HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/08/2012 Regular Council Meeting COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 8, 2012
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to
order by the Council Chair at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Room 201,
Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, August 8, 2012 at 9:08 a.m., after which the
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
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Mr. Rapozo 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 April 4, 2012
Council Meeting of April 25, 2012
Special Council Meeting of May 16, 2012
Council Meeting of July 11, 2012
Public Hearing of July 11, 2012 re: Bill No. 2438
Special Council Meeting July 18, 2012
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: I would like to go into the Consent Calendar and I
have a few housekeeping announcements that I would like to make on the consent
calendar and the rest of the agenda before I do so. I want to first make note that
pursuant to Section 28.05 of the Kaua`i Charter, the Cost Control Commission as
you know has submitted to us, via the Mayor, recommendations that are required to
be on our agenda with thirty (30) days of receipt of the recommendation. In today's
agenda for consideration since they were both submitted as two (2) separate items,
one Bill you will see on the agenda from the Cost Control Commission is dealing
with their recommendation on dishonored checks. The second Bill that came over
accordingly from the Cost Control Commission deals with a Bill related to Property
Taxes and the Minimum Tax. The County Council is certainly allowed to charge on
a minimum tax but the specific tax Bill needed additional work and this specific Bill
will then will be reviewed by the County Attorney's Office and subsequently will
come up in the near future in Mr. Bynum's Committee, that is item one (1). I
believe the staff is keeping you posted on that transmittal, Mr. Bynum? Okay.
The other item I want to you to know is there are two (2) new grants on the
agenda for today and those grants which are the P.O.H.A.K.U. Program for Keiki as
well as the OPA requirement of approval from Council. Those two (2) grants will be
moved to a Special Meeting next week Wednesday at 8:30 and will not be heard
COUNCIL MEETING 2 AUGUST 8, 2012
today. The VOCA grant as we have had interpretations from the County Attorney,
Finance and Procurement, the VOCA funds of two hundred, three thousand, one,
zero, nine are recurring items, such has been preapproved according to the
Procurement Office and the County Attorneys, that will be heard today and I did
receive a recusal letter from Mr. Kuali`i.
Mr. Kuali`i: Mr. Chair, I did have a question about the consent
calendar item before you get to that. If there was an item on the consent calendar
item that I wanted to make a comment about, do I need to make a request that it be
removed from the consent calendar item?
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Kuali`i: I would like to request housekeeping the removal of
C 2012-229, I would still support receiving it as the communication but I just
wanted to make a couple of quick comments, that would be my request.
Chair Furfaro: I will recognize you at that time. Another
housekeeping notice for everyone to be aware that we had begun and there is a
structure outline that may require some Q&A for the Wailua Golf Course, their
draft of their five (5) year strategic plan. I wanted to make sure that we made the
announcement that the queries will be made with the Parks Department and the
regular membership of the Wailua Golf Course. Now, we will go to the consent
calendar but before we do, Councilmember Kuali`i, may I give you the floor so you
could identify your item.
Mr. Kuali`i moved to remove C 2012-229 from the Consent Calendar,
seconded by Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Kuali`i: I wanted to make a couple of statements regarding
the report.
Chair Furfaro: Would you want that time now?
Mr. Kuali`i: Is this the appropriate time?
Chair Furfaro: Yes, because we are removing it from the consent
calendar.
Mr. Kuali`i: I just wanted to say that this is the quarterly
report of the equipment purchases and that in the budget process I proposed, and
we passed several provisos, two (2) of them having to do with these reports. There
is a report for equipment furniture and vehicles but I am requesting a more
detailed, specific report on vehicles and heavy equipment. I did talk to staff and I
am setting up a meeting to get some insight on this particular report but it will
come up again in the future because the reports hopefully will change just a little
bit. It just primarily has to do with the vehicle leases and also the unexpended
funds at the year's end and what amounts are being encumbered and what have
you.
The motion to remove C 2012-229 from the Consent Calendar was then put,
and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: We will now go to the Consent Calendar and I will
ask the public if there is anyone that wants to speak on the remaining items of the
COUNCIL MEETING 3 AUGUST 8, 2012
Consent Calendar, recognizing that this opportunity is provided to you so that you
can speak now and go on with your day. You will be given three (3) minutes and
there will be no questions or required responses from the Council. This is your
opportunity to pose your commentary. Is there anyone in the audience that has
anything in the Consent Calendar that you would like to speak on for three (3)
minutes?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
DAVID R. HAMMOND: I am a hundred percent stockholder of Integrity
Alarm Surveillance and Access. I would ask the courtesy of the Chair if I might
have a couple extra minutes but I am addressing the issue related to the alarms
that have come up. My attitude towards the alarm situation is, as a provider and
someone who is experienced in the field is, I do respect the use of emergency
services and I do get angry when they are unnecessarily used. There are a number
of ways to reduce the problems that take place. There will be false alarms, there
will always be false alarms, you cannot completely eliminate that but there is a way
to reduce it. I have a number of thoughts on that and I have discussed with Mel a
little bit about the idea of having an application, keeping a minimal fee of twenty-
five dollars, having couple false alarms with no charge, and then say it goes from
there to fifty and from there to a hundred and then double after that. At that point
in time people ought to have their act together.
You need to know a little history of why this is happening. I have dealt with
this problem for quite some time and one of the things that I do when I set
somebody up with monitoring is number one, I try to create a buffer zone. I put at
least three (3) to four (4) contacts on the list so the instructions to the monitoring
company is that they have to call the entire list before they contact emergency
services. I have had situations, problems with one of the largest providers in the
State and on this island, where what they are doing... for instance cleans at Anini
and they had the Fire Department out there three (3) times within two (2) weeks,
and of course I was getting angry when I heard about that. I was thinking this is
ridiculous, they should be contacting the property management company, this was
during the middle of the day and they should be on a list. If you have an
application, I believe on the application it should require the names of at least three
(3) contacts so that they have to be contacted first before law enforcement is being
contacted.
Another thing that is happening is you have these companies coming in and
saying we will give you a discount if you sign a five year monitoring agreement.
What they are doing is putting in bulk rate equipment, they are not putting in the
same kind of quality equipment that I would be putting in. I am charging more
from the start, so the customers need to be paying for somebody that is willing to
come out there and fix this. There are several things I want to point out here,
number one (1) is, we need to, I think, outlaw long term monitoring agreements in
this County. Basically, in my opinion it is a scam because quality speaks for itself.
My agreements, if you want to quit tomorrow, you can quit, you do not have to be
frustrated. I had where people use this other company and got locked in and then
after a while they are frustrated and I am like, "I am sorry, I cannot help you
because you are locked in to a five year monitoring agreement and there is nothing I
can do to take over and help with the system." I think that another thing that
would help to eliminate these types of problems is also that there is an online listing
of violations. This would show the customer and it would show the local company
that is being involved, because it is a part of your reputation. I do not want my
company to be known as one that has false alarms and so if any of these companies
COUNCIL MEETING 4 AUGUST 8, 2012
are being slack, if their names are starting to show up, well then of course that is
going to kick their tail in and they have to get their act together and start dealing
with the situation.
As far as the application goes, I think that they need to be able to list that
they got a few contacts on there. They need to be able to list who the party is that is
going to service the system and some other information related to that. I think you
have to recognize that we have had a lot of issues with break-ins going around this
island and we do not want to just like... we need alarm systems but there has to be
a balance there. We have to respect the use of the law enforcement, at the same
time we have to realize that alarm systems are necessary, and there needs to be
some sort of a balance and we need to keep the people that are involved in doing the
work responsible to what they are doing.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much and there will be no
questions from the Councilmembers, there will be questions when the Bill comes up
and the possibility of the introducer of the Bill asking for a deferral and/or sending
it back to Committee. Thank you for your testimony at this point. Is there anyone
else that would like to take their time now to speak? Let us go to our receipt of the
Consent Calendar.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2012-228 Communication (07/25/2012) from the Mayor, transmitting for
Council consideration, the Cost Control Commission's recommendation to in
increase
the Service Charge assessed for Dishonored Checks, Section 28.05 of the Kaua`i
County Charter: Mr. Kuali`i moved to receive C 2012-228 for the record, seconded
by Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
C 2012-330 Communication (08/02/2012) from Councilmember Kuali`i,
transmitting for Council consideration a Resolution relating to smoke-free county
parks and calling for a State ban on underage smoking and smoking at all
public beaches: Mr. Kuali`i moved to receive C 2012-330 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2012-229 Communication (04/11/2012) from the Director of Budget and
Purchasing, transmitting for Council information, FY 11/12 4th Quarter Statement
of Equipment Purchases, pursuant to Section 18 of the Operating Budget Ordinance
No. B-2011-732: Mr. Kuali`i moved to receive C 2012-229 for the record, seconded
by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
C 2012-331 Communication (07/17/2012) from the Director of Personnel
Services, requesting Council approval to dispose of Application Record (paper
applications, drivers license and transcripts) January 1, 2007 - present, pursuant to
Section 46-43, Hawai`i Revised Statutes and Resolution No. 49-86 (1986) as
amended, for the following reasons:
1. Kept for over two (2) years and original verified to be on file
with NEOGOV .Recruitment Computerized System).
( p Y )
2. Originals scanned and attached, stored electronically.
Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve C 2012-331, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
COUNCIL MEETING 5 AUGUST 8, 2012
C 2012-332 Communication (07/19/2012) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to decline the County's option to repurchase Unit
No. 36, Villas at Puali, located at 1963 Hokunui Place, Lihu`e, Hawaii, 96766, and
to grant the owner a waiver of the buyback and allow the market sale of the unit for
a period of one-year: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2012-332, seconded by Ms.
Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
C 2012-333 Communication (07/19/2012) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to decline the County's option to repurchase Unit No.
81, Villas at Puali, located at 1936 Hokulei Place, Lihu`e, Hawaii, 96766, and to
grant buyback the owner a waiver of the bu back and allow the market sale of the
unit for a period of one-year: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2012-333, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
C 2012-334 Communication (07/19/2012) from the Executive on
Transportation, requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, indemnify and
expend a Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5311 and 5311(b)(2) Rural
Transit Assistance Program (RTAP) grant for operational, administrative and
training expenses for the County Transportation Agency in the amounts of
$595,843.00 and $10,925.00 respectively: Mr. Kuali`i moved to approve C 2012-334,
seconded by Ms. Yukimura
Ms. Yukimura: These Federal moneys for our bus system are key
operational moneys that allow our bus system to continue, so we are very grateful to
the Federal Government and to our Transportation Agency that apply for these
moneys.
The motion to approve was then put, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: On the next item, I want you to know that I have
just received an email from the First Deputy Prosecuting Attorney indicating that
they have no one able to come to the Council this morning for the VOCA agenda
item. As they have an important cold case that they are working on and they have
a series of multiple meetings with KPD regarding some recent traffic incidents and
they are sensitive matters. Therefore, I am going to ask to defer this item.
C 2012-335 Communication (07/20/2012) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to apply, receive and expend Kaua`i VOCA Expansion
Program federal funds in the amount of$203,109.00, and approval to indemnify the
State of Hawaii, Department of the Attorney General, for salaries, fringe, and
operational expenses for the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney Victim/Witness
Program for the term commencing August 1, 2012.
Mr. Bynum moved to defer C 2012-335, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Chair Furfaro: Any discussion for anybody in the audience?
Seeing none. Councilmember Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: There is no discussion after the deferral, I would
have asked for the courtesy to have some discussion.
Ms. Yukimura: Point of order.
COUNCIL MEETING 6 AUGUST 8, 2012
Chair Furfaro: I apologize for moving towards that deferral and I
thank you very much for honoring our current rules. On that, we will have no
discussion on the deferral.
Mr. Kuali`i: Just a procedural question — I would have recused
myself if there was discussion but I can stay here and not vote on this deferral?
Chair Furfaro: I think you should step out for a moment before I
call for a vote and so noted that I do have from Councilmember Kuali`i who has
employment relationships with the YWCA who has submitted a recusal letter on
this item.
The motion to defer C 2012-335 was then put, and carried by a 5:1:1 vote
(Mr. Rapozo voting no and Mr. Kuali`i recused).
C 2012-336 Communication (07/20/2012) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to apply, receive and expend State of Hawaii, Office of
Youth Services funds for the Keiki P.O.H.A.K.U. Diversion Program in the amount
of $35,000.00, and approval to indemnify the State of Hawai`i, Office of Youth
Services for the term commencing August 15, 2012: Mr. Rapozo moved to approve
C 2012-336, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me.
Ms. Yukimura moved to defer C 2012-336, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Chang: It is a motion to defer.
Mr. Rapozo: Well some did and some did not. I have the right to
make a motion as I see fit. Did you guys discuss this before the meeting?
Chair Furfaro: No, we did not, Mr. Rapozo, and somebody made a
motion who is following it and I am not going to accept the second on the deferral.
Members, do you have comments? If not, I am scheduling this for Special Council
Meeting next Wednesday at 8:30. No discussion. Is there a second on the
deferral?
Mr. Rapozo: No, there was a second on the motion to approve.
Ms. Yukimura moved to defer C 2012-336 to a Special Council Meeting
scheduled for August 15, 2012 at 8:30 a.m., seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
C 2012-337 Communication (07/25/2012) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to apply, receive and expend State of Hawai`i funds in
the amount of $70,290.00 for the Victim Witness Program, which will be utilized to
fund a temporary Victim Witness Counselor I position ($43,296.00), temporary set
of Professional Equipment ($5,260.00), Fringe Benefits ($16,364.00), Operational
Supplies ($5,000.00) and Travel Expenses ($1,000) Fiscal Year 2013 to fulfill
aspects
important ects of the Justice Reinvestment Initiative.
p p
m looking Furfaro: This is another item that I a o0
kin g for a deferral
to our Special Council Meeting on Wednesday of next week for 8:30.
COUNCIL MEETING 7 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Bynum moved to defer C 2012-337 to a Special Council Meeting
scheduled for August 15, 2012 at 8:30 a.m., seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, before we go any further. I would like
for Jade...
There being no objections the rules were suspended.
Ms. Yukimura: Chair, on this vote, could we also have the "no"
votes?
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: You did not call for it.
Chair Furfaro: We will do it, let me get the motion cleaned up first.
JADE FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, Deputy County Clerk: Council Chair, on
C 2012-336 and C 2012-337, was that a motion to defer to the Special Council
Meeting next week at 8:30?
Chair Furfaro: Yes, that was the motion.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: For both?
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: That was the motion for me on C 2012-336.
Chair Furfaro: And that is the same motion as I stated on
C 2012-337. So if we are clear, both of these items are going to a Special Meeting
on August 15 at 8:30 in the morning.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: And C 2012-335, the VOCA moneys, is that also...
Chair Furfaro: That was deferred until that Special Council
Meeting, yes.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Thank you.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: Is the motion clear now. Now, I want to ask again,
Vice Chair Yukimura had asked to get clarification on the "no" votes for C 2012-336
and C 2012-337. I really thank you for your guidance but I have it clear on my
mind, I want to call for the "no" votes on C 2012-336. Were there any "no" votes on
C 2012-336? Okay, now may I ask on C 2012-337, were there any "no" votes to be
recorded?
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
CLAIMS:
COUNCIL MEETING 8 AUGUST 8, 2012
C 2012-338 Communication (06/04/2012) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Greg Vajda, for damage
to his personal property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kaua`i: Mr. Kuali`i moved to refer C 2012-338 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
C 2012-339 Communication (06/04/2012) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by James Dizol, for
damage to his vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kauai: Mr. Kuali`i moved to refer C 2012-339 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
C 2012-340 Communication (06/04/2012) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Tiana Aguiar, for damage
to her personal property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kauai: Mr. Kuali`i moved to refer C 2012-340 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
LEGAL DOCUMENT:
C 2012-341 Communication (08/02/2012) from the Environmental Services
Management Engineer, Public Works, Solid Waste Division, requesting Council
approval of the right-of-entry agreement and indemnification of Kekaha Agriculture
Association as follows:
• Right-of-Entry Agreement (Kekaha Certified Redemption
Center).
Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2012-341, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk, is this the same item we previously
made a motion for in 2009 as far as the easement?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Watanabe: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: It is the same?
Mr. Watanabe: Yes, it is a continuation.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone in the audience that wishes to speak on
this item?
Mr. Rapozo: I do not know if this is time sensitive or not and I
apologize for not having read this agreement identification but is it possible to have
this referred to the Committee to get a briefing from Public Works?
Furfaro: Let me just check,� , I do not think we have a
problem. Is there any time sensitivity to this? The question has been posed from
Mr. Rapozo on this document if there is any sense of urgency. I posed earlier that
this right-of-agreement, entry agreement was the same extension from 2009.
COUNCIL MEETING 9 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: You are correct. The original agreement was
approved in 2009 and went through extensions and this is the same legal document.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo, do you have any questions for Jade?
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Mr. Rapozo: Not for Jade but I guess I was not here in 2009 so I
p g
am not familiar with what this is pertains to. I recently read about the redemption
center, the HI-5 program; I do not know if this has anything to do with that. I
understand that the HI-5 program has been cut for some questions on the fiscal
components of that. I am not sure if this is again is involved and so if it is not time
sensitive and I do not believe it is, I would just ask to be briefed by Public Works.
Chair Furfaro: I would like to suggest we do this... let us give a
call to Public Works and ask them to be present at 11:45 and we will take it from
there, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: That is fine.
Chair Furfaro: Does that meet with your request?
Mr. Rapozo: That is fine.
Chair Furfaro: We will come back to this at 11:45. Mr. Clerk,
please note as such.
There being no objections, C 2012-341 was moved to 11:45 a.m.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
HOUSING / TRANSPORTATION/
ENERGY CONSERVATION & EFFICIENCY COMMITTEE REPORT:
A report (No. CR-HTE 2012-10) submitted by the Housing / Transportation /
Energy Conservation & Efficiency Committee, recommending that the following be
received for the record:
"HTE 2012-11 Communication (05/23/2012) from Committee Chair
Yukimura, requesting agenda time to discuss the Hawaii State Legislature's
approval of Senate Bill 3025, its effect on the Counties, and its
implementation,"
Mr. Chang moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
PUBLIC SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT:
A report (No. CR-PSE 2012-07) submitted by the Public Safety &
Environmental Services Committee, recommending that the following be approved
as amended on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2435 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, BY
ESTABLISHING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING TO ALARM SYSTEMS,"
COUNCIL MEETING 10 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2435, Draft 1)
FINANCE / PARKS & RECREATION/
PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMS COMMITTEE REPORT:
A report (No. CR-FPP 2012-10) 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. 2437, Draft 1 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
SECTION 19-1.3 AND SECTION 19-1.4 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE
1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PARKS AND RECREATION,"
Mr. Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried (See later for Bill No. 2437, Draft 2)
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE:
A report (No. CR-COW 2012-17) submitted by the Committee of the Whole,
recommending that the following be received for the record:
"COW 2012-06 Communication (07/19/2012) from the Council Chair
and Councilmember Nakamura, requesting agenda time for Hawai`i Health
Connector to provide a brief introduction and overview of "The Hawai`i
Health Connector," which was established pursuant to Act 205 (SLH 2011) in
accordance with the Federal Affordable Care Act (ACA), and the services the
organization provides as the "State-based" Exchange,"
Mr. Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Chang, and
unanimously carried.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 9:40 a.m.
The Council reconvened at 10:06 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: We are back from a twenty (20) minute
recess and I have decided, because the Resolution and this ordinance, as well as the
fire alarm piece, we seem to be working on an abundance of amendments, I would
like to continue our meeting.
it
There being no objections, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2443) was taken out of
ti
order.
wl BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No.2443) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 6-5.1 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO PAYMENT TO COUNTY BY CHECK OR NEGOTIABLE
INSTRUMENT, SUBSEQUENTLY DISHONORED: Mr. Kuali`i moved for passage
of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2443 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a
public hearing thereon be scheduled for September 5, 2012, and that it thereafter be
COUNCIL MEETING 11 AUGUST 8, 2012
referred to the Finance / Parks & Recreation / Public Works Programs Committee,
seconded by Mr. Chang.
Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to
speak on this proposed draft bill as it was submitted to us from the Cost Control
Commission? No one in the audience. Members, is there any commentary from the
members?
Ms. Nakamura: I wanted to thank the Cost Control Commission for
bringing this to our attention and for doing some of the background research and
laying some of the foundation so that we can look further into this matter.
Mr. Rapozo: I really appreciate the Cost Control Commission
looking at ways to basically bring these fees up to speed; however, we must
remember what the Cost Control Commission's function is by Charter. It is really
to look at cost cutting measures. These things should be handled, in my opinion, by
the Finance Department. To charge 7.50 for a bad check when the banks are
charging twenty (20) that should have been changed a long time ago. I do not think
that it is the role of the Cost Control Commission because the Charter is quite
explicit in the role of the Cost Control and it is to analyze programs and services
within the County and look at how we can cut cost without reducing the standards
and reducing services. I appreciate the effort. I am just hoping that the Cost
Control Commission will start looking at ways to actually cut costs here in the
County.
Chair Furfaro: For Vice Chair Yukimura and yourself, Mr. Rapozo,
if you recall back in 2006 I introduced an item that would replace their name as the
Cost Control and Revenue Commission, because they looked at our property taxes
which represents almost eighty-three percent of total income. My ordinance change
lost, so your point is well taken by the Chair but we have what we have.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you for the opportunity to speak again,
Chair. I actually believe that that is something I would be interested in looking at
again and reexamining. Having served on the Cost Control Commission, I think
that a lot of what we have been seeing coming out of the entity has been along what
Councilmember Rapozo brought up which is revenue enhancing recommendations,
but the fact that they had the opportunity to really look at very specific issues and
spend the time and energy around it and interview all the different County
Agencies and to get that kind of detailed feedback is something that should be
resurrected. I would be interested in supporting it.
Chair Furfaro: Well I am sure my piece is available from 2006, so
if you want to revisit it, it is there. Any more commentary on this recommendation?
Mr. Bynum: Just procedurally when we receive things from the
Planning Department, we get a staff report with all of their background, and for
Cost Control, at least getting the minutes and a report of what their thought
process that would help in our decision making.
Chair Furfaro: ...those are available and we will have them make
copies as well. As I mentioned earlier, the second item on their suggestion to the
Council will deal with the minimum tax and I will make sure that you folks have
that narrative as we get an opinion from others, especially the County Attorney.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Yukimura: I want to just piggyback on Councilmember
Rapozo's point that it is a job or duty of our Administration and the various
Departments to keep the fees updated. I think we have gotten quite a bit of flack
about the sharp increase in car registration fees and that is partly because we failed
to make incremental and gradual increases and we left ten (10) years or so without
raising the fees. It is hard on our people, our licensees when we do these major
jumps. It is much easier for them when we do incremental increases that are
aligned to the cost of processing and doing business. In deed the Water
Department, until Ernie Lau and the Water Plan failed to raise the water fees
sufficient to cover replacement and repair of the water system, so we are hurt in two
(2) ways. One (1), we are hurt by getting sudden jumps and we are hurt by not
having a well maintained system, so it really is a matter of good management that
we keep fees updated especially as related to maintenance and preventive
maintenance of our systems.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you again for revisiting that the licenses
were key example when we went through them. We had a 1972 increase, we did not
have the next one until 86, we did not have the next one until 98, we did not have
the next one until 2012. The cost incurred during the year for operations drove
some of that but it might be something we can put in our budget reviews to revisit
fees as part of the budget and as we expand what we did this year, it might be a
good time to revisit those. Any further dialog on this recommendation from the
Cost Control Commission?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2443 was then put, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
There being no objections, Bill No. 2435, Draft 1, was taken out of order.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2435, Draft 1 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, BY
ESTABLISHING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING TO ALARM SYSTEMS: Mr.
Rapozo moved to approve Bill No. 2435, Draft 1, seconded by Mr. Chang.
Mr. Rapozo: After passing this out of the Committee, I had
received a few calls from constituents regarding and inquiring the necessity to have
such high fees for the new permit. I did research the other Counties and found that
our proposed fees were quite high and it may even act as a deterrent for people on
fixed income or for anyone to get burglar alarms. In reviewing the other Counties
ordinances, I decided to propose an amendment and I am hoping we can do it today.
I do have an amendment that is being circulated.
Mr. Rapozo moved to amend Bill No. 2435, Draftl, as shown in the Floor
Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 1, seconded by Mr.
Kuali`i.
COUNCIL MEETING 13 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Rapozo: The amendment would reduce the permit fee from
a hundred and fifty dollars ($150.00) to twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for the initial.
The renewal fee, the annual renewal fee would be reduced from fifty dollars ($50.00)
to ten dollars ($10.00), and the operation of a non-registered alarm system would
drop from two hundred fifty dollars ($250.00) to a hundred dollars ($100.00) which
is what O`ahu does. That is pretty much the amendment that I am proposing. It
will bring us in line with the O`ahu ordinance which seems to be working quite well
and there has been some discussion as to the hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) fee for
the third false alarm and subsequent false alarms. I am open to discussion if in
fact that is too high, should it be graduated or should it just remain at the one, fifty
(150), so that is the proposed amendment.
Mr. Bynum: I was contemplating similar amendments, I had
talked with a number of people and so this is proof that great minds sometimes
think alike. I appreciate the effort. Part of my concern is and I am looking for it in
here but I think we addressed this in the amendment that this goes into effect in six
(6) months... I hope staff can confirm this... yes, it is. There are a lot of people and
I have talked to some of them that have alarm systems now, they do not have
problems with false alarms and we were going to impose a hundred fifty dollars
($150.00) permitting fee and Mel's amendment changes that and I am in full
support to a more nominal fee that is more appropriate. I am fine with the false
alarm assessment being high because the Bill already allows two (2) false alarms at
no charge... kind of like "get your alarm system working, we do not want to have
police coming needlessly off of their patrols." I am in full support of this
amendment and I appreciate it.
Ms. Yukimura: I received calls too and it is part of the process, I
guess which is good and part of the benefit of having our meetings televised that
people learn what is happening and call us to let us know how they might be
impacted and to suggest alternatives. My question is — do we need a registration
fee at all or could we just work with the ones that are false alarms?
Mr. Rapozo: The purpose of the registration is to provide the
necessary information for the Police Department should no one be present at the
residence if an alarm goes off. It is just a matter of keeping a record of the
subscriber so in the event something is amiss and no one is at the residence, this
would give the Police Department an opportunity to find somebody... that is the
whole purpose of the registration. Basically, to keep record of all the locations and
addresses and any other information that the Department could use when they
dispatch the officer up to the scene. Mr. Hammond testified earlier today that he
would recommend that the application include three (3) names and numbers of
three (3) contact people. I would hope that the Police Department when they put
together the application and I am sure they can follow the Honolulu one but they
would touch basis with the experts in the field like Mr. Hammond and the other
providers. What he said this morning was very helpful and informative that in fact
we do have a lot of alarm companies out there that are selling systems on long term
contracts that people cannot get out of. I know that because I get calls in my
business requesting information on how they can get out of a contract and it is
tough to get out of it and the monitoring systems, you can buy cheap alarm systems
or you can get quality alarm systems which actually you can adjust the sensitivity
of the alarms. I know we spoke about the rats and cats but you can adjust
sensitivities in these alarm systems where those things will not trigger the alarm,
they cost a little more but that is what I think Mr. Hammond was trying to get
across. There are a lot of cheap systems out there that are standalones that will
blow their horn when a cat passes whereby many of the newer technology today can
COUNCIL MEETING 14 AUGUST 8, 2012
allow — the system will know if it is a human or insect based on the mass of the
thing. I think his points were well taken. I think we do need a registration and the
twenty-five dollars ($25.00) I think is a very nominal cost, it is only for the first
initial, after that it is ten dollars ($10.00) a year and that will basically offset the
cost to administer the program. But I am open to suggestion, JoAnn, if you feel it is
too high.
Mr. Bynum: I think this brings it into a reasonable range and I
support it. The other thing I just wanted to add is these folks... I am hoping the
Police Department and that was the purpose of the six (6) month delay of
implementation to do some PR to let people know about this. I have a little problem
with I have this alarm, I had this for years, I had my first false one ever and you get
hit with a fine because you never applied for a permit and you did not know you
needed one. I do have some concerns about that but permitting it and getting a
handle on where there are alarms, what types they are, I think will improve public
safety for the owners and perhaps safety for the officers when they respond to have
the data, so I think this is a worthy effort overall and this amendment improves it.
It makes it reasonable overall.
Ms. Nakamura: I too received some feedback from the community
and I think the amendments proposed by Councilmember Rapozo address the
concerns that I received mainly because people, alarm users also pay a monthly
maintenance fee as well. On top of the maintenance fee to have to pay additional
fees at the level being... originally proposed was quite high. I think I would support
these amendments.
Mr. Rapozo: I just wanted to add that there are only a few
providers of monitor service on Kaua`i. I think the education component from KPD
need to be targeted to the providers because they get a bill every month, their bill
should include a little flyer that says "effective six (6) months from now, you will
have to register your system." If I was the provider, I would even go as far as
putting the application in the bill and I am hoping they would have that customer
service mentality that they would do it and send it out right away because it is
going to be in effect in six (6) months. I think it is a lot easier to educate the
community with this bill because of that because there is only a handful, there is
not that many. I believe the educational component will fall into place again if
KPD works directly with the alarm companies. The other comment, I know these
meetings are televised but the calls that I got, they read it in the paper. I want to
give credit where credit is due and the Garden Island actually printed a story on
this Bill and got them... at least they were informed and I am glad they did because
if not, this Bill would have passed today with those high numbers so thanks to the
Garden Island for printing a good story.
Ms. Yukimura: I have a q uestion about the service charges and
fees, when we say "operation of a non-registered alarm system" does that mean that
when there is a false alarm, that is when we will first realize that there is a non-
registered system?
g Y
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, what will happen, if let us say my alarm goes
off, and again keep in mind the monitoring service as Mr. Hammond stated should
if they have three (3) people and let us say they call me
have a list of people to call, i t e
p p � Y ( ) p p Y Y
and I go make a check of the property and I find that it is false, it is not considered
a false alarm. It only becomes a false alarm when they notify KPD.
Ms. Yukimura: Right.
COUNCIL MEETING 15 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Rapozo: If they do notify KPD, if they cannot get a hold of
me and the number two or three then they call KPD, KPD arrives and finds out it is
a non-registered system, they are going to get the hundred dollars ($100.00) fee. Of
course the first violation there is no penalty, there is no fine for the first false alarm,
so they will only be charged a hundred dollars ($100.00). That will be an incentive
for them to register the alarm.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any further questions? Mr. Rapozo, I just want you
if you can, regarding the registration fee and the annual fee, share with us again for
the audience what changes were made.
,Mr. Rapozo: The new permit fee and again this will take place
six (6) months after the Mayor signs it, if he signs it. The new permit fee will be
reduced from a hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) to twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and
that is a one-time fee. The annual renewal fee will be reduced from fifty dollars
($50.00) to ten dollars ($10.00), and the false alarm fees will not change, it will
remain at a hundred fifty dollars ($150.00) from the third false alarm and
subsequent false alarms, so the first two in a twelve month period is free or there is
no fee, and an operation of a non-registered alarm system will be a hundred dollars
($100.00) and that is reduced from two, fifty (250) and that is the only changes that
this amendment does.
Chair Furfaro: And as you mentioned there seem to be more in line
with the City and County of Honolulu?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone in the audience that wishes to
speak on this and the amendment?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KEN TAYLOR: Chair, members of the Council, my name is Ken
Taylor. I understand and appreciate what Mel is trying to do here, I am very
concerned that these newer amounts, twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and ten dollars
($10.00) annual renewal fees, do not cover the cost of maintainin g records and
issuing permits. I think I would much rather see a new permit fee at a higher rate
and no renewal fees until property changes hands. I think that makes more sense
than to have something like a ten dollars ($10.00) annual renewal fee that is costing
I would imagine to issue a renewal fee and keep track of it, you are looking upwards
of fifty dollars ($50.00). I do not know who is going to keep all these records but I
think with the new program like this it should cover its own cost and as I look at
this, I just see that it is going to require moneys from the General Fund to
administer or help administer the cost incurred. I would highly suggest that you
look at permit fees being at a higher rate and no annual fees and then the renewal
be done at the time of property changes hands and I think it would eliminate some
of the paperwork and cost involved in administering the whole project.
Chair Furfaro: Any one else in the audience wishes to speak?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 16 AUGUST 8, 2012
The motion to amend Bill No. 2435, Draft 1, was then put, and unanimously
carried.
Chair Furfaro: Any discussion on the main motion?
Ms. Yukimura: If it is possible, I would like to ask for a deferral to
the end of the agenda. I would actually like to make some phone calls and just test
a couple of the fee issues.
Chair Furfaro: Okay, I just want to say if there are going to be
many more amendments, I am going to send this back to Committee, I just want to
say that. I was lenient on two (2) items regarding fees for this but shall we defer
this to the end, we shall do so but if we are going to entertain more amendments, I
am going to send it back to Committee.
There being no objections, Bill No. 2435, Draft 2 was deferred to the end of
the agenda.
Chair Furfaro: We are still working on amendments for the other
Resolution that was on the "smoking bill" so do we have other business in front of
us? What time did we indicate that Engineering would come over?
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 10:32 a.m.
The Council reconvened at 10:51 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2012-51, RESOLUTION RELATING TO SMOKE-FREE
COUNTY PARKS AND REQUESTING STATE BAN ON UNDERAGE SMOKING
AND SMOKING AT ALL PUBLIC BEACHES: Mr. Bynum moved to approve
Resolution No. 2012-51, seconded by Mr. Kuali`i.
Ms. Yukimura moved to amend Resolution No. 2012-51 as circulated,
seconded by Mr. Chang.
Ms. Yukimura: This would take out — delete from the Resolution
the request from the Council that the State Legislature adopt a law to prohibit
minors from smoking. The reason I am proposing this is because I think the whole
attempt would be to hold... under the present law hold the sellers of tobacco
products responsible for selling to underage children in an effort not to make or give
young people a criminal record for smoking tobacco. I believe this is the orientation
of those who are trying to reduce smoking and promote health in both children and
r people who are selling adults. The effort and the target are pe p g it rather than the
children who are smoking. Actually Chair, I think there is some public testimony
on this but I believe this is the issue that is before the Legislature already and the
main thought is not to give a criminal record to minors. I hope I am stating that
accurately.
Mr. Rapozo: First of all, underage smoking would be a violation,
it would not be a criminal record, and it would just be a violation no different than a
traffic ticket. The problem that we are seeing is not necessarily the child and that
is what they are, children — the child buying the cigarettes — it is getting it from
somewhere else. So the adult buys the cigarettes, that is perfectly fine, but they are
COUNCIL MEETING 17 AUGUST 8, 2012
either taking it from the parent cartons at home or having... just like alcohol. I was
very happy to see that, I would love to see our Legislature pass a law that would
prohibit children under the age of eighteen from smoking or being in possession, I
think that is something that should be done simply because they are minors. I am
surprised to see this in here. I will not be supporting the amendment because I
think that is a critical part to the campaign is to reduce the number of children —
minors from smoking. I believe this would be in line with the alcohol law and it
would up to the Legislature to decide it would be a misdemeanor or a violation. I
look at it as a violation unlike the selling which is a criminal offense. I would like to
see it stay in because I think that is a strong statement from this Council and I am
hoping that the others will see the same. Thank you.
Mr. Chang: I would like to ask if we could get some
clarification. What is the ramifications, is it a criminal law? Is it a minor offense?
Can we have somebody to clarify?
Chair Furfaro: We can ask the County Attorney to be up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Chang: I just wanted to get the clarification, what would be
the ramifications or what is the law with minor... I guess I say that because if it is a
criminal record, I think we would all hate to have a young child make a mistake and
that gets on he or she record as far as job opportunities and college. I do not want
them to be scarred from it.
AMY ESAKI, First Deputy County Attorney: I have to apologize but I need
time to research that issue. I did not realize that this would be a question today.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore questions for the County Attorney in the
order of people that I identified?
Mr. Kuali`i: But Amy, you can answer that this is merely a
request by this Council to the Legislature to consider prohibiting and it does not
specify anything about what the penalty would be. It could easily be... and that
would be the place to lobby one way or the other but this request is just saying it
should be prohibited?
Ms. Esaki: Yes, this is a request to the State Legislature. It is
up to the State Legislature to decide to put it in a form of a State statute.
Mr. Rapozo: Amy, is it not true that the juvenile record is not
public? If a minor got cited for smoking a cigarette, that record would not follow
him as far as a job application and so forth. If you do not know that, you can go
research.
Ms. Esaki: I would prefer researching it.
Mr. Rapozo: Some juvenile records become available in certain
circumstances but I believe in a job application scenario I believe the juvenile record
is not open. It is a matter of whether it is a violation or criminal matter.
Ms. Esaki: Yes, so let me check into that.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 18 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Yukimura: Not a question for the Deputy County Attorney but
if we could... after she is done, keep the rules suspended, I would like to have some
input from the Anti-Tobacco Coalition.
Chair Furfaro: I am going to make it clear that the public will be
able to testify on this. I want the public to make sure that I am going to give
multiple opportunities but you need to be giving testimony on the item that is in
front of us which is the amendment to the Resolution. The Resolution is on the floor
and not the Bill. Anymore questions for Amy? Does anyone in the public that has
gotten a copy of the amendment to the Resolution willing or wanting to speak?
VALERIE SAIKI: Valerie Saiki from the Coalition. I just have a
quick question, so we are discussing the amendment or...
Chair Furfaro: We are only discussing the amendments at present
time. Throughout the day when we speak on specific items, other Bills — each time
you can come up and speak.
Ms. Saiki: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any comments now on this amendment?
Ms. Saiki: I just want to bring to the floor so that other
Councilmembers are aware of Senate Bill 1168. That was a Bill that was proposed
by Senator Wakai who proposed it this past Legislative Session on the Tobacco
Possession Bill on Minors. That Bill died and the main concern was the way that
the Legislation was worded, it was a criminal offense. That was a concern for jobs
and college applications.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you for that information. Does anybody
have a question on this amendment directed to the individual that is on the stand?
Ms. Yukimura: As a criminal offense I think we go back to
Councilmember Rapozo's question and I want to know if you know whether the
record is closed for juveniles.
Ms. Saiki: That I do not know but I know about the Bill that
was in...
Ms. Yukimura: And the position of the Anti-Tobacco Coalition is
that as a violation but not as a criminal offense, would that be okay or that is
something that is also not desired in terms of effective policy and stopping children
from using tobacco?
Ms. Saiki: The Coalition prefers that the Legislation stay with
the vendors and retailers because it is keeping it out of the hands, it is the
education that would prevent the youth from possession or using.
Ms. Yukimura: Like the alcohol compliance checks have shown
that it is not that effective and I guess the question would be whether a law that
makes possession a violation, possession by a minor a violation, whether that would
be effective in reducing minor use of tobacco, and your coalition does not think that
it would?
COUNCIL MEETING 19 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Saiki: It is not that we think it would or would not, we do
not want the responsibility under the youth, but the vendors and the adults
surrounding the youth, so education first and foremost when it comes to policy to
not put that on the minor.
Ms. Yukimura: It would be different from how we treat alcohol?
Ms. Saiki: I can only speak on tobacco.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore questions for Val? If not, thank you very
much. Is there anyone else that would like to testify on the floor amendment as
circulated?
TESSIE KINNAMIN: In looking at this amendment, it is just relating to
requesting a State ban on smoking at all public beaches. Underage smoking is
bracketed, so is that taken out?
Ms. Yukimura: You are right that it is and in looking at it, it is not
really the intention. We do want to ban underage smoking. It was just to not have
underage smoking be a criminal offense. That was the intention here in deleting
the phrase at the end. I thought that changing the title was a proper correlation but
actually since you raised the question, I think we want to keep the issue of a ban on
underage smoking, we just do not want to make it a criminal offense. I appreciate
you bringing that up.
Ms. Kinnamin: It is still not clear.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I am going to either withdraw this amendment
and change it or vote against it.
Chair Furfaro: For the purpose of this discussion, and this
amendment came from Vice Chair Yukimura and I do not usually like to do this but
are you... since it is your amendment, you are okay with un-bracketing "underage
smoking and"? For the purpose of further discussion, anticipate that that is
un-bracketed. Anyone else in the audience wishes to speak on this amendment
before I call the meeting back to order?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Ms. Yukimura withdrew the motion to amend Resolution No. 2012-51,
Mr. Chang withdrew his second.
Ms. Nakamura: The copy of the amendment that you are receiving
removes the "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council requests that Hawai`i
State Legislature to adopt a law prohibiting smoking at all public beaches." The
reason why I am proposing to delete this specific section of the proposed Resolution
is because of the fact that we as a County as of this moment prohibited smoking at
our County beaches and it is a little, in my book... I think it is hypocritical of the
County to be then asking the State to remove that privilege on the beaches when we
have not made that commitment for our County and public parks. That is why I am
proposing this amendment.
COUNCIL MEETING 20 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Nakamura moved to amend Resolution No. 2012-51, as shown in the
Floor Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 2, seconded by Mr.
Rapozo.
Chair Furfaro: Further dialog?
Mr. Rapozo: I am thankful that this was introduced. I was not
aware that Nadine was going to introduce this but I had the exact same concerns.
First of all, you heard my comments about the underage smoking, I believe that
that is a vital part of this Resolution. I also agree that what we discussed when we
are discussing the Bill as far as a Resolution, this covers pretty much a policy
statement to the people that in fact this Council would appreciate or really want to
see our parks be smoke free when there are patrons around. This covers a lot of
what was discussed and I can definitely support this amendment simply because it
does not put forth any bans especially and Nadine hit it right on the head when she
said "how can we ask the State to move on a Statewide ban when this County has
not moved on a Countywide ban." I will be supporting this amendment.
Mr. Bynum: I was trying to save these comments for when we
were on the Resolution as a whole, but let us be really clear, this Resolution is
coming into context and in the timing of us having another Bill on this. I think it is
premature to discuss this Resolution at all until we make a determination on the
Bill that is before us. Councilmember KipuKai said that he thought during the
debate on the Bill that he thought a Resolution was a better way to go, so I am
seeing this Resolution and the way it is worded as an alternative to a Bill that we
have not decided yet. Whether I support this Resolution or not is depending on the
outcome of that Bill and these amendments are dependent upon the outcome of that
Bill. Let us talk clearly, this Resolution is coming in the context while we are
having this debate about a Bill to prohibit smoking in County parks. I wish we
would take up that Bill and then discuss this Resolution, so when this comes to the
main motion, I would likely ask for a deferral or something to say, let us deal with
this then let us deal with this.
Chair Furfaro: Let us deal with that right now, how many of you
want to deal with the main... the ordinance first and I will go with a simple four (4)
member majority or who wants to deal with the Resolution as we are progressing
now?
The motion to continue in discussion for Resolution No. 2012-51 was then
put, and carried by a 4:3 (Councilmembers Bynum, Nakamura and Yukimura
{ voting no).
Ms. Yukimura: Call for a Division of the House.
Chair Furfaro: We will call a roll call and a Division of the House.
How many will like to continue on working on the Resolution at this time, roll call
please.
The motion to continue in discussion for Resolution No. 2012-51 was then
put, and failed by the following vote:
FOR DISCUSSION: Kuali`i, Rapozo, Furfaro TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST DISCUSSION: Bynum, Chang, Nakamura, Yukimura TOTAL— 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 21 AUGUST 8, 2012
Chair Furfaro: We have a change in vote from the voice call. This
item is tabled for now and let us read the main Resolution item. Members, please
listen clearly to what we are voting on because that is very unusual for us to do a
voice vote and then have a change as we pose the question.
Bill No. 2437, Draft 2 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
SECTION 19-1.3 AND SECTION 19-1.4 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY
CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PARKS AND RECREATION:
Mr. Bynum moved to approve Bill No. 2437, Draft 2 on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded
by Ms. Yukimura.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
REBECCA SMITH: I am giving testimony for somebody that had draft
it and he was going to be here but could not make it. His name is Paul Ochoa and I
will read his testimony.
Chair Furfaro: That decision to testify for someone else is based on
the Council Chairman's approval, okay. Is it in written form?
Ms. Smith: Yes, it is.
Chair Furfaro: Please submit it and I will give you just three (3)
minutes for that individual.
Ms. Smith: Aloha and thank you for the opportunity to speak
on behalf of this bill. Paul Ochoa, thirty (30) year, resident of Kauai, Kalaheo —
Wainiha, twenty (20) plus years Substance Abuse Services, every public and some
private schools. Vice Chair of Tobacco Free Kaua`i.
I am really here to represent the underage population and our keiki and
future, the ones without a voice. First, addiction, it is a health issue. It affects the
brain and the ability to make good choices and decisions. For example, would a
sane person take five to six breaks a day if they knew that it would jeopardize their
job? Would a sane person give up cream for their coffee to smoke cigarette and who
would beg for a cigarette or smoke someone else's cigarette butts because they are
so addicted to nicotine? What parent would want to role model this for their child?
Research has shown that anyone who has not stopped smoking after years of health
information and prevention, if not underage, is either highly addicted or has mental
health issues. Are you aware this addiction requires a residential "T" "X" which I
am thinking "treatment program" for some people, just like alcohol and other
drugs?
I heard someone testify it was about respect and I must say most addicts are
not respectful, and as a parent, am I respecting my child if I am forcing them to
breathe my secondhand smoke?
A nicotine addict coming here to fight this bill is like an alcoholic fighting to
be allowed to drink and drive. A Councilmember said "a person should not be
stopped from smoking in a park, if no one else was in the park." Should we allow a
person to drink and drive if no one else is on the road? No, because the potential for
that is very small and there can still be serious consequences. With nicotine, there
is always the rubbish. In the past when I took my family to Lydgate Park, I would
spend about half an hour picking up cigarette butts from around the picnic table. I
COUNCIL MEETING 22 AUGUST 8, 2012
can only imagine what those new campgrounds will look like the day after two (2)
smokers have been camping for two (2) days or the parking lot after a wedding in
the main pavilion. Do we really want to pay County employees eight dollars to ten
dollars an hour picking up cigarette butts?
Personally, I mow County land in front of my home because there is a
crosswalk and I want the area nice for the kids. I pick up beer bottles and caps but
mostly cigarette butts that are being thrown out the windows of cars. It is a lack of
respect for our children and environment.
Lastly, I want to mention the unemployed and homeless population. Let me
start off by saying I also work with the homeless population. Many of them live in
our parks and on our beaches, not only leaving the butts utilizing the welfare
system which affects medical cost.
I apologize if I have offended anyone, that was not my intention. My goal is
to promote health for the future generations, and laws with education and role
modeling have shown to be most effective. Again, this is a testimony from Paul
Ochoa.
Chair Furfaro: You will not get extra time, you were able to read
his testimony at the decision of the Chair. It is written and will be submitted but
since it is his testimony, we do not expect you to answer questions posed on his
testimony. You will be given time to testify on your own time when the appropriate
time comes.
Ms. Saiki: The Coalition for Tobacco Free Kauai and the
Tobacco Free Kaua`i do support this Bill as written.
Chair Furfaro: Questions for Valerie? No.
Ms. Smith: I just want you to support this Bill. Again, I am
here for our youth, our families and their health. I do work with a lot of children
that are like I stated before which are caught smoking and we do offer services.
Our smoking rate is huge... we have dropped by huge numbers with our youth and
with our adults. I know that when I go into public areas not having to smell the
smoke, it is just so refreshing to live on this island. It is a disappointment going
into the beaches and our parks and having to inhale secondhand smoke. That is my
personal testimony because I think it is bad for our environment, our families and I
hope you support the Bill.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else wishing to speak?
TINA SAKAMOTO: I am not part of any Tobacco Coalition, I am a
Kaua`i resident. If this Bill No. 2437 is to address the improvement and protection
of the health and safety and general welfare of the people of Kaua`i, I do not think a
forced behavior modification or a law is the most prudent way to address this policy.
I think a Resolution would be the best policy making a statement because forced
behavior modification really is a negative aspect of this Bill. I think you should
provide the people of Kauai information, educate them and let them make the
decision. That is their choice. If you are pursuing Legislation, then I think you
should go to the manufacturers, go to the source, and demand a better product.
Right now you are penalizing the end users — the people. I think you should go to
the source and address it accordingly. Demand that the manufacturers who provide
the alter tobacco products and the components, the production of it, have a
COUNCIL MEETING 23 AUGUST 8, 2012
Legislative means to force that these products are better for the people if they
decide to use them but do not penalize the people — educate them and let them
make the decision. My recommendation is to kill this Bill and to go on with the
Resolution.
Mr. Chang: Tina, thank you for being here. Did you have a
chance to look at the Resolution?
Ms. Sakamoto: I was just handed the Resolution, so it does not give
much time for review. I looked at the bracketed and highlighted areas.
Mr. Chang: But you have not had a chance to take a look at
this?
Ms. Sakamoto: For the Resolution... the Resolution proposed by
Nakamura, I do believe that it is a good Resolution. I am glad the smoking at
public beaches was bracketed out and on the underage smoking, I think it is a good
policy. Again, the concern is the record on a juvenile and once that is clarified I
believe that this is a good Resolution.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore from the public that wish to testify?
Ms. Kinnamin: To keep things short, I totally agree with what the
previous speaker said, Tina Sakamoto. I still oppose the Bill and the amendment
put forth today.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore testimony before I call the Council
meeting back to order?
Ms. Esaki: I think I have the answer to Councilmember
Chang's question regarding juvenile records. Due to the State statute juvenile
records are sealed except for unusual circumstances. I guess in this case it would be
sealed.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you.
Mr. Chang: I am sorry but you faded out.
Ms. Esaki: It will be sealed except for unusual circumstances
such as... and it is outlined in five, seventy-one dash eighty-four in the Hawai`i
Revised Statutes.
Mr. Bynum: I am sorry, the record is sealed but if the juvenile
subsequently becomes an adult and is charged with another crime then the
probation reports include the juvenile record, correct?
Ms. Esaki: Again, in that circumstance, yes, it probably would.
Mr. Bynum: So they are sealed in terms of public but there is
still a juvenile record that... and the fact that a juvenile had been adjudicated for
crimes does play out... it goes with them into their adulthood at least in terms of
the legal system, correct?
Ms. Esaki: That one, I would have to research further.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Bynum: Based on personal experience, I think I am correct
about that. Again, I am not making an issue, I just wanted to make that comment
that it is not public record but if you get charged as a crime as an adult, your
juvenile record plays into the probation reports that help determine the sentencing
and the outcome of your offense.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else wanting to testify, please come up
before I call the meeting back to order.
MARY PATMILLS: Aloha to all and to Ni`ihau, I am wearing my Aland
today. I am speaking for myself and for many others today that I still oppose this
Bill 2437 and any amendments that have been proposed. I would still like to see a
Resolution.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Ms. Yukimura moved to amend Bill No. 2437, Draft 2, as shown in the Floor
Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 3, seconded by Mr.
Bynum.
Ms. Yukimura: These are only housekeeping measures — because
we took out the prohibition against tobacco products, we are taking out the
definition of tobacco products which I do not believe are mentioned in the Bill
anymore. There were sections of the code that were inconsistent and the language
proposed here is a way to make the bill language consistent with the other parts of
the bill.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore dialog on this amendment. I am going to
have a roll call vote by choice. It has been too confusing a couple times here.
The motion to amend Bill No. 2437, Draft 2 was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Bynum, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, Yukimura
Furfaro TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Chang TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any further amendments before I open
discussion for this? No further amendments. Now, we will start with discussion.
Mr. Bynum: I have been clear from the beginning that I support
a prohibition of smoking in County parks. I supported the original bill which was
real straight forward to me and it since has been amended. I supported the bill as
amended because democracy is about compromise. I think the Tobacco Coalition
has been very consistent at providing excellent testimony, I want to thank them but
this bill came very close to passing and the Tobacco Coalition said we are really
uncomfortable with these provisions but they have come up with something that
they can support. I just wanted to say that... I said "a bill whose time has come." I
want to give a couple examples and I do want to read one (1) section of the
Resolution which is "WHEREAS, the U.S. Surgeon General has stated that there is
no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke, whether indoors or outdoors, and
COUNCIL MEETING 25 AUGUST 8, 2012
that children's exposure to secondhand smoke causes increased risk of sudden
infant death syndrome, respiratory infections, middle ear disease, more severe
asthmas, respiratory symptoms, and slowed lung growth." Now, this is the U.S.
Surgeon General who is telling us that kids indoors or outdoors are impacted
seriously by secondhand smoke. I want to put it into context of the story that I told
and get a little more clearer. Lae Nani is a condominium near Papaloa in Wailua
and in front of Lae Nani, as in many places, there is a hundred feet of public land,
public beach. Lae Nani, like many resorts has already made this determination
that smoking is a nuisance and an irritant to their guests and they do not allow
smoking around their pool and their outdoor areas, but what they do is have two (2)
designated smoking areas both of which are immediately adjacent or on public land.
Our resorts have already gone there, New York City has already gone there and we
understand that this is a problem but we are about... if we do not pass this law,
allowing the situation to continue, where private property owners are saying to
their guests, you cannot smoke here but go out there on the public beach and
smoke, this comes close to home. I have a new grandson Clifton and my daughter...
my kids grew up in Wailua House lots and that beach in front of Lae Nani has a
kiddy — mini pond for kids and it has been a beach that my kids grew up on and
they still go there. We had two (2) family gatherings there recently on the public
property and my daughter went there with... first ever outing for baby Clifton, goes
to Lae Nani and Lae Nani has put a smoking receptacle on the public beach and
tells their guests to go out there and smoke. My daughter is there at her favorite
beach with our new baby at his first outing, people repeatedly coming up and
smoking within three (3) or four (4) feet. She kindly asked them "can you refrain
from doing that" and they say "no, this is our designated smoking area." What is
good enough for the guests to be free of smoke and secondhand smoke and health
and then driving those people into our public beaches, I am really unhappy about
that. I think we should pass this bill. It has been based on compromise. I applaud
Councilmember Chang for introducing it and taking the heat in an Election year
because this is not a winner in terms of politics; it is about doing the right thing for
our kids, for our island and having the same set of standards in our public park that
our resorts have moved to. I strongly encourage my colleagues to pass this bill.
Mr. Kuali`i: I think like Councilmember Bynum, I have been
clear on my position on this from the very beginning and I think it is very important
that government focuses on the health and public safety on our citizens but that we
do not go so far as to legislate a morality and behavior modification — I think as one
of our testifiers did say. To pass this bill would be a far overreach of our County
getting into people's personal lives and regarding the personal choices that they
make. Besides that the most important principle there, this bill is confusing, it's
unenforceable, hr scientific
there e i s n o data that tells us how dangerous secondhand
smoke is in the open air. A lot of things are dangerous but we are clear that the
danger inside an enclosed area where the smoke is accumulating and not able to
dissipate is clearly more dangerous in an open air. With distance and open air, it is
not saying that it is safe but it is a lot less dangerous and to try to lump them
together and use general statement by the U.S. Surgeon General to say that it is
dangerous indoors and out, sure it is... it is dangerous in both instances but the
difference I am sure is overwhelming if someone could actually show us the
numbers. I do not know if either side has done it because it probably is so different
and not an argument to be made. I just think democracy is a compromise; however,
we have had no compromise here. The Tobacco Coalition has been unwilling to
compromise and this is why this bill failed its original vote and went to deferral
instead. A temporary designated area in an undersized, far away parking area is
not a compromise to smokers. That is the majority trampling on the rights of the
minority and utilizing the government to do that. I, as a government official,
COUNCIL MEETING 26 AUGUST 8, 2012
cannot do that. As much as I care about public safety and health and about our
children making right choices and choosing not to smoke and of course us having
good public awareness and good education and modeling good behavior. All you
adults who smoke should quit. You need to quit because by smoking you are
modeling bad behavior, that is clear. For your own health, this to me is the reason
why I put the Resolution forward is because from the very beginning, and I have
been very clear, this has to be about public awareness, education, it has to be about
the spirit of aloha and the common courtesy practices that are... the majority of our
citizens overwhelmingly practice and that smokers and non-smoker alike. I think
in principle, we are all trying to move in the right direction but to utilize the
government to make a law that tramples the rights of a minority in the name of and
in the fear of public safety, it is not the way to go and I just hope that we defeat this
bill at this time and pass the Resolution and take that as a start and keep pushing
the education because I think it is very important.
Ms. Yukimura: There has been education since my father was a
young father. He got cigarettes in the army and then became addicted to them and
then he had a young child and he saw an example of a lung that had been dissected
of a smoker, he decided he had to quit. The smoking rate since that time did not
go... my father quit but others did not. Education alone is not sufficient and it was
only when we started to create smoke free areas that the percentage of smokers in
our society started to go down. The evidence show that smoke free laws are the only
effective way of eliminating secondhand smoke exposure which has been proven to
be a public health hazard responsible for the deaths of at least fifty thousand
non-smokers each year. We legislate behavior all the time when that behavior
harms others. Look at drunk driving laws and smoke kills. If only the users or
smokers were affected, we would have no right to regulate behavior, but in this case
where it is affecting others especially young children, we need to regulate behavior.
To create a smoke free park is part of an affirmation that health is important to us
and to try to also have compassion and include and embrace smokers, my thought
was we have a non-smoking... a smoking area in the parking lot and that is what
we are doing here. We are going to have a trial period, we are going to see how it
works and if there are problems with how it is working or if it is working well, we
can guide our future public policy in that way. We have a chance to make a change
and establish health here on our island.
Mr. Chang: As most of us remember, I actually helped put
together a bill and we first started off at the beaches, unfortunately we could not
dictate the beaches, it is under the jurisdiction of the State DLNR. From there we
went into the parks and when we got the bill together, please keep in mind this
conversation started a year ago, this started a long time ago. It got on the floor,
maybe the timing was right or maybe it was bad, I do not know but since that we
started off with the tobacco bill. We started off with my concerns with being chew,
spit, whatever you want to call it — free for all in the parks. From the beginning I
supported a total ban. That to me was the way to go, I went with the total ban. The
ban would have been something enforceable, I believe, because it is cut and dry —
yes or no. The Police Chief Perry came here and said the easiest thing to do and
enforce would be a full ban. Now there has been a couple of things that has been
brought up into my attention mainly by myself. Last week I sat here and listened
to the Committee members chat, keeping it in mind that several weeks ago we did
have what I felt would have been a five, two vote in favor of banning and only
allowing an area in the parking space but the coalition wanted an all or nothing
decision which I felt that when we had it, we had it. Listening to what everybody
had to say last week, I did my due diligence based on what everybody had to say
and their concerns. What I did was number one (1), I went from Black Pot Beach to
COUNCIL MEETING 27 AUGUST 8, 2012
McArthur DelaCruz Park and went to different parks. There is no if, and, or buts —
every park in this area is different. Now, if we look at Lydgate Park and we think
to ourselves where are we going to go at Lydgate? We are going to go the furthest,
closest to Kamalani Bridge area along the Golf Course, that is an area where the
tradewinds will blow down and that is a fine area. But let us look at other places
when we can consider, I am going to start at Koloa Park. The closest, the furthest
away you are going to go downwind will be adjacent, if you lit up a cigarette that
that smoke will blow right into the Rosie Bukoski Memorial Pavilion and people are
right next door there. Kalawai Park, you light up your cigarette furthest away with
the trade winds, it will go into the cooking area of Kalawai Park. Lucy Wright
Park, I can tell you one (1) thing... Po`ipu Beach Park, the area in the parking lot
that floods, if one were to light up a cigarette right there with the tradewinds, that
wind will blow it right into the rooms of the Marriott Waiohai Vacation Club, The
Waiohai. When I went to Salt Pond Beach Park along with the other parks on the
Westside, Salt Pond is a clear indication to me with what hazards can happen.
That being is I do not realize if people know how large that park is, in other words
when you pull into the park it is way larger than a hundred yards to get to the end.
If I wanted to light up a cigarette with the trades, what do I do? Do I go in between
two cars and light up a cigarette and disregard it wherever I want to? Now, maybe
there is dripping oil, maybe there is gas, I do not know but if you go to the furthest
side away and if you smoke and disregard, please keep in mind if you have a chance
that is all brown dead brush. July 7, Saturday, I was up in a helicopter, I saw the
fire that happened adjacent to Burns field. If you go from Menehune Fishpond onto
the bypass road where I live, there are constant fires within that area — discarded
cigarettes. We all know what happened to Weliweli. What I wanted to say is who
knows what the direction of the wind is going to be at a given time, the wind can
blow at any given time and speaking to those that I feel knows best about the law, if
you go into a Judge and the Judge says I do not know how you determine how the
wind blows. If we were to take the time to look at the fines, we want to fine people
one hundred bucks, two hundred bucks, more than three hundred bucks but not
more than five hundred bucks. If I were to light up a cigarette right here, I get
charged fifty bucks; if I light another one up, I get charged another fifty, charged
another fifty. I do not know how that can fly in the Courts. What really opened my
eyes is that we have one (1) ranger on duty from Ha`ena to Lihu`e, one (1) ranger on
duty from Lihu`e to Kekaha, needless to say on two (2) patrolmen in that area. I do
not really think that there is a way for us to monitor and/or study and get good data
as to how this is working or not. I want to make it perfectly clear here, I am not flip
flopping, I am not changing anything around, I stood by a total ban from the
beginning but now after hearing testimony from the Committee, I did my due
g g g Y � Y
diligence to move around this island to see that there might be a lot more problems
and that problems I think a lot of fire hazards in this dry summer. I just want to
say I support the Coalition, I support and I have always supported the American
Cancer Society Relay for Life, I have done them all at Hanapepe, on the North
Shore, and at this point I felt for me a win-win situation now would be a resolution
and progressively move forward with education. I hope that the Coalition can help
the County not only on education but signage out there and I want that to happen
immediately because we all know the health hazards at this point right now but I
do not believe that what is amended from the original bill that I thoughtfully
proposed, I believe it is totally different from where I started from the beginning. I
am not going to be supporting the bill.
Mr. Rapozo: I think I made most of my comments at the
Committee Meeting. I am not going to be supporting the bill. I think yesterday was
a really good example. While we were out at the senior softball opening out in
Hanapepe, after in fact... it may have been with Councilmember Chang or Kuali`i, I
COUNCIL MEETING 28 AUGUST 8, 2012
asked the question which way is the wind blowing here? Because you could not
tell, the wind was just moving and it goes in all kinds of directions. So, how would
an officer determine what is down wind, it is impossible here with the trades and
the way it changes. The purpose of that comment is to basically say this bill is not
enforceable. I do not think it is responsible for a Council to pass bills knowing that
it cannot be enforced. Just because we can... yes, we do — we all vote and if it
passes, it becomes law but if we do it knowing that it cannot be enforced, I think it
is pretty troubling because it is passing a law with the knowledge that it will not be
enforced, I just do not think it is right. The Resolution on the other hand is clearly
a policy statement with no enforcement authority, so I think it is a much better
route. That is one of the things.
The standards set by this bill are different from the standard set by the other
bill about smoking in public places like bars and restaurants. I do not see the nexus.
I cannot understand how smoking in an outdoor area would raise a higher penalty
than one smoking on the inside which is a much more dangerous condition. I am
not sure what the nexus was to establish the fines on this one that needed to be
addressed. If anything it should have been mirrored to the existing smoking bill
that is in place involving people that smoke in areas open to the public. You can
smoke within twenty feet of any door on any public street but you cannot do it in a
park, so I question that — I do not think it is standard. Then of course there is the
argument of the Golf Course, how can we pass a no smoking in any park but we
exempt the Golf Course? I do not see the logic with that. I think we have a lot of
park users at the Golf Course, I think we have a lot of people — a lot of children at
the Golf Course... I do not see the logic. If it is bad for you at Lydgate then it
should be bad for ou at Wailua Golf Course, if it is that bad. I would agree with
Y g
Councilmember Kuali`i that there are no studies and we got that straight from the
Tobacco Coalition — that there are no studies that we know of any way that tested
the secondhand smoke in open areas in a distance whether it is thirty, forty or fifty
feet, there are no studies. Obviously, we all know that if it is in close proximity
obviously the secondhand smoke is dangerous but what is it? Where does that end
and again the public beaches wide open with tradewinds and ocean winds, I think...
there is a different scenario, it is apples and oranges when you compared it with
someone in a vehicle or in a house or building. And then the issue of personal
liberties, I believe that we are here to protect everybody's rights — smokers as well.
I think there was a compromise available and the compromise was in my opinion
i buffer zone which was a safer buffer zone within the park and
was to provide a p
obviously it did not pass. To put them in a parking lot far away, Kalawai Park is
another good example, the parking lot is far away from the park and activity.
Yesterday at the senior softball tournament, the parking lot is far away so you
would not... and there was one of those gentleman from Anahola, I believe or from
the North Shore playing on one of the Kaua`i teams, he walks around with a cigar in
his mouth. He actually lit it up after the opening ceremony but he would have to
go all the way in the parking lot to go light up his cigar and is that really practical?
Does he deserve that? I do not know. I know in Mr. Ochoa's testimony, he said a
Councilmember said a person should not be stopped from smoking in the park if no
one was in the park, should we allow a person to drink and drive if no one else is on
the road? That is a very good analogy, drinking and driving is illegal and smoking
is legal, that is the difference. That is not a very accurate analogy and I was the
Councilmember that made that comment. If you are a smoker and you get to a park
and no one is there, why should you be prohibited from doing a legal activity? I am
not going to be supporting the bill and I am looking at supporting the Resolution
later on today but at this point, I am going to be voting no.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 AUGUST 8, 2012
Ms. Nakamura: I did not come to this discussion with a position and
so this has been a real learning process for me having this deliberation over the
past month. I think I was under the mistaken impression that the furthest
downwind provision was taken out at the Committee Meeting but I guess it was
part of this amended bill that is before the Council. I have always found that to be
problematic in enforcing, but in the course of this discussion, I think one of the
things I learned is that government are getting involved in this area. There are
over six hundred municipalities across the United States that have adopted smoke
free park ordinances, including States. The real privilege of smoking has been
chipped away over the years from airplanes, bars, public buildings, just slowly
chipping away at the privilege of where people can and cannot smoke, and this just
takes it to the next level. The most influential meeting that I had and just doing
some research on this slide has been with Doctor (inaudible) Wall who really
impressed upon me the fact that education alone will not change this problem, that
really behavioral changes are needed as well, and good public policy takes into
account. I was originally proposing this Resolution that Councilmember Kuali`i and
Chang introduced and that was really my original language but mainly because I
thought of the enforcement issue was going to be a problem. I spoke also to Police
Chief and Deputy Police Chief and both actually supported the bill; they told me in
spite of the enforcement challenges, they thought it was better than not having
anything. This has also influenced my thinking about this bill. I am hoping there
would be a... and I do not know if the Chair will allow it but a further amendment
around this but... but I am going to throw my support for this bill as a way of
gradually easing in this smoke free park policy but also keeping the door open for
further amendments because we have the luxury of time to phase this in.
Chair Furfaro: I want to make it very clear, this bill has gone twice
through Committee, twice to the full Council and we are now at a voting stage and
it is not appropriate to now be throwing in new items in there. That is my answer
to your question. We have given this item more agenda time than most items we
deal with.
Mr. Bynum: I appreciate all of the dialog and I want to highlight
what Councilmember Nakamura just talked about-privilege. Earlier in this debate
I said smokers have the right to smoke and I was corrected by a number of people
who said no, and this is an important distinction that we have privileges and rights.
Driving for instance is a privilege and we restrict that privilege, you drink, you
refuse that test, you are going to lose that license, that privilege for a period of time.
We restrict privileges based on public safety and public analysis but I believe
non-smokers have a right not to have secondhand smoke imposed on them and to
have a restriction of a privilege to protect the rights of the people who choose not to
ingest toxic materials, to me, this is easy. I am a history buff, I love reading
transcripts of our County Council ten (10) years ago or reading comments that
people made about civil rights legislation. We look back at it and say "oh my
goodness, can you believe people actually argued that" and I think someday
somebody is going to look back at the transcripts of these meetings and say "wow,
can you believe those arguments even got made" because I think there will come a
time when smoking in public spaces is prohibited period. That this is a bill whose
time has come. I am concerned about liberties but we had to debate whether people
should have the liberty to walk their dogs and there were people willing to restrict
that liberty and the argument was based on public safety. This is a restriction of a
privilege, it is not taking away a right. People can still smoke, they can get in their
cars and drive wherever they like and smoke and you are right most smokers are
courteous, but just walk down any street, you are going to see there is a whole
COUNCIL MEETING 30 AUGUST 8, 2012
bunch who are not because the cigarettes are everywhere. I hope there are four (4)
votes for this.
Ms. Yukimura: I am glad Councilmember Nakamura brought back
the testimony from the Police Chief because I feel the amendments we have made to
the bill have tried to build on the top law enforcement officers' input that it is much
easier to enforce an area ban than it is a distance ban. I feel the version we have
now is much better. I am willing to amend out the parking lot twenty feet. I want
to point out that that twenty feet discretion based on a law enforcement officer is
about taking in the circumstances of the moment, but I am preparing an
amendment and I want to request and actually implore the Chair to allow us to
make this one (1) refinement based on the discussion that has happened here so
that we can take out that problematic section. I also want to say that the parking
lot exception is very much like the original smoking ban where we said not in
buildings but twenty feet away. We are saying not in buildings but in the parking
lot, which is much easier to enforce. It is not a perfect solution, there may be users
affected by that, but it is an effort to allow smokers to go and take a smoke and then
come back and participate with their families and friends at the parks. We are
going to see how that works and learn from that experience and then further revise
public policy based on that. I think it is a realistic and reasonable compromise and
yet it comes on the point of having to regulate hazards to health especially to the
health of our children. I do have an amendment on that.
Chair Furfaro: I have not made a decision on that. We have been
here for a long time, so what I am going to do is I am going to say my piece, we are
going to recess and then I am going to discuss in my observations with others how
long this thing keeps going on, new amendments, new changes and so forth. If you
asked Drug Free Kaua`i today what is their strategy of ending smoking in the
beaches, believe me that they have a strategy. If you ask them how is their
approach on ending smoking in the parks, they have a strategy. We need a
strategy and we know that thinking if this is what we really want to accomplish, it
is accomplished by lokahi and hoomanawanui. Being able to listen to others and do
it in harmony and increments that are acceptable in the long run, not as the
smoking world says "cold turkey." Hoomanawanui, we need to have patience, we
have a lot of patience with this bill, it has gone through the cycle and we had a
compromise and they chose not to compromise and now we are going through the
cycle another time. I think it is really important for us to understand that we have
to represent the unity of purpose, not mandate. We have to convince to the public
why this is... smoking is a bad habit, I quit smoking twenty-six years ago and
nobody smokes in my house when my grandchildren are there, nobody even smokes
around the garage or carport, that is the way I feel about it. But to get us to where
we should be, we should be progressive on the thinking of this. We should perhaps
start with a Resolution that indicates let us get some participation in correcting this
habit and I am sorry if you people feel that I cannot define the purpose of harmony
with our community by doing lokahi on this, by trying to travel in a single direction
at an end goal and the end goal would be to end smoking in public parks but we
have to do it in a way that we expand the issue to all of our citizens on the goals and
what we want to accomplish. Have patience and the courage to do it incrementally
as we would starting with a Resolution, that is how I feel about it. I am a twenty-
six year recovery smoker and let me tell you that it is a nasty habit but people have
those habits and parks are privileges that they do have. Smoking on the beach with
fishermen is a privilege they have but they are certainly working with the State
because the State controls the beaches, not this County Council. I want to say that
there was an opportunity to have a designated smoke area, they wanted the whole
piece and I am saying that is the right direction for us to go through a Resolution.
COUNCIL MEETING 31 AUGUST 8, 2012
You get weaned from smoking, that is how I did it thanks to the group that adopted
me back in those days with Tobacco Free people that checked in on you and so forth.
It is a tough going but more importantly we need this strategy of how we are going
to get there. I think taking these privileges of smoking in our park away from our
citizens, we have to have direction, we have to have a single goal. That goal is out
there, I know the goal is out there for Smoke Free Hawai`i, it is either 2015 or 2016
in their strategy, so they have strategic thinking in their programs. On that note, I
am going to ask you folks to take this time to do another amendment if you so desire
but I am going to ask... I would like everybody to realize that you talk specifically
about the amendment and nothing else. I do not think at this time going right into
an ordinance is appropriate. I think having a strategy through a Resolution is the
best way to go. On that note, I am going to call up Allison. Allison, you are here for
our earlier item and I would like to go back to.
Mr. Bynum: Mr. Chair?
Chair Furfaro: No, I am not recognizing anybody on further
discussion. In our rules, you had two (2) times to speak, you spoke two (2) times.
Let us go back to this other item here.
C 2012-341 Communication (08/02/2012) from the Environmental Services
Management Engineer, Public Works, Solid Waste Division, requesting Council
approval of the right-of-entry agreement and indemnification of Kekaha Agriculture
Association as follows:
• Right-of-Entry Agreement (Kekaha Certified Redemption
Center).
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Chair Furfaro: Allison, there were some members that wanted to
reflect back on this easement provision from the year 2009.
Mr. Rapozo: I just wanted to get an overview or briefing on what
this agreement does and if it is involved or anything to do with the current status of
the HI5 suspension?
ALLISON FRALEY, Solid Waste Program Development Coordinator: This
agreement is to lease a space to operate the Kekaha Certified Redemption Center.
We have had prior lease for a three (3) year period at that location and so this is to
basically renew that agreement. It is unrelated to the current closures at the
redemption centers.
Mr. Rapozo: This center continues to operate right now?
Ms. Fraley: Right now, they temporarily have closed. I have
actually spoke with the operator today and they said they plan to reopen all of their
locations starting tomorrow, so we hope on Saturday they will be at the Kekaha
location. We will be issuing a news release once we have confirmation that they
have the funds to operate.
Mr. Rapozo: And that funds come from the State?
Ms. Fraley: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 32 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Kuali`i: The lease was in place for three years prior, so it
was a three year lease that ended?
Ms. Fraley: Correct, it actually was a one (1) year lease with
two (2) extension options which took place.
Mr. Kuali`i: I thought I saw the amount was six thousand
dollars?
Ms. Fraley: Yes, it is five hundred dollars a month.
Mr. Kuali`i: The first year, the second and the third year was
all the same amount?
Ms. Fraley: Correct.
Mr. Kuali`i: And now we are going into the fourth year, there
was no reason to increase that amount?
Ms. Fraley: No.
Mr. Kuali`i: Market rates or... is it discounted rate because they
are doing a service to the County and citizens?
Ms. Fraley: Correct and actually the rent... we get a grant from
the State Department of Health to pay that rent, so the County pays it through
grant funds from the State.
Mr. Kuali`i: We get the County and then we pay ourselves as
the County?
Ms. Fraley: No, we pay Kekaha Ag who is the property owner.
Mr. Kuali`i: And who is Kekaha Ag? A non-profit?
Ms. Fraley: Yes.
Mr. Kuali`i: And they are not the same as the Kekaha Certified
Redemption Center?
Ms. Fraley: No, they are not.
Mr. Kuali`i: That is another non-profit?
Ms. Fraley: Kaua`i Community Recycling Services is the
operator at the redemption center, they are a for-profit business who has a contract
with the County to operate that mobile redemption center at the Kekaha site.
Mr. Kuali`i: The last question is for how much area? Is it land
and building?
Ms. Fraley: No, it is just an open space. I believe it is a quarter
acre. It states it in the... and I am sorry I do not have my document.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, it does on page one.
COUNCIL MEETING 33 AUGUST 8, 2012
Mr. Kuali`i: And this is what the County expects to continue
with year to year?
Ms. Fraley: Yes. This agreement is a one year term with two
(2) options to extend.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore questions for Allison? Thank you very
much for coming over at the specified time.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2012-341 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: We are back to this conversation that we have been
on the smoking ordinance and I will look first to Councilmember Nakamura, you
heard my willingness to be even more flexible... you do not have, okay. Vice Chair.
Ms. Yukimura: I have prepared an amendment to remove twenty
feet discretion of the law enforcement officer. If that will change a vote in favor, I
will like to introduce it, if it does not change a vote, I will not going to introduce it.
Chair Furfaro: I made my statement very clear on first looking at
the Resolution and practicing lokahi and hoomanawanui and setting directions; I do
not think it will change my vote.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Anybody else?
Chair Furfaro: If not...
Ms. Yukimura: I think that...
Chair Furfaro: Just answer the question, will it change your vote
Mr. Chang?
Ms. Yukimura: Or would you like some time?
Chair Furfaro: I think that is my decision or would you like to
answer the question?
Mr. Chang: No.
Chair Furfaro: Since there is no further pieces, I would like to call
a roll call on the ordinance.
Ms. Yukimura: The bill as amended.
COUNCIL MEETING 34 AUGUST 8, 2012
The motion to approve Bill No. 2437, Draft 2 as amended was then put, and
failed by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Nakamura, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Chang, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Furfaro TOTAL— 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Chair Furfaro: Let us go back to the Resolution at this point.
Ms. Nakamura: My amendment is to remove the section relating to
requesting the State Legislature to adopt a law prohibiting smoking at all public
beaches.
Mr. Bynum: I just wanted to point out that if both these
amendments pass then there is no point of having the Resolution because those are
the two (2) things that we are asking. There is one (1) Resolution saying do not do
this... do not do underage smoking and the other one saying do not do smoking on
the beaches but what I want to ask is that this Resolution, the original version be
read in its entirety into the record. May I make that request?
Chair Furfaro: Sure. I will have the Clerk read it and I disagree
on your last two (2) statements and that is why I am going to have the Clerk read it.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
RICKY WATANABE, County Clerk: This is a Resolution relating to smoke-
free County parks and requesting a State ban on underage smoking and smoking
at all public beaches.
WHEREAS, tobacco usage has been determined to have many health risks,
and cigarettes and other tobacco products (OTP) contain the addictive drug nicotine,
which can be absorbed into the bloodstream when a tobacco product is chewed,
inhaled, or smoked; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that tobacco products containing a
combination of nicotine and other chemicals (natural and added) cause a wide range
of harmful effects on the human body ranging from symptoms as mild as temporary
elevated blood pressure, nausea, diarrhea, and tremors to symptoms as severe as
allergy-induced asthma attacks, cancer, heart disease, and death; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke has been repeatedly identified as a health
hazard and in Hawai`i, thousands of young people are exposed to tobacco smoke
pollution every day; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Surgeon General has stated that there is no safe level of
exposure to secondhand smoke, whether indoors or outdoors, and that children's
exposure to secondhand smoke causes an increased risk of sudden infant death
syndrome, respiratory infections, middle ear diseases, more severe asthma,
respiratory symptoms, and slowed lung growth; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke is responsible for the premature deaths of
over 430,000 Americans each year from lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory
illness, and other diseases; and
COUNCIL MEETING 35 AUGUST 8, 2012
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke exposure causes lower respiratory tract
infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis, in as many as 300,000 children in the
United States under the age of 18 months each year, and exacerbates childhood
asthma; and
WHEREAS, children are acutely vulnerable to the dangers of tobacco use,
and approximately 80% of smokers started smoking before 18 years of age, with the
average initiation age being 12 years old; and
WHEREAS, every day an estimated 3,900 young people under the 18 years of
age try their first cigarette, and one-third of these children will die prematurely
from tobacco-related illnesses; and
WHEREAS, in Hawai`i, an estimated 2,000 youth each year under 18 years of
age become addicted to tobacco; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, American Poison Control Centers received nearly 8,000
reports of children poisoned by the ingestion of cigarettes, cigarette butts, and other
tobacco products; and
WHEREAS, in order to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of all
park patrons; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i,
that it hereby requests that all County of Kaua`i park patrons to show aloha and
respect for non-smokers by refraining from smoking when other park patrons are in
close proximity.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that all County of
Kaua`i park patrons do their part to preserve the beauty of our parks by properly
disposing of all tobacco litter.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Administration
purchase and erect signage at all County parks; such signage shall read "Please
Refrain From Smoking When Other Park Patrons Are In Close Proximity".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council requests the Hawai`i State
Legislature to adopt a law to prohibit minors (those under 18 years of age) from
smoking.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council requests the Hawai`i State
Legislature to adopt a law prohibiting smoking at all public beaches.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be sent to Mayor
Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr.; Lenny Rapozo, Director, Department of Parks and
Recreation; Ron Kouchi, State Senator; Dee Morikawa, State Representative; James
Tokioka, State Representative; and Derek Kawakami, State Representative.
Introduced by KipuKai Kuali`i and Dickie Chang.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Mr. Bynum: We are on the amendment and this Resolution
makes very strong "whereas" statements for justification and it has relatively weak
"be it further resolved"... please kokua kind of things, other than saying to the
COUNCIL MEETING 36 AUGUST 8, 2012
Legislature please ban smoking on State beaches. I am not going to support the
Resolution because I would like this to have some meaningful outcome, and
encouraging the State Legislature to ban smoking on State beaches is a significant
potential outcome, so I would like to keep that in there if I am going to support this
Resolution. I do find it ironic that this would be introduced by Councilmember
Kuali`i who is very clear that he does not want to ban smoking from the beginning
of this debate which I respect that decision, that is the choice that he is making. I
find it ironic that this Resolution that he introduced says to ask the State to ban it
on State beaches and so if you read this Resolution entirely, it is really well
written, it makes very strong statements about why smoking causes death in
children. This is not a minor thing— eight thousand children poisoned by ingestions
of cigarettes, these are serious impacts that I believe warrant some action. I am not
going to support the amendment to take out all of the teeth. Anyway, thank you.
Mr. Kuali`i: Actually what I find ironic is that Councilmember
Bynum chooses to speak to what my motivations are or are not. I actually can
support this Resolution and I can support a compromise as the amendment that
Councilmember Nakamura is putting forward because I do believe that this is about
public education and public awareness and it is the step in the right direction and
that of course it will have meaningful outcome and to not support something would
be again, not compromising. We just have to move forward and focus on the
education and focus on the public awareness and focus on the belief in the people
doing the right thing. Our citizens are good, the common courtesy, I would bet it is
like ninety-nine point nine percent and that the problems the people are saying
exist is minimal to none. Let us move forward and focus on the education, work
with the partners that are leading the way, the Tobacco Coalition, the American
Cancer Society, they have been here for a long time doing really important work,
people have told their personal stories. My grandmother died from cancer, my
grandfather died from emphysema, they were smokers probably from before I was
born, I miss them, they left in their sixties far too young. My parents are living in
their seventies, thankfully. Dad never smoked, mom smoked just for a little while
so education, aloha — that is how we are going to get there. To minimize the fact
that education is not powerful without policy, that is wrong. The statistics may
show of course that it is more effective that education be backed up with policy but
we have to be careful in the types of policy we put forward.
Chair Furfaro: Anybody else want to speak on this piece?
Ms. Yukimura: Without the end goal of smoke-free places, I think
the Resolution is meaningless. Especially in light of the really strong "whereas"
statements based on evidence of the dangers and hazards to human health and to
children especially. It does not make sense to withdraw the request for a law
prohibiting smoking in all public beaches. It is kind of a feel good but unenforceable
document and it belays the evidence that says the real way to effectively make an
impact on smoking, reducing percentages from twenty-five to thirteen percent in the
adults and twenty-five percent to six percent, that came about when we started to
do smoke-free places. It does not make sense to me to weaken this Resolution when
the evidence that is cited in all the "whereas" statements is so strong about the need
for some kind of intervention. I cannot support the amendment.
Chair Furfaro: Anymore conversation on the amendment?
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2012-51 was then put, and carried b
P by
g
the following vote:
COUNCIL MEETING 37 AUGUST 8, 2012
FOR AMENDMENT: Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo, Furfaro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Bynum, Yukimura TOTAL— 2,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
The motion to approve Resolution No. 2012-51 as amended was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Chang, Kuali`i, Nakamura, Rapozo,
Furfaro TOTAL — 6,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Yukimura TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Watanabe: Six ayes and one no.
Mr. Bynum: Put my vote as a "no" please.
Chair Furfaro: Before we break here for lunch, I would like to say
something to the group here. I want to say to you that I think you heard what I had
to say, we are looking for the goal, the ultimate goal and the vehicles to get there.
You have to continue to negotiating very skillfully on quite a few of the questions
that came upon enforceability and so forth, and I hope it is part of your business
plan. I think by way of this Resolution for the Council, we are indicating the fact of
the matter is we know where we should be and maybe it is by 2015 or 2016 and we
need to establish some way to wean the public from the use of the parks for the
purpose of getting them eventually to a smoking free facility. We do have a
Resolution and copies of this Resolution will be going to the State Legislators.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 12:27 p.m.
The Council reconvened at 1:35 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: Just to refresh everybody's memory, read the bill
again, I think we already approved the amendments.
Bill No. 2435, Draft 1 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO
AMEND CHAPTER 22, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, BY
ESTABLISHING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING TO ALARM
Chair Furfaro: Where we left off, Vice Chair Yukimura had asked
for some time to check on some points that she thought should be considered before
we actually voted on the amendments.
Ms. Yukimura: After certain time to think about it and check, I do
not have any more amendments to submit.
Mr. Bynum: I just want to thank Councilmember Rapozo for
bringing this bill and shepherding it through. We came in this morning and all of
us had some input from the public which is a great thing about democracy, we get to
hear real world examples and be able to tool things. Mr. Rapozo made amendments
that I totally supported because they were similar to the ones that I was
considering. I just wanted to thank you. I think this is a good bill and I think it
will improve public safety. My encouragement to the Police Department would be
please use what resources you have to get the word out to those folks who currently
COUNCIL MEETING 38 AUGUST 8, 2012
have alarm systems to get them registered. I think having that database will be
helpful but we need to let them know. I will be supporting this bill.
Ms. Yukimura: I think this bill addresses a problem which causes
us to use our precious resource of police availability on false alarms right now, so I
support this bill. I would also like to ask the Police Department to work closely
with the providers of alarm services so that we can have an error free system as
possible and to take into account some of those things that Mr. Hammond suggested
in his public testimony for the goal being the really good working systems in terms
of alarms.
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2435, Draft 1 as amended, on second and
final reading, 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,
Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:39 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
RICKY WATANABE
County Clerk
\ds
ATTACHMENT 1
August 8, 2012
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2435, Draft 1, Relating to Alarm Systems
Introduced By: Mel Rapozo, Councilmember
Bill No. 2435, Draft 1, Section 1 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:
"SECTION 1. Chapter 22, of the Kaua`i County Code 1987 is hereby
amended by establishing a new Article to be appropriately designated, and to read
as follows:
ARTICLE . ALARM SYSTEMS
Sec. 22- .1 Purpose and Intent
Sec. 22- .2 Definitions.
Sec. 22- .3 Alarm User Permits Required.
Sec. 22-_.4 Multiple Alarm Systems.
Sec. 22- .5 Response to Alarm -- Determination of False Alarm.
Sec. 22-_.6 Review of False Alarm Determinations.
Sec. 22- .7 Service Charge Assessment for False Alarms.
Sec. 22- .8 Service Charges And Fees.
Sec. 22- .9 Failure to Obtain Permit for Alarm System — Service Charge.
Sec. 22- .10 Deposit of Fees, Charges, and Fines in Special Account.
Sec. 22- .11 Annual Report.
Sec. 22- .12 Government Immunity.
Section. 22- .1 Purpose and Intent.
The vast majority of emergency alarms to which members of the police
department respond are false alarms. Such alarms are often the result of
improper maintenance, faulty equipment, or improper or careless use of an
alarm system. In the interest of protecting health, life, and property, and
preserving the order and security of the County and its inhabitants by using
law enforcement resources effectively and efficiently, the number of false
alarms from business and residential premises must be reduced. The
purpose of this chapter is to reduce the danger and annoyance associated
with false alarms and to encourage business and residential owners to use
and maintain their alarm systems properly.
Section 22- .2 Definitions.
As used in this article, unless the context requires otherwise:
"Activation" of an alarm system means the emission of an audible or
silent alarm or signal generated by an alarm system, including the
transmission of a message by means of an automatic telephone dialer.
"Alarm system" means any single device or assembly of equipment
designed to signal the occurrence of an emergency, including illegal entry or
other activity requiring immediate attention, to which the police department
is expected to respond or does respond, and that emits an audible alarm or
1
transmits a signal or message, including a telephonic message, when
activated. The term does not include alarms installed in motor vehicles or
fire alarms.
"Alarm system coordinator" means a subordinate designated by the
Chief of Police to administer this article.
"Alarm user" means any person owning or leasing an alarm system,
or on whose premises an alarm system is maintained.
"Chief of Police" means the Chief of Police of the Kaua`i
Police Department.
"Common cause" means a common technical difficulty or malfunction
which causes an alarm system to generate a series of false alarms.
"Emergency" means (1) an unauthorized entry or attempted
unauthorized entry into a building, place, or premises, excluding any motor
vehicle; or (2) the commission of a crime.
"Emergency service" means any law enforcement, fire, or
medical service.
"False alarm" means any alarm activation that is communicated to an
emergency service but that is not in response to an actual or threatened
criminal act or violation.
"Notice" means written notice, served personally or mailed, addressed
to the person to be notified at the person's last known address. Service of
such notice shall be deemed affected upon completion of personal service or
upon deposit of such notice in the United States mail.
"Permit Holder" means the holder of a p ermit issued under Section 2.
"Person" means an individual, corporation, partnership, trust, limited
liability company, association, organization, or similar entity, but excludes
any agency of the United States, the State of Hawai`i, or the County of
Kaua`i.
"Police department" means the Kaua`i Police Department.
"Service charge" means a charge assessed to a Permit Holder to offset
the County's cost of responding to a False Alarm as set forth in this code.
Section 22- .3 Alarm User Permits Required.
(a) Permit Required: No person shall use an alarm system which is
designed to elicit, either directly or indirectly, a police response, without first
obtaining a permit for such alarm system from the Alarm System
Coordinator.
2
(b) Permit Issuance: The permit shall be requested on an
application prescribed by the Chief of Police, or designee. An Alarm User
shall obtain the application from the Alarm System Coordinator, provide the
information requested on the application, and file the application, together
with the applicable fee, with the Alarm System Coordinator. Upon receipt of
a completed application and the fee prescribed in subsection (e), the Alarm
System Coordinator shall issue a Permit to the Alarm User. Permits shall be
valid for one year from the date of issue and shall be renewable on an annual
basis. It shall be the duty of the Permit Holder to renew the permit annually
prior to expiration of the Permit. The Permit Holder shall complete a
renewal form as prescribed by the Alarm System Coordinator and return it,
together with the renewal fee, to the Alarm System Coordinator, who shall
renew the Permit upon receipt of the application and renewal fee. If the
Permit Holder fails to renew the Permit prior to its expiration, the Permit
Holder must apply for a new Permit and pay the fee for a new Permit.
(c) Transfer of Possession of Premises; Non-Transferability of
Permit: When possession of the premises with an alarm system is
transferred, the person obtaining possession of the premises shall apply for a
Permit within 30 days of obtaining possession of the premises. Alarm User
permits are not transferable.
(d) Reporting Updated Information: Whenever the contact
information provided by the applicant on the Permit application changes, the
correct information shall be provided by the Permit Holder to the Alarm
System Coordinator within 30 days of the change. Failure to provide correct
information to the Alarm System Coordinator within 30 days of the change
may result in revocation of the permit.
(e) Fees: The fee for a Permit shall be [$150.] $25. The fee for
Permit renewal shall be [$50.] $10.
(f) Confidentiality: Completed applications and permits shall be for
recordkeeping purposes only and shall be held confidential to the extent
provided for by State and/or Federal law.
Section 22- .4 Multiple Alarm Systems.
If an Alarm User has one or more alarm systems protecting two or
more separate structures having different addresses, a separate Permit shall
be required for each such structure.
Section 22- .5 Response to Alarm — Determination of False Alarm.
(a) Police Response: Whenever an alarm system is activated which
results in a response by the Police Department, the responding police officer
shall inspect the area and determine whether an actual or threatened
criminal act or violation existed at the time of the system's activation, and if
not, determine whether the alarm was a false alarm.
(b) Notification: If the police officer at the scene of the activated
alarm system determines the alarm to be false, the police officer shall make a
3
report of the False Alarm. The Permit Holder or, if there is no Permit, the
owner of the premises as appearing in the tax rolls of the County, shall be
notified in writing, by the Alarm System Coordinator, of each False Alarm
determination. Notice shall be made personally, by mail, or by posting in a
prominent location at the premises where the False Alarm occurred.
Section. 22- .6 Review of False Alarm Determinations.
(a) The Alarm System Coordinator shall, upon request from a
Permit Holder, review the determination by a responding Police Officer that
an alarm was false. The review shall be conducted by the Alarm System
Coordinator only if the Permit Holder requests the review in writing within
10 days of the date on which the false alarm determination was mailed to or
received by the Permit Holder. The written request for review of a false
alarm determination shall include the following information:
(1) The Permit Holder's name and mailing address;
(2) Address of the premises at which the alarm system
is installed;
(3) The date of the alarm being contested;
(4) The ermit number for the alarm system; and
p Y
(5) The basis for the request for review.
(b) The Alarm System Coordinator shall make a determination on
the Permit Holder's request for review and shall, within seven days
thereafter, mail written notice of the Coordinator's determination to the
Permit Holder at the address supplied in the request for review.
Section 22- .7 Service Charge Assessment for False Alarms.
(a) A charge assessed pursuant to this section shall be considered
an obligation owed by the Permit Holder to the County of Kaua`i and shall be
payable within 30 days from the date of receipt of the assessment notice.
(b) (1) A Permit Holder who installs a new Alarm System or
reinstalls an alarm system shall not be subject to a False Alarm
determination for a period of 30 days from the date of issuance of the
Permit. An alarm user who obtains a Permit for an alarm system
already in operation on the effective date of ordinance shall not be
subject to a False alarm determination for the 30-day period
immediately following issuance of the Permit.
(c) A series of false alarms generated by an alarm system, for which
a permit has been issued under this article, as a result of a Common Cause
within any 48-hour period shall be considered a single occurrence of a False
Alarm, provided that:
4
(1) Repairs to the Alarm System to eliminate the Common
Cause are made before the Alarm System generates additional false
alarms after the 48-hour period;
(2) The Alarm User provides documentation of the repairs to
the Alarm System Coordinator; and
(3) No additional false alarms are generated as a result of the
Common Cause within the 30-day period immediately following the
completion of repairs.
(d) A service charge shall not be assessed for the first or second
false alarms activated from any premises within a 12-month period
immediately following issuance of a new permit. The third false alarm and
all false alarms thereafter activated from any premises shall cause the
Permit Holder to be assessed a service charge of$150 per occurrence.
Section 22- .8 Service Charges and Fees.
New Permit Fee [$150] $25
Renewal Fee [$50] $10
Service Charge — 1st and 2nd False Alarm $0
Service Charge — 3rd False Alarm (and subsequent) $150
Operation of a Non-Registered Alarm System [$250] $100
Section 22- .9 Failure to Obtain Permit for Alarm System — Service
Charge.
Persons operating an alarm system without obtaining a permit shall be
assessed a service charge of[$250] $100 for each false alarm incident.
Section 22- .10 Deposit of Fees, Charges, and Fines in Special Account.
All moneys collected from fees, charges and fines required by this
article shall be deposited in a special account in the general fund and shall be
used for the administration and enforcement of this Article.
Section 22- .11 Annual Report.
No later than 30 days following the first and second anniversary of the
effective date of this ordinance, the Chief of Police shall submit to the Council
and the County Clerk a report of the Police Department's activities under
this Article, which shall include at least the following:
(a) A breakdown of general fund and special account resources
assigned to or expended on the administration of this article;
(b) An accounting of the number of permits issued;
(c) An accounting of the number of false alarms by category (first,
second, third, etc.; residential or commercial, etc.);
5
(d) An accounting of the number of false alarm determinations
appealed and reviewed, and the disposition of those reviews;
(e) An accounting of the permit fees received;
(f) An accounting of the service charges assessed and paid; and
(g) An accounting of the number of violations/citations for failure to
obtain a required permit.
Section 22- .12 Government Immunity.
The following language shall be included on all Permit application and
renewal forms:
Alarm Registration is not intended to, nor will it, create a contract,
duty or obligation, either expressed or implied, of response. Any and all
liability and consequential damage resulting from the failure to respond to a
notification is hereby disclaimed and governmental immunity as provided by
law is retained. By applying for an Alarm Permit, the Permit Holder
acknowledges that law enforcement response may be influenced by factors
such as: the availability of police units, priority of calls, weather conditions,
traffic conditions, emergency conditions, staffing levels, and prior
response history."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored. All material is
new.)
(\\cok-nas-02\home\wakiona\for review\FA MR-gg aug 8,2012 cncl mtg.doc)
6
ATTACHMENT 2
August 8, 2012
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Resolution No. 2012-51, RESOLUTION RELATING TO SMOKE-FREE COUNTY
PARKS AND REQUESTING A STATE BAN ON UNDERAGE SMOKING
AND SMOKING AT ALL PUBLIC BEACHES
Introduced By: Nadine K. Nakamura, Councilmember
Resolution No. 2012-51 is amended in its entirety to read as follows:
"RESOLUTION RELATING TO SMOKE-FREE COUNTY PARKS AND
REQUESTING A STATE BAN ON UNDERAGE SMOKING [AND SMOKING
AT ALL PUBLIC BEACHES]
WHEREAS, tobacco usage has been determined to have many health risks,
and cigarettes and other tobacco products (OTP) contain the addictive drug nicotine,
which can be absorbed into the bloodstream when a tobacco product is chewed,
inhaled, or smoked; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that tobacco products containing a
combination of nicotine and other chemicals (natural and added) cause a wide range
of harmful effects on the human body ranging from symptoms as mild as temporary
elevated blood pressure, nausea, diarrhea, and tremors to symptoms as severe as
allergy-induced asthma attacks, cancer, heart disease, and death; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke has been repeatedly identified as a health
hazard and in Hawai`i, thousands of young people are exposed to tobacco smoke
pollution every day; and
WHEREAS, the U.S. Surgeon General has stated that there is no safe level of
exposure to secondhand smoke, whether indoors or outdoors, and that children's
exposure to secondhand smoke causes increased risk of sudden infant death
syndrome, respiratory infections, middle ear diseases, more severe asthma,
respiratory symptoms, and slowed lung growth; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke is responsible for the premature deaths of
over 430,000 Americans each year from lung cancer, heart disease, respiratory
illness, and other diseases; and
WHEREAS, secondhand smoke exposure causes lower respiratory tract
infections, such as pneumonia and bronchitis, in as many as 300,000 children in the
United States under the age of 18 months each year, and exacerbates childhood
asthma; and
WHEREAS, children are acutely vulnerable to the dangers of tobacco use,
and approximately 80% of smokers started smoking before the age of 18 years of
age, with the average initiation age being 12 years old; and
1 ti �-
WHEREAS, every day an estimated 3,900 young people under the age of
18years of age try their first cigarette, and one-third of these children will die
prematurely from tobacco-related illnesses; and
WHEREAS, in Hawai`i, an estimated 2,000 youth each year under the age of
18 years of age become addicted to tobacco; and
WHEREAS, in 2004, American Poison Control Centers received nearly 8,000
reports of children poisoned by the ingestion of cigarettes, cigarette butts, and other
tobacco products; and
WHEREAS, in order to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of all
•
park patrons; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the County of Kaua`i that it hereby
requests all County park patrons to show aloha and respect for non-smokers by
refraining from smoking when other park patrons are in close proximity.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests that all County of
Kaua`i park patrons do their part to preserve the beauty of our parks by properly
disposing of all tobacco litter.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Council requests the Administration
to purchase and erect signage at all County parks; such signage shall read "Please
Refrain From Smoking When Other Park Patrons Are In Close Proximity".
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council requests the Hawai`i State
Legislature to adopt a law to prohibit minors (those under 18 years of age) from
smoking.
[BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council requests the Hawai`i State
Legislature to adopt a law prohibiting smoking at all public beaches.]
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be sent to Mayor
Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr; Lenny Rapozo, Director, Department of Parks and
Recreation; Ron Kouchi, State Senator; Dee Morikawa, State Representative; James
Tokioka, State Representative; Derek Kawakami, State Representative."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. Material to be added is underlined.)
(\\cok-nas-02\home\wakiona\for review\FA reso 2012-51 no smoking 8-8-2012 NN1-gg.doc)
2
ATTACHMENT 3
August 8, 2012
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2437, Draft 2, Relating to Parks and Recreation
Introduced By: JoAnn A. Yukimura, Councilmember
1. Amend Bill No. 2437, Draft 2, by amending Section 3 to read as follows:
"SECTION 2. Chapter 19, Article 1, Section 19-1.3 of the Kaua`i
County Code 1987, as amended, is amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 19-1.3 Definitions.
The following definitions shall apply to the provisions contained in this
Article:
"County" shall mean the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i.
"County Engineer" shall mean the County Engineer, Department of
Public Works, County of Kaua`i, or his duly authorized representative.
"Department" shall mean the Department of Parks and Recreation,
County of Kaua`i.
"Deposits" shall mean sums of money placed with the Department or
Office as security for the use and maintenance of Parks and Recreation
facilities.
"Director" shall mean the Director of Parks and Recreation, Office of
the Mayor, County of Kaua`i, or his duly authorized representative.
"Office" shall mean the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of
Kaua`i.
"Parks" shall mean any park, park roadway, playground, beach
right-of-way, or other recreational areas under the control, management, and
operation of the County.
"Permits" shall mean a written authorization signed by the Director of
the Department of Parks and Recreation or his representative allowing use of
parks and recreational facilities.
"Recreation facilities" shall mean any building or other physical
structure, such as swimming pools, gymnasiums, community centers,
pavilions, picnic tables, used for recreational purposes and under the control,
management, and operation of the County.
"Shared Use Path System" shall mean the path surface, an area up to
six (6) feet on each side of the surface, immediately adjacent comfort stations,
immediately adjacent rest areas, and direct access from parking areas.
["Tobacco Product" means any substance containing tobacco leaf,
including, but not limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco,
snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, snus, bidis, or any other preparation
of tobacco; and any product or formulation of matter containing biologically
active amounts of nicotine that is manufactured, sold, offered for sale, or
otherwise distributed with the expectation that the product or matter will be pY
1 \c‘b
,
introduced into the human body, but does not include any nicotine
replacement therapy product specifically approved by the United States Food
and Drug Administration for use in treating nicotine or tobacco dependence.]
"Type I Activity" shall mean an activity organized and conducted by
the County.
"Type II Activity" shall mean an activity open to the public and
co-sponsored by the County and/or the State.
"Type III Activity" shall mean an activity organized and sponsored by
any non-profit entity which does not charge for admission, solicit donations,
or involve the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or services to the general
public.
"Type IV Activity" shall mean an activity organized and sponsored by
any person or entity which does not charge admission, solicit donations, or
involve the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or services to the general
public.
"Type V Activity" shall mean an activity organized and sponsored by
any non-profit entity which charges admission, solicits donations, or involves
the sale of goods, wares, merchandise or services to the general public.
"Type VI Activity" shall mean an activity organized and sponsored by
any person who charges for admission, solicits donations, or sells goods,
wares, merchandise, or services to the general public for profit."
2. Amend Bill No. 2437, Draft 2 by amending Section 3 to read as follows:
"SECTION 3. Chapter 19, Section 19-1.4, Kaua`i County Code
1987, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 19-1.4 General Prohibitions Applicable To All Parks And Recreation
Facilities.
(a) No person at a park or recreation facility shall:
(1) Abandon any vehicle or other personal property.
(2) Leave any vehicle or other personal property unattended
for longer than twenty-four (24) hours.
(3) Operate or use any audio devices including radios,
television sets, musical instruments or noise-producing devices such as
electric generators, or other equipment driven by motors or engines, in
such a manner and at such times that produces unreasonable noise as
defined in HRS Chapter 711-1101, unless authorized by the Director or
his designated representative on a permit.
(4) Use utilities and appurtenances for non-recreational,
commercial, or other activities, unless authorized by the Director or his
designated representative on a permit.
(5) Install aerial or other special radio, telephone, or
television equipment, unless authorized by the Director or his
designated representative on a permit.
(6) Operate or use public address systems, whether fixed,
portable or mounted on a vehicle, unless authorized by the Director or
his designated representative on a permit.
2
(7) Disturb or interfere with any other person occupying an
area, or participating in any authorized activity.
(8) Lead or let loose any dogs or other domestic animals,
unless authorized by the Director or his designated representative on a
permit, except for as set forth in Sec. 19-1.4(a)(21).
(9) Use, carry or possess firearms and weapons of any
description, except for bows and arrows for archery competitions and
air rifles for air rifle competitions when authorized by the Director or
his designated representative on a permit.
(10) Drive or park motorized vehicles, including dune buggies,
motorcycles, minicycles, and scooters, or ride horses, except on
designated roads and parking areas, unless authorized by the Director
or his designated representative by signage or on a permit.
(11) Mark, deface, or remove any natural feature or natural
resources.
(12) Destroy, injure, deface or remove in any manner any
public building, sign, equipment, monument, marker or other
structure.
(13) Destroy, dig or remove tree, shrub or other plant, unless
authorized by the Director or his designated representative on a
permit.
(14) Construct or erect any building or structure of whatever
kind, whether permanent or temporary in character, unless authorized
by the Director or his designated representative on a permit, except for
a pre-fab and manufactured quick tent no larger than 20 feet x 20 feet
for an event or gathering.
(15) Start a fire except within designated grills, portable grills,
and fireplaces. No fire shall be left unattended and all fires shall be
fully extinguished after use.
(16) Throw or drop a lighted cigarette, cigar, pipe heel, match
or other burning material, except to start a fire within designated
grills, portable grills, and fireplaces as allows in paragraph 15.
(17) Use roller skates, roller blades, skateboards, or bicycles
except in designated areas authorized by the Director or his designated
representative through signage.
(18) Dance on any gymnasium floor while wearing shoes,
provided that dancing with shoes shall be permitted if a protective
covering over the floor is used.
(19) Dispose litter in other than designated trash receptacles.
(20) Operate or use air-horns, unless authorized by the
Director or his designated representative on a permit, or to start or end
events or races. As used herein, air-horn means a device intended to
produce a sound signal by means of compressed air or gas or exhaust
gas.
(21) Dogs shall be permitted on the shared use path system
provided, however, that dogs or other domestic animals shall not be
allowed on the path system beginning at the makai end of Nalu Road
(entrance to Lydgate Beach Park) to the end of the path system
fronting Hikinaakala Heiau (see Exhibit A attached). The County
Engineer shall post signs to designate the appropriate area where dogs
are not allowed on the shared use path system.
Any dog handler with a dog utilizing the shared use path system
shall comply with the following:
3
(i) Be in command and control of dog at all
times.
(ii) Have no more than two (2) dogs under his
control.
(iii) Immediately remove his dog if it exhibits
aggressive behavior.
(iv) Visibly carry the necessary instruments
required for the removal and disposal of dog feces.
(v) Pick up and dispose of any and all feces left
by the dog.
(vi) Have the dog wear at all times a valid
current dog license tag that is clearly and visibly attached
to the dog's collar.
(vii) Have the dog on a leash that is no more than
six (6) feet in length at all times. Retractable leashes
shall not be allowed.
(22) Notwithstanding any other county ordinance to the
contrary, [Smoke] smoke or carry a lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe, or use
any spark, flame or fire-producing device to light any of the
aforementioned smoking devices.
(i) This prohibition shall not apply to any
officially designated parking area, except:
(A) When a park parking lot is the
primary venue for a public event, such as a
sunshine market; or
(B) When, at the discretion of a law
enforcement officer or park ranger, anyone
using a smoking device is asked to move at
least 20 feet farthest downwind from the
nearest park user who is using the park area
adjacent to the parking lot.
(C) Section 19(a)(22)(i) shall be
repealed on January 1, 2016.
(ii) The Chief of Police shall provide a report to
the Council before January 1, 2015, providing an
evaluation of smoking in the parking lots of all County
parks. The report shall include, but not be limited to, any
concerns, citations collected, and fines collected. At such
time, the Council shall reassess the effectiveness of the
exception in Section 19(a)(22)(i) which allows for smoking
in park parking lots.
(b) Entering or remaining in a park area when manifestly under the
influence of alcohol, narcotics or other drugs, to a degree that may endanger
oneself or other persons or property, or unreasonably annoy persons in the
vicinity is prohibited.
4
(c) County Employees authorized by the Director shall have the
authority to issue citations and charges for any violations of the provisions of
this Section.
(d) It shall be unlawful to not comply with any provision of this
section. [Any] Notwithstanding any other county ordinance to the contrary,
any person violating any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine
of not less than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for the first offense. For the
second violation of like offense, the punishment shall be a fine of not less
than Two Hundred Dollars ($200.00). For all violations in excess of two (2) of
like offense, the punishment shall be a fine of not less than Three Hundred
Dollars ($300.00) and not more than Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00). In
addition, the County shall have the right to avail itself of any civil remedy
appropriate under the circumstances.
(e) As it is anticipated that Phase III A (Wailua to Papaloa,
including Kawaihau Spur) will be completed by the Fall 2011, which will
provide approximately one (1) additional mile of paved pathway, the Director
of Parks and Recreation shall submit a report to the Council within
eighteen (18) months of the approval of this ordinance, providing an
evaluation of allowing dogs on the path. The report shall include, but not be
limited to, any concerns, incidences of dog bites, citations, etc. At such time,
the Council shall reassess the effectiveness of this ordinance which allows
dogs on the path."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2010-12 term\2437, D2, revised (JY)for 8-8-12 CN, GG_il.doc
5