Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-21-2010-Doc15907 • • MINUTES PARKS/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE April 21, 2010 A meeting of the Parks/Transportation Committee of the Council of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, was called to order by Councilmember Lani T. Kawahara, Chair, at 3371-A Wilcox Road, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, Apri121, 2010 at 11:26 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Dickie Chang Honorable Daryl Kaneshiro Honorable Lani Kawahara Honorable Derek Kawakami Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Ex-Officio Member Honorable Jay Furfaro, Ex-Officio Member The Committee proceeded on its agenda items, as shown in the following Committee reports which are incorporated herein by reference: CR-PKT 2010-01: on C 2010-83 Communication (04/05/2010) from Councilmember Lani T. Kawahara, requesting the presence of the Director of Parks & Recreation to discuss the results of the "Shared Use Path Survey." [Received for the record.] LANI T. KAWAHARA (COMMITTEE CHAIR): Thank you for the three (3) step process here. The next process would be to bring... JAY FURFARO (EX-OFFICIO MEMBER): Chairman Asing has a question for you. Ms. Kawahara: Oh! Yes Chair Asing. BILL "KAIPO" ASING (EX-OFFICIO MEMBER): If I may I just want to take this opportunity to also thank all of the volunteers for the hard work that you did, I recognized the work that you did and the value. I also want to applaud the Department for the hard work and the results of the survey. I do have some concerns about the survey, especially the area of the difference between staff responses and the participant's responses, it seems to be a hundred degrees different and so you know, why is my concern. But I want to thank all of you for all of the hard work, so thank you. Ms. Kawahara: Ok Clerk if you could please read the next item. Bill No. 2354 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 Page 1 of 17 , . • • [This item was deferred.] Ms. Kawahara: Thank you Clerk. So my intention, I think that's where I'm going right? My intention if I could put that up and again... because of the way and the time that the report was given to us and the need for the Councilmembers to be able to go through it and generate any questions that they have and also to come up with amendments that I know that there are some people interested in doing and because it's routine to put these... keep these... keep the work in the Committee work area, I would like to ask for a deferral with the very, very, very strong urging that I have a calendar up here that I want to show, that all amendments and considerations be given to all of the staff as soon as possible so that we can make the deadline. And if I can get the calendar up there because I am painfully aware of how we want to be able to surely get this done but the situation we're in is that this is the time of Committee work and we have to have time to be able to look at the stuff and offer amendments if we wanted to so ordinance eight, sixty, nine (869) the evaluation period shall be established bv the committee of stakeholders providin¢ ample time for the consideration of outcomes prior to the end of the eighteen (18) month trial period. So that's where we are, we have gotten the report, it is now at Council hands. And that's just general stuff about the ordinance now I've been working with staff and with the Clerk on the calendar and we're here on the twenty-first (21) so if we defer this Bill, the next time it's going to come up and on the very, very strong urging of the Committee Chair that we get all the amendments in with the purpose of being sure that we meet the Sunset, it ; would be Committee on the fifth (5th), where action would be taken and all amendments will be submitted and we would make a decision. At that then it will go to full Council for a second and final reading, this is my intent and hope and my suggestions to my Committee members and after the Council we transmit the Bill to the Mayor for signature and then after that it is in the Mayor's hands and it goes on to say what he has to do. So Councilmembers? DEREK S. K. KAWAKAMI (COMMITTEE MEMBER): You know clarification the Bill at hand is something that you support? The Bill on the table, well not even on the table... Ms. Kawahara: Yes. Mr. Kawakami: But and so you want to defer action on this? Ms. Kawahara: Yes. Mr. Kawakami: Um. Ms. Kawahara: Well no. Mr. Kawakami: And I understand that that's your wishes as the Committee Chair. But my personal opinion as a Committee member, I want to move on with this issue, we have other work to do so I'm going to be making a motion to approve because I want to move this forward and you know eh whether it moves to full Council, people are at will to introduce amendments at full Council, I'm ready to support it so move to approve. Ms. Kawahara: Do I hear a second? Hearing none... it sounds like... Page 2 of 17 . , • • Mr. Kawakami: So I'm assuming that you're not in support of allowing dogs in this multiuse path. Ms. Kawahara: No, I am in support of being sure the Committee members... Mr. Kawakami: Because I making a motion to support that. Ms. Kawahara: Oh okay, okay. Mr. Furfaro: Need to second for discussion. Ms. Kawahara: Do I need to second for discussion? TIM BYNUM (COMMITTEE MEMBER): I'll second that. Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Discussion? Mr. Bynum. Mr. Bynum: I would just like to ask, I support the Bill as written, I don't intend to introduce any amendments and I would just like to ask my colleagues if any of you intend on introducing some amendments to this Bill? DARYL W. KANESHIRO (COMMITTEE MEMBER): As a Committee member, that might be a possibility, I'm still looking over a few things on the Bill itself. I'm not certain if I can support the full path the way it is. I certainly can support you know dogs on the path but currently we have a Bill in front of us allowing for the full path in the whole area. So you know for me, I have some concerns. I've worked on this bill when the bill first came up several years ago and so did you, Mr. Bynum, and you know I need to put more thoughts into this bill but if the Committee wants to move it out and you have the votes to move it out I'm fine with that, I'm not objective to that. I know I got my financial budget coming right around the corner again and that's going to be taking a lot of time and effort too so. Whatever the Committee feels likes, if you have the votes to move it out. Mr. Bynum: The only point I'm making, Mr. Kaneshiro, is if there are going to be amendments, we should do those in Committee and if they're non-Committee members who would like to introduce amendments, I'd be happy to introduce them by request. That's typically what we do as we do Committee, you know make amendments in Committee. So if the intention of the Committee is to... if Committee members is to pass it out with the recommendation to pass it as is at the full Council, I'm down with that. But if there's going to be amendments I think they should be done in Committee, that's just my opinion. Ms. Kawahara: Councilmember Kawakami if I misunderstood what you were motioning? Mr. Kawakami: Yes thank you. Excuse me? Ms. Kawahara: Earlier if I misunderstood what your motion earlier I apologize. Mr. Kawakami: No there's no... Ms. Kawahara: Go ahead. Page 3 of 17 • • . Mr. Kawakami: You're running the meeting, so I don't know if my motion is dead for a lack of second or what, but... Mr. Bynum: No we seconded. Ms. Kawahara: We seconded, yeah. We brought it back because I didn't understand what it was. Mr. Kawakami: And here's what's confusing me. I mean I understand personal wants as to what you would like to see but the bottom line is it comes down to the majority that is the democratic way so. Ms. Kawahara: Yeah. Mr. Kawakami: You know we can ask guys whether they want to do amendments or not, this is the process so... Ms. Kawahara: Yes it is. Mr. Kawakami: There's a motion and a second so I'm up for discussion. Ms. Kawahara: So we're still discussing. Mr. Kawakami: A couple points and I'll be blunt. I don't really like dogs, I don't really love dogs, in fact you know I go to my mom's house and the dogs can bark at me all day and all night and the moment I yell at them, my mom is at my neck but a couple statistics from the presentation as far as the users there are forty-seven thousand two hundred thirty-one (47,231) total walkers, joggers and bicyclists. Now of the walkers, joggers and bicyclists that have dogs that only constitutes three thousand and forty-seven (3,047) people, so only six percent (6%) of people actually walk their dogs so the dogs walkers are a minority, the majority are people who don't have dogs. And everything the Administration has presented is true, right now they're understaffed you know the work... the concern of the workers are real, there are concerns that they don't feel safe; who are we to judge that that's not valid. However, the way that I'm going to cast my vote is I guess you could say it would be against the grain of how I would normally cast my vote and I'm casting my vote purely and solely on I guess my personal experience on the path and I guess first and foremost the path is a wonderful thing for everybody, walker with dogs, walkers without dogs, joggers with dogs, joggers without dogs, for everybody, keikis, kupunas. And i feel based on my personal experience that there's room on the path for everybody so I'm a little baffled as to when I make a motion to approve something, especially in light that I felt that this whole process was rushed I mean we were rushed to get the Administration to give us a survey, we rushed them to come up here to give us a report, I mean I felt like the whole thing was rushed and I'm the very one here ready to make a motion to approve it and you guys are hesitant to second my motion, you guys want to defer this thing so excuse me if I feel a little confused as to the process. You know what do I know about the path, you know I'm on it here and there, but my vote is just cast solely on my personal experience, is cast in support of allowing dogs on the path. That being said I have no further discussion. Ms. Kawahara: Councilmember Kaneshiro. Page 4 of 17 , ~ • Mr. Kaneshiro: Chair if I may, you know, there may be some technical, we may run into some technical problems. BC (check your mic.) Mr. Kaneshiro: Thanks. We may run into some technical problems because I'm just putting a scenario out you know if we follow your schedule that you had posted. Ms. Kawahara: Yes. Mr. Kaneshiro: If the Mayor veto's the Council's suggestion or Ordinance the dog path... dogs on the path will have to stop for several weeks. Ms. Kawahara: Ah actually... Mr. Kaneshiro: Complete stop with the Mayor's veto now. Ms. Kawahara: Looks like nine (9) you mean if the that all of hands chance that he veto's it. Mr. Kaneshiro: Correct. Ms. Kawahara: Yes. If we're going to rely on what other people might do. Mr. Kaneshiro: Correct. There is a technical circumstance where they'll be no dogs on the path at all for several weeks... Ms. Kawahara: Nine (9)... , Mr. Kaneshiro: Until... Ms. Kawahara: Nine (9) days. Mr. Kaneshiro: Well it depends how long it takes to... Ms. Kawahara: If, if we're going to worry about what somebody else does and not the Council does. Mr. Kaneshiro: And so I want to put that out to that that's a possibility. Ms. Kawahara: Yeah, yeah. And I'm aware if you go into... Mr. Kaneshiro: Okay... Ms. Kawahara: June sunset. Mr. Kaneshiro: I understand. Ms. Kawahara: Okay. I'd like to take a quick... Oh Councilmember Furfaro. Page 5 of 17 • 0 1 . Mr. Furfaro: I can't vote today. Ms. Kawahara: I know. Mr. Furfaro: But I do want to share with you that as a non-Committee member, as the bill is written you're going to be creating a big double standard on Parks because the bill allows those animals into Lydgate, into that area there where as I tried to point out, we're dealing with the path right now. And so it's going to cause a lot of confusion if it's passed based on the fact that Lydgate is now exempt from the dog issue you know I think that's a separate issue on a separate time. I think what you want to deal with right now is the path. You know I've made myself very clear... Ms. Kawahara: Right. Mr. Furfaro: With an email to many people, I think there's been a very good response from the volunteers, the response from the dog animals... animal owners with their dogs, I think they have demonstrated that in the area that they currently have, I think they could eventually be extended either South which is my preference or North but you know I'm not supporting the entire path right now because we don't have the manpower quite frankly and yet I would have to ask somebody to introduce my support for dogs on the path by request in Committee or I would have to wait until the whole Council. Ms. Kawahara: Yeah and that was the discussion we had and I think Councilmember Bynum said he would be happy to introduce by request in.Committee. And I think you were... ' Mr. Furfaro: Again I want to make sure that's one (1) of two (2) concerns I have in the ruling right now. We're only passing out confusion about animals in the parks, I think that's a separate item and then of course what I said earlier, I responded to emails, I support the dogs having with their responsible owners a portion, a permanent portion of the path along with the opportunity to expand as we make improvements but right now we don't have the staff. And I was very glad to hear that the Parks Department is willing to continue dialog with UPW about the appropriate staffing. So I've said what I needed to say. Ms. Kawahara: Thank you Councilmember Furfaro and he was next and then Councilmember Kawakami. • Mr. Bynum: Yeah I said earlier, you know I support the bill the way it's written if the intention to pass it out to full Council without amendments then I'm ready to vote on it today. Just to clarify some of the issues, the ordinance that is written says that dogs are allowed on the path surfaces and areas six (6) feet, each side of the surface, immediately adjacent amenities, and direct access from any parking. If they passed in that area, dogs will be allowed on the path at Lydgate park but not on other portions on the park. There's no easy way to do this as long as we are a community that doesn't allow in our parks and I have never proposed that we change that. But that dogs be allowed on the path and the path is defined as clearly as possible that avoid as much confusion as possible. What has been confusing is having a segment of the path that is and the segment that you cannot and so I think that avoiding confusion is to allow dogs on the path and then there will be much less confusion than there currently is. The reason and Page 6 of 17 • • I don't own a dog and but I support this because it would be extremely difficult to find... it's very rare for path... multiuse paths to restrict dog walking, I don't see any compelling reason why that liberty and that basic freedom that's enjoyed virtually everywhere should be restricted for the people of Kaua`i. And so I support the... and in time... oh and I want to address the timeframe, I made it very clear that I would have liked to introduce this bill in January to give sufficient time to address it, I was asked to wait, asked to wait and I waited, we agree on March 17 that I would introduced the bill and that there would be a presentation on March 17, that didn't come to pass and so now we do feel this time crunch but I made it very clear in October of last year that I wanted to introduce this bill in January, get it done with plenty of time for ample consideration and prior to the budget, unfortunately that didn't happen so at this point I'm willing to vote on this and pass it out today, I think our normal practice is to have amendments worked on in Committee. And I'm reluctant to go from that normal process but. Mr. Kawakami: Would you like me to recall my motion? Ms. Kawahara: No actually I would... Mr. Kawakami: Do you know that I'm supporting this? Ms. Kawahara: Are you upset? Mr. Bynum: Yeah I hear that loud and clear. Ms. Kawahara: Are you upset? I don't mean to be making you upset. Mr. Kawakami: I'm willing to work with you. Ms. Kawahara: Yeah well I appreciate because that's what we're doing we're trying to work it out. Mr. Kawakami: Do you want me to withdraw my motion. Ms. Kawahara: If I could get a... if I could ask my Committee members if I could get a fiye (5) minute recess. Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: I just want to... Ms. Kawahara: And we have to take a caption break. Mr. Furfaro: Could I... before you do I just wanted to... Mr. Bynum is referring to the definition of a shared use path with six (6) feet either side. I'm referring to the verbiage in the bill that references specially camp grounds, Lydgate and so forth, I just want to make sure we're clear. Mr. Bynum: Which would be? Mr. Furfaro: It's taking it out of the bill. Mr. Bynum: Right. Ms. Kawahara: Yeah. Page 7 of 17 • • . Mr. Furfaro: Meaning it would be allowed in the camp grounds... Mr. Bynum: No. Mr. Furfaro: But there's the difference in our points. Mr. Bynum: It would be allowed on the path. Mr. Furfaro: It doesn't really in my mind say that, that's all I want to make sure. I understand that you're referring to six (6) feet on either side of the multiuse path, when you read this we specifically put no camp grounds, no Lydgate park... this is in brackets so that means that comes out... Mr. Bynum: Right. Mr. Furfaro: And that's what my concern is, you can take a caption break. Ms. Kawahara: Yes if we could take a caption break, thank you. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 3:33 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 3:58 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Ms. Kawahara: The Committee is now back in order and we're going to suspend the rules and see if there's anybody that would like to comment on this new developments or anything that we've been discussing up to this point the new motion? Mr. Kawakami: Point of order, we're in... AL CASTILLO (COUNTY ATTORNEY): I'm sorry. Ms. Kawahara: Well I was told... wait I'm following directions, I thought I was supposed to take comment? Mr. Kawakami: No. Mr. Furfaro: You took comments and you're in deliberation. Mr. Kawakami: We're ready to vote. Mr. Bynum: We never took public comments. Mr. Kawakami: We took public testimony up front. Mr. Bynum: On this agenda item? . Mr. Kawakami: Oh I,m sorry. Page 8 of 17 ~ • Ms. Kawahara: I can always take public testimony, I'm understanding. So the rules are suspended. Mr. Furfaro: Suspend the rules because we had motion and a seconded which was closed so you have to suspend the rules. Ms. Kawahara: So I'm suspending the rules again, thank you and I do want to take public comment on this discussion that we're having. Mr. Bynum: On this agenda item. Ms. Kawahara: On this agenda item. Mr. Asing: On the agenda item, not the discussion. Ms. Kawahara: Okay not the discussion thank you for everybody for clarifying, not the discussion but the agenda item. Okay seeing... Oh? Okay. Calling it back to order and we're continuing discussion, trying to following directions. Mr. Kawakami: Madam Chair, I'd like to call for the question? Ms. Kawahara: Ah actually as a Chair, I don't want to take the question I want to discuss this further, is that doable? Okay we're going to settle this... because there seems to be confusion I'm getting from this ear and another ear so if I could take a quick recess and I apologize to all my Committee members and my fellow Councilmembers... Mr. Furfaro: Five (5) minute recess? Ms. Kawahara: Yes. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 4:05 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 4:25 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Ms. Kawahara: Everybody deep breaths, lots of stuff happening. So slowly we go I'm calling the meeting back to order, I am suspending the rules and I am asking for public comment on this item which is the bill. Mr. Bynum: Seeing none. Ms. Kawahara: And seeing none? Did you... who's... ' anybody please raise their hand if you want to come up and give testimony... give public comment on this bill. (PUBLIC - inaudible) Ms. Kawahara: Yes. All previous commentary and testimony stands. ~ (PUBLIC -inaudible) Page 9 of 17 ~ • , Ms. Kawahara: No, no. Mr. Bynum: You asked an opinion, no. Ms. Kawahara: Did you want to? (PUBLIC - inaudible) Mr. Furfaro: No it's not Councilwoman Yukimura. Ms. Kawahara: We received the report. Mr. Furfaro: We received that item and that is the confusion for everyone, we have two (2) items, item number one (1) was the communication from the Administration explaining their plan, public testimony was taken we then received that piece. Now is the actual bill that's coming up and you're allowed to speak on the agenda item which is that bill. Ms. Kawahara: Thank you. Mr. Taylor. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. KEN TAYLOR: Chair, members of the Council my name is Ken Taylor. I want to ask for clarification on this bill, is this bill motions to move forward or take a vote on it, is it to include dogs on the whole path? Mr. Kawakami: From what I understand that is what I am in support of, I've made it clear and if I'm voting on something... Ms. Kawahara: Ah. Mr. Kawakami: That doesn't include that then somebody can clarify that. But yes the bill that we are voting on is to allow dogs on the whole path. Mr. Taylor: Thank you for the clarification. Under those circumstances I highly recommend that you vote in favor of the bill that's before you. I understand that you know I understand where the Parks Department's coming from and their concerns about labor and how much time will be taken to take care of this section of the path but regardless whether there's dogs on the path or not, there's going to be a lot of labor involved and it's going to get done or it's not going to get done and I don't really believe that the dogs are going to add that much if any activity of the maintenance of the path so please move forward with this and let's get on with agricultural housing, thank you. Ms. Kawahara: Anyone else? Mr. Bynum: Okay call the meeting back to order. The Committee was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Calling... okay there's no further people I see that want to comment on this bill, I'm calling this meeting back to order Page 10 of 17 . . . • and I'm recommending that my... for further discussion and I'm recommending that my Committee please defer this bill because I understand that. Mr. Furfaro: Excuse me I believe there's a motion and a seconded to approve the bill, you have to take that first. Ms. Kawahara: Does a defer override? So we're having parliamentary issues here. And Councilmember Kawakami what's your question? Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Madam Chair and I will respectfully respect the voice of the majority if my motion shall not pass today. It just leaves me in some confusion as to why there would be some hesitancy to support the motion that I have made, it's fairly simple, it's in line with the goals that you and Councilmember Bynum also have and so if you would not like me to support it either, let's be clear, let me know, if your heart has changed on this issue. But I am quite frankly in awe as to why you would recommend that we defer. The Committee clearly, from my point of view and where I'm sitting has the votes to pass this out of Committee and I've been questioned a couple of times whether I would stand by my motion when it reaches full Council. Being the introducer or the maker of the motion, why wouldn't I? And so if we can just conduct business, pass this out of Committee, we have other work to do, we have staff inembers that have work to do, clearly we have the votes to move it forward so that we can move forward on this issue, why wouldn't we want to move it forward? Ms. Kawahara: Okay further discussion? Councilmember Bynum? Mr. Bynum: Because if there's going to be amendments they should occur in Committee, that's the only... Mr. Kawakami: And... Ms. Kawahara: If I could have him complete his sentences and statement, please continue before you were... Mr. Bynum: It's clear from discussion that there's three (3) votes to move it out of Committee, it's not clear that there won't be amendments next week and amendments... this has been our practice and the... respect that we giving all Committee members had amendments get worked on in Committee and so the concern quite frankly calling it out is that... is that you know the desire to move it out of Committee today is to take the management away from the ' Committee Chair to discuss amendments, that's the concern. ~ Ms. Kawahara: Thank you. If I could have... you spoken already, if I could get Mr. Kaneshiro. Mr. Kaneshiro: You know I'm not certain that that's the whole idea. I think what I'm hearing you know with my experience sitting on Committees, what I'm hearing is that, no matter if I put an amendment out today or next week or the following Committee meetings, I'm not going to get the vote because we already have three (3) of you that certainly wants the dogs on the whole path. So you know I just don't get it... so we can throw an amendment out, we can throw an amendment out next Committee meeting, or the following Committee meeting and by then the people are the ones that are suffering because it will come Page 11 of 17 . • • . to an end where they can't even walk their dog on the path because we're in here deliberating on whether you know we've got amendments on the floor or not, so if you look at it right now... you know I can count. There's one (1), two (2), three (3), that totally wants the whole path with dogs, I already express myself, I have some reservations about that. You know I'd like to look at some ways, there's no way I'm objective to dogs on the path at all, you know I'm a huge supporter of that, you all know that I several dogs, everybody knows that. I think what we're doing is we just holding this up and at the same end we still going to have the same results, which has to go to the full Council and deliberated on. Whether it's the Committee meeting in two (2) weeks from now, whether it's the Committee meeting four (4) from now, we'll be in the same situation like we are sitting here today. So you know it baffles me to hear that oh there's a strategy up here if we do that, do that, I mean... I'm amazed, I'm totally amazed but... Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Mr. Kaneshiro: But I'll go with the wish of the Committee. Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Mr. Kaneshiro: I'm just a member of the Committee. Ms. Kawahara: You wanted to speak again Councilmember Kawakami? Mr. Kawakami: Yeah. Thank you Madam Chair and with all due respect you know in an ideal world yeah you know what we'd have amendments iritroduced at the Committee level but you know I was... even though I'm a freshman Councilmember it's not like I haven't been watching and I've seen in the past many times amendments being introduced at the full Council level at the second reading level, that is the beauty of the democratic process, there are many opportunities to address the concerns of our residents, there are many opportunities and we are not compelled to hold back amendments at any one section I mean yes it would be ideal to do the work at the Committee level, I agree, I have no amendments at this time that I. wish to introduce, we cannot compel any other Councilmember to introduce amendments if they are not ready to introduce amendments but I think the one (1) thing I'm sure of is I'm ready to move forward on this bill, I'm ready to allow dogs and walkers with dogs, and bicyclist with dogs to be allowed to walk and that's just based on my personal experience like I said, it's not from judging any of the testimony that came across it's just that I'm on the path and i feel that you know it's a reasonable thing at this time, once again and this will be the final time that I talk but I'm ready to move forward, we have the support why we wouldn't move it forward now is a mystery. Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Thank you. Councilmember... Anyone else have discussion? Mr. Furfaro: No I stated my position... Ms. Kawahara: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: I'll wait for the full Council. Ms. Kawahara: Councilmember Chang. Page 12 of 17 . . ~ • DICKIE CHANG (COMMITTEE MEMBER): Thank you. Well first of all I want to thank everybody for being here and I think it's clear that everybody here supports the dogs on the path. My concern is quite honestly about various places on connectivity, in other words there are parts of the path that is obviously planned but it's not built presently so there are people in wildlife, conservationist, I mean people have concerns within the secluded areas of Nawiliwili or the backside of Hanama`ulu of what have you and I'm a little bit uncomfortable with the dogs at Lydgate and I would like to say overwhelming whether it's ninety-seven point two percent (97.2%) or ninety-four percent (94%) of everybody that loves the dogs and want to walk the dog, I do want to say that there is a group of people that may not come here to testify that are really afraid of dogs. Dogs whether they're adults, whether they had a bad experience as they were kids in fact I'm not going to mention any names but one of the several testimony that is out here, comes from a young lady that identifies herself has the first person that got bit on the dog path at the start of the dog path and still today, she is terrified on the path with friends, jogging, on a bike or what have you. So we need to be really and truly and humbly thinking about the others that also want to share the path and when I personally think about Lydgate and Kamalani Play Ground, Kamalani Bridge, you know the children, the kupuna, people crossing that particular path I know we're talking about the dog on the path but people in a very populated area such as Lydgate, I do have a concern. I do want to say I also do not own a dog, I am a pet owner of three (3) cats and I am thrilled that everybody wants to walk their dog, they want to exercise their dog, it saddens me when a dog is on a chain or a dog is in a kennel and they're not getting.that exercise. To me the dogs are so blessed and there's a real bonding of the owners with the dogs, how can I not say that I don't support the dogs on the path? But sensitive to the concerns of the Administration, the Parks and Recreation, our enforcers, they do have concerns within this area and concerns that we have to address. Now please keep in mind it's not as though we make a decision or make a vote and down the road you know other parts of the path does not open up, if it was a perfect world and I'll say this, I wish that the existing path that we are now allowing dogs would continue up North to Kuna Bay and have that connectivity that a lot of people have voiced their opinion. Now we had a lady here a little bit earlier, she's concerned as to where she parks, she liked the fact that the ground is flat and at any given time if she can make it past Kealia or anybody can, they can turn around at any given point, but that would be a nice added bonus to be able to go further North and enjoy as much of the path if it was a perfect world. I would be happy to support something as such but hearing from the Administration, the reason why they're giving us their recommendation is to be able to properly service, maintain and take care of the path itself so hopefully down the line we get additional rangers, hopefully down the line we can make you know adjustments as far as what gets approved or not because connectivity on this path, you know we have a lot of concerns with Wailua Beach for example, or that narrow portion by the Shell Restaurant so I want to say that I do support the dogs on the path but I do sincerely have a little bit of problem but I would like to move it into the full Council for discussion and that way we can have the Administration, Pm sure they already , talked numerous times with their... with the union but... in any way, shape, or 'I form I don't think anybody here is against having dogs on the path. And so I just want to say that yes I am ready to move on but I will say at this time I am not comfortable with every single link of the entire path at this point, thank you. Page 13 of 17 . ~ Ms. Kawahara: Councilmember Bynum. Mr. Bynum: Thank you Councilmember Chang for that statement. That's the kind of dialog I think we should be having in Committee. I want to say that I also when I mentioned that to Stephanie this morning, or our staff member when she had to check that one testimony as a... my mistake as a pro because I am moved by that testimony, I know that individual, I spoke with them and one if the reasons why I'm proud of... you know last term I introduced two (2) bills, one (1) to allow dogs on the path, the other one that strengthen the leash law, created nuisances... nuisances created by dogs, ordinance. And I'm very pleased that over the last eighteen (18) months there has been an increase in compliance with the leash law which is the primary and most important element for our community to make... to deal with those individuals who I fully recognize are intimidated by dogs and you know there is this part of the population and when we had our public testimony I didn't expect this but what I heard particularly from Mrs. Nakea was that how safe even dog people feel walking on the path because of that enforcement, because of a reduction of the amount of off-leash dogs if you recall her testimony was two (2) or three (3) times when she was walking her dog in the Homesteads other off-leash dogs had, she had her own traumatic experience so there's no question we have issues with dogs but the way communities deal with this issue is with the leash law and we still have a long ways to go and I'm thrilled that the Parks Rangers... you know I believed we heard a testimony that two (2) of those positions are going to be filled soon. And I think your concerns about Lydgate and other things it's just saying to me that we should keep this in Committee because that's where we work on it and that's where we have the discussion and if tliere are ongoing discussion meeting and amendments, we have another opportunity for Committee with still time to pass it out of Council but I don't want to... so what I want to do is right now and I checked with staff, I want to make a motion to defer. Mr. Castillo: I'm sorry Councilmember Bynum, you cannot make a motion to defer, you seconded the motion to approve. Ms. Kawahara: Doesn't a motion to defer override... Mr. Bynum: You see I just asked that question. Mr. Castillo: Somebody else can make the motion to defer. Ms. Kawahara: I'm the Chair yeah, he's not the Chair of the Committee. Mr. Castillo: No. Councilmember Bynum made the motion to... seconded the motion to approve. Mr. Bynum: So if I withdraw my seconded, then I can... Mr. Castillo: That is correct. Mr. Chang: Hold on, hold on for a second. Can I make the motion to defer? Mr. Castillo: Correct. Page 14 of 17 . • • Mr. Chang: I'd like to make a motion to defer. Mr. Bynum: Can I seconded it? Mr. Castillo: That is correct. Mr. Bynum: Seconded. Ms. Kawahara: So I would like to thank you... I'd like to thank my Committee members because... Mr. Kawakami: Point of order, there's no discussions... Ms. Kawahara: Oh okay. The bill is being deferred for with the instructions that the Committee members and all Councilmembers please come forward with the amendments and concerns for the next... Mr. Kawakami: Point of order again. There's no discussion on a motion to defer. Ms. Kawahara: Meeting... okay vote. So all in favor? (BYNUM, CHANG, KAWAHARA): Aye. Ms. Kawahara: All those against? (KANESHIRO, KAWAKAMI): No. Upon motion duly made by Councilmember Chang, and seconded by Councilmember Bynum, and carried by a 3:2 vote, Bill No. 2354 was deferred. Ms. Kawahara: With the majority being three (3) to two (2) the motion is deferred. And there's no discussion but I will be talking to the Committee members, thank you. Mr. Kaneshiro: So you recognized mine as a no vote? Ms. Kawahara: Yes. Three (3) to two (2). (inaudible) Ms. Kawahara: Even though we have the golf one? Okay I'd like to recess this Committee so Budget and Finance can begin theirs, thank you. ' There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 4:25 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 4:45 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Ms. Kawahara: Calling the Parks and Transportation Committee meeting back to order, I have all my Committee members here, if the Clerk could please read two, three, four, eight (2348). Bill No. 2348 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 19-3.2 AND SECTION 19-3.3 OF THE Page 15 of 17 . , . . ~ ~ i ~i Page 17 of 17