HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC 8-28-12 Minutes KAUAI PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
August 28, 2012
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the County of Kauai was called to order by
Chair Jan Kimura, at 9:21 a.m., at the Lihue Civic Center, Moikeha Building, in meeting room
2A-2B. The following Commissioners were present:
Mr. Hartwell Blake
Mr. Wayne Katayama
Mr. Jan Kimura
Ms. Camilla Matsumoto
Mr. Herman Texeira
Absent and excused:
Mr. Caven Raco
Discussion of the meeting, in effect, ensued:
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Kimura called the meeting to order at 9:21 a.m.
ROLL CALL
Planning Director Michael Dahilig noted that five commissioners were present and there
was quorum.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
On the motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Herman Texeira to
approve the agenda,the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
MINUTES of the meeting(s) of the Planning Commission
Regular Meetin of f July 24, 2012
On the motion made by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Herman Texeira to
accept the minutes of the July 24,2012 meeting, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote.
VA2012 Master Piles\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes OCT 0' 9 2012
RECEIPT OF ITEMS FOR THE RECORD
On the motion by Herman Texeira and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto to receive
all items for the record,the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Continued Agency Hearing (NONE)
New Agency Hearing: (NONE)
New Public Hearing (NONE)
All public testimony pursuant to HRS 92
Mr. Dahilig stated that Mr. Sherman Shiraishi is signed up for testimony on the agenda
item relating to the Department of Water.
Chair Kimura informed Mr. Shiraishi that they are asking for public testimony on all
agenda items at this time, but he would have the opportunity to speak when they discuss the
application.
There was no public testimony.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Status Reports (NONE)
Director's Report(s) for Project(s) Scheduled for Agency Hearing on 9/11/12 (NONE)
Shoreline Setback Activity Determination
Commissioner Texeira with concurrence from Commissioner Matsumoto requested
moving item G.3.b. pertaining to SSCR-2013-4 and SSD-2013-8 out of the consent calendar to
new business for discussion.
2
VA2012 Master Files\Commissions\P1aElning\Minutes\2012-8-28,Planning Commission Minutes
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2013-2 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD-2013-2 for a shoreline activity determination, Tax Map Key 5-4-02:011,
Princeville Kauai for acceptance by the Commission=Joan Frank.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2013-5 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD-2013-9 for a shoreline activity determination, Tax Map Key 2-6-005:014,
Koloa Kauai for acceptance by the Commission=Douglas Roland c%Albert Fernandez, Kuhio
Shores Management Office.
Director's Report pertaining to thi§matter.
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2013-6 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD-2013-10 for a shoreline activity determination Tax Map Key 5-8--008:031,
Wainiha Kauai for acceptance by the Commission=Robert Rucker.
Director's Report pertaining to this matter.
On the motion by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Herman Texeira to approve
the consent calendar, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
EXECUTIVE SESSION (NONE)
GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS
On the motion by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Herman Texeira to move
general business matters to the end of the agenda, the motion carried by unanimous voice
vote.
COMMUNICATION (For Action) (NONE)
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Subdivision
Commissioner Texeira presented the subdivision committee report.
3
V12012 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Final Subdivision Action:
The following was approved unanimously, 3-0:
5-2010-12=State DLNR, Land Division, 2-lot Subdivision, TMK: 4-6-003:04, 10, 21, 34
Tentative Subdivision Extension Requests_
The following was deferred to the 9/11/12 meeting, unanimously, 3-0:
5-99-45 Allen Family LLCIMoloaa.Bay, Ventures, LLC/Three Stooges, LLC
12-lot Subdivision, TMK: 4-3-003:001
The following were approved unanimously, 3-0:
5-2006-27=Grove Farm Properties, Inc., 26-lot Subdivision, TMK: 3-3-003:041
5-2009-13=Grove Farm Properties, Inc., 57-lot Subdivision, TMK: 3-3-003;041
5-2009-14=Grove Farm Properties, Inc., 63-lot Subdivision, TMK: 3-3-003:041
5-2009-15=Grove Farm Properties, Inc., 109-lot Subdivision, TMK: 3-3-003:041
5-2009-21=Grove Farm Properties, Inc., 21-lot Subdivision,TMK: 3-3-003:041
Commissioner Katayama questioned the deferral of 5-99-45.
Mr. Dahilig stated that it is unusual for the Department to be proposing denial of an
extension, and they felt it best to provide a two week deferral for further discussion before the
Committee.
Commissioner Katayama questioned if specific ambiguity would be cleared up in the two
week period.
Mr. Dahilig stated that they would be able to bring forward more information concerning
the proposal before the Board of Water and discussions of what is being requested, and other
types of issues concerning affordable housing for more clarity.
Commissioner Blake questioned if the Department expects that the additional information
would buttress their recommendation.
Mr. Dahilig stated that it would be in tandem with the statement in the subdivision report
concerning their issues with self-induced delays versus delays caused by agencies that are out of
the applicant's control.
On the motion by Camilla Matsumoto and seconded by Hartwell Blake to approve
the subdivision report, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
4
V A2012 Master files\Commissions\Planning\Mnutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (For Action)
Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2013-1,Use Permit U-2013-1 for improvements to the
existing Ornellas Tank site in Kapahi which includes construction of two Q 0.5 million a� lion
(MG) concrete reservoirs and drilling of an exploratory well and Variance Permit V-2013-1 to
deviate from the land coverage requirements within the Agriculture District, pursuant to Section
8-7.6 of the CZO on a parcel situated at the Kaapuni Road/Kawaihau road intersection further
identified as Tax Map Key 4-6-011:003 and affecting a total area of 0.836 acres= County o
Kauai, Department of Water. [Director's Report received 7/24/12,hearing closed 8/14/12.1
Staff Planner Dale Cua stated that the Department has prepared a supplement to the
Director's report. The Director's report was transmitted to the Planning Commission at the
meeting held on August 13, 2012. At that meeting the immediate neighbor who was opposed to
the project expressed concerns regarding the aesthetics and the visual and drainage impacts to the
property. After considering the testimony,the Department offers the following conditions that
serve to supplement the requirements in the Director's report dated July 18, 2012 to mitigate the
neighbor's concerns:
• Prior to building permit and construction plan approval,the applicant shall work closely
with the Department of Public Works to address and mitigate any drainage impacts to the
surrounding parcels. The measures shall be incorporated into the plan approvals.
• The applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Planning Department a
landscape plan composed of Native species or species common to the area to assist in
screening proposed water tanks and integrate tht site with its surroundings.
• The final condition incorporates requirements of the Department of Health which
addresses the noise and health concerns regarding the proposal.
Glen Koyama representing the Department of Water clarified that the proposed well is an
exploratory well as opposed to a production well to test if there is sufficient ground water to
provide a sustainable yield for a permanent production well. If the results are positive,then
efforts would go into planning design and constructing a production well. With the production
well there would be another environmental assessment and all related permits would be obtained.
If the results are negative then the well would be capped and abandoned.
Commissioner Texeira questioned if there is a Plan B and if other potential sites were in
mind.
Mr. Koyama stated that they are looking for proper pressure zones in this area, but they
have looked at a possible site several hundred feet mauka of the existing well.
Commissioner Texeira asked for clarification that this pressure zone area is important for
developing future water sources for the Kawaihau area.
Mr. Koyama stated that it is very important that they consider the pressure zone because
it determines how the water is fed into the system and reduces the pressure in the system to
supply the customers.
5
VA2012 Master Filcs\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Commissioner Texeira noted that the report indicates a deficit in this area.
Mr. Koyama stated that there is a deficit in terms of storage. They are proposing two half
million gallon reservoirs on the site. It is an odd configuration so they were constrained by
design options and could not go in with a one million gallon reservoir. They need this source to
meet the projected demand for the area.
Commissioner Blake stated that with the concerns expressed by the residents in the area
and the poisons that were used to kill nematodes during pineapple production, he questioned if
soil studies were done to ensure that will not affect the water. He referenced the Heptachloride
that was in pineapple that were fed to cows causing concerns of contamination in dairy products.
It is a serious concern and there is no sense exploring a well if there are soil issues with
insecticides that remain in the soil.
Mr. Bill Eddy,the Deputy Manager at the Department of Water stated that they have
done a complete environmental assessment that did not involve an in-depth soil analysis for
contaminants, but the drilling of the well would include testing of the ground water. The ground
water they are aiming for is in the range of 300 feet below the ground surface. The ground
elevation is about 310 feet above sea level, so a successful well would have a water level that
floats slightly above mean sea level which would put a layer of soil of several hundred feet
between the ground surface and the ground water. They would do extensive testing of the water
in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Commissioner Blake questioned if they will also be testing for pesticides and herbicides
given the surrounding farming around the well.
Mr. Eddy stated that there is a long list of chemicals that are tested. Every year they print
out a consumer confidence report that is mailed out to customers listing the chemicals that are
tested for in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. Generally the herbicides and
pesticides are in the organic contaminant category and they do extensive testing for those
chemicals. In general the chemicals that are applied are engineered and designed to have a short
life and quickly break down. They are not long lasting chemicals.
Commissioner Blake questioned if there is a high concentration of chemicals, but a good
production of water, if it would be converted to agricultural water.
Mr. Eddy stated that it is possible but the cost of pumping the water for ag purposes
might be prohibitive.
Commissioner Blake asked for clarification that ag water is at a lower rate.
Mr. Eddy stated that there are general use rates and ag use rates for the same distribution
system. They sell water for ag at a reduced rate, but it is high quality drinking water. There may
be another option of treating contaminated ground water that is done on other the islands.
6
VA2012 Master Files\Commissions\Piaii�iijig\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Commissioner Blake stated that he would hate to waste money on water they are not
going to use.
Chair Kimura questioned what decision would be made if the chemicals that the
neighboring farmers are using will affect the water. He expressed concern that the farmers
would be asked to stop.
Mr. Koyama stated that the only thing they can do is comply with the Department of
Health regulations in terms of providing good quality water to the customers.
Mr. Dahilig stated that the applicant is requesting to potentially provide safe drinking
potable water. He noted that farmers are also required under environmental protection agency
and other regulations to use pesticides and herbicides that are within the bounds of safe
distribution. How and where those items percolate through the subsurface to drinking water
table are subject to safe drinking water Federal monitoring by the Department of Water. It
would become a two sided issue where farmers can't use certain types of chemicals.
Chair Kimura questioned if farmers would be penalized for using chemicals 40 years ago
in the pineapple days.
Mr. Dahilig stated that they wouldn't necessarily be penalized because it comes as a
consequence of exploratory drilling. They are asking to drill a well, stating that they have looked
at the hydrology. The exploratory well is to determine if what is drawn can be used for potable
purposes. He didn't feel there is any penalty that would happen because the regulation on what a
farmer can and cannot do as a consequence of spraying chemicals would come from Federal
regulations.
Chair Kimura questioned the status of the Commission's request for the Department to
work with the farmers.
Mr. Dahilig stated that the Department tried to incorporate as much as they felt
appropriate based on the August 20t1, letter that was appended to the supplemental report,
fleshing out the concerns of Mr. Shiraishi's clients,the Yamamotos. There is still some
discussion that the representative may want to bring before the Commission.
Commissioner Blake stated that there has been a lot of talk about sustainability and that
farmers markets to hotels are malting an effort to use locally grown produce. He would be very
hesitant to stop or impede a farming operation because a new well is going in where their farms
have always been. Providing potable water is as important as growing food, but since the farm
has nowhere else to go, and the Water Department has other places to go, he would be hesitant to
vote for something that would impede an ongoing farming o�eration. He hopes it will be worked
out to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.
Commissioner Matsumoto agreed with Commissioner Blake.
7
VA2012 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Commissioner Texeira stated that the development of the well is very important to the
area and the cost benefit would have to be weighed against the whole community, He
questioned what happened to the Moloaa farmers operation when they created the agricultural
subdivision.
Commissioner Blake noted that conditions would need to be unfavorable to make
someone move their family and equipment.
Commissioner Texeira stated that it was an opportunity and they created a treatment plant
for the papaya operation. He agreed that it is an important ag parcel, but he felt that things can
be worked out.
Commissioner Blake stated that this family has been there for generations.
Mr. Eddy stated that sustainability is important to the Department of Water and is a
priority. One of the reasons for drilling the well is to try to reduce energy consumption.
Currently they have to pump water to a high elevation, and then drop it back down. The well
would allow them to pump up to the elevation of the tank site. He felt they can work with the
surrounding farmers and they have been neighbors with the existing tank for at least 50 years.
They have been able to coexist and can continue to coexist without causing any changes to the
farming activities.
Mr. Koyama noted that the Department of Water has a very stringent water quality
requirement. Any signs of contamination would be detected through the continuous monitoring
program to ensure public safety,but they have no authorization to tell the neighbors what they
cannot do. It is within their power to ensure quality water to the public.
Commissioner Blake questioned how far a cesspool or septic system would have to be
from a well.
Mr. Eddy stated that there is a 1000 foot rule that applies to any new septic system. He
noted that the ones that are currently in place are fine.
Mr. Sherman Shiraishi, representing the adjoining land owner Gary Yamamoto, and
members of his family that also own adjoining parcels, stated that the Department of Water has
been very receptive and open and they have met to discuss their concerns. The current reservoir
feeds from the top, creating a lot of noise. His client has stated he is willing to live with the
noise and has hung a picture of a water fall. The reservoir was stated to be 18 feet high, but is
actually 22 feet high, however they are willing to live with that. Their only concern is that this is
a third generation fanning family and they want to ensure that the proposed development will not
constrain the Yamamoto family from continuing their agricultural activities. Technology is such
that pesticides and other chemicals are strictly regulated and the Yamamoto faanily abides by
best practices as put out by manufacturers, As conditions change and standards evolve, they just
want to be sure that they will not be penalized or constrained from their continued farming
activities.
1
8
VA2012 Master files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Commissioner Katayama questioned the location of the reservoir on the map.
Mr. Shiraishi stated that the reservoir would be at the corner of Kaapuni and Kawaihau
Roads. There is an existing reservoir on the third parcel and the Water Department proposes to
install two additional reservoirs.
Commissioner Katayama questioned the drainage issues that were addressed in the letter.
Mr. Shiraishi stated that when he met with the Department of Water representatives they
indicated that all drainage is going to be diverted to Kapahi Road which satisfies the Yamamoto
family. The Department has stated that they are willing to revoke and cancel any rights to
drainage easements on the Yamamoto parcels.
Commissioner Katayama questioned the ditch easements on the map.
Mr. Shiraishi stated that he did not know in whose favor the easements run, but the
Department of Water has indicated to him that if they have any rights to those easements, they
are willing to waive their rights to use those them.
Commissioner Blake questioned the location of the farm from the yellow outlined areas
on the map.
Mr. Cua stated that based on the discussions the farm is either on parcel 2, directly
adjacent to the water tank site on parcel 3, or on parcel 140.
Mr. Shiraishi provided an aerial photo showing the majority of the parcel in agriculture.
Commissioner Texeira questioned the location of the home.
Mr. Shiraishi stated that the home is on parcel 2. There is another house on 138 and one
on 148 and the rest is the farm.
Commissioner Matsumoto questioned the type of farming.
Mr. Shiraishi stated that there is truck farming,papayas, orchards, and fruits. They make
a living from their active farm.
Commissioner Texeira questioned the status of the 20 acres operation leased in Moloaa.
Mrs. Yamamoto stated that at one time all the farmers were experiencing difficulty due to
Blite disease that wiped out the tomatoes. The State opened the Moloaa farms and her husband
was instrumental in gathering the farmers to Moloaa to allow their land to rest. They planted
papaya in Moloaa, but they had to borrow a lot of money to operate. They had to farm hard to
repay the loans and they were paying$500 a month for water from the well. They planted
papaya, but they had a hard time marketing them. Her husband was appointed to the papaya
committee and they promoted them in Japan. They also planted truck crops but Kauai couldn't
9
VA2012 Master Files\Commissions\PlanninglMinutes\2012-$-28 Planning Commission Minutes
take the amount they used to sell, so they used to sell produce on Oahu bidding for the Army and
the Navy. As time went by the plant didn't do well and their land was in Ferrell long enough so
they left Moloaa and returned home.
Commissioner Texeira questioned what happened to the land.
Mrs. Yamamoto stated that it was all leased land. Some farmers purchased the land after
the plant closed down, but her family had their own land.
Commissioner Katayama stated that the minimization of an urban encroachment or urban
impact on the development of resources needs to be addressed to ensure that the farmers are able
to maintain their activity unencumbered. He questioned whet kind of understanding has been
reached with the farming community in assembling the project. He questioned if the reservoir
was for post water in surplus of the tanks for water going into the tanks.
Mr. Eddy stated that most of the watez sources in the Department of Water are from
wells, and them there is the storage component that stores source water. Then there are
distribution and transmission lines. They are proposing to construct 1 million gallons of storage
mainly to serve existing critical customers, including Kapaa High School and Elementary, and
Mahelona Hospital. Currently they are in a deficit of storage in that system. The additional tanks
would eliminate the deficit and provide for some growth in the future.
Commissioner Katayama clarified that the reservoirs are tanks.
Mr. Eddy clarified that that they are tanks. They are reinforced, circular shaped, concrete
enclosed reservoirs.
Commissioner Katayama questioned what assgrances the neighbors have for quiet
enjoyment. He felt that rapport should be developed with the farmers.
Mr. Koyama stated that the project is the development of a utility to serve the
community. Because it is not a land use that generates impacts related to growth or
development there's no specific zoning designation. It becomes a use that is allowed in the
different zoning districts through the use permit process. Because it's not a residential or
commercial use, you don't look at uses as either compatible or incompatible. How they
determine compatibility with the community is through construction. They apply mitigative
measures to reduce any conflicts in uses, and they apply best management practices during the
construction process to mitigate impacts of dust, noise, etc.
Commissioner Katayama stated that he is more focused on the right to farm. He
questioned the proposal if any development or encroachment impinges their ability to farm..
Mr. Koyama stated that farming is another use that the utility serves.
Commissioner Katayama stated that without the utility,there would not be any of those
activities and the area is in deficit so they need to move forward with the increase in capacity.
10
VA2012 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
That in itself is encouraging an urban usage of the land. He stated that the Yamamoto has been
the classical farming community that they want to preserve and expand. He questioned what
they propose in terms of policy.
Mr. Koyama stated that the general plan takes the different activities and uses into
consideration and establishes goals and objectives. The general plan has a goal on sustainability
and promoting agricultural activity. The policies are developed to sustain agriculture in the
County. The Department of Water has a 2020 plan that is designed to serve the uses and the
goals of the General Plan. The Department of Water provides a special rate for agricultural use
of water.
Chair Kimura thanked the Department of Water for working with the farmers and it
shows good character.
Mr. Dahilig stated that there is an additional condition based on the discussion that has
ensued before the Commission.
Mr. Cua stated that condition nuinber 12 would read that the applicant is made aware that
intensive agriculture in the vicinity of the project site which may entail dust, active pesticide use
and other nuisances associated with agriculture uses will occur. The approval of this permit shall
not limit or prevent the continuation of intensive agricultural activities within the immediate
surroundings.
Mr. Koyama stated that they had no problems with the condition that was read.
Mr. Dahilig clarified that the applicant has read and has no objections to'the other
conditions.
Mr. Koyama stated that they have reviewed the conditions and are okay with those as
well.
Commissioner Matsumoto questioned if all of the five points in the August 20t1' letter
from Mr. Shiraishi have been addressed.
Mr. Cua noted that all of the concerns have been addressed.
Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung stated that a motion would be needed to approve,
approve with modifications or deny. He questioned if the Department is incorporating the
conditions.
Mr. Dahilig noted that the additional conditions have been incorporated into the
Director's report so no particular amendment is needed to the main motion.
Commissioner Texeira questioned if the farmers had any comments.
11
VA2012 Master Files\commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Shiraishi on.behalf of t1le adjoining land owner stated that condition number 12
addresses their number one concern in their August 20i" letter and they approve of the additional
language.
On the motion by Wayne Katayama and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto to
approve Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2013-1,Use Permit U-2013-1 for improvements to
the existing Ornellas Tank site in Kapahi the with conditions 1-12 as written and orally
stated, the motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
NEW B SI3 NESS
Shoreline Setback Activity Determination
Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2013-4 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD-2013-8 for a shoreline activity determination, Tax Map Key 4-3-009.002,
Kapaa, Kauai, for acceptance by the Commission=Dileep G. Bal,
Directors Report pertaining to this matter.
Staff Planner Jody Galinato stated that this is for a concrete block fence with a gate
adjacent to the house on the side and mauka of the house along the road and a vinyl fence along
the side of the house to the property line. The applicant is off island.
Commissioner Texeira expressed concern about the view plane toward the ocean. He
noted there is nothing in the Ordinance to prevent it, but felt that the Commission should be
concerned about view plane being blocked to the ocean.
Mr. Dahilig noted that the requirement under law for the Department's analysis is riot the
development. He stated that the concerns being raised are addressed more in special
management area analysis. What is being presented is a calculation of whether what is being
proposed meets the setback requirements and where the line needs to be drawn. No comment or
analysis is provided with respect to the type of development that is proposed when doing these
types of determinations.
Commissioner Texeira emphasized that he understands,but he wanted to bring public
attention that they should be concerned about things like this.
Chair Kimura questioned if future discussions in the consent calendar can be discussed in
the consent calendar.
Mr. Dahilig clarified that any discussions need to be pulled out of the consent calendar.
Commissioner Texeira questioned the height limitations to the height of the fence
proposal.
12
VA2012 Master Filcs\Commissions\Plaiming\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Dahilig stated that the activity before the Commission is to determine whether the
line has been properly set. He stated that they still need to go through permitting.
Chair Kimura stated that they are discussing the setback of the fence.
Mr. Dahilig clarified that the discussion over the actual fence versus what they are
proposing and where it is placed is different.
On the motion by Wayne Katayama and seconded by Camilla Matsumoto to accept
the Shoreline Setback Commission Review SSCR-2013-4 and Shoreline Setback
Determination SSD-2013-8 for a shoreline activity determination,the motion carried by
unanimous voice vote.
GENERAL BUSINESS MATTERS
Update on recently enacted amendments to Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 92,
re a_g rdinp Hawaii's Sunshine Law. This update will briefly discuss Act 177 (which creates two
new permitted interactions) and Act 201 (which allows boards to conduct meetings by
"interactive conference technology"), [Deferred 8/28/12.1
Deputy County Attorney Ian Jung stated that the Legislature recently passed two acts in
the last session. Act 177 with regard to the Sunshine Law in terms of what types of authorized
permitted interactions are allowed for Commissioners dealing with other Commissioners at
presentations or informational meetings. Act 201 allows for interactive conference technology.
He will have the new Sunshine Law guide emailed.
Chair Kimura noted that they do not yet have their ipads, so they would be unable to have
it with them when they come to meetings.
Mr. Dahilig stated that the ipads have been purchased,they are installing pdf software
and will be doing trial runs in the next month or two.
Chair Kimura stated they were being purchased in June and it is now three months later.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that Act 177 addresses cancelled meetings due to
lack of quorum or natural disasters. They are able to now receive testimony and presentations
and allow for the public to testify without actually having a quorum. There can be brief
discussion, but there has to be discussion at a next duly scheduled and noticed meeting. They
can create like a sub-committee report that they bring back to the full Commission for discussion
and deliberation following the canceled meeting.
Chair Kimura noted that he does not agree with the Act.
13
V A2012 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Commissioner Texeira questioned if the people testifying would be able to testify again
at the next scheduled meeting.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that by functional law they would be able to testify
again at the next public meeting, but they would be able to accommodate those who took the day
off to testify and present materials. The Commission can collect the materials for the record and
carry the materials over to the next meeting. Act 177 expands the rule of two. Less than a
quorum could attend an informational or presentational meeting, but the caveat is that it cannot
be directed for or set up specifically for the Commission. Informational meetings or
presentations on matters relating to official board business can include meetings with another
entity such as another Commission, Legislative hearings, a convention or seminar or community
meeting, provided that the meeting or presentation is not specifically or exclusively organized for
or directed for members of the board. It can't be set up for the Commission to specifically have
three people sit and have and informational briefing. The other facet is that if there is an
informational presentation held in which three members are attending and it relates to official
board business, they need to collect the materials and bring it before the full Commission at a
next duly noticed meeting, presenting a report and then discussed before the full commission
before any action is taken.
Commissioner Texeira questioned if two Commissioners can meet informally.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the rule of two is that they cannot agree to vote.
Commissioner Texeira questioned if they can now include a third person.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that it can include a third person, but it cannot be a
meeting set up or directed for a meeting between the three Commissioners. They would halve to
be attending a separate meeting of another entity, Legislative meeting, or community meeting.
Commissioner Texeira questioned if Commissioners would be able to have lunch.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that they can have lunch, but they just can't discuss
business, because that would not be considered a hearing or community meeting. He noted that
the rule of two remains the same, but if there is a community meeting or informational meeting,
then more than two, but less than quorum can attend,and they can deliberate and discuss, but
would have to bring the materials back and report to the full Commission.
Commissioner Texeira questioned a site inspection.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that because it's a meeting for the Commission, the
new law could not be used. They could do a full Commission site visit, they could also set up a
permitted interactive group which would allow a committee to do a site visit. They would need
to avoid serial communication. With the new Act 202,the both venues would have to be open to
the public. If testimony is received, technically the written testimony would need to be at both
sites. If not, they would not be allowed to take action.
14
V:\20I2 Master files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Mr. Dahilig stated that the major change is that they no longer need to set up video
conferencing. The previous law was that they were allowed to have satellite meetings, but now
all that is required is voice communication that facilitates an easier setup. If a Commissioner is
on another island laid still wanted to participate in the meeting, they would have to notice both
sites and testimony would need to be at both sites.
Commissioner Texeira questioned the use conference technology if there was a regularly
scheduled Commission meeting with no quorum and there was a Commissioner was on another
island.
Mr. Dahilig stated that there is an emergency provision on the interactive communication.
Generally you would notice a-meeting, but if there is a last minute emergency where perhaps a
bridge washes out,then he believes they could utilize conference technology to maintain
quorum.
Deputy County Attorney Jung noted that a board member with a disability that limits or
impairs the member's ability to physically attend the meeting may participate in a board meeting
from a location not accessible to the public. He stated that it would be limiting in terms of
someone with an actual disability. He noted that an act of God may not be covered.
Mr. Dahilig stated that if a bridge washes out and a Commissioner is unable to get out.,
they would want to notice that as an available site with interactive audio technology.
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that he thinks that they could move to amend the
agenda to include that under an unanticipated event.
Commissioner Blake asked for clarification that if a Commissioner is on another island, it
would have to be noticed that he is on the Big Island and members of the public would be
allowed to go there.
Mr. Dahilig stated that the intent would be to provide Commissions and Boards more
options to be able to obtain quorum and hold meetings. If two members were out of state and
one was on the Big Island, they could still hold a meeting.
Commissioner Blake questioned why they would need to extend the meeting all over the
world.
Chair Kimura noted that the ipads would have Skype ability.
Mr. Dahilig stated that they are only options. He noted that it is not necessarily a change
as to how they intend to do business. He noted that if airlines have to shut down and there is no
access with a Commissioner on another island, then audio technology could be used to still
conduct business and move things forward. The reason the sites would be open and available to
the public is because you would want to treat it the same as the Board room.
Chair Kimura requested an email with all the necessary information.
15
V:\2012 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes
Deputy County Attorney Jung stated that the Office of Information Practices has updated
their pamphlets that they issue as guidance for interpretation. He stated that the details come
when the laws are implemented. They will wait to see what the first opinion letter will be like,
but in the meantime he will email the pamphlets.
Commissioner Matsumoto thanked the Deputy County Attorney for the update. It is
important to know the changes so they can help serve the public.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Dahilig noted that they anticipate the subdivision agenda on September I 1 h to be
lengthy and one item will probably involve a lot of discussion, so they may start a little earlier
than usual.
Commissioner Texeira requested the packet ahead of time so they have time to review the
information.
Mr. Dahilig stated that they will try to get the information out as soon as possible.
Chair Kimura announced that the following Planning Commission meeting will be held at
9:00 a.m. or shortly thereafter at the Lihue Civic Center, Tuesday, September 11, 2012.
ADJOURNMENT
The Commission adjourned the meeting at 11:16 a.m.
Respe ally submitted by:
rr
DukYNakamatszu,
Commission Support Clerk
16
W20I2 Master Files\Commissions\Planning\Minutes\2012-8-28 Planning Commission Minutes