Mr. Rapozo: And 8, I am sorry, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: And 8, I am sorry.
failed? Ms. Yukimura: Would you repeat that list again of those that
Council Chair Furfaro: Eight, number 11...
Mr. Topenio: And 13.
Council Chair Furfaro: And 13.
Mr. Rapozo:. I am sorry, Mr. Chair, I failed to ask the audience if
they wanted to testify.
Council Chair Furfaro: Well, I am sure Mr. Mickens will forgive you if you
call him up now.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GLENN MICKENS: For the record Glenn Mickens. Yeah, thanks, Mel,
I forgive you. Just a couple brief comments on number 1, 5, and 14. Number 1, we
have reviewed this issue for years. I strongly support our getting funds from these
tickets. We pay our police department big bucks. I think we are entitled to have
that money and I do not think anybody here was opposed to that. We have been
trying to get it I do not know how long, Jay, but it has been for quite a while.
Number 5, I agree with JoAnn. Use the money for more education of the kids
for prevention purposes unless, as KipuKai said, the bill already goes in that
direction. But if it does not, but I guess, KipuKai, you read it okay, so if it goes in
that direction, I guess it is just ... you do not have to say it. But I do agree that I
think that money should go for education of the kids. With these kids and drugs,
the media and everybody so overwhelmingly shove it down their throats, whether it
is a sports event, every other ad is a beer ad or something or we are advertising in
the paper continually about the drink of the week or whatever it is. But you keep
continually barraging our children today with this and you know, I do not know how
you counteract that with education, but it is going in the right direction.
Number 14, this is probably, for me and all of you, it is probably the most
important resolution on the list and hopefully the county can apply enough pressure
on the legislature to make sure that we get our share of TAT. There is nobody that
has not brought this up every year or that we keep on sitting here on pins and
needles waiting for the legislature to take that TAT money and we have to adjust
our budget or whatever. So anyway, these are my comments. Thank you, Jay,
thank you, Mel.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, Mr. Rapozo, you still have the floor, if you
want. Any questions of him?
COUNCIL MEETING -78- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: No, that is all, Mr. Chair. And now I will turn the
meeting back over to you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. I do want to make a note here that
Mr. Rapozo will be traveling when items 3, 5, 9, and 12 go to the IGR Committee.
The IGR Committee will be made up of four members during that time next week.
We have some questions that need to go over, staff, for urgent replies. Please focus
on that and please note whatever the outcome of that committee meeting will come
to the full council and I do not plan to have additional discussion on what is being
referred to the committees because of the time in trying to get things into the
package. Also, I want to make note it has been decided that the five items that are
in the HCOM piece, Mr. Rapozo, what is your understanding of how that would be
merged into this legislative package?
Mr. Rapozo: On the next IGR Committee, it would be added on
like we just went over and I would ask the IGR Chair, Mr. Kuali`i...
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, members, Mr. Kuali`i is being
addressed.
Mr. Rapozo: I would ask that the IGR Chair next week at the
committee meeting take up each of the HCOM matters. Obviously two of them are
duplicates, so those are all done. But the other ones, I would definitely invite that
discussion and like the Chair said, I will not be here, but I will share with the Chair
my concerns on two of those items. And then if it passes out of the committee, we
will see it at the full council in two weeks and we can take action. And once it
passes this council, all of the matters will be brought back to HSAC and all of the
ones that have passed all counties will be formally adopted as the HSAC package
and sent over to the State.
Council Chair Furfaro: Again, I just want to make sure that I want that
work done in the committees. We worked on it today. We will get it done in the
committees and I do not plan to have a whole series of conversations again on what
comes out of the committee. So we have these four items plus the five from the
mayor of which two are duplicated. So Mr. Kuali`i, we will be back to probably nine
items in your committee. Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I want to say, in anticipation of getting
support for the modified proposal on the gallonage tax for liquor, I am going to be
submitting, before the deadline tomorrow, a revised proposal for the county's
legislative package so that we can take that up in committee as well. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, is there any questions on this particular
item? I guess at this point we have some items that were approved and we have
some items that are going to be referred. So for the items that we have referred to
IGR, all those in favor say aye.
Councilmembers: Aye.
Council Chair Furfaro: For those items that we have approved as part of
the package for Mr. Rapozo, how do you wish to handle that now because I do not
want to... do you want a motion on those approvals?
COUNCIL MEETING -79- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: I think the motions were made and it is fine. We
are done. It is just a matter of reposting the deferred items and then we do have,
Mr. Chair, the next item on the agenda includes two HSAC resolutions. Depending
on where that falls, that may end up as well in IGR. We will see. I think there may
be some concerns.
Council Chair Furfaro: You know, I just wanted to direct it to you rather
than people reminding me what was already approved that so forth that we started
this thing at 11:10 this morning. So I just want to reconfirm, you will be gone, how
you see that being handled. So would you state that one more time for the staff.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, the HSAC approved items are disposed of at
this point. The referred items will show up on the agenda for next week's
committee meeting. Obviously the ones that have failed will disappear and then
the next agenda item, which are the two resolutions, will be treated the same way.
The HCOM proposals will show up under the posting of the county legislative
package and not the HSAC package. So I just wanted to clarify that.
Council Chair Furfaro: Very good.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. I do appreciate you allowing us the
opportunity to go through this today because my initial suggestion would have been
to send it off to committee.
Council Chair Furfaro: But then you would not have been here.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you for thinking of me, Mr. Chair
appreciate that.
Council Chair Furfaro: Always. Okay, members, so I think the voting and
the summaries are all pau.
Mr. Rapozo: All pau.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, for the clerk, I want to go back and take care
of...let us see. We are back on 298, item b.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2011 -298 Communication (10/24/2011) from the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee Chair, requesting that Proposals to be considered and
included in the 2012 Kauai County Legislative Package be submitted and discussed
at the November 16, 2011 Council Meeting:
b) Communication (11/10/2011) from the Intergovernmental Relations
Committee Chair, transmitting the following:
A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act Relating to Energy
Resources (To align Chapter 196 -6.5, Hawaii Revised
Statutes, with the stated intent of Act 155, SLH 2009 with
respect to variances in the law (proposed by Councilmember
JoAnn A. Yukimura: Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve
C 2011 -298, item b) A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act Relating
to Energy Resources, for inclusion in the 2012 Kauai County
Legislative Package, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
COUNCIL MEETING -80- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. So we have a motion to approve and a
second. Vice Chair Yukimura, is there any commentary you want to add here?
Ms. Yukimura: No, just that I am glad we had the discussion in
committee so that we do not have to add it to our long agenda today. If there are
any further questions, I am willing to entertain and try to answer them.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, so we are going to take a vote on this.
Ms. Yukimura: Councilmember Chang.
Council Chair Furfaro: Oh, Mr. Chang, I am sorry, I did not see your hand.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. Vice Chair, you know we
did have a discussion last week, but can you just let the viewing audience know that
ultimately the final or the owner that is supposed to be in the house will indeed
have a choice at the end?
Ms. Yukimura: The way we are proposing to modify the existing
variance in the law would clarify that it is the end owner and user is the one eligible
to apply for the gas variance. All the others are available. So there is the
variance... actually, thank you for letting me explain this. We are not touching the
variance that is allowed to someone where there is poor solar resources because of
the lack of sun, because it is a very rainy place, or because it is in a valley, they can
apply for a variance under the first criteria, which is poor solar resources. We are
also leaving untouched the variance that says if you have a technology that is based
on renewable energy, you can do that too instead of a solar water heater. So those
two are allowed and it is only the on- demand gas that we are asking would be
allowed only for an end -user, only the person who is an end user can apply.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay. Is there any further discussion? If not, all
those in favor signify by saying aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -298, item b) A Proposed Draft Bill for an Act
Relating to Energy Resources, for inclusion in the 2012 Kauai County
Legislative Package was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -299 Communication (10/11/2011) from the Police Chief, requesting
Council approval to expend Kauai Police Department asset forfeiture funds for
costs associated with the initial accreditation process through the Commission on
Accreditation for Law Enforcement Agencies (C.A.L.E.A.), estimated at $35,000.00:
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -299, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? There is no one to testify
on this. So Vice Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I just want to say we discussed the
accreditation process during budget. I think all of us wanted to see it proceed as
quickly as was feasible for the police department. I think it is very appropriate and
creative to use forfeiture money to start the process. And I am going to be voting for
it.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Any further discussion? Just for the
captioner, the acronym for this is CALEA, it is with a "C" not a "K." So no further
discussion? All those in favor signify by saying aye.
COUNCIL MEETING -81- November 16, 2011
The motion to approve C 2011 -299 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -300 Communication (10/21/2011) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval of the following:
1) To sell the residential property situated at 9661 -A Haina Street,
Waimea, Hawaii 96796, Tax Map Key (4) 1 -2- 008 - 007 -0002, at an
affordable leasehold sale price of $213,000.00 or the leasehold
appraised value, whichever is lower. This property was developed
utilizing Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds, which
restricts sales to individuals on the Affordable Housing Waitlist
and are 120% and below the Kauai Median Household Income.
2) To authorize the Interim County Clerk or its designee to sign all
legal documents related to the sale of this property.
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -300, seconded by Mr. Rapozo.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion on this item?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, Vice Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: I just want to commend the Housing Agency, again,
for pursuing this leasehold program. I mean you can see the affordability in
$213,000 for a single - family house in Waimea and it is insulated from the market.
As we talked about the importance of it earlier in terms of a real estate boom that
could take it up, if we allowed it to be out of the market, we would no longer have
that house as an affordable unit. So I think it is very important that we pursue this
program and I appreciate the Agency going forward on it.
Council Chair Furfaro: I also would like to say that I think the Agency has
a clear focus on what we are doing to keep inventory available at the affordable
level through this leasehold process and I, too, would like to send my compliments.
Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -300 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -301 Communication (10/24/2011) from the Fire Chief,
requesting Council approval to accept the donation of two (2) jet skis, a rescue sled
and a trailer from the Kauai Lifeguard Association (KLA), valued at approximately
$24,000.00: Mr. Kuali`i• moved to approve C 2011 -301 with a thank -you letter to
follow, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Council Chair Furfaro: I, too, also would like to send out my complete
mahalo to the efforts related to the Kauai Lifeguard Association, many of the
individuals that had really launched the marketing effort of this, including Andy
Melamed and many others. Mr. Chang and I were able to attend this particular
event that they raised these funds at. Dr. Downs did an outstanding job working
with the lifeguard association. Thank you. Mr. Chang.
Mr. Chang: Thank you, Chairman. I, too, want to echo. You
know Dr. Monty Downs has been involved with ocean safety for many, many years
and he has seen firsthand the unfortunate casualties that the ocean presents. So I
COUNCIL MEETING -82- November 16, 2011
want to thank Dr. Downs and Chief Westerman and Kalani Vierra. I also want to
just thank the amount of people that ... there were over thousand people that
showed up for a fundraiser and I want to thank all the Rotarians scattered
throughout this island of Kauai, along with our Zonta Club of Kauai and Fred
Atkins in Kilohana. But I do want to say a special aloha out to Any Melamed, his
vision, being an ocean man himself. He has been very passionate, but I believe
Andy single - handedly, quite frankly, put this fundraiser on the map. But not only
did he put it on the map, but he certainly went above and beyond all fundraising
expectations, so I want to thank him. A lot of these moneys also trickled over to the
KORE, the Kauai Ocean Recreation Education Program. I believe they have
another function out at Hanalei Bay this week Saturday from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m., and
also the Junior Lifeguard Program and many other programs on this island relating
to water safety. So I just want to take this opportunity again to thank all the
organizers and everybody that made the Kauai Lifeguard Association fundraiser a
huge success, so much so that there are plans for a second wave, which will be
coming right down the road. Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: Again, there is almost too many to thank from the
Lifeguard Association. Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, I am reading the communication that came
along and apparently this donation was not from that event. This donation is
coming from Mr. and Mrs. Toru Kawakami. Initially I thought it was from that
event, but apparently Mr. and Mrs. Kawakami lost a son who had owned these
pieces of equipment and donated it to the KLA and in turn, the KLA is donating it
to the county. So this is a separate donation. This is not from that event. And I
guess the mahalo letter definitely needs to go to KLA, but more specifically, it needs
to go to the Kawakami's because these two jet skis, a trailer and the other
equipment were owned by John, who apparently recently passed away.
Council Chair Furfaro: I want to thank you for pointing that out. The fact
of the matter is the awareness of the equipment needs came through the efforts of
the Kauai Lifeguard Association and as Mr. Chang said there is more to come. But
the generosity expressed by the Kawakami's to the Kauai Lifeguard Association
will certainly receive, not only a letter of mahalo from the council, but also from
Chief Westerman.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: And I think Mr. Chang ended by saying there is
more to come from this community effort, of which the Kawakami's, in memory of
their son, certainly stepped to this contribution an awareness that the Lifeguard
Association made on the needs. Okay, thank you very much. May I reiterate about
the mahalo letter and the reference, I do want to do a joint letter with the Fire
Chief. Any further discussion? All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -301 with a thank -you letter to follow was then
put, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -302 Communication (10/31/2011) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval of the following:
1) To apply, receive and expend federal funds in the amount of
$106,000.00 from the FY 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant (JAG), to continue the Drug Prosecution Unit for
the period February 1, 2012 to January 31, 2013, and
COUNCIL MEETING -83- November 16, 2011
2) To indemnify the State of Hawaii, Department of the Attorney
General.,
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve C 2011 -302, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: On the next items 303, as well as 304, I am asking
for a motion to receive these two items through a discussion that I had with both
the county attorney and the prosecuting attorney would like to make a motion to
receive.
C 2011 -303 Communication (10/31/2011) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to apply, receive and expend $10,000.00 from the New
Dawn Community Grant, to purchase supplies for activities associated with the
community diversion program Project P.O.H.A.K.U. (Productive Optimism Helps
All Kauai Unite): Ms. Nakamura moved to receive C 2011 -303 for the record,
seconded by Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -304 Communication (10/31/2011) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval of the following:
1) To apply, receive and expend federal funds in the amount of
$96,500.00 from the FY 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice
Assistance Grant (JAG), to create a Cold Case Unit with the Kauai
Police Department, to commence January 1, 2012 to December 31,
2012, and
2) To indemnify the State of Hawaii, Department of the Attorney
General.
Ms. Nakamura moved to receive C 2011 -304 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -305 Communication (10/31/2011) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval of the following:
1) To apply, receive and expend federal funds in the amount of
$47,927.00 from the S.T.O.P. Violence Against Women Grant, to
continue the Domestic Violence Prosecution Unit for the term
commencing November 1, 2011 to October 31, 2012, and
2) To indemnify the State of Hawaii, Department of the Attorney
General.
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve C 2011 -305, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. I would like to go to the
next... oh, I am sorry.
Ms. Yukimura: Can I just ask a question. I guess I saw a letter to
recuse yourself and is that... is there a change?
Council Chair Furfaro: It has been withdrawn.
COUNCIL MEETING -84- November 16, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Yeah, I apologize. It should have been withdrawn
because the grant itself is for non...
Mr. Bynum: Unrelated.
Mr. Rapozo: Completely unrelated.
Council Chair Furfaro: So you are correct that originally we did have a
recusal letter. Later, the councilmember approached me to have it withdrawn. I
am sorry for that miscommunication. Okay, we voted on that item, but did you
have something more to say? Okay, next item 306.
C 2011 -306 Communication (11/01/2011) from the Executive on Aging,
requesting Council approval to receive and expend a donation of $500.00 from the
Kauai Filipino Chamber of Commerce to be used for the Better Choices, Better
Health workshops sponsored through the Agency on Elderly Affairs: Mr. Kuali`i
moved to approve C 2011 -306 with a thank -you letter to follow, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: We have 307 here, but I believe I want to take
ES -513 first, then come back and revisit this item. So is that acceptable to all of
you? Thank you very much. Let us jump over to page 5, 309.
There being no objections, C 2011 -307 was moved to the end of the agenda.
C 2011 -309 Communication (11/10/2011) from HSAC President Mel Rapozo,
transmitting for Council approval, Resolutions from the Hawaii State Association
of Counties (HSAC), approved by its Executive Committee, to be considered by the
State House and Senate during the 2012 Legislative Session as follows:
1) Resolution requesting the State Legislature to adopt House Bill
1521 (HB 1521) relating to an amendment to Chapter 339D,
Hawaii Revised Statutes, regarding electronic waste recycling
(County of Hawaii proposal);
2) Resolution requesting that the Hawaii State Department of Health
amend Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 62, §11-62-
06, General Requirements, to establish up to a ten -year exemption
period to connect to a public or private sewer system after
installation of an individual wastewater system (County of Hawaii
proposal).
Council Chair Furfaro: First, let us take some discussion on resolution 1.
Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, Mr. Chair, I want to speak in support of it and also to
take note that we had a communication from Allison Fraley in Solid Waste and
attached to her communication was testimony by County Engineer Larry Dill in
favor of HB 1521, which was made at the last legislative session. So it appears that
it is something that our recycling division supports and...
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, excuse me, take that conversation off to
the side, please, because when our mikes are on, we get picked up. Go ahead, Vice
Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you and it is something that will support the
creation of a zero waste infrastructure for electronic waste. So I am glad that it is
on the agenda and I hope we can all support it as part of HSAC's package.
COUNCIL MEETING
Council Chair Furfaro:
1...
Mr. Topenio:
Council Chair Furfaro:
Im
November 16, 2011
Any further discussion? If not, all those on item
We need a motion.
I need a motion, that specific motion.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, you are going to have to take it ad seriatim
as well.
Council Chair Furfaro: That is the way we are doing it. I said item one.
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2011 -309, item 1 for submission by HSAC
to the State House and Senate during the 2012 Hawaii State Legislative
Session, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Now number 2. Vice Chair Yukimura,
you wish to speak?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I would like to refer this matter to IGR
because I think we need to hear from our Sewers Division because it impacts the
finances of our Sewers Division if they do not get hook -ups and if we do not get
adequate hook -ups, we should not put sewer systems in. So at minimum, let us get
some input.
Council Chair Furfaro: I agree. I have problems with this myself because
this is something that came across from the County of Hawaii, who through their
large county process they do allow for septic and sewer in subdivisions and then
they end up deferring the cost to recover the cost for the infrastructure for 10 years.
That would be almost one of the biggest challenges we would have here in a
subdivision whether it is at Kukui`ula A &B, Grove Farm, to allow people to defer
their assessment for 10 years. So your motion, again, I will come back to you if I
hear other comments. Any other comments? You can make the motion.
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer C 2011 -309, item 2, to the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee and request input from our Sewers Division, seconded
by Ms. Nakamura, and unanimously carried.
LEGAL DOCUMENTS:
C 2011 -310 Communication (11/02/2011) from the Police Chief,
recommending Council approval of the following from the Hawaii Army National
Guard:
• Memorandum of Understanding to use facilities and property
located in Building 1, Room 101, 1 -3460 Kaumuali`i Highway,
Hanap6pe-, Hawaii 96716 on the island of Kauai, temporarily as a
"mini- station" for the Kauai Police Department officers, from
December 1, 2011 until December 1, 2013.
• Use Permit L1512 -002 granting access to and use of Room 101 in
the Hawaii Army National Guard Hanap6pe- Armory located at 1-
3460 Kaumuali`i Highway, on the island of Kauai, as a satellite
workplace for Kauai Police Department officers, for a period of two
years.
COUNCIL MEETING -86- November 16, 2011
Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve C 2011 -310, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
CLAIMS:
C 2011 -311 Communication (10/26/2011) from the Interim County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Monica Ka`auwai for
damage to her personal property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County
of Kauai: Mr. Kuali`i moved to refer C 2011 -311 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
C 2011 -312 Communication (10/28/2011) from the Interim County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Brenda V. Braun for
damage to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai:
Mr. Kuali`i moved to refer C 2011 -312 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition
and /or report back to the Council, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously
carried.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
A report (No. CR -PL 2011 -05) submitted by the Planning Committee,
recommending that the following be received for the record:
"PL 2011 -02 Communication (11/3/2011) from Committee Chair
Nakamura, requesting agenda time for Diane Zachary, President and CEO,
Kauai Planning & Action Alliance, to provide a summary presentation on
their "Measuring What Matters — Community Indicators Report 2010," and
to discuss the areas of focus, including Kaua`i's economic and business
climate, public education, neighborhood and community health, civic
engagement, our natural environment, land use and rural character, and
culture and arts,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Council Chair Furfaro: I would like to take a moment again to just thank
KPAA for what I thought was an excellent update on statistics and data within our
community, very much appreciated again. All those in favor signify by saying aye.
The motion for approval of the report (No. CR -PL 2011 -05) was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: Excuse me just a second, I am sorry. Councilman
Kuali`i, did I miss you? Did you want to comment on the last item? Okay, I
apologize if I moved forward too (inaudible).
A report (No. CR -IGR 2011 -02) submitted by the Intergovernmental
Relations Committee, recommending that the following be approved as amended:
"IGR 2011 -02 Communication (10/14/2011) from Council Vice Chair
Yukimura, requesting agenda time to request support of proposed
amendments to Chapter 196, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Relating to Energy
Resources (Act 204, SLH 2008) for inclusion in the 2012 Kauai County
Legislative Package,"
COUNCIL MEETING -87- November 16, 2011
Mr. Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and
unanimously carried.
A report (No. CR -FPP 2011 -13) submitted by the Finance /Parks &
Recreation/Public Works Programs Committee, recommending that the following be
received for the record:
"FPP 2011 -08 Communication (10/24/2011) from Committee Chair
Bynum requesting the presence of Larry Dill, County Engineer, to provide an
update on the repairs to the Hanapepe Pedestrian Access Bridge,"
Mr. Bynum moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
A report (No. CR -FPP 2011 -14) submitted by the Finance /Parks &
Recreation/Public Works Programs Committee, recommending that the following be
approved as amended on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2416 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, KAUA`I COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING
TO REAL PROPERTY TAX (For the Tax Year 2012),"
Mr. Bynum moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2416, Draft 1)
BILL FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2416, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, KAUA`I COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY TAX (For the Tax Year 2012): Mr. Bynum moved for adoption of
Bill No. 2416, Draft 1 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the
Mayor for his approval, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Council Chair Furfaro: Any discussion here? Yes, we have an amendment?
Very good.
Ms. Nakamura: I am circulating an amendment that ... I think at
our last committee meeting, there was some uncertainty about how ... I think the
language that the Finance Department put together on Ag Dedication applications
involving areas less than 100 acres in size, we had some questions on the language
and applicability. So they have come up with some revised language that is
underlined and highlighted. In the definitions, we also wanted to add a definition
for "partitioned area" so it is not the entire land wholly or parcel size, but it is
actually a partitioned area that is dedicated for ag uses. And the other amendment
had to do with a comment made by Carl Imparato questioning, on page 3, the very
bottom of page 3, why we needed to make the distinction between the first year of
the dedication and what happens thereafter. So I think the Finance Department
just decided to take that language out to make it clearer. So those are the changes
that are included and can I make a motion to amend as circulated?
Ms. Nakamura moved to amend Bill No. 2416, Draft 1 as shown in the Floor
Amendment attached hereto (see Attachment No. 1), seconded by
Ms. Yukimura.
Council Chair Furfaro: I will let you continue this piece. You will want to
ask people if they have any further questions.
COUNCIL MEETING -88- November 16, 2011
Ms. Nakamura: Do you have any questions?
Council Chair Furfaro: None? Okay. So do we want to first vote on that
amendment? Okay, we have a motion and a second on the amendment as it relates
to this particular description that Councilmember Nakamura gave us. All in favor
of this amendment, signify by saying aye.
The motion to amend Bill No. 2416, Draft 1, as shown in the Floor
Amendment attached hereto (see Attachment No. 1), was then put and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Furfaro: And there was a second amendment? I am trying
to connect... okay, I got it. This is the bill; this is the amendment. Thank you. For
those of you that do not know, I am color blind and I have a very difficult time with
red, oranges or yellows. So when you highlight something in yellow, sometimes I do
not see it. I do not know if I am supposed to share that. '
Mr. Bynum: Maybe we should highlight in blue.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Okay, we are back to the
main bill. And there was a question from Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: I was just looking at the county attorney opinion
from Jennifer Winn. Do we have to make a motion to make it public? It is
regarding the mandatory use of "shall."
Council Chair Furfaro: May I share something first before you go further?
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, okay.
Council Chair Furfaro: We have a county attorney's opinion for an item
that is currently very active on our agenda. Our rules indicate that when we get
the county attorney's opinion for an item that is active on our agenda that we
immediately share it with the group. I do want to also say to you at this particular
time I am working on some material based on that interpretation of an item that
makes reference whenever we use the term "shall" going forward that we clearly, as
referenced in her suggestion, make sure that we have a discussion that it is in fact
mandatory. And so Morimoto is working on that for me.
Ms. Yukimura: And Mr. Chair, may I assume that that will come
up then with Bill No. 2417.
Council Chair Furfaro: You are correct. That was one of the reasons I
walked over to talk with him a little bit with the urgency on that bill.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, because both 2416 and 2417 address our real
property tax code. So putting it in the next upcoming bill, which is going to be in
committee next week, would satisfy our concerns about that.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, that is my intent and I also want to thank the
discussion there and kind of end it until you see it coming from me.
Ms. Yukimura: That sounds fine. I understand that we will be able
to work on that amendment in Bill No. 2417.
COUNCIL MEETING -89- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro: I would rather leave it like I said for right now and
just end it.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, that is ... I think it is fine with me.
Council Chair Furfaro: I think it is fine with you. I think it is questionable
by others and so forth. I just want to end it for right now.
(Inaudible.)
Council Chair Furfaro: I appreciate the trust and confidence that you put
in me. Thank you. Okay, were there any more questions? If not, as amended, may
I have a roll call vote on this bill for second reading?
Mr. Bynum: Did we vote on the amendment?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, I thought we did.
( ?): Did we not?
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes, we did, Mr. Bynum. Sorry, I am hearing well,
although I am color blind. Okay, the roll call vote, we are going to do that right
now, as amended.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2416, Draft 1, as amended, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, TOTAL — 7,
Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much.
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Just a clarification on the reference that it was
Bill 2416, Draft 1, as amended. Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Furfaro: We did have the numbers right the first time,
right?
Mr. Topenio: Yes.
Council Chair Furfaro: Okay, thank you for the clarification, though. Our
next item, I believe we actually probably need the county attorney to come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
AMY ESAKI, First Deputy County Attorney: Okay, we'd like to request to go
into executive session for ES -513 and ES -514.
COUNCIL MEETING -90- November 16, 2011
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES -513 Pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. § §92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), (6) and (8),
and Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is
to provide the Council with a briefing on Kathleen M. Ah Quin v. County of Kauai,
Department of Transportation, et al., Civil No. 08 -00507 JMS BMK, U.S. District
Court, and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of
the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the
County as they relate to this agenda item.
ES -514 Pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. sections 92 -4 and 92- 5(a)(4), and
Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is to
provide Council with a briefing and request for authority to settle the claim filed
against the County by EAN Holdings, Inc. on July 25, 2011, and related matters.
This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties,
privileges, immunities and /or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate
to this agenda item.
There being no objection, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Mr. Rapozo moved to convene in Executive Session, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura.
Council Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to
speak on this before I call for a vote. And remember, it is my policy when we call for
a vote it is a roll call vote to go into executive session. Roll call, please.
The motion to convene in executive session was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR CONVENING: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, TOTAL — 7,
Yukimura, Furfaro
AGAINST CONVENING: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. For the Ho`ike operator, we
will be coming back after we are briefed on two executive session items. BC, if you
could stay close by, it would be much appreciated. Okay, this council is going to
break.
There being no objection, the meeting was recessed at 5:10 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 5:52 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Furfaro: We have returned from executive session. We have
one item to address at this particular time that I am going to ask a deferral on.
Would you read the item, please, deputy clerk?
C 2011 -307 Request (11/09/2011) from the Office of the County Attorney for
authorization to expend additional funds up to $10,000.00 to enable special
counsel's continued representation in Kathleen M. Ah Quin vs. County of Kauai,
Department of Transportation, et al., Civil No. CV08 -00507 JMS BMK, U.S. District
Court, and related matters.
COUNCIL MEETING -91- November 16, 2011
Council Chair Furfaro:
for two weeks.
Members, I am looking for a deferral on this item
Mr. Chang moved to defer C 2011 -307 for two weeks, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:54 p.m.
Res s itt ,
EDUA O TOPE l , JR,r
/wa Deputy County k
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
(November 16, 2011)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2416, Draft 1, Relating to Real Property Tax (Tax Year 2012)
INTRODUCED BY: Nadine Nakamura
1) Amend Bill No. 2416, Draft 1, by amending Section 8 to read as follows:
SECTION 8. Section 5A -9.1 of the Kauai County Code 1987, as
amended, is hereby amended by amending subsection (a) as follows:
"(a) Definitions. As used in this section:
"agricultural use" means the use of land on a continuous and regular
basis that demonstrates that the owner intends to obtain a monetary profit
from cash income received by:
(1) raising, harvesting, and selling crops;
(2) feeding, breeding, managing, and selling of livestock, poultry, or
honey bees, or any products thereof,
(3) ranching of livestock;
(4) dairying or selling of dairy products;
(5) animal husbandry, provided that the exclusive husbandry of
horses for recreational or hobby purposes shall not be considered
an agricultural use under this section;
(6) aquaculture;
(7) horticulture;
(8) participating in a government- funded crop reduction or set -aside
program; or
(9) cultivating of trees on land that has been prepared by intensive
cultivation and tilling, such as by plowing or turning over the
soil, and on which all unwanted plant growth is controlled
continuously for the exclusive purpose of raising such trees.
Factors that shall be considered to determine whether an owner
intends to obtain a monetary profit from the listed activities include, but are
not be limited to, evidence that the land enjoys County Department of Water
agricultural water rates, filed copies from the immediate preceding year of
U.S. Internal Revenue Service Schedule F forms showing profit or loss from
farming, filed copies of federal fuel tax exemption claims made pursuant to
Sec. 6427(c) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, sales receipts generated from
the listed activities, a valid, current, State general excise tax license, and
covenants, conditions and restrictions encumbering or affecting the property
which prohibit or limit agricultural activities.
Physical evidence such as grazing livestock, fences, artificial or natural
windbreaks, water facilities, irrigation systems, or crops that are actually in
cultivation, or indicia that farm management efforts such as weed control,
pruning, plowing, fertilizing, fencing, or pest, insect, or disease control are
occurring on the land, shall also be used as factors to determine whether the
land is being used for any of the listed activities.
Agricultural dedication applications involvinapetitioned areas that are
less than one hundred (100) acres in size must have the petitioned area
entirely in cultivation and /or production at the time of filing of the petition to
1
/_ W4) �4 /'J I A�Lu
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
dedicate. For agricultural dedication applications that involve petitioned
areas of one hundred (100) acres or more, the larger of one hundred (100)
acres or fifty percent (50 %) of the petitioned area must be in cultivation
and /or production at the time of the filing of the application to dedicate. Any
approved petitioned areas that exceed the one hundred (100) acre or fifty
percent 50 %) requirement (aforementioned), but not vet in cultivation and /or
production at the time of filing, shall be planted at a rate of ten percent 10 %)
per year, each year thereafter.
For parcels involved in the ranching of livestock, the entire dedicated
area shall have established fences and livestock present at the time of filing
petition to dedicate.
Land areas which are part of a tree farm management plan that was
prepared, submitted and is in compliance with K.C.C. Section 5A -11.26 shall
be deemed to be in "agricultural use ", notwithstanding the fact that said
areas are not in cultivation and are yet to be planted. [Parcels under 100
acres must be in cultivation or production at the time of the filing of a
petition for agricultural dedication. For parcels of one hundred (100) acres or
more, a minimum of one hundred acres or at least fifty percent (50 %) of the
dedicated area, whichever is larger, must be in cultivation or production at
the time of filing of the petition to dedicate.] Any area that is not in
cultivation or production at the time of the filing of a petition to dedicate
shall be planted at a rate of 10% per year, each year thereafter, as detailed in
a farm management plan to be submitted with the application for
agricultural dedication; provided that if the existing tree farm management
plan specifies a rate of planting other than 10% per year, the rate of planting
specified in the tree farm management plan shall prevail and control.
The term "agricultural use" shall not mean uses primarily as yard
space, landscaped open areas, botanical gardens, or the raising of livestock or
fruit trees primarily for home use.
"Homesite" means any portion of land, on a dedicated parcel intended
for existing or future residential use that is not in a dedicated or unusable
area, including garages, sheds, yard space, landscaped open areas, and
driveways, and not including non - agricultural use areas such as areas left
fallow and /or overgrown with weeds, or portions of driveways used for
agricultural use.
Any undedicated or unusable land area on a dedicated parcel will be
valued at its proportional share of the fair market value of the total land area
of the said parcel. The homesite area for each residential building that
is 20% or more complete as of the January 1 assessment date, shall be valued
on a building by building basis, at its highest and best use, based on
comparable values of similar size lands used as residential use as reflected in
the market and shall not include the value of any additional density allowed
by the County of Kaua`i's Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance.
"owner" means possessors of fee simple estates and lessees and
licensees holding leases or licenses whose terms extend for at least ten (10) or
twenty (20) years, as the case may be, from the year in which the petition to
dedicate is filed.
X
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
"parcel" means a subdivided lot or an "apartment" created by the
submission of land to a condominium property regime pursuant to the
provisions of Haw. Rev. Stat. Chapter 514A[.] or 514B.
"petitioned area" shall mean lands which are intended to be dedicated
to an approved" myricultural use" as described in Section 5A-
"unusable" means land which is physically incapable of being put to
any agricultural use such as gulches, mountains, or pall, eroded bedrock, or
rocky, hilly, or barren land."
2) Amend Bill No. 2416, Draft 1, by amending Section 11 to read as follows:
SECTION 11. Section 5A -9.3 of the Kauai County Code 1987, as
amended, is hereby amended as follows:
"Sec. 5A -9.3 [Dedication of Home Exemption Property to Permanent Home
Use] Permanent Home Use Tax Limit For Home Exemption Property.
(a) Any owner who has a home exemption under Sec. 5A -11.4,
K.C.C. 1987, [is hereby enrolled in the dedication of home exemption property
to] shall receive a permanent home use tax limit and shall have the
[dedicated] property taxed as provided in subsection [5A- 9.3(f).] 5A-9.3(e),
(b) Any owner with a home exemption who [desires not to be
enrolled in the dedication of home exemption property to] does not want the
permanent home use tax limit shall inform the director [on forms provided by
the director,] in writing by December 31. [In the case of multiple owners, all
owners are required to sign the form.]
(c) The director shall note on the notice of assessment or tax bill, or
both, that the property [is dedicated to] receives the permanent home use
tax limit.
(d) Notwithstanding any provision in this Sec. 5A -9.3 to the
contrary, any owner may [cancel his or her dedication under this Sec. 5A -9.3]
stop his or her permanent home use tax limit for any reason and at any time
without the imposition of any rollback taxes, penalties, and interest
whatsoever.
[(e) Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, the sale or
change in use of a dedicated property shall not constitute a breach under this
section and shall not result in the imposition of any rollback taxes, penalties
and interest whatsoever.]
[(f)]Le) Home exemption property [dedicated to] receiving the
permanent home use tax limit shall be taxed in the following manner:
[(1) The taxes on the dedicated property in the first year of
the dedication shall be increased only as provided in Sec. 5A- 9.3(f)(2).]
[(2)]LI) The [dedicated] property shall be taxed based on its
assessed value, provided that, beginning in tax year [2005,] 2012, any
increase in taxes from the prior tax year shall not exceed the greater of
t
ATTACHMENT NO. 1
[two (2)] zero 0 per cent a year[.] or the latest annual Honolulu
Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI -U)
(A) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the owner
received a circuit breaker credit for the tax year 2011 for the
property, beginning in tax year 2012, any increase in taxes from
the prior tax Year shall not exceed the greater of
zero percent 0 %) a year or the latest annual Honolulu
Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI -U).
[(A)]I Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any
improvements are undertaken on the [dedicated] property, and
such improvements increase the fair market value of the
[dedicated] property, the taxes shall be increased based on the
fair market value of the improvements undertaken [plus up to
two (2) per cent a year beginning in tax year 2005, and up to
six (6) per cent for each tax year preceding 2005 in which the
property was dedicated for permanent home use], except
as follows:
(1) If property is damaged by fire, wave,
earthquake, flood, wind, natural disaster, or accident, any
increase in taxes due to repairs or reconstruction shall be
limited to [two percent (2 %)] the greater of zero
percent 0 %) per year or the latest annual Honolulu
Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers (CPI -U)
over the taxes for the tax year following the last
assessment of the undamaged property.
(2) If the size of the existing floor area (exclusive
of garages, carports, and porches) is increased, the taxes
attributable to the additional floor area shall not
be limited.
[(B) If omitted improvements are added to the rolls, the
taxes shall be increased based on the fair market value of the
omitted improvements, plus up to two (2) per cent a year
beginning in tax year 2005, and up to six (6) per cent for each
tax year preceding 2005 in which the property was dedicated for
permanent home use.]
(C) If home exemption property [dedicated herein]
receiving the permanent home use tax limit subsequently
increases in assessed value due solely to actions of the owner in
changing use within the property itself, such as but not limited
to, change in the agricultural use or the number of homesites, or
breach or expiration of [other] any dedication, or the creation of
a subdivision or condominium property regime, the taxes shall
be increased based on the increase in the assessment value due
to such change in use[, plus up to two percent (2 %) a year] .
(D) If the amount of the exemption for which the
property is eligible changes, the taxes shall be adjusted by the
amount attributable to the change in the exemption[, if any,
plus up to two percent (2 %) a year].
F1
ATTACHMENT N0. 1
(E) If there is [a clerical] an error in any year's
assessment the correction of which is not permitted under the
terms of Section 5A -1.19, the taxes for the next year shall be
based on what the taxes would have been for the previous year
without the [clerical] error.
(3) In the case of home exemption properties that are multi-
use parcels or structures, [only those portions which receive the home
exemption or are used exclusively as a dwelling can receive the limit
on tax increases. The adjustment shall not change the term of the
dedication. A partial loss of home exemption shall not be a breach.
"Dwelling" means a building or portion thereof designed or used
exclusively for residential occupancy and having all necessary facilities
for permanent residency such a living, sleeping, cooking, eating and
sanitation, excluding apartment and condominium buildings. In the
event an apartment building or condominium building is on the same
property which receives a home exemption, the tax limitation shall not
apply to that portion of the property containing the apartment building
and condominium building.] the entire property shall receive the
permanent home use tax limit, but shall be classified and taxed at the
hizhest applicable tax rate based on the property's use.
[(g) Qualified owner occupants shall be entitled to both the
exemption in the Permanent Home Use program under section 5A -9.3 and
the Circuit Breaker program under section 5A- 11.4(e) to be calculated
simultaneously so that the more advantageous program shall apply.]"
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.)
V: \CS OFFICE FILE S \AMENDMENTS \2010 -12 term \NN Floor Amendment Bill No 2416 (11 -16 -2011 CN).doc
5