HomeMy WebLinkAbout 07/17/2013 Council Minutes COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 17, 2013
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua'i was called to
order by the Council Chair Jay Furfaro at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street,
Room 201, Lihu'e, Kaua'i, on Wednesday, July 17, 2013 at 9:10 a.m., after which the
following members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Tim Bynum
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Ross Kagawa
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. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
PUBLIC COMMENT.
Pursuant to Council Rule 13(e), members of the public shall be allowed a total of
eighteen (18) minutes on a first come, first served basis to speak on any agenda
item. Each speaker shall be limited to three (3) minutes at the discretion of the
Chair to discuss the agenda item and shall not be allowed additional time to speak
during the meeting. This rule is designed to accommodate those who cannot be
present throughout the meeting to speak when the agenda items are heard. After
the conclusion of the eighteen (18) minutes, other members of the public shall be
allowed to speak pursuant to Council Rule 12(e).
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Is there anyone in
the audience who wishes to speak now on any agenda item? Come right up, Sir.
There are four (4) of you there. You have three (3) minutes. This is a three (3)
minute period with no questions and answers.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you, Jay. For the record, Glenn
Mickens. I have a short testimony because I know there are a number of other
people who want to talk. I know we only have eighteen (18) minutes.
Chair Furfaro: You have three (3) minutes.
Mr. Mickens: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: Start now, the clock is running.
Mr. Mickens: If it is less than three (3)...
COUNCIL MEETING 2 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: You have three (3).
Mr. Mickens: Right.
Chair Furfaro: Please start.
Mr. Mickens: I want to reassert my previous testimonies to
express my full support of the Office of the County Auditor and Ernie Pasion. I just
hope that this Council and our Administration will do everything in their power to
support our Auditor and his Office in their quest to point out corrective actions that
need to be taken to put more efficiency in our Government. Since budget cuts have
seriously impaired the ability of this Office to perform audits, I implore this Council
to restore the cuts and let Mr. Pasion and his Staff continue their fine work that
they were tasked to do. With your permission, Jay, I have a testimony from John
Hoff that he would like me to read for him.
Chair Furfaro: You can use your time any way you want.
Mr. Mickens: Okay. This is from Mr. John Hoff. "When I
first read this governing body and our present Mayoral Administration is
attempting to cut the budget of our newly established Auditors Office, I truly could
believe it. Any public agency or private sector individual that dares to get too close
to the truth in our plantation state is subject to reeducation. Needless to say, I am
in full support of the entire Auditor's Office, Ernie Pasion, and the entire Staff.
They have performed in a highly professional and honest manner and reporting the
facts in their very short existence, six (6) audits. In closing, I would like to point out
one (1) very disturbing point. I was born in the Nation that embraced three (3)
basic principles; life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. In today's world,
newborns are delivered into a corrupt plantation mentality based upon money,
power, and politics where the truth cannot be tolerated. The voters of Kaua`i voted
for the Auditor's Office. Does that mean anything to this governing body? Do not
disenfranchise our vote again by repeating the `Ghana Kaua`i Property Tax
incident. God help our children and grandchildren because politicians will certainly
not. Aloha, John Hoff." Thank you, Jay.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Next speaker, please
SHERWOOD HARA: Chairman and members of the Council, I am
here to speak in support of Mr. Ernie Pasion, our County Auditor. He has fulfilled
his role and his duties...
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, you need to introduce yourself for
the record.
Mr. Hara: I am sorry. My name is Sherwood Hara.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Hara.
Mr. Hara: I am a citizen of the County of Kaua`i.
Mr. Pasion has fulfilled his responsibilities and duties as the County Auditor. Let
me put it this way—with the integrity and honesty that we, people of the County of
Kaua`i, can expect and should expect from any auditor, Mr. Pasion has delivered
that. I am here to speak for him in support of him because I realize that you are
COUNCIL MEETING 3 JULY 17, 2013
going to have an Executive Session following the Council Meeting to address some
of the things about Mr. Pasion's performance and your expectations. I am here to
bring focus on your Executive Session. The question is, "What do you expect from
the Auditor's Office?" I would assume that you would expect honesty, integrity, and
truth. I feel that this is what the people of the County of Kaua`i would expect from
you, from the County Auditor's Office, and from any elected office that or any
executive office in the County. I come here to put focus on that, that when you go
into Executive Session, that you keep focus on what Mr. Pasion has brought to the
County Auditor's Office. I expect and I hope that he will continue to be allowed to
continue his role as the County Auditor because he has brought exactly those
characteristics to the Office.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Mr. Hara. Next speaker, please.
JOE ROSA: Good morning, members of the Council. For
the record, Joe Rosa. I sent out a letter with three (3) words that I think should be
considered overall for Mr. Ernie Pasion as our County Auditor. In 2008 when this
Office was given and established by way of the voters on a Charter Amendment,
Mr. Pasion applied for it. In doing so at that time, there was a lot of vigor in him to
do that or get into that Office. When he went to work or came to work, he put a lot
of time and he was very enthusiastic with his work to get it done and do the things
that would better his work, his Department, and the County of Kaua`i. I emphasize
that; the County of Kaua`i and the people of Kaua`i. It took a lot of courage, not only
courage, but guts to uncover a lot of the things that he did in his audits that I have
read so far...six (6) of them. I think it deserves merit to show the honesty and
integrity of Mr. Ernie Pasion in his Office. Sure, he is rocking some boats and some
people are being affected, but that is where honesty comes in. In an editorial from
last week Friday, it says the title—and the Mayor seems to be that he cannot stand
the heat. If you cannot stand the heat, he gets out of the kitchen. That shows and
proves that people are following the County Administration and the Office of Ernie
Pasion. I just hope that those audits that were printed would be made public so the
people can see how valuable the Auditor's Office has been in uncovering a lot of
discrepancies, such things as the evaporation of gasoline, which was ridiculous at
first. Then it was made and found out. It was some way along the "local boy style."
All in all, I also would like to leave you with two (2) words when thinking of doing
away with Mr. Pasion's Office; those are the words of "just cause." It cannot be
anything to do with personalities with any of the members of the Council or the
County Administration. It has to be with just cause.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. That is your three (3) minutes,
Joe.
Mr. Rosa: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Next speaker, please.
JOSE BULATAO, JR.: Good morning Councilmembers. My name is
Jose Bulatao, Jr., a retired dinosaur from Kekaha. Clarity, transparency, and
accountability—were these not the very reasons why the reestablishment of a
County Auditor's position came to be in response to a mandate expressed by the
voting constituency of Kauai? We have been very fortunate, indeed, to have in our
midst Ernesto "Ernie" Pasion, who has performed his duties exceedingly well with
focused intensity. In spite of having such a person and such a Department, there
appears to be a movement to diminish its role and its purpose. Would it not be to
COUNCIL MEETING 4 JULY 17, 2013
the advantage of our public officials and the various Departments in which their
jobs are performed to be monitored and/or reviewed and to see where and how
performance levels may be improved and to analyze and determine whether
cost-effective and savings may be realized? The age of information has made it
possible for the public to access information with greater ease through the
availability of tech systems and devices so readily available. With that said, it is
crucially essential to retain Ernie as Auditor with the appropriate support of
staffing positions needed as requested. It is as pure and simple as that. Thank you
very much.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Next speaker, please. Come
right up, Ken.
KEN TAYLOR: Good morning, Chair and members of the
Council. My name is Ken Taylor. I turned in some comments that consist of a
letter to the editor of The Garden Island that was published on July 15th, a letter
that I E-mailed to the Mayor and you Councilmembers on Julyl3th, and also
includes an op-ed piece from Walter Lewis that was published in The Garden
Island on the 12th of July. I will leave that stand as my comments in reference to
the Auditor's Office. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Come right up because you are
the last speaker.
ELAINE DUNBAR: Elaine Dunbar for the record. I just want to
point out a couple of things from the letter from Walter Lewis that kind of stood out.
In June, the Association of Local Government Auditors completed a Peer Review of
the Kaua`i Auditor's Office and concluded that "its systems were operating
effectively and in compliance with Government Standards." Apparently, the Kaua`i
Administration did not take kindly to the fact that some of its operations and
practices were being criticized by the six (6) audits that were made. As Mr. Rosa
stated a very important point, the decision should be based on "just cause," whether
or not he is reinstated or the funds are reinstated. This County has had no problem
giving tens of thousands of dollars to the Marathon, a private business. I was just
wondering how that is working out for you guys? Hundreds of thousands of dollars
are spent for outside Legal Counsel and maybe an Auditor could have curtailed
some of the bleeds. The Office of the County Auditor is about efficiency and
streamlined government. The State in the paper today—I do not know if anybody
has had a chance to read it but they just discovered that over two hundred fifty
million dollars ($250,000,000) was wasted. The Auditor found that. JoAnn, at one
time you told me—you made the comment, "Elaine, you just do not like
Government." You could not be further from the truth. What I do appreciate is
good Government. In order to have that, I do not see how you can without an
Auditor. I am asking you to please reinstate the funds necessary to keep his Office
running with whatever he needs. This is critical. Thanks.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Carole, you are the last of the
speakers. We had seven (7) speakers today but we still have three (3) minutes left.
CAROLE NACION: Thank you. Good morning, Chair and
members of the Council. This is hana hou for me. I have been here before and that
was a testimony for myself. Today, I am here to speak on behalf of our parish, Holy
Cross. You have heard my testimony on Mr. Pasion's character of integrity,
honesty, and respect. Today you look in the audience and we have some
COUNCIL MEETING 5 JULY 17, 2013
parishioners of Holy Cross parish, including our Pastor, Father Edison Pamintuan.
That is how strong we are in supporting Ernie because he has been very
instrumental and very important to our parish as a parishioner, and as a person
himself. You may wonder because I mentioned "integrity, honesty, and respect."
You must be wondering, what does that have to do with Ernie? A lot of things...
everything. A person's character determines what kind of decision and actions that
person would make at his workplace and in his personal life. I humbly ask you once
again, hana hou, to keep an open mind in your decision regarding Ernie Pasion. My
thanks again to all of you and keep up your good work. Aloha.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Carole. That will end the period
of the Consent Calendar. I do want to share with all of you that according to our
rules and 13(e) that was read earlier, when you speak during this consent time, you
no longer speak during the meeting. Thank you very much for your comments. I
would also like to point out that for your general information, the three (3) of the six
(6) final audits will appear on the August 14th calendar. Again, a draft is submitted
to us for review. Subsequently after comments, a final report is given. That final
report on three (3) of the six (6) that were mentioned will be on August 14th. I also
wanted to clarify something, that this Council adjusted the Auditor's Budget only by
about forty thousand dollars ($40,000) this past year. In fact, he carried about a
two hundred thousand dollar ($200,000) surplus from the previous year. I am not
sure where the commentary is coming from on the Auditor's Budget being slashed.
It was adjusted by forty thousand dollars ($40,000) and it had about a two hundred
thousand dollars ($200,000) surplus from the previous year. Perhaps, we will have
more dialogue at the August 14th Meeting. Thank you again for your comments.
On that note, let us go to the Minutes that need approval.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
June 5, 2013 Special Council Meeting
June 12, 2013 Council Meeting
June 19, 2013 Special Council Meeting
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kagawa and unanimously carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2013-244 Communication (06/17/2013) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to Section 2,
Ordinance No. 891, relating to the Authorization of the Issuance of General
Obligation Bonds of the County of Kaua`i for the Purpose of Financing Certain
Public Improvements and Refunding Certain Bonds of the County; Fixing or
Authorizing the Fixing of the Form, Denominations, and Certain Other Details of
Such Bonds and Providing for the Sale of Such Bonds to the Public: Mr. Rapozo
moved to receive C 2013-244 for the record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
C 2013-245 Communication (06/18/2013) from the Boards and Commissions
Administrator, transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to
Section 22-5.4 of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to the
COUNCIL MEETING 6 JULY 17, 2013
Designation of Exceptional Trees, to correctly identify the boundaries of Exceptional
Tree No. K-12: Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2013-245 for the record, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-246 Communication (06/18/2013) from the Boards and Commissions
Administrator, transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to
Chapter 3, Article 1, of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to the
Code of Ethics, to incorporate Charter Amendment language which was adopted
during the 2010 General Election: Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2013-246 for the
record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-247 Communication (07/11/2013) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to Chapter 5A of the
Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to Real Property Taxes:
Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2013-247 for the record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura,
and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Please go to Communications, Mr. Clerk.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2013-248 Communication (05/01/2013) from Council Vice Chair
Nakamura, requesting the presence of the Director of Economic Development,
representatives from the Kaua`i Economic Development Board (KEDB), and
consultant Alan Tang, to provide an update on the Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy (CEDS) — Creative Technology Center Business Plan.
RICKY WATANABE, County Clerk: Chair, we have had some
housekeeping requests. First, on page 2, C 2013-248 regarding the update of the
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Creative Technology
Center Business Plan. We received a request from Councilmember Nakamura to
defer this item until September 11, 2013.
Chair Furfaro: On that housekeeping item, let us give the
floor to the Vice Chair. You made a request to defer the item?
Ms. Nakamura: Yes, thank you, Chair. I wanted to give the
consultant additional time to finalize the draft business plan to share it with the
user group made up of different stakeholders in the community to get feedback, to
provide Councilmembers a draft plan to provide feedback, and then have the
consultant come. That way, at least we have had a chance to look at the business
plan and be prepared to ask him the hard questions. We have Mia Ako and
Director Costa from the Office of Economic Development, if we have further
questions, but at this time the intent is to ask for a deferral until September 11th.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura?
Ms. Yukimura: I have no problem with a deferral. I was just
wondering whether we would be able to get a copy of the business plan before
September 11th?
Ms. Nakamura: Yes. When the draft plan is done, it will go
to the Administration, the Council, to the user group, and then for feedback. The
idea is to get all of that feedback and then incorporate it into a final plan.
COUNCIL MEETING 7 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Yukimura: Good, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: So that is a motion to defer, JoAnn?
Ms. Yukimura: No, but I can make one if there is no further
discussion.
Chair Furfaro: No further discussion? No public testimony?
Ms. Yukimura moved to defer C 2013-248 to the September 11, 2013 Council
Meeting, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk, let us continue on a few more
housekeeping items, please.
There being no objections, C 2013-256 was taken out of the order.
C 2013-256 Communication (06/20/2013) from Council Chair Furfaro,
requesting the presence of the Director of Planning, to provide the Council with a
briefing on the status of the easement in the Kahuaina Subdivision from Falko
Partners that was found to be in favor of the County of Kaua`i, which will provide
pedestrian access to the shoreline.
Mr. Watanabe: For C 2013-256, we have a Legal Document
that will appear on the July 31, 2013 Council Meeting. This involves the update on
an easement from Falko Partners, Kahuaina Subdivision. There is a request to
receive this in open session.
Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2013-256 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Hooser.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: We are receiving this because we will get a
briefing some other time?
Chair Furfaro: On the 31St, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
The motion to receive C 2013-256 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk, please continue on the
housekeeping items.
Mr. Watanabe: We have three (3) housekeeping items
related to Executive Sessions. ES-635, relating to a briefing on the AOAO of
Kulana Subdivision. There was a briefing during the Special Council Meeting so
there is no update necessary at this time. There is a request to receive that item.
On ES-642, relating to Ricky Ball versus Kaua`i Lagoons Company, there is no
update in the case. This item is also requested to be received in open session, along
COUNCIL MEETING 8 JULY 17, 2013
with ES-643, Jeffery Sampoang versus Harvey Brothers. There is no update in this
case so there is a request to receive it in open session. Three (3) items; ES-635,
ES-642, and ES-643.
There being no objections, ES-635, ES-642, and ES-643 was taken out of the
order.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-635 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4),
and Section 3.07(E) of the Kaua`i County Charter, the Office of the County
Attorney, on behalf of the Director of Finance, requests an Executive Session with
the Council to provide the Council with a briefing and request for approval of
proposed tax compromise with AOAO of Kulana Condominium, and related
matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers,
duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as
they relate to this agenda item: Ms. Nakamura moved to receive ES-635 for the
record, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
ES-642 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing in Ricky L. Ball vs.
Kaua`i Lagoons Resort Company, Ltd., et al., Civil No. 12-1-0289 JKW (Fifth Circuit
Court), and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration
of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the
County as they relate to this agenda item: Ms. Nakamura moved to receive ES-642
for the record, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
ES-643 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing in Jeffery Sampoang vs.
Harvey Brothers, LLC, et al., Civil No. 12-1-0294 JKW (Fifth Circuit Court), and
related matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the
powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the
County as they relate to this agenda item: Ms. Nakamura moved to receive ES-643
for the record, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, take us back to
page 2.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2013-249 Communication (06/13/2013) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Period 10 Financial Reports — Detailed
Budget Report, Statement of Revenues (Estimated and Actual), Statement of
Expenditures and Encumbrances, and Revenue Report as of April 30, 2013,
pursuant to Section 21 of the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Operating Budget
Ordinance No. B-2012-736 of the County of Kaua`i: Ms. Nakamura moved to receive
C 2013-249 for the record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-250 Communication (06/27/2013) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Period 11 Financial Reports — Detailed
Budget Report, Statement of Revenues (Estimated and Actual), Statement of
Expenditures and Encumbrances, and Revenue Report as of May 31, 2013,
COUNCIL MEETING 9 JULY 17, 2013
pursuant to Section 21 of the Fiscal Year 2012-2013 Operating Budget
Ordinance No. B-2012-736 of the County of Kaua`i: Mr. Bynum moved to receive
C 2013-250 for the record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-251 Communication (06/21/2013) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Condition of the County Treasury
Statement quarterly report as of May 7, 2013: Mr. Bynum moved to receive
C 2013-251 for the record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-252 Communication (06/19/2013) from the Executive on Aging,
requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend grant funds from
Hawai`i Health Connector's Hi`i Ola Program's Marketplace Assister Grant in the
amount of $125,000 to provide assistance to consumers fifty-five (55) years of age
and older with health care coverage in accordance with President Obama's
Affordable Care Act for the following:
• Three (3) part-time and one (1) full-time equivalent positions,
work-related equipment such as laptop computers, mobile phones with
Wi-Fi access, training and related travel expenses, marketing, office
supplies, interpreter/translation services for non-English speaking clients
as needed, vehicle and ground transportation expenses, and
administrative overhead.
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve C 2013-252, seconded by Ms. Nakamura.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Vice Chair, you
have the floor.
Ms. Nakamura: I just want to acknowledge the Agency on
Elderly Affairs because I think this is a really good opportunity for the County to
have a role in the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Our County Agency
can carry out the intent of the act on the island and provide the services to elderly
folks to connect them to their health needs. I think they are the appropriate entity
to carry out and deliver this service.
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, I agree with Council Vice Chair. The
success of the Federal healthcare program depends on making these connections so
that people know how to access the benefits of the Legislation. Our Office of Elderly
Affairs, as usual, is taking a really proactive role. We have Kealoha in the
audience. Thank you. We are just singing praises to you. They are taking a
proactive role and really being aggressive in making these connections. It is a
wonderful thing and we thank the Office of Elderly Affairs.
Chair Furfaro: Kealoha, may we ask you to come up?
Mr. Kagawa has a comment or question for you. Kealoha, thank you for coming
over. Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Kealoha. Thank you for applying
for the grant and receiving it. Part of this grant is to provide transportation—is
that travel expenses for Staff? Ground transportation?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING 10 JULY 17, 2013
LUDVINA KEALOHA TAKAHASHI, Executive on Aging: The travel is
for training.
Mr. Kagawa: For training, okay. If they are fifty-five (55)
or older, what do they get help with by these workers?
Ms. Takahashi: These are for uninsured people. It is to help
them to pick a medical insurance plan.
Mr. Kagawa: To help them apply for whatever services are
out there?
Ms. Takahashi: Particularly, it is the health insurance, the
Obama's Affordable Care Act.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. This has been going on for some time?
Ms. Takahashi: No, it just started October 1st.
Mr. Kagawa: Just started October 1st.
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, it is a one-year grant.
Mr. Kagawa: Do we have like a lot of requests from people
to Elderly Affairs? Do you expect a big workload?
Ms. Takahashi: This is the grant gap area for the uninsured.
It could range from age twenty-six (26) and older. We are hoping to target people at
the age of fifty-five (55) and older, but our doors are always open for any age.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Kealoha, for being here today. I
apologize because I did not get a chance to look at grant application. These three (3)
part-time and one (1) full-time positions, is that temporary positions?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes. The full-time is an equivalent. We are
using our present Staff, twenty-five percent (25%) of their time to help with
outreach and helping with the form.
Mr. Rapozo: That is the full-time equivalent, and then for
the three (3) part-time, we are going to hire three (3) people?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Again, is that temporary just for the term of
the grants?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Just for the term of the grant?
COUNCIL MEETING 11 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else have questions for Kealoha?
Vice Chair.
Ms. Nakamura: When you hire the part-time people, you are
just telling them that it is just for one (1) year for now?
Ms. Takahashi: That is correct.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Kealoha, I assume that those that are hired
for part-time will in fact be working nineteen (19) hours or less per week?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Kealoha, thank you very much for all
of your work. Vice Chair, you have the floor.
Ms. Nakamura: Just to follow-up on Councilmember
Kagawa's question, if you have someone who is under fifty-five (55) who is
uninsured, you would be able to assist that person?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, we will.
Ms. Nakamura: Do you envision any other entity providing
that service on Kaua`i for fifty-five (55) and below under this program?
Ms. Takahashi: We have Ho`ola Lahui, who has also applied
for a grant as well.
Ms. Nakamura: Would that be limited to Native Hawaiians?
Ms. Takahashi: I am not sure.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. I think it would be good to
understand, once the grants are awarded, that we will get a better picture of who is
serving who. It is good if in this instance that you are open to serving everyone.
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, we do not deny help to anyone or any
age, especially for help in finding a good plan for themselves.
Ms. Nakamura: Right. Do we know how many people are
uninsured on Kaua`i?
Ms. Takahashi: That is a good question. We do have a count
of how many are uninsured for that target range but at this time, I cannot provide
you with that information. I can provide it later on.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you very much.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 JULY 17, 2013
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: Again, thank you very much, Kealoha for all
of your hard work, your Department, and for spearheading this grant.
The motion to approve C 2013-252 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-253 Communication (06/20/2013) from the Executive on Aging,
requesting Council approval to receive, expend, and indemnify the State Executive
Office on Aging for their intent to award State funds to the County of Kaua`i's
Agency on Elderly Affairs for Fiscal Years 2013-2015 for the following:
• Provision of Kupuna Care services in the amount of $1,016,412 or
$508,206 per State Fiscal Year.
• Provision of service to older adults who are at risk of elder abuse in the
amount of$45,220 or $22,610 per State Fiscal Year.
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve C 2013-253, seconded by Mr. Kagawa.
Chair Furfaro: Members, are there any questions for
Kealoha while she is here? Kealoha, may we have you back, please?
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. Kealoha, I just wanted to
get some information on State funding. How does this compare with the prior three
(3) years? Or is it two (2) years?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Takahashi: Two (2) years.
Mr. Kagawa: How does this compare? Did it go up or
down?
Ms. Takahashi: Pretty much stayed the same.
Mr. Kagawa: Stayed the same?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, we may have less funding but it has
been the same amount.
Mr. Kagawa: The Kupuna Care takes care of what kind of
things?
Ms. Takahashi: Personal care, homemaker, home delivery
meals, transportation, and case management.
Mr. Kagawa: I just have to say, and I think I said it during
Budget, but my grandma got the benefit of Elderly Affairs like going and visiting,
keeping her company, bringing her food, and helping her clean the house. It was a
tremendous service. You have people that do a great job.
COUNCIL MEETING 13 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Takahashi: Thank you.
Mr. Kagawa: I just want to make sure that the State
continues to help us with the fair share because it is a State and County problem.
We want to work together and continue it. Is the meals affected by Kupuna Care?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Kagawa: How do we look for the weekends? How long
are we planning to go on the weekend meals?
Mr. Takahashi: The weekend meals were already
discontinued.
Mr. Kagawa: They are already discontinued?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes. We were okay. We did not have any
adverse impact.
Mr. Kagawa: The people out there in the community...
Ms. Takahashi: They are fine.
Mr. Kagawa: They are okay?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any other questions for Kealoha?
Kealoha, you might as well stay there because the next two (2) grant items are
yours as well.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2013-253 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-254 Communication (06/20/2013) from the Executive on Aging,
requesting Council approval to receive and expend funds from the grant
amendment awarded by the Corporation for National and Community Service to
the County of Kaua`i's Agency on Elderly Affairs, Kaua`i Retired and Senior
Volunteer Program (RSVP) in the amount of $73,347, including the carry over
amount of$9,000 and a one-time augmentation of$1,500, to assist the Kauai RSVP
in carrying out a national service program as authorized by the Domestic Volunteer
Service Act of 1973, as amended (Title 42 United States Code (USC), Chapter 22):
Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2013-254, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: I will suspend the rules if anyone has
questions. Councilmember Bynum.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING 14 JULY 17, 2013
Mr. Bynum: Hello, Kealoha. There were changes in what
types of volunteer services that Kaua`i Retired and Senior Volunteer Program
(RSVP) would provide, is that correct?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, that is correct.
Mr. Bynum: Did that transition already happen?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: It went okay?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay. Thank you very much.
Ms. Takahashi: You are welcome.
Chair Furfaro: Please note that there is no one in the
audience who wishes to testify. Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2013-254 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-255 Communication (06/20/2013) from the
Executive on Aging, requesting Council approval to receive, expend, and indemnify
the State Executive Office on Aging for their award to the County of Kaua`i's
Agency on Elderly Affairs of additional State funds in the amount of$18,048 for the
Kupuna Care Program services. A modification to contract KA2013A02 was
processed to reflect the increase in funding which totaled $293,994 in additional
funding for the provision of personal care, homemaker, home delivered meals, case
management and/or adult day health services: Mr. Rapozo moved to approve
C 2013-255, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: I will suspend the rules. Councilmember
Yukimura, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Kealoha, it says in the letter
"eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000) additional," but it was actually an additional
amount of two hundred ninety-three thousand dollars ($293,000)?
Ms. Takahashi: These are actually funds that the State
Legislature appropriated, besides the...
Ms. Yukimura: The additional Federal moneys?
Ms. Takahashi: No, these are just State funds.
Ms. Yukimura: Both are State?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 15 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Yukimura: The two hundred ninety-three thousand
dollars ($293,000) was initially added or is that a regular funding?
Ms. Takahashi: No, it is additional added. It is just that we
had some unexpended funds that we wanted to use.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, so it is a total of two hundred
ninety-three thousand dollars ($293,000), the eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000)
plus...
Ms. Takahashi: Yes. This is not the base amount that we
usually get. This was additional that was appropriated from the State Legislature.
Ms. Yukimura: The base amount is...that is the one we
originally received?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: You are getting a fifty percent (50%) increase
this year?
Ms. Takahashi: This was past years that we received. This
was just an unexpended amount that they said we could carry over.
Ms. Yukimura: The eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000)
was?
Ms. Takahashi: The eighteen thousand dollars ($18,000), yes.
Ms. Yukimura: But the larger amount was also additional?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, besides our regular State-funded
amount.
Ms. Yukimura: Does that mean that this year you are
getting about fifty percent (50%) more moneys?
Ms. Takahashi: We are hoping that we do have an additional
amount, but we have not heard yet. It depends if the Governor has released at the
added funds.
Ms. Yukimura: When you get these fairly large chunks of
extra money, are you able to administer them with your existing Staff?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. That is wonderful.
Ms. Takahashi: It usually goes to services.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes. The money goes to services and again,
that is a testament to your Staff. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair, you have the floor.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Nakamura: With the additional funds, is the intent to
help more elderly people or provide more services to the existing pool of clients that
you serve?
Ms. Takahashi: It could go both ways, both to help more
people, and then to provide existing services to the clients that we now serve. It
could go either way.
Ms. Nakamura: Now you have more flexibility to provide
additional services?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: Would that include weekend meals?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: Are you considering that or are there other
needs that take a higher priority?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes. We are looking at personal care and
other areas where it shows a high need or where we have a wait list.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Takahashi: You are welcome.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Is this need based? Are there need based
qualifications or income based qualifications, or is anyone who is elderly qualified
for the services?
Ms. Takahashi: We do have a set of eligibility criteria for
Kupuna Care funding. It is based on need and their income status as well.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. That is good. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Hooser, you have the floor.
Mr. Hooser: Good morning. I have a question and I
probably should know this already, but I cannot recall the answer so I will ask you.
The Office of Elderly Affairs is kind of a blend with a lot of State and Federal funds
and housed under the County umbrella.
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Hooser: Who directly manages you or your Office? Is
it the Mayor?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes, the Mayor.
COUNCIL MEETING 17 JULY 17, 2013
Mr. Hooser: The Assistant to the Mayor, Mr. Heu or the
Mayor, would meet with you, go over your Budget, and go over your goals and the
program?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Hooser: Do they do that on a regular basis?
Ms. Takahashi: Yes.
Mr. Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any further questions? If not, Kealoha,
thank you for your participation today. I think that is last item so I will let you
vacate the seat. Thank you very much.
Ms. Takahashi: Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2013-255 was then put, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-257 Communication (07/03/2013) from the County Attorney,
requesting Council approval to expend funds up to $5,000 for Special Counsel's
continued services provided for in the claim against the County of Kaua`i, filed by
Shane N. Matias on June 2, 2010 and related matters.
Mr. Watanabe: We have an Executive Session scheduled for
this item. We can move this to the end of the agenda.
Chair Furfaro: We will move this to end as we come out of
Executive Session.
Mr. Watanabe: Okay. That brings us to C 2013-258.
C 2013-258 Communication (06/14/2013) from the Chief of Police, requesting
Council approval to accept a donation of a twenty-four (24) inch by thirty-six (36)
inch (National Institute of Justice (NIJ) Level IIIA) Diamond Lite Ballistic Shield
from Point Blank Enterprises, Inc. valued at $2,350, for use by patrol officers as the
need arises: Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2013-258 with an appropriate
thank-you letter to follow, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
Mr. Watanabe: Chair, on page 5, this item also involves an
Executive Session item, ES-657. We can move that one to the end of the calendar,
also.
Chair Furfaro: Okay.
Mr. Watanabe: This brings us to the Legal Document.
COUNCIL MEETING 18 JULY 17, 2013
LEGAL DOCUMENT:
C 2013-260 Communication (07/10/2013) from the Chief of Police,
recommending Council approval of a Right of Entry Permit and indemnification of
Grove Farm Company, Inc., or any of its affiliates (including/without limitation to
Mahaulepu Farm, LLC; Haupu Land Company, LLC; Haili Moe, Inc.; Visionary,
LLC; and Lihu`e Land Company) for Right of Entry access at Grove Farm Company,
Inc.'s "Old Koloa Camp.": Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2013-260, seconded by
Mr. Hooser.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone here to testify on this Legal
Document? You have a question? Go right ahead. The rules are suspended for the
Lieutenant.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Lieutenant. Thank you, Chair. I
have a quick question. In a nutshell, what is the reason that we need to get this
Right-of-Entry Permit and indemnification from Grove Farm?
KAREN KAPUA, Lieutenant: Good morning, I am Lieutenant Karen
Kapua, Kaua`i Police Department. It is to provide us access to conduct training.
Mr. Kagawa: To conduct training in there. Okay. Thank
you.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any further questions for the
Lieutenant? If not, Lieutenant, thank you very much for being here. I will call the
meeting back to order. We have a motion to approve. JoAnn, discussion?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Ms. Yukimura: I just want to say that this request has a lot
of emotional connections because it is about "Old Koloa Camp" where people were
evicted from their homes. At this point, there is no reason not to approve, but it I do
want to express my sadness about the fact that people no longer live there.
The motion to approve C 2013-260 was then put, and unanimously carried.
CLAIMS:
C 2013-261 Communication (06/20/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by the Kaua`i Humane
Society, for reimbursement, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kaua`i: Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-261 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
C 2013-262 Communication (07/03/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Ronald J. Barretto, Sr.,
for funeral expenses, personal injury, medical costs, and emotional distress,
pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i: Mr. Kagawa moved to
COUNCIL MEETING 19 JULY 17, 2013
refer C 2013-262 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition and/or report back
to the Council, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
C 2013-263 Communication (07/05/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Garden Isle Disposal,
Inc., for damages to their vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County
of Kaua`i: Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-263 to the County Attorney's Office
for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
C 2013-264 Communication (07/05/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Katherine Ramos, for
damages to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i:
Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-264 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk, I have a footnote. I would like to
get a briefing from the County Attorney on Section 23.06 of the Kaua`i County
Charter regarding the claim by the Kaua`i Humane Society in the very near future,
please.
Mr. Watanabe: So noted. Next, we are going to Committee
Reports on page 6.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
PLANNING COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PL 2013-05) submitted by the Planning Committee,
recommending that the following be approved as amended on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2483 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTERS 7, 8, AND 9, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF VARIOUS PERMITTING
CHARGES AND FEES LEVIED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
(County of Kaua`i, Applicant),"
Ms. Nakamura moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura,
and unanimously carried.
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES / PUBLIC SAFETY / COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE
COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-EPC 2013-07) submitted by the Environmental Services /
Public Safety / Community Assistance Committee, recommending that the following
be approved as amended on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2486 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 16 AND CHAPTER 19, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO ABANDONED VEHICLES,"
COUNCIL MEETING 20 JULY 17, 2013
Mr. Bynum moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
PUBLIC WORKS / PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2013-17) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be received for the record:
"PWPR 2013-11 Communication (04/04/2013) from Committee Chair
Kagawa and Council Chair Furfaro, requesting the presence of the Director of
Parks and Recreation to provide an update on the repair and maintenance of
the swimming pool facilities located in Kapa'a and Waimea, along with the
status of the plans to relocate the Kapa'a Swimming Pool to a new location,"
Mr. Kagawa moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. May I ask for a short,
personal privilege?
Chair Furfaro: Sure.
Mr. Kagawa: I have been very troubled by people in the
community as I go out to any function. This weekend I went fishing at Anini
because the `Oama is biting. I had a couple of people come up to me, who both of
them used to work for the County, the Layosas who recently retired. They did not
want to bother me by relaying this kind of news when we are just relaxing with
family. They told me that the bathrooms at Anini Beach—the one by the boat
ramp, both mens and womens, were just filled with feces all over. I do not know if it
is a septic problem or if it is just too much volume of use, but this is not the only
instance. My brother-in-law guys went to the boat race and canoe races at Hanalei
the other week, and they, like the Mayor, saw how bad the restrooms were. It just
comes to the point where people are just really dismayed by our performance. I do
not know if it is not—we are not ready for the big crowds. We are not ready for the
large amount of campers and having more routine checks. We had Lenny up here
in my Committee. I know members were quite concerned with some of the
responses. I think we have to stay on top of it and we have to look for better
solutions. It is happening over and over again, every week. I am sure all of you are
getting the same complaints island wide. I just wanted to mention that. I will try
and put as much as I can in my Committee. Let us go ala carte because I know it is
not fair to Lenny to ask him island wide about problems. It is good if we notify him
at least two (2) weeks in advanced for what park we are asking for and what
information. I just wanted to let Councilmembers know that my goal is to put on
the agenda every time I hear a bad report. At least the public knows that we do
hear them. We are trying to find a better solution and we are trying our best.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you for those comments and concerns.
I think we should send some correspondence and your experience over to the Parks
Department. I think that we also need to recognize that this is peek citizens
recreational time. This is summertime and the kids are out of school. Parks are
full. Camping permits are issued. This needs to surface again as a reminder of the
extra needs and the attentiveness to the condition of some of the public restrooms.
We will send something over in writing. Vice Chair Nakamura, you have the floor.
COUNCIL MEETING 21 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you, Councilmember Kagawa, for
that comment. Based on the discussion last week, it seems that it is a systems wide
problem. I think there needs to be a system wide solution. We can take it case by
case, but I think it is a larger management concern. I am not sure—I think the
Director said that they are waiting for the Park's Planner to come on board to assist
with coming up with a repair and maintenance plan, but I think there needs to be
some discussion about the approach and what do we do now until we come up with
the plan? That might take a little while, but I think we need to have further
discussions about what management needs to do to address this concern? It is
island wide.
Chair Furfaro: Please note in our communication to the
Parks Department, I think it would be appropriate to have them in a very near
term and have them make us a presentation on the staffing guides for the parks, so
that we understand what resources are there for manpower. That will be a future
agenda item in Mr. Kagawa's Committee. Again, thank you for your commentary.
The motion to approve Committee Report CR-PWPR 2013-17 was then put,
and unanimously carried.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE:
A report (No. CR-COW 2013-12) submitted by the Committee of the Whole,
recommending that the following be approved as amended on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2487 – A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR BARGAINING UNIT 1
BETWEEN JULY 1, 2013 AND JUNE 30, 2017,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
A report (No. CR-COW 2013-13) submitted by the Committee of the Whole,
recommending that the following be approved as amended on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2488 – A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR BARGAINING UNITS 2,
3, AND 4 BETWEEN JULY 1, 2013 AND JUNE 30, 2015,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Before we go into the Resolution, I am going
to ask to take a fifteen (15) minute recess so that if anyone wants to do some
research on their own before we get into the Resolution, they have the time to do it
now. We will be back at 10:25 a.m.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 10:10 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 10:31 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 22 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: We are back from recess. Let us go to
Resolution No. 2013-56.
RESOLUTION:
Resolution No. 2013-56 – RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MAYORAL
APPOINTMENT TO THE BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY (Hugh A. Strom):
Mr. Kagawa moved for adoption on Resolution No. 2013-56, seconded by
Mr. Rapozo.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Ms. Yukimura, I
will recognize you first.
Ms. Yukimura: There is probably no one more qualified, in
terms of credentials, to sit on the Water Board. Hugh Strom—his expertise in
water systems and utility management is unquestioned. I acknowledge Mr. Strom
for offering himself and his expertise to help. I know that his main motive is to
serve and use his knowledge for the betterment of Kaua`i. He has also been very
gracious in the face of questioning. However, the source of his expertise—he has
worked with Aqua Engineers...is also the source of what appears to me to be a
pervasive, potential conflict of interest in three (3) major ways. First, the work that
Aqua Engineers does overlaps in part with the Water Department's work. Both
Aqua and the Water Department depend on water systems. They manage water
systems for income. That makes the Water Department and Aqua Engineers
competitors of sort. Secondly, many of Aqua Engineers' clients come from before the
Water Department and the Water Board. This includes not only six (6) clients for
whom Aqua manages private water systems, but includes many clients for whom
Aqua manages sewage treatment systems. Many of the AOAOs—that is the condo
associations, the Hyatt, Kukui`ula, and others.
When I spoke to Mr. Strom, he recognized the nature of that kind of conflict.
He assured me that he will recuse himself anytime a client of Aqua Engineers
comes before the Water Board. He saw thought it would be in Aqua's interest to
please their client, but he also saw that to do his job on the Water Board might
require him to vote against Aqua's clients. Recusal would get Mr. Strom out of
offending anyone; however, it also gets him out of doing his job as a Water Board
member. Recusal is appropriate, but only if it happens infrequently. Frequent
recusal renders a board member unable to do the job he was appointed to do. The
third way that there is a potential conflict of interest is a few of Aqua clients have
major interest and issues before the Water Board. We need a board member who
can act on these issues. What comes to mind is Carol Suzawa and how she was both
as Chair and as a member of the board. Such an advocate for the rate payers and
for the water system. If the conflict of interest prevents Mr. Strom from acting on
these issues, he will not be able to perform his work as a board member. It would
be as if Jonathan Chun, a land use lawyer with great expertise in planning and
land use, would be appointed to the Planning Commission. Jonathan's expertise
would be of great help to the Planning Commission, but only if there would not be
many potential conflict of interest situations, which there would be if measured by
the number of clients of Jonathan's law firm that appear before the Planning
Commission, or are affected by the policy decisions made by the Planning
Commission. Let me say here that conflict of interest is not about a person's
integrity or lack thereof. Conflict of interest is a situation that is inherent in
certain factual circumstances. Basically, defined as "having to serve two (2)
masters," which is not possible, no matter how honest someone is. By definition, if
COUNCIL MEETING 23 JULY 17, 2013
there is a conflict, if you do something that is right by one (1) master, it will be
wrong by the other. There is a fiduciary duty that Mr. Strom has to both Aqua
Engineers and to the Water Department, if he is selected as a board member. In
trying to judge how pervasive Mr. Strom's conflict would be, I researched the major
decisions that the Water Board is likely to make in the next year or two (2), and
found that in many cases, it would be appropriate for Mr. Strom to recuse himself.
For example, any time the board is planning or negotiating to acquire a private
water system, there is a potential conflict because the option of staying private
would mean that there is a potential customer for Aqua Engineers. Any time the
board has to approve private water systems and they do have to approve private
water systems as a substitute for the public water system—again, this is involving a
potential Aqua Engineer's customer. Any time the board is contemplating
condemning land to add to its public water system, there is a conflict with the
landowner is a client of Aqua Engineers. There is a major decision that the board is
to make about the development fee, which is also known as the "Facilities Reserve
Charge." This is a major policy decision. Approval of a sufficient facilities water
reserve charge will keep the fund from going bankrupt. This is critical to the Water
Department's system. It will also enable the Water Department to provide another
source of potable water for Lihu`e, where right now, Grove Farm is the only
provider. It will affect Grove Farm. Grove Farm has a huge stake in this and Aqua
Engineers has a "no-bid contract" worth two hundred fifty thousand dollars
($250,000) a year with Grove Farm Company. Mr. Strom would need to recuse
himself from this major Water Board decision, which will affect Grove Farm, which
Aqua Engineers has a no-bid contract in the amount of two hundred fifty thousand
dollars ($250,000). This will take away from him doing his job as a Water Board
member.
Then there is a decision about the horizontal drilling project, which has the
potential to eliminate huge fossil fuel based pumping fees, which will benefit the
rate payers tremendously in the future and yet, it has the potential to generate
many environmental impacts. It is a tough decision. It is a major policy decision
that the Water Board those make. Mr. Strom will have to recuse himself because
Aqua Engineers has a no-bid contract to run the Surface Water Treatment Plant,
which would be shutdown, or is proposed to be shutdown if the horizontal drilling
project is successful. Being unable to vote on major issues before the Water Board,
it is my feeling that Mr. Strom will not be able to fulfill the responsibilities of a
board member. "Recusal" means that a person does not take part in the discussions
on or off the table, so side lobbying is a violation of recusal. It is very hard to
enforce this on a case-by-case basis. To me, this is an inherent problem. I am eager
as anyone to have Mr. Strom's expertise work in the County, but with his pervasive
conflict of interest, the County and the people of Kaua`i will not be able to access his
expertise in practice for the public good. This is not Mr. Strom's fault. It is
inherent in the circumstances. That is why I am not able to confirm Mr. Strom's
nomination today. I want to note that two (2) members of the Ethics Board, the
Chair and one (1) other member, dissented from the Ethic's Board majority decision
clearing Mr. Strom. In my opinion, the majority of the Ethics Board did not look
deeply at this issue. In there opinion, they cite Section 20.03(A) that "the County
shall not enter into my contract with an officer or employee or with a firm in which
an officer or employee has substantial interest involving services or property of
value in excess of $1,000 unless the contract is made after competitive bidding." In
this case, the County has a contract with Grove Farm, but Grove Farm in
implementing the contract with the County has a no-bid contract without
competitive bidding with Aqua Engineers. To me, this falls under Section 20.03(A).
Once Mr. Strom retires and divests himself from any major financial interests in
COUNCIL MEETING 24 JULY 17, 2013
Aqua Engineering, I would welcome his service with open arms. It would be a
wonderful day for Kaua`i because then we would be able to fully utilize his
incomparable technical and administrative expertise on behalf of the public good.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Hooser.
Mr. Hooser: This is a difficult decision for me also. I
want to commend Councilmember Yukimura for articulating my concerns so well
and very valid concerns. I also have a difficult time confirming this appointment. I
want to stress what has already been stressed that this is not about the integrity of
the person. There is no question whatsoever but it places the individual in what I
believe to be in an untenable situation of having fiduciary responsibility to two (2)
different organizations, and just be stuck in this inherent conflict. I think it is a
very real conflict and as much as any individual who would want to manage that,
that the conflict will be there, both in reality and perception. I think the perception
is also important. There is a very real conflict in my opinion so I will not be able to
vote in support. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum, do you want the floor?
Mr. Bynum: Yes. I take very seriously the appointments
to Boards and Commissions. I want to say that I believe that the Mayor in the last
several years has done overall an outstanding job of bringing really qualified people
to work on our Boards and Commissions. The Water Department is a unique
commission in its make-up and in its responsibilities. It is unique in that our
County Engineer and our Planning Director are both voting members on the Water
Board. The other members are appointed by the Mayor with our agreement. In my
opinion, the history of the people on the Water Board has been highly weighted to
business interests over last five (5) or six (6) years. I have said to the Mayor as
excellent as his appointments have been, he needs to really look closely at balance.
On this particular Water Board, Mr. Strom, who I think is an outstanding
candidate, who I have no questions about his integrity and his value to our
community and his expertise, is wonderful. We could all learn a lot from him.
JoAnn has done, as she typically does, really good research about some of the major
decisions that are coming before the board. Currently, with Mr. Strom—my reasons
are a little different for the uncomfortableness. The inclusion of Mr. Strom will
continue a board that has virtually all members that are not County employees that
are businessmen who have interests, whose clients have interest with the Water
Board at times. That does not mean that they are not eligible but when the entire
board is made up of those folks—Mr. Roy Oyama was on the board and it was
important to have a farmer for many years because of the Ag water rates and how
the Water Department impacts ag. He is no longer on the board. There are women
members of the Farm Commission that could be good candidates for this position,
but I am uncomfortable putting all business people making these decisions. We
need a consumer advocate who who's role with the Water Department is as a
rate-payer and not have other business interests to give balance to these decisions.
JoAnn mentioned the Facilities Reserve Charge. There is a history of that at the
Water Board where consultants have said that you need to increase this fee, so your
current rate-payers are not subsidizing new construction and new facilities. This
fee needs to be increased. It used to be a Council decision and the Council went
against the consultants and kept the fees low, historically. That major decision is
before this board and I am concerned that our current water rate-payers not be
subsidizing new water services for new construction. Those are the types of major
decisions that get to be made. For the first time ever, I am going to vote against a
COUNCIL MEETING 25 JULY 17, 2013
nominee not because of the individual, but because of the lack of balance on this
commission. I feel the same way about the Police Commission, that we need a
consumer advocate and we need a woman on that commission. These balanced
perspectives are what make these Boards and Commissions work really well.
Having industry people with expertise is great for a board, but not the entire board.
I want to apologize to Mr. Strom because I know his motives are pure and if he was
not the fourth business member of the four (4) appointees, I would certainly be
voting for him but not the fourth person in the same category at the expense of
having a consumer advocate, a woman, or someone who does not have business
interests with the same board that they act on. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank
Councilmember Yukimura for pointing out some of the reasons why she is not going
to be supporting it. I am struggling with this a little bit; however, after looking at
the make-up of the board, I think a candidate like Hugh fills a big gap in the side of
the technical and construction side help that the Water Board could use. If you look
at O`ahu, there has been two (2) water main breaks in the past month. One by was
McCully and yesterday there was another big one. I am not sure where that
happened but it was a geyser going up in the air. I know we have a lot of old lines
in our system and we constantly patch and cover it up, then and a few weeks later
we are digging it up again and patching again. Soon, we are going to have a geyser
come out. We need some long-term planning and some expertise from the private
sector so that we can address some of these things in an efficient manner instead of
going out and doing patch work. I think Mr. Strom can provide some of the advice
and help that the Water Board could use. I do not think one (1) person is going to
control the voting of six (6) people voting. To me, when I look at the make-up of the
board, you have Clyde Nakaya, Randy Nishimura, Sherman Shiraishi, Ray
McCormick, and Larry Dill, who are the voting members. As well as I know, most
of them, they are not going to be influenced the one (1) person trying to get what he
wants because of his personal interests. I hear the concerns; however, I believe that
he would be a good addition to something that is really important; a board that is
really important. This is the most important board that we do not control in the
County. When we have our bills each month that we pay—we have to pay our
mortgage, we have to pay our car payments, we have our Real Property Tax, we
have electricity, we have sewer, and of course, we have our water bill. It is that
important. It is something that we all pay and we all are concerned about it. We
need not only people from the business sector, people who just pay these bills and
worry about these bills, we need people from the private sector who can help the
Water Department in guiding them to be more efficient, to tackle problems in a long
range manner that the private sector does tackle them. A lot of times in
Government, we are the deep pockets, so we just do things. It is not about being
efficient because no matter what we do, we do not get hired or fired. In private
sector, if you do not cut it, you get fired. I think we need the private sector
expertise. I think he would be one. Randy is on the construction side, but I think
he gives that balance that we need in the long-term. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Rapozo: I think Councilmember Yukimura brought
up some valid concerns as well, but we just spoke earlier about the Parks
Department and the lack of management, lack of expertise, and the reasons that we
got some issues there. Councilmember Yukimura really laid out the qualifications
of Mr. Strom, as far as his knowledge and experience. There is a question of the
potential or pervasive, as Miss Yukimura says, conflict but I am satisfied with the
COUNCIL MEETING 26 JULY 17, 2013
Board of Ethic's ruling that they rule there was no conflict and that, in fact, if there
were issues that involved Mr. Strom in his personal capacity, he would recuse
himself. If you look far enough, you all could find a conflict in each of us, every one
of us on this Council, that there are matters that may be a conflict. Imagine if we
disqualified everybody for having a conflict or a potential conflict because of your
private work. I would expect Mr. Strom to perform in the best interest of the Water
Department. I think the Charter is clear that that board manages the Water
Department. It is unlike any other board that we have. One of the examples was
Jonathan Chun. On the Water Board right now is Sherman Shiraishi. Sherman's
firm takes care of a lot of developments. He takes care of a lot of projects that
involves water. Are we going to vote him out? Of course not. I think we need to
apply the same standard throughout and Mr. Strom. He will definitely have to
recuse himself in some occasions, but I expect him, as I said earlier, to utilize the
best judgment. I think Mr. Kagawa said it best. I cannot imagine one (1) person on
the board controlling that board. I am going to support the appointment. I think
we need to look at more opportunities to increase the technical knowledge and
experience and the abilities to actually help the Water Department be managed in a
more professional way. I think Mr. Strom has all the tools. I will be supporting the
appointment. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Vice Chair.
Ms. Nakamura: I was hoping that we would get a female
candidate on this board. I am disappointed that we were not able to fill this
position with a female candidate. Mr. Strom brings strong management
background and strong technical background. In my conversations with him, I feel
comfortable that he will recuse himself in all matters relating to areas where he has
conflicts with Aqua Engineers. I am comfortable with the Board of Ethic's ruling. I
think that if he in practice is not able to participate in votes and that it is pervasive
that majority of votes—he cannot participate. If that is the case, I think at that
time, he will choose to step down. I think he will make that choice and make those
recusals where it is appropriate. I will be supporting this nomination.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I just want to make sure that my position is
clear that we mentioned other board members. Mr. Shiraishi—outstanding board
member, but he is an attorney who has clients with business with the Water Board
on occasion. Randy, who has served for a long time, great board member—he is a
business person and he is the next person that I believe will be fulfilling an
appointment. Looking to the future, please Mayor, look for a consumer advocate, a
farmer, or a woman. All three (3) of those can be in one (1) person who does not
have an ongoing business relationship with the board. I voted for Mr. Shiraishi,
Randy, and Clyde, who is a banker. These are great people, but it is just that we
cannot have every board full of business people with expertise who have a different
perspective than a consumer, just by their nature of it. I think Mr. Strom will be an
addition. It looks like he will succeed today in his vote, but I hope the Mayor is
paying attention to the messages from Councilmembers to seek balance on these
commissions in the future. I do not mean to sound critical because he has given us
some really outstanding candidates. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Does anybody else wish to speak again before
I speak? I want you to know that I know Hugh in a very professional manner. I
dealt with him for eleven (11) years when his company contracted the wastewater
COUNCIL MEETING 27 JULY 17, 2013
treatment facilities for my resort. In fact, he impressed me very much in being able
to deliver the bad news to me as a customer when there were attempts that we
wanted to improve systems and weighing out costs. He always seemed to give the
right kind of strategic thinking to us. He certainly understands the moving parts
and environmental issues that exist in the Water Department. At the same time,
between Vice Chair Nakamura and Mr. Bynum, I understand their points about the
Mayor needing to hear from the Council that going forward, it is appropriate for us
to have a consumer advocate here. Now at the same time, I want to put on my hat
and remind us all that we have a Planning Director, the State Department of
Transportation, and the Engineer of the County on this board and at the same time,
part of that reasoning is the fact that the County is the undersigning of any bond
money that we loan to the Water Department. If things are not done appropriately
in a fashion that is financially feasible, those challenges could end up right here on
the County Council's table. Again, I want to say that to have someone with this
kind of expertise with utility management and understanding some of the issues
coming up with source finding for the assets of the Water Department, I feel
comfortable. I feel comfortable that what the Ethics Committee did was point out
some things, as did Councilmember Yukimura. I will be supporting this first term
for Mr. Strom. Obviously, it gives me an opportunity to evaluate him again on a
second term if some of these issues come up. I will be voting "yes," and on that note,
I would like to call a rollcall vote.
The motion to adopt Resolution No. 2013-56 was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Kagawa, Nakamura, Rapozo, Furfaro TOTAL— 4,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Bynum, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. That will give Mr. Strom the
confirmation to be on the Water Board.
BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2492) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
SECTION 2, ORDINANCE NO. 891 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FOR THE
PURPOSE OF FINANCING CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND
REFUNDING CERTAIN BONDS OF THE COUNTY; FIXING OR AUTHORIZING
THE FIXING OF THE FORM, DENOMINATIONS, AND CERTAIN OTHER
DETAILS OF SUCH BONDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF SUCH
BONDS TO THE PUBLIC: Mr. Kagawa moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill
No. 2492 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon
be scheduled for August 14, 2013, and that it thereafter be referred to the
Committee of the Whole, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 28 JULY 17, 2013
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2493) –A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
SECTION 22-5.4 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO DESIGNATION OF EXCEPTIONAL TREES: Mr. Kagawa moved
for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2493 on first reading, that it be ordered to
print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for August 14, 2013, and that it
thereafter be referred to the Enviornmental Services / Public Safety / Community
Assistance Committee, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Nakamura, do you want the
floor?
Ms. Nakamura: Yes. I was just wondering if we could ask
the County Attorney to come up to address a few questions. The reason why I am
asking the questions now is just so that prior to the Public Hearing, the public
understand the properties that are in question. Thank you for being here. I just
wanted to clarify what is the change that you are proposing? What properties are
you looking at?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
JODI A. HIGUCHI SAYEGUSA, Deputy County Attorney: Okay. Good
morning, Jodi Higuchi Sayegusa, Deputy County Attorney. The properties in
question are the makai side of Kuhio Highway. Aleka Loop—the street that goes
towards the ocean side...I think it passes those hotel properties. In that loop, there
is that coconut grove. Those are the properties in question. A little bit of
background related to this agenda item is that in 1976, that whole property was
designated—let us see, that coconut grove within that property...I think it is K-12, I
think it is on the Ordinance. By the passage of Ordinance No. 227, that grove was
designated as an exceptional tree or exceptional grove. That in addition to other
Tax Map Keys (TMK)s on the mauka side. Several groves were designated as
exceptional trees. Those were described as TMK Nos. (4) 3-006-002 and then makai
side was TMK (4) 3-007-027, TMK (4) 3-007-028, and TMK (4) 3-007-029.
Subsequently in 1979, at the time the Planning Commission granted new
preliminary approval to subdivide TMK (4) 3-007-029 into two (2) lots. In 1981, the
final subdivision was granted so those two (2) lots were subdivided. The original
designation had to do with that whole property. Subsequently, that property was
subdivided into two (2) lots. This was just merely a housekeeping matter to kind of
bring the Exceptional Tree Ordinance in line with the original designation, which
was meant to be that whole parcel...those two (2) lots. That is why we are here
today.
Ms. Nakamura: So both parcels TMK (4) 3-007-029 and
TMK (4) 3-007-030?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes. That is the resulting two (2) TMKs
after the subdivision in 1981. That refers to that area, that grove makai side of
Kuhio Highway and encased by that Aleka Loop Road.
Ms. Nakamura: That would be good for the public to see that.
Chair Furfaro: Scott is going to put it up.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you for clarifying that and providing
these maps, Jodi. The other thing is that did this come from the commission or the
Arborist Committee?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Niupia did come on another related matter a
couple of meetings ago. It was kind of uncovered that the Ordinance was not
updated since 1981.
Ms. Nakamura: This recommendation came from an action
made by the Arborist Committee?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: It was not necessarily referred by the
Arborist Committee, but it was other items. I think it was that they were going to
remove fifteen (15) trees and replace them because some of the trees were dead and
dying. At that time, when the matter came up before the Arborist Committee, that
is when it was discovered that the Ordinance had not been updated. That was a
couple of meetings ago.
Ms. Nakamura: Where did this come from if it was not...
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: This came from Boards and Commissions.
Ms. Nakamura: What does the Committee think?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: The Committee recommended at the first or
second meeting that the correction should be made to the Ordinance.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum, you have the floor.
Mr. Bynum: Is this the parcel that the Planning
Commission just approved permits for Longs?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I am not sure. This is the parcel that it
relates to but I am not sure what the status is in the Planning Commission. I
cannot speak to what exactly happened to that at the Planning Commission.
Mr. Bynum: I just want to know if the Longs proposal
generated this and what is the impact on their proposal if this is designated.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Right. On June 6th, the applicant came to
the Arborist Committee with its preliminary plans for its development. I think the
result of that was that the Arborist Committee forwarded the plans to you folks
being that it is a designated grove. The Arborist Committee sent the entirety of the
plans to you folks, being that it affects the designated grove. I believe because it
was preliminary and because at time, the applicants wanted just input on how to—
any input that the Arborist Committee can advise them on how to not affect the
grove. At that time, it was just more of a for your information (FYI) thing. The
understanding was once they have a finalized plan, perhaps they would be
approached again and come to the Committee again.
Mr. Bynum: Let me just take a step back. If the grove is
designated as historic or exceptional, that does not preclude them from developing
COUNCIL MEETING 30 JULY 17, 2013
but it requires them to come up with a plan for preservation/replacement? Is that
accurate?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: That is accurate. If there are certain actions
that would affect the designation, I would think that the Council is the deciding
body on that.
Chair Furfaro: May I ask Mike to come up?
MICHAEL A. DAHILIG, Director of Planning: Mike Dahilig, Planning
Director.
Mr. Bynum: Is it just coincidental that this is the Longs
development and this is before us, or did the Longs development have us look at
this and discover the problem?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I think it is somewhat coincidental. It was
something that was a housekeeping matter that should have been done in 1981, and
so right now we are here to correct the Ordinance to make sure that the Ordinance
reflects the accurate description of the original designation in 1976.
Mr. Bynum: Mike, what is the status of the Longs
proposal at the Planning Commission?
Mr. Dahilig: We do actually have an active application
that is coming before the Planning Commission. The Director's Report will be
received at the Planning Commission next week Tuesday and set for Public Hearing
for the first meeting in August.
Mr. Bynum: Is that report available online?
Mr. Dahilig: It will be when the agenda is actually
posted...today actually.
Mr. Bynum: Okay. I was surprised to see this. I read the
news about Longs and wanted to know it if it was related.
Mr. Dahilig: I cannot necessarily speak for the
housekeeping matter but I would suspect that some of the questions about the
legalities concerning the grove and how that needs to be handled in the context of
development of this issue probably popped up in that discussion since that lot has
been vacant for quite a while.
Mr. Bynum: Has this Ordinance been reviewed by the
County Attorney's Office?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes, it has.
Mr. Bynum: I would assume but I wanted to ask. Thank
you.
Chair Furfaro: Let me ask a couple of questions here, Mike.
At the same time, give a little history here as I know it. In 1972, I was the
Executive Assistant Manager for the old Sheraton Coconut Beach, which was
COUNCIL MEETING 31 JULY 17, 2013
opened there. In 1976, this parcel was not favored as an expansion of the
Plantation Hale because at time, the Plantation Hale was on the market as a
leasehold property, and not fee-simple as it is converted to. This was all one (1)
parcel for Plantation Hale. How did this piece get subdivided since they already
applied for their one-time subdivision rule? This parcel was part of Plantation Hale
Phase 4 and three (3) years after the Sheraton Coconut Beach opened, this parcel
was subdivided again. How did that work in accordance with our one-time
subdivision law?
Mr. Dahilig: That is a good question, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: I would like you to look into that. Also, I
would like to share with you that there was a time when I attended a meeting there
and granted, I was maybe twenty-five (25) or twenty-six (26) years old, but if I
remember the discussion about this parcel was that it was going to be a compatible
resort opportunity on that parcel, such as later building a gym, a spa, facial
treatments, and things of that nature; not necessarily as a commercial
neighborhood property that you would put a drug store on. Has anybody reviewed
those? It was supposed to keep that "resort feel." I cannot remember but the gym,
spa, and things of that nature seemed to have been in the discussion about that
parcel back in 1976. Have we reviewed the records there?
Mr. Dahilig: We are not complete with the report. That is
history that we can maybe look into.
Chair Furfaro: I am sorry. My history is a little vague here
but I remember being a discussion about being compatible since it would be next
door to resort condominiums and across the street from what eventually was
thought of being maybe three (3) resort hotels, but at the time it was only the
Kaua`i Beach Boy and the Sheraton Coconut Beach. You are going to research that?
How did it get subdivided a second time?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes, how it got subdivided and the
compatibility.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. I would like to ask you to look into
that.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes, sure.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, you have the floor, and then
Mr. Kagawa.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. On the map up there on the
screen, is Longs going to be on one (1) of those lots? Or is proposed to be?
Mr. Dahilig: The proposal in terms of what the
application states at this point—is I guess you would say the left-top corner of the
map and one (1) parcel over to the right...the one (1) that looks kind of slightly
oblong, almost like an upside down side review mirror.
Ms. Yukimura: Right. There are two (2) small parcels on the
bottom and two (2) on the top, so to speak?
COUNCIL MEETING 32 JULY 17, 2013
Mr. Dahilig: The one that Niupia Land Company has
come in for application on is pertaining to this parcel right here.
Ms. Yukimura: That is where Longs Drugs is being
proposed?
Mr. Dahilig: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Right now there are trees on it that are
designated "exceptional."
Mr. Dahilig: That is correct. There is a grove that is
designated, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: In order for Longs to put their drugstore
there—they will need to tear down the trees or uproot the trees?
Mr. Dahilig: The proposal does have movement,
replacement, and other activities that have been presented before the Arborist
Committee, pertaining to the maintenance of that grove. Yes, there would be
some...
Ms. Yukimura: Major...
Mr. Dahilig: I do not want to say "killing," but...
Ms. Yukimura: "Removal?"
Mr. Dahilig: "Removal" would be a better word.
Ms. Yukimura: The Arborist Committee does not have the
power to stop it, right? The Ordinance I am looking at says that trees in a grove
may be removed subject to approval of the County Planning Department. That is
going to be part of the Planning Commission's or your decision?
Mr. Dahilig: That is something that we are aware of is
our authority and in terms of looking at guidance on the measure. We are seeking
guidance from the County Arborist Committee on it.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. The action before us would implement
a clear intention from 1979?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I think it was 1976.
Ms. Yukimura: 1976?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Ordinance No. 227.
Ms. Yukimura: That designated those lots as part of the
exceptional tree designation?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 33 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, before I recognize Mr. Kagawa, I
think in that grove, there is at least—because we have had to treat those trees
before with vitamins. There is at least a dozen and a half of those trees that are
make. Am I correct?
Mr. Dahilig: In fact, prior to this inquiry by the
landowner to the Arborist Committee, there was one (1) previous request to us and
the Arborist Committee concerning removal of trees that were make because the
trees have a certain life span. Given the hazardous nature of those trees, they were
to remove them and then actually replace them with new seedlings.
Chair Furfaro: Mike, I think the nature of that virus—
because I have been involved all the way to the Hilton—I think that virus in the
palms actually can be transmitted to other trees. It is not just about age. It is
about that virus. Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question was
where the location was for the new proposed Longs. The parcel on the left of that is
not, just the one that is circled? That would include the store and the parking lot in
just that lot?
Mr. Dahilig: In terms of what they proposed, yes. The
proposal is to have everything inclusive on that parcel.
Mr. Kagawa: Well, I just want to say that I have some
concerns about impact on traffic. We already have two (2) major shopping centers
going in that cause a lot of the traffic, and we are just going to have another big pile
of cars turning into this new Longs proposal. I just wanted to mention some of my
concerns.
Mr. Dahilig: Just to assure you, we have routed the
application to the State Department of Transportation, Highways Division, as well
as the Department of Public Works, Engineering Division for their comments
pertaining to issues like traffic. We are waiting for comments back from them.
Mr. Kagawa: My comment to that is that a lot of times the
State is not the ones that really have to handle the traffic problems. I know they do
contra flow and stuff, but it basically comes down to us a lot of times. We did the
bypass. That has eased it, but that is not a long-term solution. We heard it many
times from other Councilmembers. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Anybody want to speak for the first time
before I recognize JoAnn? JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Just so the audience is clear,
this lower lot to the left, even though it is marked as "exceptional trees," it is
actually the parking lot and the hotel of The Courtyard at Marriott, right? Maybe
the trees in the parking lot are designated "exceptional," but it is not like a grove.
It is actually a developed property whereas the large parcel on the right is a grove.
Right?
COUNCIL MEETING 34 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: It is the same grove, JoAnn. The parking
stalls at the Marriott are in between trees. The template is laid out so they
preserve the trees.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, but if you look at the second picture,
which is a photograph, it shows the lower left property as pretty much developed
but the lower right property is really the grove, yet open space, yet trees, right?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. You see at the center of the
screen are those two (2) upper lots. That is Kuhio Highway. That is the upper
road, and then in this lower right corner...
Chair Furfaro: That is The Courtyard. That is the parking
lot and you can see the tops of the trees.
Ms. Yukimura: Right. That is pretty much a developed
property, not really a grove of trees. The adjacent property to the right, as we were
looking at the former map; the first map, is all grove.
Chair Furfaro: I want to tell you that when they developed
that in 1972, there were only three (3) trees that were moved so that was the grove.
The parking lot template fit over the...they moved three (3) trees.
Ms. Yukimura: That is really good history. Basically, you
are saying that the parking lot was designed into the grove.
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: I see, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Go ahead, Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: The County Code says that it the Arborist
Advisory Committee is created to advise the Council in determining which trees are
to be designated "exceptional trees" by reason of historical or cultural value,
aesthetic quality, endemic status, age, rarity, location, or size, and are to be
preserved for posterity. This is a very important role to play and I will value their
guidance on this matter, taking into account all of the criteria laid out in the
Charter. I think it is important that we get a communication from the Arborist
Committee that this is a grove that meets this criteria because that provides
guidance to the County and to the Planning Department as to how to deal with this
concern. I agree with Councilmember Bynum that this is tied very closely to the
proposal before the Planning Department. I think we need to have that basic
guidance in writing before this body to have clarity.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I believe that as a result of that last June 6th
meeting, as part of the preliminary—the plan that was forwarded; the minutes also
were? It was a June 12th transmittal from the Arborist Committee to the Council,
kind of giving an update of the action on the June 6th, and forwarding the
preliminary plans. We can also forward the minutes of their discussion discussing
the tree and their preliminary plans at the time and any concerns that they may
have.
COUNCIL MEETING 35 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Nakamura: The bottom line recommendation is that this
is an exceptional grove of trees?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Sorry if I am being redundant, but when the
Coconut Beach Hotel was developed, that was an exceptional grove already?
Ms. Higuchi Sayagusa: I am sorry...
Mr. Bynum: Let me reframe the question. If it does not
preclude development, it just puts a layer that says you have to look at this historic
value of the trees and save whatever you can or come up with some plan to
recognize that significance? It does not preclude—if we pass this, it does not say,
"No development can ever happen there," does it?
Mr. Dahilig: Again, this is not an area of law that I am
familiar with if I am wearing my former hat, but I know that there is also a tax
interface with this. I do not know exactly how that works. In terms of how
development precedes on an area that has been designated as a grove, as compared
to...
Mr. Bynum: An individual tree?
Mr. Dahilig: An individual tree. What you are alluding to
with respect to the construction across the street, whether there that was a grove
before the Marriott put in the parking lot and it was designated as such, I am not
familiar with that if that is the case. That could be a template for us to look at in
analyzing these applications. Again, I am not familiar with the history—as the
Chair has stated, there is some history with respect to how that parking lot was
designed and that might have to come into play here.
Mr. Bynum: Not often is a parking lot an asset to a
property, but that one is. If this is designated an exceptional grove, does that
preclude development on the property?
Mr. Dahilig: Not necessarily, but how it is done, I think
we have to analyze it with an abundance of caution because of the designation.
Certainly, as Councilmember Yukimura has pointed out, groves from a
maintenance standpoint do fall into more of an administrative purview, versus a
singular tree. That is why there is some question as to how to treat this
application. That is what we are going to be addressing once the report is released.
Mr. Bynum: Even at this process, the developer has said,
"Here is our plan for preserving as many trees as possible." Did I hear that in this
discussion? They have already kind of recognized that these trees have significance
and that they need to address that.
COUNCIL MEETING 36 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Right. We did mention at the last Arborist
Committee Meeting was that a lot of these trees are already at the end of their life
span and a lot of them are decaying. I am not exactly sure where on that parcel
those trees happen to be. If the proposed development is in that area, that might be
so. That did come up during the discussions.
Mr. Bynum: I am sure that you know that the Royal
Coconut Coast Organization has been reformed. There is a recommitment to
identifying that area as coconut trees being historically and culturally significant.
It is in our best interest to preserve as many of those trees as possible, right? I
guess if we vote this, it is going to make it even stronger for that developer to
demonstrate as much consideration to this historic grove as possible, but it does not
preclude them from developing? I just heard "not necessarily."
Mr. Dahilig: I think that it is not a "blanket no," but it
does raise regulatory questions for us as to how the form and the character of the
development needs to be either compatible or work around trees that do need to be
preserved. Certainly, the trees will come first when it comes to determining how
these things are going to be sited if that is where this goes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. To what extent has the
Committee actually researched this grove, aside from the applicant going in and
sharing what they want to do? Have they taken an inventory? Have they done an
assessment on the trees? In if there are any viruses, what the potential life span is?
Have they done that?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: They have looked at the plans and the
associated Arborist—I think they have an Arborist Report along with the plans that
were presented to the Committee, and so that is what they looked at in preparation
for the June 6th meeting.
Mr. Rapozo: That Arborist Report was from the developer
or the applicant?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Mike, you mentioned something about tax
implications. You said you were not real familiar with it, but is there a tax benefit
for someone that develops in an area that includes these protected trees?
Mr. Dahilig: I am just familiar that something exists. I
do not have the specific...
Mr. Rapozo: Is it to the benefit of the applicant?
Mr. Dahilig: I believe it is some type of credit that is given
either at a...
Mr. Rapozo: Right, that is what I was thinking. That is
why I do not think it is a coincidence that this is showing up now because the
COUNCIL MEETING 37 JULY 17, 2013
applicant is applying all of a sudden. We want it to appear that we are protecting
trees but in reality, we are giving the developer or applicant some kind of financial
benefit. That is my concern right now. I think we need to explore that as we move
forward. I will have some comments after, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair: Mike, on the history on that grove, just so we
are real clear, Niupia has done a lot of research. I want to make sure I am clear as
well because I was talking about the parking lot, that the parking lot was
designed—I was not referencing the footprint of the hotel itself. When it came to
the parking lot, the template was designed around that. In fact, I forget which
Tarzan it was, either Johnny Weissmuller—no, it was not Johnny Weissmuller.
Buster Crabbe had—there were five (5) Tarzans. I was not one (1) of them, but
Buster Crabbe had a beach house right at the point there. They had this driveway
that came in that had a whole series or Norfolk Pines. I think we lost those in Iwa.
The parking lot was done well and being designed around that. I think there is
around two hundred and twelve (212) stalls inside of the grove, separate from the
footprint of the hotel. Niupia—the question about the grove, they have all of the
information. I remember the grove there before the hotel was there because they
used to be a bull that had these big horns. The grove has been there for quite a
period of time. It was the same grove that is on the site over there. I really want
you to look into this. Were there conditions when they resubdivided that Plantation
Hale piece again? There might have been some conditions that were put in that
half because that came much later when Blackfield was managing the resort parcel.
I really would like you to look into that. Are there anymore questions here?
Mr. Rapozo, go right ahead.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Rapozo: I just was shared the report from the
Arborist Commitment so I apologize. I wish we had seen that before. I think that
would have answered a bunch of questions. I just gave it to the Staff to make copies
so I have not gone through it, but it appears that the Arborist Committee submitted
some recommendations. My point is that these things should come from the
Arborist Committee. I believe that the recommendation should come from the
Arborist Committee, that is why the Arborist Committee is there. I understand it
came from Boards and Commissions but I do not know if the Arborist Committee
took the time to actually investigate this Bill. My suggestion is that we send the
Bill, as we do with any Planning Bill to the Planning Commission, that we send this
Bill in its draft form to the Arborist Committee so that they can have it on the
agenda. The other thing that it does is provide the community an opportunity to
speak at the Arborist Committee Meeting. I think it is important that we get a
formal recommendation from the Arborist Committee, as it is pointed out in the
Charter. The other concern is that I want to see what the benefit is to the applicant
because I am very suspicious that, in fact, this is coming about. If you read the
letter from the consultant, Mr. Avery Youn, he is already clear that the area is
protected trees and you will see it when the copies come back. They submitted the
Arborist Report with a plan to remove some of the dead or dying trees but what is
lacking is the Ordinance for the exceptional tree. It is not in the Ordinance right
now. Without that, they do not qualify for any tax credits or any kind of benefit
that may exist. It is clear that the applicant is going to follow the process, but I
think this is required for them to get the tax benefit. That is my concern. I hope
that is not the motivation for this. I am hoping that it is truly housekeeping, but I
think the timing is suspect and that, in fact, in order for them to qualify, they would
COUNCIL MEETING 38 JULY 17, 2013
need the Ordinance to put that grove in that class so they can qualify for the tax
benefit. I am concerned with the development. I do not want to go into that. I
think there will be another day for that, but my concern is that again, we are trying
to accommodate this applicant and giving them some benefits which they should
already be respecting the historical significance of that grove anyway. I look for
more discussion but I would ask that we just refer this over to the Arborist
Committee for a formal recommendation. I have some questions for the Finance
Department and Real Property Tax, as well. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. I would like to get some clarification.
You are referring to the document that I sent over to Peter Morimoto? Is that it?
Mr. Rapozo: It was addressed to you that Councilmember
Nakamura shared with me. I checked my box and I did not see it so I am not sure if
we got it. It may be somewhere. I did not see it before today.
Chair Furfaro: I think I referred it to Peter Morimoto.
Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Hooser.
Mr. Hooser: In listening to the discussion; on the one
hand, I think I am hearing that perhaps this Ordinance is being used to prevent
development or slow development, and then I am hearing that the applicant or the
developer is supporting the Ordinance. I do not know. Is there any communication
whether the owner is supporting the Ordinance or what the motivation is? Do you
think the developer want this Ordinance to pass?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: This issue—the need to clarify and amend
the Ordinance came up actually before the June 6th meeting. I think it was the
March 15th or February meeting. At that time, Niupia came to the Committee in an
abundance of caution because I believe there were fifteen (15) trees that were dead
and dying, so they wanted to bring it before the Arborist Committee and take those
dead, dying trees before it became a safety hazard and plant them at the base of
those trees. At that time and that action, that was when the outdated Ordinance
issue was uncovered. It was just a little bit of a delay on our part. Initially, that is
when that issue was uncovered. At that time, Niupia was in agreement that the
Ordinance should be amended and clarified to reflect the original designation in
1976. It really is a housekeeping type of measure that should have been done in
March or when it was initially uncovered. Subsequently, there was another
meeting that discussed those preliminary plans of Longs, and that was the June 6th
meeting.
Mr. Hooser: Chair, can I ask a question?
Chair Furfaro: Go right ahead.
Mr. Hooser: I know you cannot speak for Niupia as we
are sitting here, but is it your understanding that Niupia would be supporting this
Ordinance as is proposed?
COUNCIL MEETING 39 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: When I reviewed the March meeting
minutes, March 15th I believe it was, I did read and remember that—I had brought
up that there is a need to correct the Ordinance and they were in agreement.
Mr. Hooser: You understand that the discussion may
inhibit development and may be an incentive to the development. As far as you are
know, they would not oppose the Ordinance?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: No.
Mr. Hooser: Are we clear on tax implications or do we not
know about that?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I am not familiar with the tax implications
at this point.
Mr. Hooser: No one really knows...
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I am not familiar at this point. I can look
into it.
Mr. Hooser: Thank you. Thank you, Chair. It is on first
reading also, right?
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Hooser: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Jodi, I just want to
clarify what I am hearing. When they came to propose to remove, relocate, and
replace, we found out that we should have had this Ordinance done?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: It was in March or February, I think it was
when they initially identified a safety issue with some of these trees that were
already decaying. There was concern that it may topple. At that point, they
wanted permission to be able to take those trees done and replace them at the foot
of the trees. At that time, that was when it was uncovered.
Mr. Kagawa: That is when we uncovered that we should
have had this Ordinance in place?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes, clarified.
Mr. Kagawa: Clarified that they were...
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: After the subdivision in 1981.
Mr. Kagawa: It happened because of that, now we are
here, and doing it after the fact and doing it the right way, it looks like it is going to
benefit them somewhat.
COUNCIL MEETING 40 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Like I said, I am not aware of any tax
implications but we can look into that at the Council's pleasure.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Jodi, we have just been given copies of the
Arborist Committee memo to the Council and it looks like the developers of the
proposed Longs Drugs are addressing this issue because they have to address it, but
they are not contesting the designation of exceptional trees, right?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: It looks like they are saying that they are
going to build that business or that drug store in a way that is integrated into the
grove. That is what...
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: My understanding—if there are really
specific questions on the development maybe...
Ms. Yukimura: In the process of the Arborist Committee
considering the request by Avery Youn to review the proposed Longs Drugs
proposal, they discovered that technically the grove is not properly designated.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I am not sure if that actually came up
related to the plans. I think it was already understood that the designation applied
to both lots.
Ms. Yukimura: Right, but you found out that the technical
tax key reference is not included, right?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: I believe the whole area is designated. The
whole grove in those two (2) lots. It is just mere clarification of the Ordinance to
reflect the TMK description because that whole area was designated in 1976.
Ms. Yukimura: The Bill before us is to clarify that?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes, to clarify.
Ms. Yukimura: I do not see any reason to delay that. We
should just go ahead and clarify it and move ahead with that. How that interfaces
with the Longs Drugs proposal is something that does not appear to be within the
Council's kuleana. It is within Planning at this point. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: I am hearing that we should probably let this
go to Public Hearing. Councilmember Nakamura, you have the floor.
Ms. Nakamura: After looking at the June 12th transmittal
from Chair Laurie Ho in the Arborist Advisory Committee, it is clear that the
Committee motion and approve to accept the preliminary plan presented by the
developer. I am comfortable moving to the Public Hearing, but I also think it is
important for—I think we should ask the Arborist Committee, just to kind of go
back and look at the initial exceptional tree designation because I do not see
COUNCIL MEETING 41 JULY 17, 2013
anything in this cover letter regarding that discussion. I think that is the basis of
everything moving forward. The Arborist Committee has the responsibility not only
to add new trees, but to remove where it is appropriate. I think that is where we
are relying on their expertise.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Also, to make recommendations to you folks,
who are the deciding body.
Ms. Nakamura: I am hoping it can happen in parallel with
our process.
Chair Furfaro: Jodi, let me ask you on that note, if it is
moving parallel, you are in agreement that we should send that request, Mr. Clerk,
to the Committee while we go ahead and move forward on the Public Hearing? You
are in concurrence with that?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Sure. They are the advisory to you folks,
yes.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk and Staff, you understand what
we are going to do here? Okay, Jodi. Anymore questions?
Mr. Rapozo: I have one (1) more question.
Chair Furfaro: Go ahead.
Mr. Rapozo: Can you put that thing back on? Thank you.
We have two (2) TMKs and there is the 436 which is one (1) lot...these drawings are
so small that I cannot see the lot numbers. I see 27 here. I do not know which one
436 was. I am assuming that is the...
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: If you can refer to your maps, there is Kuhio
Highway and Aleka Loop on the top left hand corner of the map.
Mr. Rapozo: Right. Is that the 436?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: On the leftmost corner there, that is
(4) 3-006-029 and to the immediate right is (4) 3-007-030.
Mr. Rapozo: We are adding 30 to this? That is what we
are doing? We are amending the existing Ordinance to include 30?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: To clarify that the designation applies to
both lots, which was the original intent and the designation in 1976.
Mr. Rapozo: Where is that documented anywhere?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: The original designation?
Mr. Rapozo: Right. The 1976 designation?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Ordinance No. 227.
Mr. Rapozo: It includes Lot 30?
COUNCIL MEETING 42 JULY 17, 2013
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: At that time, it was those two (2) lots
because it was not subdivided at that time.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Then subsequent to that in 1981, it was
subdivide to two (2), but really the original designation applied to both.
Mr. Rapozo: Included the whole thing?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: What about across the highway because it
says "makai and mauka of Highway 56 at Waipouli," but they are only listing—are
there more tax map keys for across the highway?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Is it in there now?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes. That was designated in 1976.
Mr. Rapozo: Is that reflected in the existing Ordinance?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: This only shows the amendment.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes. I am sorry—the description also refers
to the degisnation of the makai and mauka. There are other TMK maps listed on
the description of the groves. Those include the...
Mr. Rapozo: Those are accounted for, I guess, is what I
am trying to say.
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Since we are working on this, we want to
capture that across the highway as well?
Ms. Higuchi Sayegusa: Right.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Hooser.
Mr. Hooser: It may not be a question but I just did a
quick Google on the tax and I believe there is a State tax deduction of three
thousand dollars ($3,000) per tree for maintenance that can be taken once every
three (3) years. For one hundred (100) trees, it adds up, I suppose. This is a State
tax. I am not one hundred percent (100%) clear if it is still in effect but there was or
is that deduction. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 43 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: For the Planning Director, there are two (2)
questions that we would like to get followed up before then. On the tax piece that
Mr. Hooser just did some research for us, we want to know the total number of
trees, the parcel, and the application of a tax credit that might equal one thousand
dollars ($1,000) a year. Also, the second part to that question is, do you count living
trees or the fifteen (15) that are already make? The second question with one (1)
part is the some of the history on how that parcel was—there was a second
subdivision of that parcel in 1976. If you could help us with that before the Public
Hearing, I would appreciate it. Are there anymore questions? Jodi, thank you very
much. I will call the meeting back to order. Are there any questions? Mr. Bynum,
you have the floor.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Bynum: We had a lot of dialogue to try to tease this
out and this document that we received would have been very helpful to be in our
packet prior to the meeting today.
Chair Furfaro: I take full responsibility for that. I got it and
I sent it to our legal people to review.
Mr. Bynum: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: That was my fault.
Mr. Bynum: I just wanted to say that I got a chance to
read this now and it is clearer. This all looks pretty good to me and the questions
about tax credits, we can address before this comes to Committee and understand it
better. The proposal is to—there are one hundred six (106) trees there now, and
after this there would be one hundred six (106) trees. Fifty (50) of them would have
been replacement trees at the twenty (20) to thirty (30) foot height instead of the
sixty (60) to eighty (80). There is an Arborist Report from Jerry Nishek. Seeing all
of this, it is clear to me that the intent is good and there will be as many coconut
trees as there were as the proposal, and the ones that are one hundred (100) years
old that have questionable life spans are going to be replaced with trees that are
warranted to survive. The grove-like appearance—there are drawings that shows a
parking lot similar to the Coconut Market Place where trees are preserved
whenever possible. This answers a lot of questions; these documents. I think we
could proceed with this today and ask additional questions through the Committee
process. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Anymore? Again, I give my apologies
because when I got the documents, I sent them for a series of questions to our legal
people. JoAnn, did you have another question?
Ms. Yukimura: I have a comment.
Chair Furfaro: You have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: I think what our task is fairly simple to
complete the official designation of this particular lot as part of the exceptional tree
protection, if you will. It really raises this whole issue about development and
changing the character of place. From the drawings, it looks like you could
COUNCIL MEETING 44 JULY 17, 2013
incorporate—I am surprised because I did not think it was possible. This Longs
Drug Store in a grove-like environment but I have to also say that it is really
different from just a grove of coconut trees. As Councilmember Bynum pointed out,
there has been a resurrection of the Royal Coconut Coast Association. To keep that
character of coconut trees would be very important for this east coast of our island
and for the businesses and so forth. How we do it is a real challenge and raises all
kinds of questions. I think there is a concern by the landowners now about
addressing these trees, but until a development is proposed, you could almost say,
"Well, let them die." It costs money to maintain them. If they were dying trees,
why were not think keiki trees planted earlier in anticipation of them dying? This
whole issue of how we encourage and incentifies owners of property of the
exceptional trees to maintain those trees is an ongoing issue. This new Longs is
going to be located almost a block away from the existing Longs, just like Safeway
in Lihu`e is going to be about two (2) blocks away from another grocery store. It is
beginning to take away the entire rural environment along our main highway. It is
a gradual, but an eventual strip development that we are getting. I thought
Planning was supposed to prevent that. What is happening here? These are just
questions raised by this particular issue before us. I do not know all the answers,
but I think we have to find all of the answers if we want to somehow maintain the
character of our towns.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree totally with
Councilmember Yukimura on this. Looks like we need to do what we are supposed
to have done back in 1976. If it provides a benefit to the developer, then so be it. We
are correcting something that should have been done. I, too, have concerns like her.
We have a proposed new Longs that is going to be there and we already have
sufficient stores in the area. I hear the people of Kaua`i, at least the ones that I talk
to, talk to me about improving traffic in the Kapa'a area. I do not hear them telling
me that they need another big store there. Convenience wise for me, on my way
from fishing from here to Anini, it would be easier for me to pull right overthere
and pick up my drinks, ice, and bait and head out to Anini but in reality, is it what
is going to be best for our people? I hope the Planning Commission will consider
those thoughts. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: That includes us going to Public Hearing on
what date?
Mr. Watanabe: August 14th.
Chair Furfaro: Mike, you are going to watch for the
correspondence as a follow-up to some of the questions that Mr. Rapozo raised?
Okay, on that note, may I please have a roll call vote?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2493 on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
August 14, 2013, and that it thereafter be referred to the Environmental
Services / Public Safety / Community Assistance Committee was then put,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL– 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL– 0,
COUNCIL MEETING 45 JULY 17, 2013
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2494) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 3, ARTICLE 1, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE CODE OF ETHICS: Ms. Yukimura moved for passage of
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2494 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a
public hearing thereon be scheduled for August 14, 2013, and that it thereafter be
referred to the Committee of the Whole Meeting, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Anyone in the
audience? Vice Chair, you have the floor.
Ms. Nakamura: I just wanted to ask a question about the
source of this change and the rationale for this Bill.
Chair Furfaro: Paula, would you please come up?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
PAULA MORIKAMI, Boards and Commissions Administrator: Paula
Morikami, Office of Boards and Commission. In 2010, the general public voted for
this as a Charter Amendment on the ballot and it was never put into the Code.
This is just a housekeeping measure to make that happen.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Thank you very much for that
clarification.
Chair Furfaro: Paula, thank you for coming up. I wanted
you to expand on that. Let us call for a roll call vote, please.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2494 on first reading,
that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
August 14, 2013, and that it thereafter be referred to the Committee of the
Whole Meeting was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2495) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY TAXES: Mr. Kagawa moved for passage of Proposed Draft
Bill No. 2495 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing
thereon be scheduled for August 7, 2013 at 8:30 a.m., and that it thereafter be
referred to the Finance & Economic Development (Tourism / Visitor Industry /
Small Business Development / Sports & Recreation Development / Other Economic
Development Areas) Committee Meeting, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
COUNCIL MEETING 46 JULY 17, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Is there anyone in the audience
who wishes to comment on this item? If not, the Chair recognizes Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I want to start by thanking Steve Hunt,
Jennifer Winn, and our Staff; Ashley Bunda and Scott Sato, who have been meeting
and preparing this Bill over the last few weeks. This really brings to fruition three
(3) years of our tax reform efforts. This is something that we worked out in
corporation with our Staff, me, and the Mayor's Office so I want to go over the main
elements of the Bill just briefly. This Bill first removes the permanent Home Use
Credit that has caused some difficulties in its old age and replaces it with a Home
Preservation Credit for those folks who might be impacted dramatically. These are
kind of the outliers and Real Property estimates it will be one hundred (100) to two
hundred (200) applicants. We can talk with more detail about why this is needed,
but it brings back the homestead back into ad valorem taxation or based on
assessed value/minus exemptions/times rate. Each citizen will be treated the same.
The Bill also increases the Homeowner's Exemption. The numbers in the Bill are a
placeholder because as we discussed with the Permanent Home Use (PHU) doing
data analysis is complicated, but in meetings with the Mayor, we have agreed to
target tax relief for the homestead class at about three point nine million dollars
($3,900,000) which is the current PHU credit. This will reduce taxes for the
homestead class and bring them more in line with the expectations that we had in
2008. I would like there to be more relief, but the Mayor has agreed to this level
and we can discuss if it should be more or less when the Bill comes. The Bill also
increases the minimum tax for everyone over—well, not for everyone...increases the
standard minimum tax from the current twenty-five dollars ($25) to one hundred
dollars ($100) next year and one hundred fifty dollars ($150) in the subsequent year.
It kind of phases it in over two (2) years. It also exemptions everyone on Hawaiian
Homelands from minimum tax. It kind of establishes for the first time, kind of
minimum tax on credit unions of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500). Credit
unions have been exempt from all taxation, even though they have business
properties and buildings. This will say that you are assessed each building that you
have...your maximum tax will be one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500). That
is roughly about one hundred eighty seven thousand dollars ($187,000) of
commercial value. Most credit unions have buildings that would be taxed much
higher than that. This is saying that they are making some contribution, but also
recognizing the nonprofit status of credit unions. As Mr. Furfaro and I discussed, it
also eliminates—we were going to introduce a separate Bill but it is included in
here—elimination of Homeowner's Exemption for anyone who has a Transient
Vacation Rental (TVR) permit. Current law, you can both have a Homeowner's
Exemption and have a commercial use of your property. This would say if you have
a commercial use, you are no longer eligible for Homeowner's Exemption. I think
there was discussion in concurrence on most of these issues during our last Budget
and tax sessions, so I believe this is a reasonable Bill that we may have some
discussion about the amount of Homeowner's Exemption. It is a compromise both
from my position and the Mayor's, and I think again, with the help from Jennifer
Winn, Steve Hunt, and Kim Hester; we think this is a good Bill. I just wanted to
give that overview.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any questions? JoAnn.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes. In addition to all of those
acknowledged, I do want to acknowledge the Finance Committee Chair, Mr. Bynum.
He has been a ceaseless advocate for restoring equity and fairness in our Real
Property Tax system. This Bill will help us move in that direction. I think it is
COUNCIL MEETING 47 JULY 17, 2013
timely and I look forward to working on it, so we can get a good product for the
people of Kaua`i.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Vice Chair?
Ms. Nakamura: Yes, I too, want to acknowledge
Councilmember Bynum and the Finance Department. They said during the Budget
Process that they were going to move expeditiously on it. I think you have working
together. Thank you very much. I believe that this is a time-sensitive Bill, in order
to impact the next Fiscal Year.
Mr. Bynum: Yes, it is.
Ms. Nakamura: I look forward to our discussions. Thank
you.
Mr. Bynum: I would like to say a couple of other things. I
am going to thank Chair Furfaro for recognizing the expeditious manner of this Bill.
These are very complex issues. I think this is going to bring us to a very
manageable, sustainable, and fair manner of taxation. It is time sensitive, so I
would encourage members to read the Bill, as questions, and work with Staff if you
have Amendments to prepare because we do not want to "miss the boat" in terms of
making these next Fiscal Year. The final thing is just a reminder that we increased
the low income exemption. We created a long-term rental incentive for our
landlords and this proposal to increase the Homeowner's Exemption, including
senior, that even though the PHU is coming away with the tax reduction, the
majority of taxpayers will see a reduction. Those who see an increase...they will not
be that great and when they are great, there is this home provision credit that is
new. It is like, "Hey, if you already are senior and you already have low-income
discounts, you used all of these mechanisms, and still your home is not threatened,
this Bill addresses that. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Anymore? I, too, want to thank Scott,
as well as Ashley from our team, but Kim Hestor, our Finance Director, Steve Hunt,
and Sally—I have had time separately with them. I am ninety percent (90%) happy
with what we have in this document. I also want to acknowledge Mr. Bynum for his
comments about finding the time that putting it on the agenda and expediting it...I
was happy to do so, Tim.
Mr. Bynum: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Like I said, at this point, I know Mr. Kagawa
and I have had some time to review the Bill. I am ninety (90%) happy with what we
have coming out here. Mr. Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to thank
Mr. Bynum and yourself for putting it on the agenda and everybody who has
worked on it. After the Public Hearing and when we go to Committee, I would like
to see some examples provided by Mr. Hunt. He has been in the Real Property Tax
Division for a long time and he has that expertise. I would like to see some
examples. It does not have to have names or exact TMKs, but I want to see some
examples of how this would play out in reality. If that could be provided...maybe
ten (10) examples or so, cases in which homestead classes will go down and where
COUNCIL MEETING 48 JULY 17, 2013
those bills that was low would come back to even or as we say, "get everybody more
on a level playing field." Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Yes. Like Mr. Bynum said, between the
three point eight million dollars ($3,800,000) and three point nine million dollars
($3,900,000), there will be some tweaking in there but we will' have time to do that.
Before I call for the vote, Jennifer, thank you very much for your legal work on this.
It is very much appreciated. Are there anymore comments before we call for the
vote here? We have a motion and a date. May I have a roll call vote, please?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2495 on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
August 7, 2013 at 8:30 a.m., and that it thereafter be referred to the Finance
& Economic Development (Tourism / Visitor Industry / Small Business
Development / Sports & Recreation Development / Other Economic
Development Areas) Committee Meeting was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2460, Draft 1 —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 12, OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, ENTITLED
"BUILDING CODE:" Mr. Kagawa moved to receive Bill No. 2460, Draft 1 for the
record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo.
Chair Furfaro: Discussion? Mr. Bynum, you have the floor.
Mr. Bynum: This is a Bill where we got trumped by the
State Legislature. The County of Kauai had a mechanism to both not require
permits, and at the same time, make sure that structures are built to Code. We
have to go back to the drawing board based on the State Legislature's Bill and kind
of see where we are at. That is why we are receiving this Bill in its current theme.
The motion to receive Bill No. 2460, Draft 1, for the record was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR RECEIPT: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST RECEIPT: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Bill No. 2483, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTERS 7, 8, AND 9, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE ADJUSTMENT OF VARIOUS PERMITTING CHARGES
AND FEES LEVIED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
(County of Kaua`i, Applicant): Ms. Yukimura moved for adoption of Bill No. 2483,
COUNCIL MEETING 49 JULY 17, 2013
Draft 1, on second and final reading, that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his
approval, seconded by Ms. Nakamura, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Bill No. 2486, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 16 AND CHAPTER 19, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO ABANDONED VEHICLES: Ms. Yukimura moved for adoption of
Bill No. 2486, Draft 1, on second and final reading, that it be transmitted to the
Mayor for his approval, seconded by Mr. Kagawa, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Bill No. 2487, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR BARGAINING UNIT 1
BETWEEN JULY 1, 2013 AND JUNE 30, 2017: Ms. Yukimura moved for adoption
of Bill No. 2487, Draft 1, on second and final reading, that it be transmitted to the
Mayor for his approval, seconded by Mr. Kagawa.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Go right ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: This is for the United Public Workers (UPW)
Collective Bargaining Agreement. I want my comments to apply to the next Bill as
well. Our blue collar and white collar County employees have been very patient and
have borne a lot of the economic crisis that we have been in. They have suffered not
only from not having pay raises, but from actually having to bear cuts and
furloughs. It is time to put things back on track. I am glad for both of these two (2)
Bills that are before us for approval today.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Is there any further comments? If not,
may I have a roll call vote, please?
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2487, Draft 1 on second and final reading,
that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Bill No. 2488, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT FOR BARGAINING UNITS 2, 3,
AND 4 BETWEEN JULY 1, 2013 AND JUNE 30, 2015: Ms. Yukimura moved for
adoption of Bill No. 2488, Draft 1, on second and final reading, that it be
COUNCIL MEETING 50 JULY 17, 2013
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: Before we go to lunch, I want to call the
County Attorney up. Before I do, Al, I would like to give Councilmember Yukimura
a personal privilege. You have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. I feel a bit shy about announcing
this because it is so personal, but this is a personal privilege. It is pretty happy
news. I just wanted to say that today is my parents' 65th Wedding Anniversary. It
is hard for me to conceive being together for so long but it is typical, I think, of this
generation of my parents, that they are together so long, reflecting fidelity,
commitment, and love. It is just a happy thing that I wanted to share. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you for doing that. This entire
Council wishes them all of our aloha. You have some dynamic parents there that
have touched all of us in meeting them. Congratulations to them.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Al, may I ask you to come up? We will have
to come back after Executive Session. Al, can you read us into Executive Session,
but we will go to lunch.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR., County Attorney: Thank you. Council
Chair and Councilmembers, Al Castillo, County Attorney. I might add
"congratulations" also, JoAnn.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Mr. Castillo: I can see their faces. Anyway, Council Chair,
I will read the items up for your consideration.
ES-610 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4,
92-5(a)(4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), on behalf of the Council, the
Office of the County Attorney requests an executive session with the Council to
provide the Council with a briefing related to the procurement matter and
recommendations as stated in the Management Advisory Report Finding 12-01
"Review Purchasing and Procurement Process of Independent Contractors," and
related matters. This briefing and consultation involves the consideration of the
powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the
County as they relate to this agenda item.
COUNCIL MEETING 51 JULY 17, 2013
ES-629 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(3), and (4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is for the Council to address issues relating to ongoing labor
negotiations and related matters and to consult with the County Attorney. This
briefing and consultation involves the consideration of the powers, duties,
privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they
relate to this agenda item.
ES-656 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4, 92-
5(a)(4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County
Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the Council
with a briefing regarding the claim against the County of Kaua`i by Shane N.
Matias, filed on June 2, 2010 and related matters. This briefing and consultation
involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or
liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
ES-657 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8) and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the
County Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council, to provide the
Council with a briefing in matters relating to the investigation of personnel
matters involving the Office of the County Auditor and related matters. This
briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges,
immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this
agenda item.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa moved to convene into Executive Session for ES-610, ES-629,
ES-656, and ES-657, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Chair Furfaro: Members, we are going to break now but we
will be back at 1:30 p.m.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 12:21 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 3:37 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: To the Clerk's Office, can you take us through
the public portions of these Executive Sessions?
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2013-257 Communication (07/03/2013) from the County Attorney,
requesting Council approval to expend funds up to $5,000 for Special Counsel's
continued services provided for in the claim against the County of Kaua`i, filed by
COUNCIL MEETING 52 JULY 17, 2013
Shane N. Matias on June 2, 2010 and related matters: Mr. Bynum moved to
approve C 2013-257, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and carried by the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
C 2013-259 Communication (07/11/2013) from the County Attorney,
requesting Council approval to expend additional funds up to $20,000 for Special
Counsel's continued services to advise and represent the County Council in matters
relating to the investigation of personnel matters involving the County Auditor's
Office, and related matters: Ms. Yukimura moved to defer C 2013-259, seconded by
Mr. Hooser, and carried by the following vote:
FOR DEFERRAL: Bynum, Hooser, Kagawa, Nakamura,
Rapozo, Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST DEFERRAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. This brings us to conclusion of today's
Council Meeting as posted. Thank you everyone and have a nice evening.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:17 p.m.
Re- I ectfullyy 1 ubmitted,
JA V • • TAIN-TANIGAWA
Dep County Clerk
:cy