HomeMy WebLinkAbout 09/25/2013 Council Meeting Minutes COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 25, 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, September 25, 2013 at 9:05 a.m., after
which the following members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Ross Kagawa
Honorable Mel Rapozo
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura
Honorable Jay Furfaro
Excused: Honorable Tim Bynum
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Chair Furfaro: Let the record show that I did hear from Vice
Chair Nakamura that she is traveling. I believe Mr. Bynum is just late. I have not
heard more from him. We have five (5) members present for the meeting this
morning. I would like to share some information with the members in the audience.
I have had requests to take the following in this order this morning, including
Resolution No. 2013-71 which deals with the renaming a softball field at Anne
Knudsen Park in honor of Rosie Bukoski and her contributions to recreation on our
island. That will be the first item and I will turn that over to you, Mr. Kagawa.
The item after that will be C 2013-320 which is a Planning update on the Hanapepe
Pedestrian Access Bridge Project. Those will be the two (2) items we take first.
Due to the fact that they are in Court this morning, I got a request from the County
Attorney's Office asking that we move item C 2013-319 to approximately 1:30 p.m.
or soon thereafter so that they can be present. That will be the order of the day at
this point. Now, let us go to Public Comment. Pursuant to Council Rule 13(e), I
will allow members of the public three (3) minutes at the discretion of the Chair to
talk on any item that is on today's agenda, limiting it to a total of six (6) people, or
eighteen (18) minutes. There will be no questions from the Council. This is for the
convenience of taking early testimony, and then we will go into those items that I
spoke about. Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on Public
Comment at this point?
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).
RICKY WATANABE, County Clerk: Mr. Chair, we have two (2) registered
speakers, but first we need an approval of the agenda.
COUNCIL MEETING 2 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Yes. Do you have the names of those two (2)
registered speakers?
Mr. Watanabe: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you.
Mr. Watanabe: The first one will be Caren Diamond, and
then Lonnie Sykos.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. May we have an approval of the
agenda?
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Ms. Yukimura moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kagawa, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura
were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Our first speaker is
Caren Diamond. Caren, you have the floor.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
CAREN DIAMOND: Good morning, Councilmembers. I came this
morning to talk because I saw the Executive Session listed on the vacation rental
issue, and this is one of the dates that I had on my calendar that the Council had
assigned as a public update on this issue, as well. I have come here to testify from
the public perspective, both for myself and for "Protect Our Neighborhood "`Ghana,"
which is composed of citizens of Ha`ena and Wainiha, who are most impacted by the
proliferation of vacation rentals. Nowadays, we are most impacted by the lack of
transparency of what happened and how that happened. I wanted to tell you today
that the lack of transparency is still going on very much. It was presented to this
Council and to the public that there was a bubble of renewals that were coming up
on July 31st. We had filed a request for public information on August 20th to find
out what actually had been renewed and what had not been renewed, only to be told
that it would cost us one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) to actually find out
what was renewed and what was not renewed in our neighborhood. You now have,
"Is it a five hundred (500) room or one thousand (1,000) room hotel and resort
across our ocean front lands in Wainiha with absolutely no knowledge of where it
is?" Maybe you know, but we do not. No one knows what is legal, what is not legal,
and what was permitted. As it turned out, Mike ended up to be a little bit
transparent and produced a list for us, which was very nice, but the list actually
had scrambled Tax Map Key (TMK) and Transient Vacation Rental (TVR) numbers.
It turned out that these bubble of approvals did not actually happen after July 31st,
but happened during April, May, June, and July. So, there was not a bubble and
there is no timeline in which to even look at what Planning has done in a
transparent way in any timely manner. When I looked at the list, and it took a long
time to actually decipher because it turned out that over twenty-five (25) of the TVR
numbers had actually been changed to different numbers. When it is told to you
that these numbers are dead files, a lot of these dead files just had their numbers
changed. The numbers then changed again for a third time. Planning told us that
COUNCIL MEETING 3 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
they filed these files by TVR number, so I am not sure if that is why there is so
much confusion because the TVR numbers keep changing. If you look at what is
happening in a TMK or what is happening in a neighborhood, it is not really clear.
When we looked at what the file said, several of these actually had conflicting
information where it would have the same TMK, an approval date, a renewal date
that conflicted with further down the list, and that same TMK having another
renewal approval date. Other ones had three (3) certificates and three (3) renewals
with different numbers. Other ones had two (2). It was completely unclear as to
what had happened. What was renewed? What was not renewed? Their
information conflicted with each other.
Chair Furfaro: Caren, that was your three (3) minutes.
Ms. Diamond: Thank you. As for transparency, our
neighborhood deserves better and we hope this Council actually keeps on it because
we do deserve more. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: I am going to break one of my own rules and
just to let you know that our final session with them is October 9th.
Ms. Diamond: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Lonnie, please come up.
LONNIE SYKOS: Good morning, Council Chair and
Councilmembers. Thank you for the opportunity to speak this morning. For the
record, Lonnie Sykos. As I was looking at the agenda for today's meeting and read
about the Repeal of the Iniki Bill, one of the things that I was looking at in it was
waiving various standards. In this process of waiving standards specifically for
Coco Palms, is the public going to assume the liability that if we waive standards,
that means we end up with a substandard outcome? Who is liable for the
substandard side of it? Something definitely needs to be done with Coco Palms but
for disclosure, is the public going to end up assuming any liability as part of trying
to get the property out of the state that it is in today?
For the Kapaia Swinging Bridge, C 2013-319, one of the things that I
pondered is whether the County has ever explored going and harvesting redwood
trees. These are trees up in Koke`e and there is a redwood forest at Polipoli State
Park on Maui. At the State park on Maui, the trees need to be thinned. There is a
process to go through the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) to
harvest trees. My canoe club in Hana harvested six (6) koa trees off of State land as
an example, so if they want fidelity to replace the original material, perhaps it
already exists in Hawai`i, and we just need to go harvest the trees. Does the
Council have a report or statement about the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
compliance throughout our park system? It kind of seems like we are dealing with
it piecemeal, but do we have an understanding of what the Scope-of-Work that is
required to bring us up to ADA compliances throughout our park system? Are we
forecasting that into your current budgets? Finally, I support registering and
regulating lobbyists. Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Lonnie.
Mr. Sykos: Good job, Council. Aloha.
COUNCIL MEETING 4 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Lonnie, under Rule 13(e), we cannot respond
to you so if you pose questions...
Mr. Sykos: I thoroughly understand that rhetorical
questions to be addressed later.
Chair Furfaro: Understood. It is a period just to take
testimony. Thank you very much.
Mr. Sykos: Right, thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any other registered speakers?
Mr. Watanabe: No.
Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone else in the audience who
wishes to speak now? If you speak now, you will not have another opportunity
today for agenda items. Seeing no one, the next item in our order of business today
by request, I would like to actually go to Resolution No. 2013-71, which I am going
to turn the floor over to Mr. Kagawa.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you. Chair, before you turn it over, I
think the Clerk wanted you to cover the minutes.
Mr. Watanabe: Yes, the minutes, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: I think that would be appropriate.
Mr. Watanabe: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you for pointing that out.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
June 26, 2013 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2485
July 31, 2013 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2491
August 14, 2013 Council Meeting
August 14, 2013 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2489, Bill No. 2490,
Bill No. 2492, Bill No. 2493, and Bill No. 2494
August 28, 2013 Council Meeting
September 4, 2013 Special Council Meeting
September 12, 2013 Special Council Meeting
September 16, 2013 Special Council Meeting
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kagawa.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion amongst members?
COUNCIL MEETING 5 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Yukimura: Yes. Thank you. I would like to ask that the
July 31, 2013 Public Hearing Minutes on Bill No. 2491 be omitted so that I have a
chance to look over it.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. We can omit it and give you the time
to review and have it come back on another calendar. Is that your first request?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, if the maker of the motion would agree
to a friendly amendment.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Kagawa: I second.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. From this approval, we are moving
the July 31, 2013 Public Hearing Minutes on Bill No. 2491 to another Council
Meeting date for time to review. The makers of the motion have both agreed. Is
there any further discussion, members?
The motion to approve all Minutes except the July 31, 2013 Public Hearing
Minutes for Bill No. 2491 was then put, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Ms. Yukimura: I have a point of inquiry.
Chair Furfaro: Go right ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: Do we need a special motion to defer this?
Chair Furfaro: You can make a motion. Go right ahead.
Ms. Yukimura moved to defer the July 31, 2013 Public Hearing Minutes on
Bill No. 2491, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, rather than restate
what I said earlier, I would like you to refer to the Resolution.
There being no objections, Resolution No. 2013-71 was taken out of the order.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2013-71 — RESOLUTION NAMING THE SOFTBALL FIELD
AT ANNE KNUDSEN PARK "ROSIE BUKOSKI FIELD" IN HONOR OF THE
LATE ROSEMARY BUKOSKI: Mr. Rapozo moved for adoption of
Resolution No. 2013-71, seconded by Mr. Kagawa.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa, do you want to take time to
read the Resolution?
Mr. Kagawa: Yes. Thank you. I would like to thank you
for allowing us to take this item up first. I looked at the afternoon schedule and
thought the morning was much better, so thank you very much. I am going to read
the Resolution. First of all, I want to thank Mayor Carvalho, who agreed with me
COUNCIL MEETING 6 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
that this was very appropriate. I also want to thank Lenny Rapozo, Director of
Parks and Recreation, who also agreed, and Mr. Rapozo for cosponsoring this
Resolution with me. I feel this is well-deserved and long overdue.
With that, I will read the Resolution. "Whereas, the late Rosemary Bukoski
known by many as "Aunty Rosie," was a long time resident of K5loa, and an
inspiration for numerous youth on Kauai; and whereas Aunty Rosie was born and
raised on the softball field at Anne Knudsen Park and spent many hours coaching
and playing softball; and whereas, Aunty Rosie was instrumental in spearheading
the construction and completion of the pavilion at Anne Knudsen Park, which was
built in 1999 and has benefited the community tremendously by providing shade
and a gathering spot at the highly utilized park; and whereas, "Rosie's Lunch
Wagon" was a fixture at the park as many fondly remember indulging in Aunty
Rosie's delicious mushroom burgers and mouth watering homemade pasteles while
watching a softball, baseball, or t-ball game; and whereas, as a tribute to her
lifetime dedication to her community, and Kaua`i's youth, it is appropriate that the
softball field at Anne Knudsen Park be named after Aunty Rosie and a plaque of
recognition be erected in a fitting location; now, therefore, be it resolved, by the
Council by the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, that the softball field at Anne
Knudsen Park be hereby named "Rosie Bukoski Field" to recognize and honor the
late Rosemary Bukoski for her many contributions to the community. Be it further
resolved, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Mayor Bernard P. Carvalho,
Jr., and Leonard A. Rapozo, Jr., Director of Parks and Recreation with a request
that appropriate signs be erected at the park to proclaim her name."
I want to thank the Staff for preparing the Resolution and doing a great job. I
particularly just want to mention that Sherri Cummings, along with the Bukoski
family, reminded me because we talked about this earlier, and I had kind of
forgotten. With that, we will have the family come up and speak.
Mr. Watanabe: We have three (3) speakers who signed up.
They are Uli`i Castor, David Bukoski, and Nani Sadora.
Mr. Kagawa: All three (3) is fine at the same time, if you
want to take turns. Thank you. You have the floor. Please state your name.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ULI`I CASTOR: Good morning, Chair and Councilmembers.
For the record, my name is Uli`i Castor. I have lived with the Bukoski family for
many years. Rosemary was an inspiration for me because the Bukoski's took me in
as part of their family. She was a very, very outgoing person. She played softball
for many, many years here on Kaua`i and on the mainland because she ran away
from home right after high school. She was in California for eleven (11) years.
While she was up there, she was playing softball and also played semi-professional
fast pitch. They wanted to draft her into professional fast pitch, but her father had
a heart attack so she elected to come home in 1977. Upon returning to Kaua`i, she
took upon herself to develop and help the youth, especially in t-ball, little league,
and bobby sox. Then, she formed her own women's softball team and also a co-ed
team. We ran the tournament for over twenty-five (25) years and had teams from
all over, statewide and California that came to her tournament. She had the
largest tournament here on Kaua`i for many years, like I said, for over twenty-five
(25) years. In testifying today, I think it was well-deserved for you folks to do this
Resolution in her memory because the late Bryan Baptiste also requested to have
COUNCIL MEETING 7 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
this softball field named after her because of all the community services she has
done. Like it was stated, we did work hard for that pavilion after the old fire
station was demolished. We jumped on it right away. From May through
December, we rededicated it back to the Council. There was a lot of hard work. We
did not have any support from our Koloa community—I do not want to say that, but
the only support was from Ricky Wa'alani, (inaudible), Rod Sueoka from Sueoka
Store, Dean Petro with his construction people, myself, and a couple of her family
members who helped erect that pavilion. Then we built a score booth, some
reconstruction on the electrical box and enclosed it, renovations in the dugouts, and
then requested to have the bleachers removed because of safety. She did not want
the County to get sued because of that reason. I want thank you on behalf of the
Bukoski family and myself. Thank you, Ross and Mel, for presenting this
Resolution. I also want to thank Sherri for talking to Ross and bringing this up.
Mahalo.
NANI SADORA: Aloha, Council. My name is Nani Sadora. I
am a niece to Rosemary. I wanted to take some time out this morning to come in
and say thank you. It is something that I think all of us, or a lot of residents in
Koloa, and maybe even islandwide or statewide, feel that that field was already
Rosie Bukoski's field. To be able to have this plaque there in her memory; it is just
a legacy to who she was and I think for what she has given to us. Many of our
families now also participate in the community. Our family is very strong in
baseball, softball, or whatever you want to call it, but a lot of us still give back to
your our community really because of what she has instilled in us. Whether you
have been honored to play with her, for her, or against her; she was a force to
reckon with. There was a lot of respect that people gave her and it was because of
what she was so willing to give all the time. I am honored to be her niece and I am
honored to be able to have this field be something that is dedicated in her name.
My children, grandchildren, and all those who come after me can see what legacy
she has left for us. Mahalo.
DAVID BUKOSKI: Aloha, Chair and members of the Council.
My name is David Bukoski. I would like to also thank you for doing this and
passing this Resolution. Aunty Rosie was quite a special individual. She touched a
lot of people's lives like what you have heard before. I think that many of the
softball community or just the youth sports, there was not too many people who was
not touched by her generosity and her giving. On behalf of our family, we would
just like to say thank you and just remember that people like that do exist.
Ms. Castor: Can I add one thing?
Mr. Kagawa: Of course.
Ms. Castor: I forget to mention that she was actually the
first woman to play on the all men's team on Kaua`i, which was her father Frank's
team. She challenged a lot of men and they could not believe she was the type of
person she was. She also spearheaded under Eddie Sarita's "Adopt a Park
Program." She took care of the softball field and the pavilion during that time the
program was in existence. We mahalo the County and everyone for allowing that.
Mr. Kagawa: Members, are there any comments or
questions?
COUNCIL MEETING 8 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: First of all, it is very good to see all of you
here. I have very fond memories of Aunty Rosie, as well. For me, it really is
honoring her in her sense of community. She was certainly a lover of that ballpark
and baseball as a sport, but she also had great aloha for Kaua`i. I know she also
invested in a lot of people; young people, senior softball, all of those things. She
made it a personal investment to help people where she could to really living kokua.
I enjoyed going to the baseball tournaments many times with Bryan and I think one
of the things that I remember was that she made great shoyu chicken. Whoever
was on her team made outstanding shoyu chicken. I think many future Koloa
restaurants might have "Aunty Rosie's Shoyu Chicken" on their menu. I want to
say that this lady lived aloha. She walked the values that we all appreciate here in
Hawai`i. I have very fond memories of her and very delighted to support this
Resolution. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. Councilmember
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. It is so wonderful to hear the
family memories and Chair Furfaro's memories and the details of what Aunty Rosie
did for the community. I came back to Kaua`i about the same time that she came
back in the late `70s. I feel so privileged to have gotten to know her. I remember
her great spirit, her compelling voice, and all of the things that she did. What you
detailed—I did not know all of that. It is just amazing to know what she did for the
community and how many lives she touched. It is wonderful. Thank you, Ross,
Mel, and Mayor, and those who are making this naming happen because now, that
memory will be etched into the community memory through this naming of the
softball field that she loved, developed, played on, and encouraged young people to
play on. It is a wonderful day, this morning, to remember Aunty Rosie.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser.
Mr. Hooser: It is an honor for me to vote in support of
this. To hear these stories, it just warms my heart and makes me think about Rosie
and seeing the image of her smiling and laughing. It is just great. Thank you for
introducing this and thank you for being here. It is just really an honor to be able
to be part of honoring Aunty Rosie. Thank you.
Mr. Kagawa: Councilmember Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Mr. Kagawa. Thank you all for
being here. When Ross asked me if I was interested in cosponsoring, like one of the
speakers, I kind of thought they already did that a while back. I thought that field
was already in her name. That is how ignorant I am, but like Gary just said,
whenever I go down to Koloa and see the pavilion and the field, you cannot help but
think about Aunty Rosie. It is just like she never left and she is still here. I know
you talked a lot about baseball, but yet, she kept those football kids in line, too. The
Chair always talks about sometimes "aloha" means having to deliver the bad news.
She was good at that, as well. When I see her, yes, I see her smiling face but I also
see a very strong woman who took pride in the park, the facilities, and the entire
park. I can see her yelling at kids. You wonder, "Why does that pavilion stay so
clean? Why has that pavilion not been defaced?" It is because they are scared
because Aunty Rosie is still here. We were there for the Koloa Plantation Days
parade and that is where we staged up—I staged at the wrong place, but I staged at
the pavilion because when they said to go to Koloa Park, you just assume that is
COUNCIL MEETING 9 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
where it would be. I sat in the pavilion and started to think about Aunty Rosie
again and enjoying and admiring that facility that was built. I am glad that you
brought up the fact that it was done by a very small group of people that had a
vision led by Aunty Rosie. It is definitely an honor to support this. Like I said,
when we did the field for Wally Sonoda out in Kaumakani, we do not do this often.
We do not name parks and name facilities often, so we are blessed to have had that
opportunity to do that for some very special people. The community has to
understand that Aunty Rosie was very special, not just to that park, but to the
entire community and to the entire island. This is well-deserved and probably too
late. We waited too long, but nonetheless, what you said about your generations to
follow will always know that is Aunty Rosie's field. That is least that this Council
can do. Thank you, Ross, for this and I look forward to the sign, placard,
monument, or whatever it will be, so that people will remember how it all came to
be. Thank you all. Thank you, Ross.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Councilmember Rapozo. I guess
if I could add to the value of Aunty Rosie for women's sports and how far it has
come. When I remember early in the `70s, there were just very limited
opportunities for young girls to start playing. Look where we have come today. I
think Aunty Rosie was a pioneer because she could play with the men and she could
hit the ball over the left field fence at Koloa. There is not a whole bunch of men
that can do that and this was with the older bats. She was just one of the top
women softball players of all time. She was that great of an athlete, but I think it is
a tribute to her that a lot of our women of Kaua`i have done so well like Jessica
Iwata and Ulu Matagiese. I think Kaua`i has definitely put a mark on women's
softball and baseball. I want to thank the entire family. David has been coaching
baseball for a long time. Nani has been running Lihu'e Baseball League (LBL) for
many years. It is tribute that you are carrying on what Aunty Rosie had taught you
guys, so thank you for all of your community service. Aunty, mahalo for all that you
guys did and continue to do your announcing, all day long, without taking a break.
She is the best announcer, too. She can go all day and she knows the game. Sherri,
please come up if you would like to say something.
SHERRI CUMMINGS-YOKOTAKE: Aloha, Council and Ross. Thank you
so much for putting this Resolution forward for our Aunty. Thank you, Mel, for
cosponsoring. Thank you to Lenny Rapozo, Parks and Recreation, and our Mayor.
I am also a relative of Aunty Rosie. Her mama and my tutu are sisters; mine is the
oldest and Aunty's is the youngest and last living of our kupuna for our family. I
want to just touch on what Nani said because it is so true. First and foremost, she
is an icon in Koloa. Aunty was kind of like the piko of that area. It was not only
community, it was family because I think through her, the Bukoski's—I speak on
behalf of my sister, Nani, also. I would be remiss to not mention the name "Na
Kolohe" because that was our Aunty's team name. It would have been such a
privilege and an honor for anybody who our Aunty thought was competent is an
understatement because you had to prove yourself worthy. Trust me; there was a
lot of proving going on with the older generations and coming up through the ranks.
I think I was probably the youngest one. I was not very privileged in the very
beginning years, but in the ladder part, I got to be a part of Aunty. I would say for
you, Ross, and me, we lived and breathe sports. Coaches were very important to us
and she raised that bar. You have got "coaches," and then you have got "coaches,"
and that was our Aunty. You perform, you eat balls and everything, and you never
complained. It was an honor to be on the team. Just a small correction, you
mentioned our Aunty pounding the ball in the left field, but she was all right field.
She was a lefty. No, she could switch it occasionally, but Aunty was a big batter. I
COUNCIL MEETING 10 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
think right after my sister, Nani; she would call her "nana." She was probably the
youngest with, I think, Kim Naholoholo at the time. They could rope bats and they
emulated my Aunty because she was the one on the field. Granny, our Aunty
Kalehua—that was the place that you would always see our Aunty and our Frankie
there. They would own that field. All of the families would come, so I would say the
park was the piko of the family. For that, I am so thankful that you guys are
honoring our Aunty in that manner. I would just like to say mahalo.
Mr. Kagawa: Mahalo. Are there any questions for Sherri?
With that, does anybody else from the public want to speak? Lenny, come right up.
LEONARD A. RAPOZO, JR., Director of Parks and Recreation: Good
morning everybody. For the record, Director of Parks and Recreation, Lenny
Rapozo. As the Director, it is so fitting to honor someone from our community who
has given so much. Our Mayor, who not only is the Mayor, but also had a very close
personal relationship with Aunty Rosie, is in pain for not being able to come here
today but he already had an commitment on the West side at the tech center on
Pacific Missile Range Facility (PMRF). I would like to express his gratitude to
Councilmembers Kagawa and Rapozo, and this body for bringing this forward,
having this on the agenda, and doing this dedication. It is an honor. We have
reached out to the family and spoke to Aunty Uli`i, but we are working out an
appropriate time to put up a plaque. Again, it will be a twelve (12) by twelve (12)
granite plaque with an inscription, and most appropriately, put her picture on
there. Granite will last a lifetime for us and we think that would be appropriate at
a place of their choosing for the honor of that particular facility at the park.
With that being said, now for the record, I am Lenny Rapozo, a community
member. My experience with Aunty Rosie goes back a long time. When I came
back from college, I got involved with community softball and just playing as one of
the boys. I kind of knew who she was but never really knew her. Coming back from
college, I took the honorary task of helping Kaua`i High School and coaching girls
softball. If you ever coached girls, you know what it means when it is "honorary."
Anyway, I did that. Nineteen (19) years ago, I realized that there was a need for
girls softball and the Kaua`i Junior Olympic Softball Program was started by myself
and a group of community organizers. In Koloa, there are two (2) teams; one
coached by BJ and one coached by Doreen Matsumura. We all wanted to get this
thing. The girls were excited. Baseball was big in Koloa; it was huge. The County
also helped us with getting this softball program. They used every part of that park
for baseball. When we wanted part of the softball field to use for our girls, it was
told to us that they would cut a pasture and the girls would play at a pasture. As
we organized, I looked for different community people to help me. Who else did I go
to but Aunty Rosie. When you start something new, we have no money. We started
with absolutely zero. We had donations from De Beers Sports who provided the
balls. With Aunty Rosie's help, we did a lot of food booths at some of the different
places, and that is how we started to raise money. When she found out what had
happened, you can imagine the words that came out of her mouth. I think we all
know the famous phrase. It has part of the "pua a" anyway. Long story short, we
got our way. The girls played softball in that area. That was their part of the field
because it was a softball field, but really, Aunty Rosie was instrumental in Koloa to
help develop the Junior Olympic program which is an islandwide program. I am
happy to still see it go on nineteen (19) years later. Today is a wonderful day.
There is only one other thing that could really top today, and I am speaking from a
personal standpoint with my relationship with Aunty Rosie, which was really to
have her here today. That would top everything. We all know such is life. We
COUNCIL MEETING 11 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
know that she is here in spirit in her own way, not only in this room as we celebrate
her work at the Koloa Anne Knudsen Park, but we also are now celebrating her life
as part of this. We celebrate her accomplishments. We celebrate her community
involvement. Most importantly, we celebrate Rosie Bukoski for the person that she
is. I thank you guys for doing this and I thank you for this opportunity to speak.
Mr. Kagawa: Mahalo, Lenny. Are there any questions for
Lenny? If not, shall I turn the meeting back to you, Chair?
Chair Furfaro: Yes. I would like to see if we can at least
take a picture with the family members under the seal.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Is there anybody
else from the public wishing to speak? If not, is there any further discussion
amongst the members?
Chair Furfaro: Okay. May I have a roll call vote, please?
The motion to adopt Resolution No. 2013-71 was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Yukimura,
Furfaro TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Bynum, Nakamura TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: Can the family come up and take a picture with us
under the seal? Let us a take a short recess so we can do that. Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 9:47 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 9:48 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Clerk, I would like to go to the next item
that we posted on the order of the day. We are going to go to item C 2013-320,
relating to an update on the Hanapepe Pedestrian Access Bridge. Is Mr. Dill here?
Mr. Watanabe: Chair, we can take the Consent Calendar
first.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2013-316 Communication (08/21/2013) from the Kaua`i Planning
Commission, transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve
the repeal of Ordinance No. 716, relating to standards, permits, and fees for work on
buildings, structures, and property damaged by Hurricane Iniki: Mr. Kagawa moved
to receive C 2013-316 for the record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and carried by a
vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
COUNCIL MEETING 12 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
C 2013-317 Communication (09/18/2013) from Councilmember Kagawa and
Councilmember Rapozo, transmitting for Council consideration, a resolution
naming the softball field at Anne Knudsen Park the "Rosie Bukoski Field" in honor
of the late Rosemary Bukoski: Mr. Kagawa moved to receive C 2013-317 for the
record, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and
Ms. Nakamura were excused)..
C 2013-318 Communication (09/19/2013) from Councilmember Yukimura,
relating to Bill No. 2496 — A Bill For An Ordinance Approving A Collective
Bargaining Agreement For Bargaining Unit 12 Between July 1, 2011 And
June 30, 2017: Mr. Kagawa moved to receive C 2013-318 for the record, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were
excused).
Chair Furfaro: I believe the County Attorney and the
Engineering Division asked for a post at 1:30 p.m. on the Kapaia Swinging Bridge,
but I did not get that same request for the Hanapepe Pedestrian Access Bridge.
Larry is on his way? Okay. We will move onto other things. Let us go to
Communications.
COMMUNICATIONS:
EDR 2013-03 Communication (07/24/2013) from Councilmember Yukimura,
requesting agenda time to discuss and approve a proposed amendment to Senate
Bill (S.B.) 16, Senate Draft (S.D.) 2 amending Chapter 196, Hawai`i Revised
Statutes (HRS), (Solar Water Heating Law for New Single-Family and Duplex
Construction) by requiring variance applications and requirements to be handled by
the Counties, for inclusion in the 2014 County of Kauai and Hawai`i State
Association of Counties (HSAC) Legislative Packages: Mr. Kagawa moved to defer
EDR 2013-03 to the October 23, 2013 Council Meeting.
Chair Furfaro: If you want to have discussion, now is the
time.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Chair, I agree with a deferral to
October 23rd and thank Councilmember Kagawa for wanting to make that motion. I
just want to say that the Administration and I have a meeting set for the week
before and we really need that time before this is acted on by this Council, so a
deferral would be appreciated.
Chair Furfaro: Okay.
The motion to defer EDR 2013-03 to the October 23, 2013 Council Meeting
was then put, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. On a housekeeping
note, I have received a note from Council Services that Mr. Bynum has written in
that he is under the weather today and will not be present due to illness. Let us
continue.
Mr. Watanabe: Chair, I see the Executive on Transportation
here and there is an item on the agenda from them.
COUNCIL MEETING 13 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Let us go there then.
Mr. Rapozo: Chair, I have a question really quick.
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: I understand that Public Works has asked to
move the Kapaia Swinging Bridge item until after lunch but I see the community
here. I am not sure if they were informed.
Chair Furfaro: I was told that they were informed this
morning. Is that correct, Staff?
Mr. Rapozo: For Kapaia, not Hanapep5.
Chair Furfaro: That is what I said. We did not defer
Hanapepe, so they called for him again.
Mr. Rapozo: I am talking about Kapaia because I see
Ms. Moriguchi here in the back.
Chair Furfaro: Let me go through this highlight again. The
request came from the County Attorney because they had Court today. They asked
to come back at 1:30 p.m. only for the Kapaia Swinging Bridge, followed by the fact
that I spoke with the Staff to inform those that they knew or could identify that
that request had been made for 1:30 p.m. Am I correct, Staff?
Mr. Rapozo: Staff informed me that they spoke to Kako
for the Hanapepe Bridge, but not to the people of Kapaia.
Chair Furfaro: I did not recognize you, Mr. Rapozo. Let me
get clarification from the Staff. Did you inform the people in Hanamd'ulu? Okay,
so we did not speak to anybody directly. Okay, now you have the floor, Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: My concern, Mr. Chair, is that when we have
these issues that we know involve a community and they have been here every
meeting, and if we are going to move the item, we should probably let them know
ahead of time so that they can make arrangements to their schedule. I am not sure
if they want to stay here but if we are going to do it after lunch, and they are willing
to return, then fine. If they cannot come back after lunch, I would ask that we give
them the opportunity to testify.
Chair Furfaro: I did not say that they would not be able to
testify. I said that the County Attorney and the Engineer asked to come and speak
to us at 1:30 p.m. and they will be given their appropriate time.
Mr. Rapozo: I appreciate that, but again, these meetings
are for the public. I guess I got concerned when I heard that the Transportation
Agency is here so we were going to go there first. I am just saying that if we follow
the agenda, I think we should make it convenient for them. If the Kapaia public
testimony is willing to come back after lunch, then that is fine. If they cannot, I
would ask that we at least take their testimony now and then we can deal with the
matter after lunch.
COUNCIL MEETING 14 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Again, I think this ruling is my
concern. If you noticed almost two (2) months ago, members, you overwhelmed me
with a number of requests that you had for people to be present and giving them
specific times. From that, I developed and you were E-mailed electronically the
order of the day. I can simply stop doing the order of the day and we are going to
take everything in order. These requests for today came from Mr. Kagawa. The
request from the Administration came at 8:35 a.m. this morning. In trying to find a
reasonable solution if people show up, I will let them testify. I am informing you
that the County Attorney will not be available, nor the Engineer, for that one until
after 1:30 p.m. Regarding this communication that the Staff had with me this
morning, if they were not clear on my instructions, please ask the questions.
Lorraine, we will be talking about the bridge this morning. Let us go to the
Transportation Agency.
There being no objections, C 2013-324 was taken out of the order.
C 2013-324 Communication (09/11/2013) from the Executive on
Transportation, requesting Council approval of the indemnification and Limitation
of Liability provisions contained in the Equipment Acquisition and Maintenance
Agreement, which allows the Parsons Environment and Infrastructure Group to
administer the Periodic Motor Vehicle Inspection Program (PMVI) and continue
providing the County with vehicle safety inspection services: Mr. Rapozo moved to
approve C 2013-324, seconded by Mr. Kagawa.
Chair Furfaro: We are going to suspend the rules and give
you time to address the item. Staff, one moment, please. According to our protocol,
if I step out, the Vice Chair takes over. If the Vice Chair is not present, the Finance
Chair takes over the floor. Both of them are absent. JoAnn, I am going to give you
the floor at my own discretion while I step out to get some clarity on the past item.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Yukimura: Good morning, Celia. Can you introduce
yourself and tell us what is before us here?
CELIA M. MAHIKOA, Executive on Transportation: I am Celia
Mahikoa with the County Transportation Agency. What you have before you is the
Transportation Agency requesting approval for one (1) section and article within the
agreement that we are required to enter into with a company called "Parsons
Environment and Infrastructure Group," which is the company that was contracted
with the State Department of Transportation to carry out the Periodic Motor
Vehicle Inspection (PMVI) programs. That is a statewide program that is being
implemented. Every location, private or Government, that is carrying out motor
vehicle inspections is required to enter into this agreement and comply with the
stipulations that are included within it. We were required to submit it in
September.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you. Are there any questions of
Celia? If not, thank you very much. Is there any discussion? Is there anyone from
the public who wishes to testify on this matter? If not, thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 15 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2013-324 was then put, and carried by a vote of
5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
C 2013-320 Communication (08/28/2013) from Councilmember Kagawa,
requesting the presence of the County Engineer, to provide an update on the status
of the Hanapepe Pedestrian Access Bridge Project to include, but not be limited to,
the project's critical path, summary of costs from the initial budget appropriation to
present, and anticipated costs: Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2013-320 for the
record, seconded by Mr. Kagawa.
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Dill, good morning.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
LARRY DILL, P.E., County Engineer: Thank you. Good morning. For
the record, Larry Dill, County Engineer. Hanapepe Bridge repairs and pedestrian
walkways is a Federal Aid project. Bids were opened on February 14th of this year.
The apparent low bidder was Goodfellow Brothers. There were some issues with
qualifications for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) so the State was
concerned, and got involved. Goodfellow Brothers is the apparent low bidder with
the qualified bid at approximately one point three million dollars ($1,300,000). The
summary of budget costs from 2009—for our preliminary engineering, we had one
hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) from Federal Highways and twenty-five
thousand dollars ($25,000) matching the County. It was an 80/20 typical split. The
same split was for construction. In 2013, we have about one point two five million
dollars ($1,250,000) from the Federal government and our match of about three
hundred twenty thousand dollars ($320,000). We do not anticipate any future costs
unless some Scope-of-Work is changed on this project.
You may be aware of one of the issues here, which is the pedestrian walkway
on the bridge. The original bridge, which did not include the pedestrian walkway,
was constructed in 1911. I believe the pedestrian walkway was added in 1929. The
Scope-of-Work is to repair the bridge because there has been some delaminating
and spalling on the bridge on the vehicular deck, and then to remove the pedestrian
walkway. We would like to put it back, but not exactly as it was originally proposed
or originally built. The way it was originally built was that it was sitting on top of
the makai parapet wall. We looked at that and a few issues came up. One is that
with the intent of this County, when we build public facilities, as this is, that we
make it Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible so many folks from our
island can take advantage of that facility. With the location of the existing
pedestrian walkway on top of the parapet wall requires stairs to get up there.
Obviously, it is inaccessible. Our proposal is to relocate that walkway so it is
outside the parapet wall, as it was before, on the makai side still, but to lower it
down to the elevation of the bridge deck. That would negate the need to put the
steps on either side and make it accessible, so we thought that was a good
compromise. We have been to the community a couple of times and there are folks
in the community who supports that, and there are folks in the community who do
not support that. Obviously, it is a situation where we cannot please everybody.
We have submitted that to the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). We
did submit that for a request for review and approval to SHPD with that proposed
alignment. I spoke to back in October 2012, and are still awaiting a response.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Unfortunately, I cannot tell you what their response was because we have not seen
that yet. As soon as we do, then we would be able to decide and hopefully go
forward with this scenario. As you can see, we are ready to go because we have
opened bids and we are ready to approve a contract. Unfortunately, that is still an
"unknown" on this project.
I have a second slide here that is hard to read, but I believe you have a hard
copy in front of you. It reflects what I have been talking about with the overall
project. We are ready to award a contract. Later this year, in late November or
early December, hopefully we will have SHPD concurrence by October or November,
then the project can move forward. The Notice to Proceed by hopefully the end of
this year or beginning of next year, and then about a ninety (90) day construction
project which would mean that the project would be complete by June of next year.
That is my presentation.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you, Larry. Are there any questions?
Councilmember Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Larry, so we put it out to bid and Goodfellow
Brothers was the apparent low bidder?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Kagawa: The bid was for the restoration/repair that
you just mentioned to demolish the walkway?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Kagawa: Also to fix up the bridge, sturdy it up, and
add an ADA ramp?
Mr. Dill: Not a ramp, but to add an ADA walkway on
the same side of the bridge that the current walkway is located.
Mr. Kagawa: The same side...
Mr. Dill: Same side, outside of the parapet wall, but
just approximately three (3) lower in elevation. Instead of on top of the parapet
wall, we would make it at the level of the bridge deck.
Mr. Kagawa: There would be some type of barrier between
vehicles and...
Mr. Dill: Then the parapet wall to the bridge would be
the physical barrier between pedestrians and the walkway. If you picture a cross
section on the bridge—I apologize because I do not have one, but you have the
bridge deck, and then you have parapet walls on either sides, and the walkway
would be outside of the parapet wall on the downstream side. The parapet wall
would be a safety barrier between pedestrians and the vehicles.
Mr. Kagawa: You did not say a percentage, but you said
some of the community supports it this way and some of them oppose it. What is
the reason why they oppose it?
COUNCIL MEETING 17 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: There are folks who are very passionate
about the historic nature of that bridge. I feel a little awkward representing their
opinion on this, but my understanding of their position is that they want to
maintain the historic character of that walkway up on top of the parapet wall as
much as they can.
Mr. Kagawa: You may have "hit the nail right on the
head." The bridge is over one hundred years (100) old. Wanting to preserve the
look—I think when we go back, why did we let the bridge get in such bad shape to
begin with? That is why we are now faced with this conclusion that I guess, the
best way to accommodate ADA is to just knock it down. It would have been easier
to restore had we not let a whole one hundred (100) years go by to finally start
fixing that ramp, but I guess hindsight is 20/20.
Mr. Dill: Councilmember, I agree with you. We are
putting together a better program for repair and maintenance of all of our facilities
so that these things do not fall off the radar to the point where we have to close the
bridge, and then it becomes a significant project. I agree.
Mr. Kagawa: The hard part is for me to basically tell these
people in the community that, "Well, we are going in this direction because it
satisfies ADA, but actually, we are going in this direction because we did not
maintain it for all these years and it is so wrecked that it is the only way that we
see fit right now." That is the part that, I guess, that troubles me. It is not only to
please the ADA population, but actually it is because we let it get in such bad shape
that there are limited options to fix it and do it in a safe manner, I guess.
Mr. Dill: Yes. I might add one other thing. I do not
disagree with you. Given the circumstances, the existing walkway is not repairable.
It is in such bad shape so we need to replace it. We did look at putting it up on top
of the bridge and putting... then you would have long ramps on either end of the
bridge. Also, when taking a look at the parapet wall, the type of concrete used back
then, and if you look at today's criteria for loading when you design something like
that, the existing wall would not be able to support the design load of the walkway
on top of the wall, so we would not be able to put that on top of the existing parapet
wall.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: Are there other questions from
Councilmembers? Councilmember Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: I guess I do have a question and I think it is
a question that the community continues to ask, whether it is Kapaia or Hanapepe,
and I know it has been asked many times on this floor, but when you restore a
historical structure, there are exemption opportunities from the ADA. Was that
explored here?
Mr. Dill: Yes. A decision was made early on that the
County wanted to make this facility accessible to everybody.
Mr. Rapozo: So that was done at the Administration, not
at the Council?
COUNCIL MEETING 18 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: There is truth to that statement that if, in
fact, the County decided to restore it to its original specs, it could have been
exempted from ADA?
Mr. Dill: The problem I mentioned a minute ago was
that the parapet wall, if we rebuilt the structure on top of there, it does not meet
the current requirements so we cannot put it up there anyway.
Mr. Rapozo: With this current design?
Mr. Dill: We could not put it back into the existing
proposal or the preexisting condition.
Mr. Rapozo: Because of how the wall is made?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: Are there any more questions? Chair?
Chair Furfaro: I am good.
Ms. Yukimura: I have a couple of questions. What I am
hearing you say is that if you were to put the walkway up above, as it is now, you
would have to make it accessible. Your underlying assumption is that it would be
accessible to all, so it would have to meet ADA requirements. You would have to
make very long sloping approaches, right?
Mr. Dill: Correct. We looked at different options. The
option of keeping it on top of the parapet wall would require the long ramps if you
wanted to make it ADA accessible.
Ms. Yukimura: Right. It would also be too heavy for the new
bridge to hold or withstand. Is that what I heard?
Mr. Dill: For the existing parapet wall, correct
because the pedestrian walkway sits on top of the existing parapet wall.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. The existing parapet wall is an
essential structure of the bridge?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: If you had to change that whole wall,
basically you would you have to rebuild the whole bridge in order to make it ADA
accessible with that elevated pedestrian walkway?
Mr. Dill: There would have to be a significant changes
to that bridge and that would then affect its historic character.
COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, then it would affect its historic
character.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. The plan presently is to have a wall
that separates the car traffic from the pedestrian traffic, but have the pedestrian
way be at road level or bridge level? It would be at car surface level?
Mr. Dill: It would be the same elevation as the bridge
deck, but outside of the parapet wall.
Ms. Yukimura: It would be outside of the parapet wall, but
inside another wall? The question was asked, what would separate the pedestrian
traffic from the car traffic?
Mr. Dill: The parapet wall.
Ms. Yukimura: So you are actually going on the outside of
the bridge?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: You are cantilevering?
Mr. Dill: Correct. We are hanging it from the side of
the bridge.
Ms. Yukimura: Actually, the pedestrians will have a
beautiful view of the river.
Mr. Dill: I would think so.
Ms. Yukimura: For a while, I had them going between two
(2) walls, but now I think I understand the scenario.
Mr. Dill: Right. Outside of the parapet wall, there
would be a railing.
Ms. Yukimura: Right. Of course.
Mr. Dill: What came up at the last community
meeting that we had, there was a request that if that is the proposal, then they
want us to mimic, if you will, the existing railing that is out there. We are going to
modify our design through the Systems and Processes Engineering Corporation
(SPEC) process to see that it matches as closely as possible to the existing rail.
Ms. Yukimura: You are right that a cross section drawing
would have helped, but thank you, I think you verbally clarified for me. Given all of
the constraints that you have to work with, you want to keep the basic historic
character of the bridge and you wanted to make it accessible to all. It seems that
that proposal you are proposing is the best even though it does not fulfill the
present historic character because otherwise, it sounds like you would either have
to majorly change the basic historic character of the bridge in order to make it ADA
COUNCIL MEETING 20 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
accessible or you will not be able to make it ADA accessible. People with disabilities
would have to use the other bridge rather than this bridge which gets you right into
the old historic town.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. I think I understand. Are there any
other questions? Councilmember Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Chair, I just really want to get the input
from Kako and Elsie. I think we will probably have more questions for the
Administration after. Thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: We can do that. Thank you, Larry.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, do not leave. Al, may I ask to you
come up for a second? I just want to take a moment for personal privilege before we
go into other items here.
ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR., County Attorney: Good morning, Council
Chair. Al Castillo, County Attorney.
Chair Furfaro: Gentlemen, I have been making exceptions
for a while now. I have to tell you that when the agenda is posted on Thursdays,
you have a twenty-four (24) hour period to respond to the Council, by rules, if you
are available. I shortened that to allow you to contact me by Monday, instead of by
the end of business Thursday. Today, I am getting phone calls at 8:35 a.m. and I
am getting hand delivered notes from the Building Division saying that they have
another meeting and will not be able to be here until 11:00 a.m. I want to
reemphasize the rules. The rules are the rules. The Council Meeting is posted, not
for the purposes of"RSVP." You are required to be here or have somebody there, or
respond to me in writing of why you cannot be. I cannot just take a handwritten
note to the Staff. I cannot take a phone call twenty-five (25) minutes before the
meeting. That is no longer acceptable, okay? I will stay with the three (3) day rule
that I sent in the memorandum. I have to tell you; our attorneys must know what
days they are going to be in Court, and not on the day of the meeting. They
probably know a week before. Is that a fair assumption, Al?
Mr. Castillo: It is.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. In the spirit of fairness and kokua,
please understand, no "RSVP" for the agenda anything more than three (3) days
out. If they are not going to be here, I want to know by Monday.
Mr. Castillo: I understand, Council Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Okay, Larry? Thank you very much. We
will take public comment now. Thank you for the personal privilege everyone.
Mr. Kagawa: Chair, I just want to say something about
this situation today. I think our rules have worked well; it is just that today we
have a little glitch because attorneys want to be here to talk about Kapaia, but I
think the intention all along was that the people of Hanapepe who want to support
the Kapaia Bridge people because they are dealing with similar reasons why they
COUNCIL MEETING 21 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
are being told that things cannot be done the way it used to, or restored the way
they wanted to. I think they just wanted to have it done at the same time. It was
the Administration who called at 8:35 a.m. to now say they cannot discuss one side.
It is an unfortunate incident which is why it is a little frustrating that they cannot
be there to support each other. I want to thank you, Chair, for taking my item up
first. I think it is a policy that goes around to all Councilmembers at different times
where we want to handle things at the beginning of the day. I think it is a good
policy and we should not have to change it just because we had one (1) day where it
did not go real smoothly. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: I am not saying that we will not continue
with Councilmembers' requests to create an order of the day. What I am trying to
saying is that to the Administrative people, this is not repondez s'il vows plait. This
is not a respond to us if you cannot—especially by note or phone call. It does not
work that way and it is not acceptable. To those, whether they were here or not
from the Administration, we will stay with taking testimony. I think that answers
Mr. Rapozo's question. Whether the appropriate people are here to hear the
testimony is discouraging, but we will take the public testimony. Again,
Mr. Castillo and Mr. Dill, please understand that we are trying to get through by
rules and I am asking for a minimum of three (3) days notice. Okay. Who do we
have for public comment?
Mr. Watanabe: We have two (2) people signed up. They are
Elsie Godbey followed by Dorothea Hayashi.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Please come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
DOROTHEA "KAKO" HAYASHI: I would first of all like to thank the
Council and especially the Council Chair for this opportunity to present to the
public our dilemma that we are having about our Hanapepe Bridge. Also, because
of the media, we can let our feelings be known because we did have five hundred
(500) on our petition that wanted this walkway to be restored. There were so many
misunderstandings and so much misleading information that we had received. We
did not realize that what we were presented with was not everything. How shall I
say it? It was over twenty (20) years ago, I believe, but I do not know when we had
James Tokioka and Ron Kouchi on the Council. At that time, we had already
approached them about the deterioration on the walkway. That was our main
focus. It was not the bridge of 1911; it was that walkway. We were never informed
at any time until way after that it was a... now I found out 1929. We were told
1927. Because of that, we kept going on with working together with the
Engineering Division, thinking that this was what we were working towards...
getting that walkway repaired. Even yesterday, when I passed by the bridge,
someone is still crabbing off of it which means it is not to the point where you
cannot even go on it. It is just because it has holes in it and that was why we kept
asking for the repair to be done to stabilize that walkway. Of course, we are now
finding out that apparently someone wants to put the ADA... that is a priority over
the preservation of our walkway. I am coming from that side of the street. We
found out also—I do not know, and I would like someone to do the research on it. I
am not going to do it because I do not have the ability or the time for it. Our bridge
was listed on "Category 1" on the State list. I am wondering what it means because
we were given certain definitions on it, but I only heard it. Also, we were told that
there is a way of preserving it if we get the right people. I am sorry to say, but you
COUNCIL MEETING 22 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
do have people with expertise on historic bridges, and this is what we would like to
also request, that we have someone with historic bridge background look into it
because this is vital. Right now at this time, what they are proposing is a totally...
how should I say? It is on the side because they are saying they want to do it for
ADA.
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, that is your first three (3)
minutes. You have your second three (3) minutes.
Ms. Hayashi: Thank you. There were so many things that
I wanted to say, but...
Chair Furfaro: You have three (3) more minutes.
Ms. Hayashi: Yes. In listening to what was said, and like I
said, I think there was so much misunderstanding. For one thing, I think we had
the impression that there was no alternative, and that is still the impression that
they are giving. There is no alternative because it is ADA or nothing. I would like
that to be looked into. Yes, you want everyone to be able to use it; however, I think
you can even call the bus service to take you from "point a" to "point b." We have
this for the ADA people. We have the other bridge that is ADA accessible. It is like
we are just locked into this position where ADA is like... we cannot do anything. I
do believe that all laws, as you folks should know, too, have loopholes to
accommodate needs like this bridge, which is in our eyes, historic. My last request
at this time—because I know that when we met with the Mayor, we had a lengthy
conversation at that time. At that time, we also talked about the moneys, the one
point two million dollars ($1,200,000). We were kind of surprised to hear that
fifty-seven thousand dollars ($57,000) had already been spent for in-house... I guess
the architectural plans. My question is if fifty-seven thousand dollars ($57,000) was
already spent in-house, where does the money go? These people who have been
working on the plans work for the County, right? That is my assumption. I just
want clarification for myself because in my mind, even if fifty-seven thousand
dollars ($57,000) was spent in-house, that means that the bridge still has one point
two million dollars ($1,200,000). Am I right? Am I wrong? I do not know and I
would like clarification on that, if possible. I think it is very important. Fifty-seven
thousand dollars ($57,000) is a lot of money if we lose it for the bridge. That could
be used for the repairs. I found out that even words make a big difference and that
is why we are caught in this dilemma for ourselves. I would like to remind you that
there were five hundred (500) people that signed the petition. We could have gotten
more, but we knew it was a rush thing so in three (3) days, we got that many people
supporting the walkway.
Chair Furfaro: Dorothea, I will send that question over as a
separate question about the money and I will see that you get a copy.
Ms. Hayashi: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: We will do that today as it relates to the
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). Larry, that is a heads up to you that we are
sending over a question related to that. I will give JoAnn the floor, followed by
Mr. Kagawa.
Ms. Yukimura: Kako, thank you very much for being here. I
am just trying to understand that if there is no way to preserve the historic
COUNCIL MEETING 23 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
character of the bridge in the way that you see it, and provide ADA, you would say
to not provide ADA because people can access it through other ways?
Ms. Hayashi: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Ms. Hayashi: May I also say something?
Ms. Yukimura: Sure.
Ms. Hayashi: I am not sure if I am correct, but this is what
we had heard that even the swinging bridge in Hanapepe is supposed to be ADA. If
it is supposed to be ADA, where are the limits to all of this? This is what I heard
and I am not sure, but this is the information that we were given at one of the
meetings we attended.
Ms. Yukimura: I think the engineers and builders have to
think about where the bridge goes to... when you look at the swinging bridge, there
are a few houses on the other side of the river, but in this case, this bridge really
connects two (2) parts of Hanapepe Town. There are a lot of people on both sides. I
still respect your position that you would come down... if it is an either/or. You are
right; maybe we need to get a Historic Preservation consultant to make sure it is an
either/or. If it is an either/or and we cannot do both, you would come down on
Historic Preservation and say, "Get an ADA exception and let the other bridge be
the way that people cross over, even though they may have to go pretty far." I do
not know if there are even connecting sidewalks. But that would be where you
would come down. Okay. Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you. I have a question. Of the
supporters of the idea of restoring it the way it used to be, do they include a lot of
business people in Hanapepe Town?
Ms. Hayashi: Well, there was one (1) business person that
came out to help us, but basically it was all grassroots; it was the locals. I believe
you do have a copy and you can read the names off of it and you will see that it is
the local community.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. I guess the reason I say that is
because there has been a long push to kind of restore it in the early `70s when
Hanapepe Town was a booming town for business and visitors going through it. I
think it is kind of coming back, like on Fridays. There are a lot of people there.
The orchid festival really does well. I think it comes down to Government deciding
what to keep historic and what to modernize. By "modernize," I mean having it
ADA accessible and what have you. I think in this case, we have a one hundred
(100) year old bridge or older at—well, the walkway is eighty-four (84)... that is
almost close to one hundred (100), but definitely historic, right? Eighty (80)
something years is historic. I think they have made a decision to go with the
modernized way of thinking regarding the bridge. I agree with you that it is not
being insensitive to the ADA accessible people. When I grew up, I remember seeing
people in wheelchairs actually going across on the road.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Hayashi: On the bridge.
Mr. Kagawa: Yes, on the bridge, over the bridge. Cars
used to go very slow and it would not be dangerous at all, as far as I remember.
There is an option. You do not have to go to the other bridge. You can go across on
road shoulder. I do not know what you think about that.
Ms. Hayashi: May I just make a statement? I do have a
friend who is handicapped and she said that she would rather see the bridge be
preserved rather than have it to accommodate herself. She said that is how
valuable she thinks that the preservation of this walkway is to her. She was not
here to sign our petition, so she asked if she could sign it now but I told her it is too
late. It is done already. I just wanted to say that she would have come, but
something came up so she was unable to.
Mr. Kagawa: That is why I really feel like this is an issue
that should have been decided by the local community there. I think to change the
look of that bridge takes away from what people there want to see. I think we can
agree to disagree that we cannot agree on everything all the time. I think in this
case, I disagree with the Administration. I thank you for bringing up your thoughts
and options, and I guess until they award the contract, there is time for dialogue.
Ms. Hayashi: Yes. Thank you.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Let me see if other Councilmembers have a
question for you. Mel, did you have a question?
Mr. Rapozo: No.
Chair Furfaro: Gary? No. Okay. JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Kako, you said that a lot of times it was hard
to understand what the options were, even with the terminology and things like
that. Do you feel that the five hundred (500) people who signed the petition would
come down on Historic Preservation even if it meant no disability access?
Ms. Hayashi: Well, if you ask me that now, for those we
have spoken to before they signed the petition, we talked to them about the ADA
accessibility. That was part of the approach. I will just say that whoever I spoke to
and whoever I got my signatures from within our community, they were all
supportive because of the fact that we all felt this historic bridge was more
historically significant to be "preserved as is," rather than for the ADA accessibility.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Next speaker.
ELSIE GODBEY: Elsie Godbey, for the record. First of all, I
am bringing up this book again. It is a Historic Preservation Architect. They did it
for the County. I think the Hanapepe Business and Professional Organization paid
for part of it, and because of`Iniki, I guess funding came in. I know I have read this
before. This is from this architectural firm known for historic preservation. They
COUNCIL MEETING 25 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
said—I am going read it again, "Similar standards and principles to those outlined
in the design guidelines for building should be applied to preservation of bridge
structures. The original faces of the bridges should not be removed or altered.
Original finishes should be respected. Light fixtures part of the original design
should be restored. The existing flood control gate at east end of old Hanapepe
Bridge is fairly inconspicuous and this should be maintained." Larry said that at
this community meeting, some people did not support this and some people did. As
I recall at the meeting, there were about three (3) people who sort of changed their
minds after the statement was made that, "Oh, if we do not have ADA, the County
can be sued." Of course, some of us said, "So what? Let the County be sued." These
three (3) people seemed to have only changed their mind after hearing that
statement. At that meeting, I also got an E-mail from Kiersten Faulkner and she
wrote that ADA could be relinquished in certain historic circumstances. The last
time that Kapaia Bridge came before you, Mauna Kea Trask said that if the bridge
is the route and not a destination, ADA can be...
Chair Furfaro: Waived.
Ms. Godbey: You do not have to have ADA. What is the
meaning of that statement that Mauna Kea Trask made? Certainly, this bridge is a
route and it is not a destination. I think the swinging bring at Hanapepe is a
destination. They have advertised it as a scenic kind of thing and they do not have
ADA.
Chair Furfaro: That was your first three (3) minutes. You
have another three (3) minutes.
Ms. Godbey: Okay. I would also like to ask what was in
the E-mail from SHPD that was sent to Larry. That walkway was not
deterioration, it was damage because the County did not come and fix it in the
beginning. For the holes that were there, you could see it getting bigger and bigger,
and people were making it bigger. If they had repaired it right away, I do not think
that would have happened. I do not call that "deterioration." It was damaged;
vandalism probably. I think it would help if the Planning Department had
somebody qualified to be a Historic Preservationist. I think that would help us a lot
because it sure has been a very difficult and complex thing for us to get information
about how to go about registering a historic structure.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. We may have some questions for you,
Elsie. Mr. Kagawa. JoAnn, you will be next.
Mr. Kagawa: Elsie, your route versus destination; the
bridge is considered a route?
Ms. Godbey: Of course. It connects the west side of the
town to the east side. People go to the post office using that bridge and using that
route. It is not just our town; it goes to the east side, north shore, west side, and
whatever. It is certainly not a destination.
Mr. Kagawa: Yes, because if they ever decide to close the
new bridge, than that would become the only way to connect, right? The difference
of between the ADA requirements between the routes and the destination is that
the destination should be ADA and the route...
COUNCIL MEETING 26 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Godbey: The route does not. That is what I heard
Mauna Kea Trask say.
Mr. Kagawa: Mauna Kea said that the routes do not
necessarily have to have...
Ms. Godbey: I thought that is what he said. I have
watched the television presentation a couple of times.
Mr. Kagawa: I will be sending a follow-up letter to Mauna
Kea on that question. For Kako's question, Staff is going to get the other answer of
where the fifty-seven thousand dollars ($57,000) is. Thanks.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Elsie, thank you for bringing the historic
plan. It is supposed to be a guide, so it is good that you...
Ms. Godbey: Like a Bible.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, a Bible, if you will. It is good that you
invoke it and remind us of the guidelines. That is one done by Spencer Leineweber's
firm. They are right in Honolulu so we could actually consult with them now, could
we not?
Ms. Godbey: I heard she was not feeling well, so this
architect who used to work for her had mentioned that. That architect was at the
hearing before the Kaua`i Historic Preservation Review Commission when they
brought their project up on the State bridge that they were repairing. I do not know
her name but if could you get her name, then she would know because she did work
for Spencer.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. You mentioned a name Kiersten
Faulkner. Who is that?
Ms. Godbey: I do not know what her title is, but she
works at SHPD.
Ms. Yukimura: She works at SHPD?
Ms. Godbey: She worked there. I do not know her title.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Ms. Godbey: She said certain historic structures can be
exempted.
Ms. Yukimura: I think the Administration is possibly
thinking that even if you could get an exemption from a public policy standpoint,
"do we want to?" It is such a main thoroughfare between two (2) parts of the town.
Maybe in the 1970s, people could travel on wheelchairs safely, sharing the road
with cars, but the volume of traffic... back in the `70s, there used to be dogs sleeping
on the road in Hanalei Town because a car came by maybe once or twice a day.
COUNCIL MEETING 27 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Godbey: It is the opposite with us. We had more
traffic in the old days in the `40s and `50s.
Ms. Yukimura: That is true.
Ms. Godbey: It is hardly any now.
Ms. Yukimura: There is a lot of work trying to bring the
historic Hanapepe Town back to its glorious levels.
Ms. Godbey: I think it is part of our economic
revitalization to keep it historic.
Ms. Yukimura: Right.
Ms. Godbey: I really feel there is no other way to. There
are ways of course, but I think historic preservation is a really important part of
economic revitalization for our town.
Ms. Yukimura: That is absolutely true. Without its historic
character, Hanapepe would not be as attractive a town as it is.
Ms. Godbey: It is so well preserved as a historic town.
Ms. Yukimura: I think the Administration is trying to
preserve the historic character of the bridge, but then again, you get into these
shades of gray as you try to interface the ADA policy. Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: We are on the Hanapepe Bridge now. Is
there anyone else who wants to speak on the Hanapepe Bridge? If not, I am going
to call the meeting back to order so we can have some dialogue. May I start? To
Mr. Dill and the Engineering Division, as well as the County Attorney, I would like
to say that I think we need some real help on when a historic item gets changed. If
it is normal repair and maintenance, does that require the new ADA standards? Is
it a major repair or construction/restoration that triggers when ADA comes into
play? I think in the Hanapepe case, it is obvious that if we are trying to do
something with the parapet wall, this is a major architectural change. It is
probably the piece that is triggering the ADA compliance. Where we have the
Hanapepe Valley Swinging Bridge, where it is normal repair & maintenance, which
I think comes under the County until such time that we go to change the swinging
bridge in design, it does not have to be compliant. That seems to be a very
confusing point for everybody here. I would like to ask that between the
Engineering Division and the County Attorney, please give us some definition on
when a building, such as this building or a bridge, gets renovated or historically
restored; at what point does ADA come for their interpretation of what must be part
of the repair and maintenance? It seems to be the most confusing issue. I will be
sending that over as a question, please. That is all I have to say at this time.
Mr. Kagawa.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. As a lot of you know, I
grew up in Hanapepe, went to 'Ele'ele School, and did the walk home from 'Ele'ele
COUNCIL MEETING 28 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
School to Hanapepe Heights. I always remembered walking over that bridge and
remembering how it used to be. I cannot think of a town that can be more historic
than Hanapepe Town. We are definitely not keeping it the way it used to be when
we talk about old bridge. We have our reasons. I hear the reasons. I do not agree
with the reasons why we are going in this direction, but it is not my call in the end.
I can only state what I would like to see as a person that cares about the town and
about keeping Kauai, Kaua`i and keeping Hanapepe, Hanapepe. I just hope that
we continue to listen to the community there, and try to work out some kind of
solution to at least let the community know there that they are being heard and
that they are not being ignored. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, did you want to speak?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: Go right ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: I agree with what Ross said in terms of
"keeping Hanapepe, Hanapepe." I think in doing that, that is the basis for future
economic prosperity of Hanapepe. Its historic character makes it unique and that is
what makes people want to come to see it. I think the historical preservation is
very important. I feel like the Administration is trying to honor that by their
proposal, but they do have a dilemma in that they are also trying to make the
bridge functional for the future. If you do assume that the town will come back to
its higher historic activity of economic development and utilization, I think it is
important to think about how all people will cross over that bridge. I think it would
be important to follow—I think it was Kako's suggestion to get a review by some
Historic Preservation expert to see if we have actually looked at all the options and
make sure we are not missing any, in terms of possibly addressing the dual goals of
historic preservation and accessibility. We do not want to overlook any option. If
there is no option, I think the proposal may be workable, at least to me. I know I
am not someone who has crossed that bridge like Ross has everyday going home
from school, but to not affect the basic historic character of the bridge by having to
change that parapet wall, but by cantilevering a walkway over it... and history is
made by human beings who are living in the world. Things change and things
move, but can we change in a way that still maintains the basic historic nature and
yet show a modification, which in fifty (50) years, will become part of history
because there was a community that was trying to address its needs in the present.
I would like to see it being looked at further to make sure that we are not
overlooking any options. I love the fact that there might be a beautiful walkway on
this historic bridge that remains historic; yes, altered in some way, but still keeps
the balance of present and past. It is not the Council's decision, but I am hopeful
that we can find something that will work for the community.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else? Mr. Rapozo, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: I just want to make a few comments.
Unfortunately, I think the decision has already been made. This discussion is not
new. Kako, I think you have been here enough times and you have heard this go
back and forth. I think we have had SHPD here. We have been told by the State
Historic Preservation Division that historical structures are exempt or can be
exempt. We have been told that. We have asked the Administration numerous
times to really consider the options, and they did. They looked at the totality of the
information and they made the decision to proceed in this fashion. I disagree, as
COUNCIL MEETING 29 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
well, but I am not saying that their direction is wrong or right. I just think that
historical structures, historical places; once you change it, it is gone forever. That is
just how I feel. In a place like Kaua`i; in a place like Hanapepe and in a place like
Kapaia, bridges have had so much value to the communities. I agree with that and
that I think that should be the priority. It does not say that the ADA community is
not important, but I think when you look at the historic significance of some of these
structures—I will speak for myself. I have been to numerous conferences when I
have been on this Council throughout the United States. Everywhere we go, they
always have some tour to a historical place and an important place to that town,
community, or that city. The city, county, state, or whatever the case may be; goes
the extra mile to preserve those, whether it is a building, museum, road, bridge, or
whatever it may be. They will go the extra mile to preserve it so that they can
retain that character of that community because it is important. In this case, I
think we did not do that. I think sometimes the economics, costs, or whatever it
may be, may justify going another route. I guess my only message is to the
Administration that I would ask that we seriously consider, as we move forward,
taking care of the historic significance of this island. Once it is gone, it is gone. You
cannot recreate that anymore. Ross is right; we did not maintain that bridge.
Okay. That is water under the bridge; no pun intended. Where do we go from here?
We have an opportunity. We could have gotten exemptions. It may have cost it
more money and some people will disagree that we should be spending money on
cultural preservation. I disagree with them. I think we should spend the money.
Rather than spend mega millions on new structures, we need to spend money on
structures that retain our cultural heritage here. I believe that with all my heart. I
can defend that to anyone that that is what we need to do. The Council puts the
money there, and at the end of the day, the Administration decides what they are
going to do. They have made the decision and I am not going to bring Larry back up
to ask him if it is too late, but based on what I have seen, it may be too late. If it is
too late, then it is another opportunity lost to preserve one of our communities. All
of our communities are special, but Hanapepe—that book that you bring up; that
plan that was done in the `70s...
Ms. Godbey: No, it was in 1995.
Mr. Rapozo: That is even better because it is more
current. That was done for a purpose and that tells us, and everyone that lives
beyond the authors of that book, that this was important for Hanapepe and this is
what we should do. For whatever reason, we ignored it. Like I said, I am not
saying that it was the wrong decision but I am just say it is one I disagree with. We
should take every opportunity to preserve what is left on this island. It is what it is.
I apologize. I know you guys have been fighters for a long time. I will say that at
the last community meeting I attended when Larry was there, the community
showed some support. The members that were there did support the new design.
They were not unhappy with the design. They were willing to compromise, but I
guess my concern is that a lot of those people compromised because they felt that we
had to go ADA. They made their decisions based on the comments made that "we
had to go ADA." They took the lesser of two (2) evils and lent their support to the
new design. I believe if we had told them upfront, "These are the options. We can
go historical restoration and we could get an exemption. It may cost more, or we
could go the new way." I believe in my heart that the majority of people would have
said, "Let us go and restore the bridge." Those are my comments. Thank you,
Chair.
COUNCIL MEETING 30 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Again, to the County Attorney and to the
County Engineer, I think we need to have a clear understanding here that there are
certain things that when we trigger a repair on a building, a structure, and so forth;
that is going to trigger the ADA requirements. I think it is your job to understand,
clearly at all parts of your division and in all parts of your legal guidelines, when
that trigger happens. On the other side, there is the value we put in our sense of
place, dealing with preserving the character of Kaua`i. It may cost more money at
times, but we need to clearly understand what the procedure is to write for a
variance and absolutely understand when those parameters are. That has to
happen at early discussion of what is going into a CIP Budget. Are we willing to
write for certain variances on this? Are we at the point that we do not value
keeping that historic? What does ADA trigger for us by the rules? On that item, I
would like to take a recess after this discussion. I will be sending that over as a
statement.
The motion to receive C 2013-320 for the record was then put, and
carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: We are going to take a ten (10) minute break.
When we come back, I am going to allow testimony on the Kapaia Swinging Bridge
piece.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 11:00 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 11:14 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: We are back in session. I do want to note
that both Councilmember Yukimura and I met with some individuals from
Hanamd'ulu who indicated that they would be back at 1:30 p.m. Therefore, there is
no one to offer testimony at this point, so that will be at 1:30 p.m.
Mr. Watanabe: Chair, Housing is here so we can take up
that item.
There being no objections, C 2013-322 was taken out of the order.
C 2013-322 Communication (09/06/2013) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to apply for and expend grant funding in the amount of
$133,000 and to indemnify the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for the continuation of the two (2) Housing Choice Voucher
(HCV) Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Program Coordinator's salaries which enables
participating low-income families to increase their earned income, reduce or
eliminate the need for welfare assistance and rental subsidies, and make progress
toward economic independence and self-sufficiency: Mr. Rapozo moved to approve
C 2013-322, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Kamuela, please come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KAMUELA COBB-ADAMS, Housing Director: Kamuela Cobb-Adams,
Housing Director. Good morning, Chair and Council.
COUNCIL MEETING 31 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: If everyone else could introduce themselves, I
would appreciate it.
KATHRYN KATO, Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator: This is
our newly hired Family Self-Sufficiency (FSS) Coordinator, Bricen Moritsugu.
Chair Furfaro: Good morning, Bricen.
BRICEN MORITSUGU, Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator: Good
morning.
Chair Furfaro: Kamuela, please touch on the highlights of
this funding. Afterwards, I will see if there are any questions from Councilmembers.
Mr. Cobb-Adams: Briefly, it is a Federal grant we have
received for the past twelve (12) years; Family Self-Sufficiency Program that Kathy
has gotten for us. She writes it every year. That allows us to work with families in
Section 8 to help increase their income and basically become more independent of
assistance. In a nutshell, that is what they do.
Chair Furfaro: Kathy, would you like to expand on the
program?
Ms. Kato: It is exactly what Kamuela said, the purpose
of the Coordinators is to connect participants to resources in the community.
Basically, what we are doing is we are working with employers in the community,
as well as resources. We work with about eighty-five (85) resources each year. I
also serve on the Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Board and work with employers,
as well.
Chair Furfaro: I was once one of the employers that worked
through that.
Ms. Kato: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, did you have anything?
Ms. Yukimura: I am really eager to recognize this program.
I think it is a very, very important one that takes our Section 8 clients and helps
them better their lives for their families. I am very grateful for the work that the
Housing Agency has done in this area, and the fact that you continue to apply for
this grant to keep it going. I am looking at your transmittal here. You served one
hundred twelve (112) families last year, assisted four (4) in purchasing homes, and
seventy-two (72) of the participants increased their incomes and at an average of
four thousand dollars ($4,000), and one hundred three (103) participants no longer
receive cash welfare.
Ms. Kato: That is correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Those are really encouraging statistics. To
me, it is a very important compliment to providing shelter and housing. I am really
happy to support this and I want to thank all of you; Kathy, especially, for holding
the torch for so many years and helping so many families.
COUNCIL MEETING 32 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Kato: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Yes, I would like to second that. Thank you
very much.
Mr. Kagawa: I, too, want to thank you folks for what you
do for these people who on welfare and trying to get them off of welfare. I kind of
was surprised by a recent KHON news piece where they mentioned a figure that
kind of startled me. They said for a person on welfare, they make as much as sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000) a year. That kind of struck me as why would a person
want to go and look for work if they were getting sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) a
year? Do you guys have any figures as to what a person on welfare takes from the
Government, so we can—for them to work, it is a plus and minus. They have to
figure out, "is it better for me to take this job" or "is it better for me just to keep
collecting?" Do we have any figures as to how much a person in Hawai`i who does
not work collects?
Mr. Cobb-Adams: Sorry, I do not have that information. It is
actually done by the State. I am not sure how KHON came up with that and I do
not have the State figures. Like I said, our FSS; although we do help people to come
off welfare, it is part of our Section 8 Housing Voucher rental assistance program, so
it comes out of Section 8. It is a program to help them get off of Section 8 or just
become more independent. Sometimes, it might not come off Section 8 or welfare,
but it would decrease the dollar amount that Section 8 has to provide. Coming off
welfare may be a benefit, but I do not know that. Do you know that, Kathy?
Ms. Kato: I do not know that figure, but I would like to
speak to the component of the FSS program that encourages people to get off, and
that is called an "escrow account." How the program works is that rental assistance
is based on their income. The less they make the more rental assistance they get.
Part of this program is called an "escrow account." When they start to earn more
earned income, then the portion that their housing assistance goes down is actually
put into an escrow account for them. The program can go for as long as five (5)
years. At the end of the five (5) years, if they are off welfare, they are full-time
employed, and then they get whatever cash is in that escrow account. It really
encourages them... "asset building" is what it boils down to. It encourages them not
to utilize the welfare or the housing assistance as much, but to build assets. We
have had actually had families leave with as much as twenty-five thousand dollars
($25,000) in the accounts. There is a responsibility that we have of trying to help
them plan on how they are going to use that money. Of course, we encourage them
to perhaps purchase a home or we encourage them to put it into a savings. That is
the component that makes all the difference with what you said because before,
clients were saying, "What is in it for me to get off of housing? Why should I do
this?" In this case, it is asset-building and encouraging them to move forward.
Mr. Kagawa: I was just startled when I heard that figure
in the news report. Sometimes, those reports are based on just a really isolated
case, but when it is a major news station that reports a figure, they tend to report
information that is actually more accurate than not. In this case, they may have
gotten it wrong. I do not know if that sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) figure is like
for a family of two (2) with two (2) children. It was not clear as to that. It seemed
like according to that report, it was sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) for a single
person. It struck me because as a representative of Kaua`i County, if a person is
making that much, then how successful are we going to be to try and get them off of
COUNCIL MEETING 33 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
welfare when you can basically just stay at home, raise your family, and collect that
kind of income? It is going to be very tough for us to complete with that because as
we know, sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) a year job requires a lot of skills and
experience. It just kind of worries me as to where we are headed in the future. I
thank you for your answers and for all of your work. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, I think that sixty thousand
dollars ($60,000) number was for a family of four (4).
Ms. Kato: A family of four (4), okay.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, you have the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: I want to ask you, how many Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) clients do we have? How many HUD vouchers...
Ms. Kato: I think it is just under seven hundred (700).
I want to say six hundred sixty-seven (667), but that is just a guess.
Ms. Yukimura: Plus or minus six hundred (600). Okay. If
you had more people working on this, would you be able to help more families?
Ms. Kato: We would; however, I think you are all
aware of what is happening in Congress and with budget cuts. Last year, there
were sixty million dollars ($60,000,000) that was appropriated for the FSS program
in terms of grants. That was actually cut by five percent (5%) and now it is down to
fifty-six point eight million dollars ($56,800,000). What they are actually doing is
that people or agencies that are able to apply this year are ones that were funded in
last three (3) years, so they have limited it there. There has also been a freeze on
the maximum amount that you can get from the last three (3) years, as well. If the
Agency does not have that money to add to the cost of the two (2) employees...
basically, we are limited by the grant to two (2) positions right now.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, thank you for having applied and kept
the program going for the last three (3) years so we qualify. That is good. This five
percent (5%) cut is because of sequestration?
Ms. Kato: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: If the County got a grant or something to do
more positions, is that all we need to service more families or is there also some
monetary amounts that go towards—HUD is not giving you anything? It is just the
savings that the client makes that goes into the escrow account. Is there a match to
the savings?
Ms. Kato: No.
Ms. Yukimura: They are just allowed to make more without
decreasing their HUD rental subsidy, right?
Ms. Kato: Their rental subsidy is decreased, but the
reward for doing that is that the amount decreased goes into that escrow account.
For instance, say the rent is one thousand dollars ($1,000) a month and maybe that
client is only paying one hundred dollars ($100) a month; they get a job and their
COUNCIL MEETING 34 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
portion goes up to maybe five hundred dollars ($500) a month. Where they start,
that starting point of one hundred dollars ($100) a month and then the five hundred
dollars ($500) increase; that four hundred dollars ($400) difference goes into the
escrow account. At the end, they do have to be full-time employed off of welfare in
order to get that money. Does that answer the question?
Ms. Yukimura: HUD is not putting out more money for these
families? You do have the program where all you need is more workers to help
families get into this program?
Ms. Kato: Well, the grant money is not even covering
the two (2) positions right now. That money is coming out of Section 8 budget.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Ms. Kato: It is pretty tight.
Ms. Yukimura: If you did not get moneys out of Section 8
budget, what would it cost to have one (1) more position or two (2) more positions?
What is the total cost of a position?
Mr. Cobb-Adams: Well, we have to be careful because just to
give you an overall perspective; Section 8 has been decreasing the dollar amount we
have been getting every year. As you know, the rent rates have been going up. I
think last year and this year, we have maintained about the same amount of
money, but since rents go up, we are providing more subsidies per person. The
number of people is going down that we service. It might have been seven (700) and
now coming down to the six hundreds (600). The Administration fee which we can
take to pay our Staff is not based on dollar amount, but the number of vouchers you
serve. Therefore, our Administration fee in Section 8 has decreased to the point
where this year, we are really close to even pay what we budgeted this year. On top
of that, we have always been able to use some of that money to subsidy whatever
the FSS grant has not given. I just wanted to put in perspective that it is a little
bleak.
Ms. Yukimura: It is very bleak.
Mr. Cobb-Adams: Yes. Then we have potential raises next
year that we are assuming and that will only compound the situation. Of course,
more money would be good to get another position. I just wanted to give you the
background. It would be great to add the position, but we are trying to work just to
hold our current positions with the Federal money that we have right now.
Ms. Yukimura: If you did not depend on any HUD moneys,
and say you could get another source—I am just trying to understand the total cost
of a position... just a ballpark figure?
Mr. Cobb-Adams: There are two (2) different positions so to
create another position, we would have to set it up at a certain rate, SR number.
Ms. Yukimura: Do you have an average?
Ms. Kato: Currently, Bricen's position is at forty-three
thousand eight hundred twenty-four dollars ($43,824). My position is at fifty three
COUNCIL MEETING 35 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
thousand three hundred fifty-two dollars ($53,352). The challenge becomes when
you add the employment benefits on top of that.
Ms. Yukimura: Right, which is about seventy percent (70%).
Ms. Kato: It is a lot. Actually, our HUD Field Office
has called that into question because approximately for mine, it would be about
eighty thousand dollars ($80,000).
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: I want to caution us all here that we are
drifting into subject matter that is not posted on the agenda. I will let it go at that.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: JoAnn, I did not mean to cut you off. If you
wanted to find out the allocation was for the current positions that we get, I assume
you were telling us that the rental numbers where used to service eight hundred
(800) people went down to seven hundred (700), and then the money available for
staffing went down by fourteen percent (14%), as well. Is that what you are saying?
Ms. Kato: Correct.
Chair Furfaro: That would be acceptable.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you for being here. Is it not like a
"double-edged sword" though because as these people reduce their dependence on
HUD funding, that available funding which would be available for another potential
client goes to a trust or an escrow account for this person?
Ms. Kato: True.
Mr. Rapozo: There is no money available to bring in more
HUD clients? Am I getting that right?
Ms. Kato: If you are looking at the short term... if you
are looking at the bigger picture and long term, that person is eventually off of
Section 8.
Mr. Rapozo: I support this program... no doubt about it,
but long term—I wish more of us would think long term. You are mentioning that
the numbers are decreasing from seven hundred (700) to six hundred (600), and so
forth and that is going to be a residual effect of this program because the moneys
that would typically be available... as someone's HUD allocation drops because they
make more money or they get a new job... before this program, would those not
funds be available to help another family?
Ms. Kato: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 36 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Rapozo: It is not a risk, but it is something that I
think, long term, it is better off but I am just saying that could be the explanation of
the decrease in numbers, as well.
Mr. Cobb-Adams: Well, I would disagree because they only get
that for a limited amount of time. They might have increased their income six
hundred dollars ($600) or seven hundred dollars ($700), so they get it while they are
on the program, and once that is done and they met all of their conditions, they will
get that money. If not, they do not get that money and it comes back to the pot.
They have to meet this high standard.
Mr. Rapozo: Right.
Mr. Cobb-Adams: In the meantime, you are encouraging them
to build and become more independent. Without the program, it is kind of like what
Mr. Kagawa said, they are like "why should I make two hundred dollars ($200)
more if I just have to pay two hundred dollars ($200)?"
Mr. Rapozo: I have experienced that as an employer
where applicants would come up and say "I can only make this much because if not,
my housing will be affected." I am well aware of that. What is the percentage of
people in the program that actually get their escrow account?
Ms. Kato: About sixty-two percent (62%)...
Mr. Cobb-Adams: That graduate and get their escrow.
Ms. Kato: Yes. What comes into play there is that we
have people who poured out who leave the County. We have people who are asked
to leave the program for whatever reason. There are some other variables that are
coming into play there when we look at that.
Mr. Rapozo: Sixty-two percent (62%) is not too shabby,
actually. I was thinking much lower than that, but that is good. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any more questions? We have a
looming date of October 1st here. I tuned into C-Span this morning and there was a
guy trying to filibuster, but he was reading a book by Dr. Seuss. Is there anything
that we should be aware of with potential Government closures or disbursement of
money to the Counties? Is there anything that we should be aware of?
Ms. Kato: Not that I am aware of.
Chair Furfaro: Especially on the disbursements? Okay,
nothing that you are aware of. Mr. Hooser, did you have anything?
Mr. Hooser: No.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. We are all fine. We appreciate you
being here today and giving us an update. I am sure that we will be happy to
approve as such. Amy, are you here to talk to us on this? Okay. Are there any
further discussion? I will give Mr. Kagawa the floor, and then JoAnn.
COUNCIL MEETING 37 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. I am going to support this
grant. I want to thank Housing for their work. It just brings up with further
discussion that we have to analyze not only at the County level, but at the State
and Federal level. We have to look at how effective our Government system is of
dealing with people on welfare and people who are struggling in the middle class
and dealing with finances that they have. People on welfare—I think Chair Furfaro
said that for a family of four (4), you get sixty thousand dollars ($60,000) a year.
You also have other benefits like free and reduced lunch. When your children go to
college, you can have grants so you do not have to pay for their college. For people
who are not on welfare that are middle income, they have to pay for everything.
When their children go to college, they have to pay thirty thousand dollars ($30,000)
or forty thousand dollars ($40,000) a year. It comes to a point where our
Government has to look at the big picture because people in the middle class are
getting killed. They have to work and struggle with bills when their children go to
college and they do not get any help from the Government for their children's
education, which is just blown out of proportion. I do not know how parents do it
where they have to pay thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) or forty thousand dollars
($40,000) a year. It is coming to the point where people are actually almost better
off not working, and that is not a good thing. I think we just really need to get
together. There is a huge nationwide issue of looking at how we are going to solve
this problem. Where is our future headed for our residents? It concerns me and it
is something that I want to look at because it should be to the point where you are
better off working. When it comes to the point where it is better off for people to
stay home and collect, then I think we are definitely headed in the wrong direction.
Thank you, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Anyone else?
Ms. Yukimura: I am very happy to vote for this item,
because it is continuing a program in our Housing Agency that is helping build
capacity in our families and helping them get off of Government subsidies. To think
that we would have to subsidize housing for a family for the life of the family is a
big chunk of money. To take off of what Councilmember Kagawa said, if we can
help them be better off working, which is what this program does do, I think that
we are all better off. I really commend and thank the Housing Agency, and Kathy
and now Bricen, who are going to continue the work for doing a really exemplary
program that I hope sometime and somehow in the near future, we can expand.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Hooser?
Mr. Hooser: I am also enthusiastically in support of the
program. Unfortunately, the safety net that many people count on in our Country
has been worn thin over the last ten (10) or twenty (20) years. There are so many
people, through no fault of their own, who work very hard and have two (2) or three
(3) jobs and cannot afford proper housing, childcare, and just the basics that many
of us take for granted. I think it is the Government's responsibility to help provide
these people with a hand up. The reality is that Government subsidizes just about
everything. I get a homeowner deduction for the interest that I pay on my home;
that is a subsidy to me. Farms get lower property taxes for farming. Oil companies
get subsidies for doing research. The Government subsidies touch every segment of
our population and we should not leave out those most in need that, through no
COUNCIL MEETING 38 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
fault of their own, have greater needs. There is a price to pay no matter what we
do. If you look at the very neediest of the needy, those that are without homes,
there is a price we have to pay for that. Whether we like it or not, there is a medical
price, social price, and cultural price. It behooves us to provide a strong safety net.
I am in strong support of this program. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any further commentary? If not,
Mr. Clerk, may I have a roll call vote?
The motion to approve C 2013-322 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Yukimura,
Furfaro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Bynum, Nakamura TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Let us go to our next
item, please.
LEGAL DOCUMENTS:
C 2013-323 Communication (08/26/2013) from the County Engineer,
recommending Council approval of a Request for Dedication Agreement, made by
and between the County of Kaua`i and the State of Hawai`i Department of
Transportation (HDOT) to dedicate to HDOT a four (4) foot wide strip of land from
the following properties adjacent to Kuhio Highway for the Lydgate Park to Kapa'a
Bike/Pedestrian Path project:
• TMK: 4-3-09:41, Kaua`i Kai Association (Lot B-2)
• TMK: 4-3-09:71, Creighton S. Fujii (Lots D-2 and E-2)
• TMK: 4-3-09:42, Masakatsu & Mieko Katsura (Lots F-2
and G-2)
• TMK: 4-3-09:04, Kapa'a Shore Condo (Lots C-1, H-1, J-1, K-1,
and L-1)
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve C 2013-323, seconded by Mr. Hooser.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Haigh, are you here for this item?
Please come on up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Chair Furfaro: Is this the map that you have submitted to
us for the legal documents?
DOUGLAS HAIGH, Chief of Buildings: Doug Haigh, Department of
Public Works, Building Division. You should have two (2) maps.
Chair Furfaro: Yes, I have two (2) pages.
Mr. Haigh: Yes. That is showing the parcels that we are
looking at deeding over to the Hawai`i Department of Transportation (HDOT). Just
COUNCIL MEETING 39 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
a little bit of a clarification; the County of Kaua`i owns these lots. We acquired
them from the property owners noted in the letter. We do own the lots at this time.
Chair Furfaro: That is the portions highlighted in the
yellow?
Mr. Haigh: In the what?
Chair Furfaro: In the yellow?
Mr. Haigh: I believe so, yes.
Chair Furfaro: Give this to Mr. Haigh. I just wanted him to
look at this and make sure.
Mr. Haigh: That is correct, it is the parcels highlighted
in yellow.
Chair Furfaro: By scale, those yellow pieces represent a four
(4) foot width?
Mr. Haigh: That is correct.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any questions for Mr. Haigh?
Councilmember Kagawa, and then Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Kagawa: Doug, this is where the bike path is along the
State highway. The contractors did a beautiful job. I see people using it a lot. I
saw when they were constructing it and it looked like it kind of inconvenienced the
homeowners there for a little while, but the end result was very nice. I guess it ties
into our connection of the bike path along that Kapa`a/Wailua area. That area that
is highlighted in yellow, the four (4) foot right of way; is that the County right of
way in front of the property or is that some of the...
Mr. Haigh: This is where the bike path goes along Kuhio
Highway and these are parcels that we acquired for the bike path. The actual bike
path is primarily already in the Highway Department of Transportation right of
way, but we needed this additional four (4) foot strip to fit so we have
approximately two (2) feet of bike path and two (2) feet of shoulder within that four
(4) feet. The bike path is straddling both existing HDOT right of way and these
parcels that we have acquired. Just one (1) clarification, for the Kapa'a Shore
Condo property, we are still in the process of finalizing our ownership of it.
Mr. Kagawa: We are purchasing a total of four (4) feet of
their property from the owners.
Mr. Haigh: That is correct.
Mr. Kagawa: Two (2) feet of the actual bike path that is
there is within the four (4) feet and there is another two (2) of play?
Mr. Haigh: Correct.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 40 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Doug, for being here. The
Kapa'a Shores portion is not the County's portion yet?
Mr. Haigh: The County Attorney has told me that we are
still in the process of that. We should be in the process of finalizing. We did a
friendly condemnation and it should be in the final process.
Mr. Rapozo: But it is not.
Mr. Haigh: I am surprised that it is not. Maybe you
could update the status, Amy?
Mr. Rapozo: I was under the impression that we did not
own that yet, so I am not sure how we are legally able to...
Mr. Haigh: I am sorry, this is...
Chair Furfaro: Amy, why do you not come up?
Mr. Haigh: We do have the land. That was incorrect
information. We were thinking of a different property. The Kapa'a Shore
Condominium is a property on the corner of Kuhio Highway and Wana Road, and
we do have that property in hand.
Chair Furfaro: Let us make special note that Doug's earlier
testimony is corrected now. We do have this portion.
Mr. Haigh: Yes, Kapa'a Shore.
Mr. Rapozo: This question is for Amy. On the actual legal
document that we are going to be approving, all of the Tax Map Keys (TMK) on that
legal document is County owned?
AMY I. ESAKI, First Deputy County Attorney: Yes. It is Kapa'a Sands
that we are currently completing the transaction.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Ms. Esaki: We have already negotiated it. We are just
waiting for the deed and for the funds.
Mr. Rapozo: That has nothing to do with today's legal
document?
Ms. Esaki: No.
Mr. Rapozo: That is all I have. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: We will get to see that final negotiation?
COUNCIL MEETING 41 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Ms. Esaki: As far as for Kapa'a Sands? Yes. I believe
the Council already approved the purchase agreement. We are just trying to extend
the closing date because of the multiple owners. You should be getting a Second
Amendment, as well as the Warranty Deed very soon.
Chair Furfaro: We will be watching for that. Thank you,
Amy. Any questions for Amy before I excuse her? Any more questions for Doug? If
not, thank you, Doug and Amy.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2013-323 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Yukimura,
Furfaro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Bynum, Nakamura TOTAL — 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
CLAIMS:
C 2013-325 Communication (08/30/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Susan F. Rubin, for
damages to her property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kaua`i: Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-325 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried
by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
C 2013-326 Communication (09/09/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by William R. Ronaldson, for
damages to his property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kaua`i: Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-326 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried
by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
C 2013-327 Communication (09/13/2013) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Mary Ann A. Bender, for
damage to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i:
Mr. Kagawa moved to refer C 2013-327 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and carried
by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES / PUBLIC SAFETY / COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE
COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-EPC 2013-12) submitted by the Environmental Services /
Public Safety / Community Assistance Committee, recommending that the following
be received for the record:
COUNCIL MEETING 42 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
"C 2013-294 Communication (07/05/2013) from the County Engineer,
requesting agenda time to provide a progress update of the Proposed New
Landfill and Resource Recovery Park,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and
carried by a 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
PUBLIC WORKS / PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2013-23) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be received for the record:
"PWPR 2013-16 Communication (07/19/2013) from Committee
Chair Kagawa, requesting the presence of the Director of Parks and
Recreation to provide an update on the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) improvements and food booth for Hanapepe Stadium. This briefing
shall include the plans for a new ADA restroom behind the home team
bleachers, as well as the plans for an ADA walkway and food booth which the
Council approved in the County of Kaua`i's Capital Improvement Projects
(CIP) Budget for Fiscal Year 2013-2014,"
Mr. Kagawa moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura,
and carried by a 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2013-24) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be received for the record:
"PWPR 2013-17 Communication (08/12/2013) from Council Chair
Furfaro, requesting the presence of the Director of Parks and Recreation to
discuss Oceanit's report that addresses the large amount of debris that
accumulated in Lydgate Pond from the March 2012 storm events, and their
recommendations thereof. This briefing shall include, but not be limited to,
the current status of the Pond,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura,
and carried by a 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2013-25) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be received for the record:
"PWPR 2013-18 Communication (09/04/213) from Council Chair
Furfaro, requesting the presence of the Director of Parks and Recreation and
the County Engineer to discuss the current policies, procedures, and various
responsibilities for processing repair and maintenance requests,"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Ms. Yukimura,
and carried by a 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were
excused).
Chair Furfaro: Let us go to Resolutions, please.
RESOLUTIONS:
COUNCIL MEETING 43 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Resolution No. 2013-67 — RESOLUTION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 2013-02 RELATING TO THE RULES OF THE COUNCIL OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF COMMITTEES AND
THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair?
Chair Furfaro: Yes?
Ms. Yukimura: I have been working with our Legal Analyst
Peter Morimoto and we think we have addressed the issues. I would like to move to
refer to the Committee of the Whole Meeting next week when a proposed
amendment will be ready.
Chair Furfaro: Is that the date of October 2nd?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura moved to refer Resolution No. 2013-67 to the October 2, 2013
Committee of the Whole Meeting, seconded by Mr. Kagawa, and carried by a
vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Next item, please.
BILL FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2502) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO REPEAL
ORDINANCE NO. 716, RELATING TO STANDARDS, PERMITS AND FEES FOR
WORK ON BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY DAMAGED BY
HURRICANE `INIKI: Ms. Yukimura moved for passage of Proposed Draft
Bill No. 2502 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing
thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2013, and that it thereafter be referred to the
Planning Committee, seconded by Mr. Hooser.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any further discussion?
Ms. Yukimura?
Ms. Yukimura moved to amend Bill No. 2502 as circulated, as shown in the
Floor Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 1, seconded by
Mr. Hooser.
Ms. Yukimura: I have been advised that these are technical
amendments that will make the repeal complete.
Chair Furfaro: Is there any discussion? Seeing none, let us
vote on the amendment.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2502, as amended, was then put, and carried
by 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Let us go back to the Bill, as
amended, and do a roll call vote.
COUNCIL MEETING 44 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
The motion to approve Bill No. 2502, as amended, was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Yukimura,
Furfaro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Bynum, Nakamura TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Let us go to the next item.
Mr. Watanabe: Chair, we have our Executive Session items
for the day.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair?
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: I have received a memo from the County
Attorney's Office regarding ES-677. I believe you got it, as well. They are asking
for us to receive it. If there are no objections, I will make the motion.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-677 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes Sections 92-4 and 92-5(a)(4),
and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this Executive Session is
to provide Council with a briefing and to request for authority to settle the case of
Verna Rita vs. County of Kaua`i, Civil No. CV12-00605 JMS RLP (U.S. District
Court) and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of
the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the
County as they relate to this agenda item.
Mr. Rapozo moved to receive ES-677 for the record, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura, and carried by 5:0:2 vote (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura
were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. We have two (2) open items at
1:30 p.m. Am I correct?
Mr. Watanabe: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: One is dealing with the Kapaia Swinging
Bridge and one dealing with the Prosecutor's Office.
Mr. Watanabe: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair, as far as the Prosecutor's item, is
it necessary for them to be here?
Chair Furfaro: If I can get an understanding from all of you,
do you want to take action on it now?
COUNCIL MEETING 45 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Rapozo: I believe it is a recurring grant. Unless there
is a desire to have them here—the request application that came over was very
thorough. Unless we have questions, I am prepared to vote.
Chair Furfaro: Members, do you have any questions dealing
with the one hundred thirty thousand dollar ($130,000) grant, Ke `Ahi Pio `Ole
project? We can take action on that now. Please read the item, Mr. Clerk.
There being no objections, C 2013-321 was taken out of the order.
C 2013-321 Communication (09/04/2013) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to receive and expend Federal funds in the amount of
$130,000 for the Ke `Ahi Pio `Ole project, also known as the Cold Case Unit, for
consultants, overtime for Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) Detectives and the Office
of the Prosecuting Attorney's (OPA) Special Investigators, training, travel for
interviews, DNA submission, digital photographs and/or transcripts, and office
supplies to continue work on solving the island's cold cases; and to indemnify the
State of Hawai`i, Department of the Attorney General: Mr. Rapozo moved to
approve C 2013-321, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: Would you please notify the Prosecutor's
Office and the Police Department that this will not require their presence. That
leaves us with the bridge and a public hearing. Am I correct?
Mr. Watanabe: Yes, we do.
Chair Furfaro: I will wait to call the other Executive
Sessions because Ho`ike will be required to be here. It is 12:00 p.m. I guess we
have a ninety (90) minute lunch today. It does not mean you can have a second
scoop of rice.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair, can the rest of the Executive
Sessions be done before lunch?
Chair Furfaro: Al, would you like to come up?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Castillo: Council Chair and Councilmembers. Al
Castillo, County Attorney. I would have to notify Ian Jung.
Chair Furfaro: Would he be available? Do you need five (5)
minutes to call him?
Mr. Castillo: Yes, please.
Chair Furfaro: Let us take a recess.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 11:58 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 12:00 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 46 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: After consultation with the County Attorney,
the County Attorney feels that we need to allocate at least an hour to an hour and
fifteen (15) minutes to the Executive Session items. Therefore, I would suggest that
we do break for lunch at this time. We will be back at 1:30 p.m. for public hearing
and we will be recessed for lunch.
There being no objections, the meeting was recessed at 12:01 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 1:32 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: We have returned from lunch. I believe
there is some housekeeping that we need to do on the rest of the afternoon. On that
note, let me turn the floor over to Mr. Kagawa for some suggestions.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe we can deal
with some of the Executive Session items because Councilmember Bynum and
Councilmember Nakamura are not here. I believe that for ES-672, we can move
that item or actually refer it to the Committee of the Whole.
There being no objections, ES-672 was taken out of the order.
EXECUTIVE SESSIONS:
ES-672 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes 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 regarding the impact of the Koontz vs. St. Johns River
Water Management District on the County's ability to impose exactions on
developers and issues relating to the County's liability with respect to public access
easements, 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.
Mr. Kagawa moved to refer ES-672 to the October 2, 2013 Committee of the
Whole Meeting, seconded by Mr. Rapozo.
Chair Furfaro: Okay.
There being no objections, ES-670 was taken out of the order.
ES-670 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 and to discuss legal issues concerning the
application and enforcement of Kaua`i County Code Chapter 8, Article 17,
specifically the sections enacted under Ordinance Nos. 864, 876 and 904, 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.
Mr. Kagawa: The other item regarding TVRs, we can defer
it to the October 9, 2013 Council Meeting.
COUNCIL MEETING 47 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Kagawa moved to defer ES-670 to the October 9, 2013 Council Meeting,
seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: I would probably ask that the Executive
Session on that be scheduled accordingly and that we have some briefing on that
prior to going into action on the outcome. Is there any further discussion on that
deferring to October 9th?
The motion to defer ES-670 to the October 9, 2013 Council Meeting was then
put, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were
excused).
Chair Furfaro: Okay. That addresses the last two (2)
Executive Session items today.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 1:34 p.m. to convene in
Public Hearing for Bill No. 2497.
The meeting reconvened at 1:35 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
I believe the last item on our agenda today is the Kapaia Swinging Bridge
update. This has been put on the agenda by myself. I believe we have Mr. Dill here
to do a presentation.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2013-319 Communication (08/15/2013) from Council Chair Furfaro,
requesting the presence of the County Engineer, to provide an update on the Kapaia
Swinging Bridge Project to include, but not be limited to, the following:
• The results of the review by the Kaua`i Historic Preservation
Commission at the September 5, 2013 Commission meeting.
• The project's critical path that documents the steps that need
to take place in order to begin construction.
• The land access options, i.e., grant of easement, lease, or
purchase.
• Summary of budget costs from the initial appropriation by
the Council in FY 2006 to present, and anticipated future
costs.
Mr. Rapozo moved to receive C 2013-319 for the record, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: I will suspend the rules. I think there are
members in the public that would like to see your presentation and hold their
comments until afterwards. Mauna Kea, you are welcome to come up and join
Mr. Dill.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Dill: Good afternoon, Council Chair and members
of the County Council. For the record, Larry Dill, County Engineer. We were here
fairly recently. I think the main issue that we wanted to bring you up to speed on
before projecting a path forward was we had scheduled a meeting with the Kaua`i
COUNCIL MEETING 48 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Historic Preservation Review Commission for a little bit more background. Our
consultant prepared construction drawings for what we are going to call Phase One
of this project, which is essentially the replacement of two (2) towers. You can see a
picture of the two (2) towers there. That work was done fairly quickly and was
submitted to all of the various agencies. Unfortunately, we did not receive
comments back from SHPD for quite some time. As I mentioned before, I think we
all know that SHPD has some challenges that they are dealing with in their office
these days. We did get a request from them in August or so that we make a
presentation to the Kaua`i Historic Preservation Review Commission for their
review and approval. We did go to them on September 5th and I think I can safely
say that they were pretty pleased with the proposal because we are basically
proposing to replace the towers almost exactly to their historic configurations. They
did vote to accept the report and recommend approval of that phase of the work to
SHPD.
In my second slide here, I have kind of broken down for you how we are
looking at the project. Phase One, as I mentioned, is essentially removal and
replacement of the two (2) main support towers in-kind, to mean that we are pretty
much matching identically or as close as feasible to the historical configuration of
those towers. For Phase Two, we are looking at removal and replacement of the
remainder of the bridge, which would be all the timber members, hangers, and main
suspension cables. This is a very short description but I will add is that there will
be an effort to salvage and reuse what we can when this happens, but essentially, it
would be the remainder of the bridge as Phase Two.
I have already covered that we went to the Kauai Historic Preservation
Review Commission on September 5th. They approved what we presented to them.
Going forward now, Phase One is the towers. We are currently working with the
landowners in order to acquire pedestrian access easements from the highway to
the bridge, and then back up the other side to Kuhio Highway. Also, in this
timeframe between now and March, we are having our consultant prepare the
Phase One construction bid documents. We project by March, at which time we will
be ready to bid the contract, negotiate, and award the Phase One work. We had
project that it would happen by July of next year, and then we can issue the Notice
to Proceed for construction for Phase One. I believe this is a fairly conservative
schedule right now, but to be safe, we are saying by May of 2015 of which the actual
work would be done. That is Phase One.
For Phase Two of the work, over the next few months now that we have
essentially SHPD's concurrence on this phase of the work, we feel we can more
freely move forward with confirming the Scope of Work for Phase Two with SHPD
and Disability and Communication Access Board (DCAB). This, as you know, has
been the item of somewhat contentious discussion about how to finalize this project.
We believe this is an historic structure and an historic area, and we believe that the
area should be preserved as much as possible. That is the main focus of this project.
Because there are DCAB and ADA issues that need to be considered and addressed,
we hope to resolve those in the next few months. Having done so by February, we
will be able to establish that Scope-of-Work and then move to the Phase Two design
work, which is the remainder of the bridge. Everything follows similar to the
previous path. In March of 2014 to January 2015, design and permit the Phase Two
portion. In January 2015 to May 2015, bid documents, bidding, and awarding of
construction will take place. In June of 2015, which hinges on completion of the
Phase One, Phase Two will happen immediately after that, and then in the
beginning of June of 2015, a Notice to Proceed and then complete the work.
COUNCIL MEETING 49 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
As I mentioned, land access is one of the things or a key item in this project
that we have initiated discussions to secure easements from the affected
neighboring properties. At the moment, we do not have any funds specifically
allocated or budgeted towards that acquisition of those leases or lands to that
property. We are optimistic that the affected parties down in the valley are
supportive of this project and recognize the historic character of the bridge and its
importance to the area, and are willing to support the area and will recognize that
when it comes time for acquisition of these easements.
The last thing we were asked to talk about was a summary of our budget
costs. Back in June 2008, we had a twenty-seven thousand dollar ($27,000) contract
for engineering services for the Kapaia Swinging Bridge to look at the bridge itself
and come up with some drawings for reconstruction of the bridge. In May 2010,
that scope was expanded significantly to include a significant amount of
improvements and land acquisition. That is what the additional engineering
services were in May 2010 for eighty-nine thousand dollars ($89,000). There were
some significant ADA improvements that were considered as being possible at that
time. Then most recently, in December of 2011... maybe December of 2012. I
apologize. That is a typo. This is the work for the two (2) towers. Actually, I
apologize for that typo on there. This is the consultant's work to prepare the
construction drawings for replacement of the two (2) towers of the bridge that we
are currently looking at right now, and then to of course submit those and process
those through the various agencies. These are our engineer's construction
estimates for the two (2) phases of work. We have been in communication with
contractor about completing this phase of the work. We believe these estimates are
fairly conservative; very conservative. These are what I am presenting to you
today. Based on discussions I have had with contractors, we are optimistic that
that Phase Two will be significantly less than what is shown there. Of course until
we get to the point where we have drawings prepared and request bids, we will not
have that number. As of this moment, our only official estimate we have from our
consultant is what you see before you there. I think I have mentioned here at
Council before; currently we have approximately two hundred thirty thousand
dollars ($230,000) that has been appropriated by Council towards this project. That
would be sufficient for Phase One, but we may need to come back for more moneys
to accomplish Phase Two construction. That concludes my presentation.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, I want to make sure that I
understand Phase One. Does that rebuild the bridge?
Mr. Dill: Phase One is reconstruction and replacement
of the two (2) main towers.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. After the rebuilding of the two (2)
towers, we are at a balance of about sixty thousand dollars ($60,000). Does that
finish the bridge? Forget the rest of the land acquisitions right now—does it finish
the bridge?
Mr. Dill: Let me clarify that the one point two million
dollars ($1,200,000) is what our engineer is projecting as construction costs to finish
the bridge without everything else.
Chair Furfaro: You cannot be serious about that.
COUNCIL MEETING 50 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: As I mentioned, that is very conservative
number.
Chair Furfaro: To finish the bridge itself?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, over the last year and a half, we have
seen prices that indicated that a quarter of a million dollars ($250,000) can finish
the bridge. Now we have consultants...
Mr. Dill: I agree. We have got very different numbers
from our consultant and from our contractors of who we have been talking to.
Chair Furfaro: So we are not building the "yellow brick
road?"
Mr. Dill: No.
Chair Furfaro: It is not gold plated and whatnot?
Mr. Dill: No, our intent is to restore the bridge to
almost exactly as it was prior to the damage.
Chair Furfaro: I understand that is what you are giving
from your consultants and I understand that you also agree with me; that is pretty
excessive. Could I ask you just to sharpen the number for the bridge?
Mr. Dill: Yes, Sir.
Chair Furfaro: We will deal with the land acquisitions and
other things later.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Chair Furfaro: I thank you for what you have given us, but
that is my only question. Please sharpen the number for reestablishing the bridge
after the towers are complete because I think we have a balance of about sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000).
Mr. Dill: Actually, it is eighty thousand dollars
($80,000).
Chair Furfaro: Okay, so your estimate is about eighty
thousand dollars ($80,000).
Mr. Dill: Yes, depending on how the bid comes in for
Phase One.
Chair Furfaro: It is just a habit sometimes of people looking
at what they are bidding on. They see who is building the work and it is the County
of Kaua`i, and their perception is that we have deep pockets. Let me send this
message out to all contractors that the County of Kaua`i does not have deep pockets.
COUNCIL MEETING 51 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
We are using reserve money now to get us through our recent labor negotiations.
We still have to lobby the State to lift the cap on our share of the TAT. Thank you.
Mr. Dill: Thank you, yes.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, gentlemen. Is there anyone that
would like to take some time to speak to the Council after this presentation by
Engineering?
Ms. Yukimura: I do have some questions for Larry.
Mr. Dill: We have Councilwoman Yukimura who has
the floor.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you for your work on this. It looks
like there is an end in sight, which is great. I think I heard you say that we have
got SHPD's approval.
Mr. Dill: We have the Kaua`i Historic Preservation
Review Commission's approval. Maybe I was a little optimistic there, but my
understanding is that SHPD's comments on this were going to be similar to
whatever the Kauai Historic Preservation Review Commission were. That is what
I anticpate.
Ms. Yukimura: The recommendation from the Kauai
Historic Preservation Review Commission does carry a lot of weight with SHPD.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. You show on your slide five (5) that
you are going to confirm the SOW, which is what now?
Mr. Dill: Scope-of-Work.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes. "Scope-of-Work with SHPD and
DCAB." DCAB meaning the...
Mr. Dill: The Disability and Communication Access
Board who handles ADA issues.
Ms. Yukimura: Right. It is at that time that you will
confirm an exemption or actually an approval of the Scope-of-Work that will become
clear?
MAUNA KEA TRASK, Deputy County Attorney: For the record, Deputy
County Attorney, Mauna Kea Trask. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act,
and this is the Accessibility Guidelines published July 23, 2004; Guideline 202.5,
Alterations to qualified historic buildings or facilities, it states "where the State
Historic Preservation Officer or Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
determines that compliance with the requirements for accessible routes, entrances,
or toilet facilities would threaten or destroy the historic significance of the building
or facility, the exceptions for alterations to qualified historic buildings or facilities
for that element shall be permitted to apply." Under the advisory recommendation
or the advisory text under 202.5, it states, "the State Historic Preservation Division
COUNCIL MEETING 52 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Officers or State Appointed Officials who carry out certain responsibilities under
the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)." In this case, you have the
implementation of two (2) Federal laws by State agencies; ADA and NHPA,
respectively. "The State Historic Preservation Officers consult with Federal and
State Agencies, local governments and private entities on providing access and
protecting significance elements of qualified buildings and facilities. There are
exceptions to alterations for qualified historic buildings of which this applies and for
accessible routes." The specific exception that we would deal with is 206.2.1, which
states that "where exceptions for alterations to qualified historic buildings or
facilities are permitted by 202.5, no more than one accessible route (inaudible) to an
accessible entrance shall be required."
What we understand this to mean in speaking with DCAB, is that the
process that the County would go through SHPD review first and it is the exception
under the guidelines. This does not mean that DCAB will sign off, but what it does
is that SHPD would do their review, and if they determine that under the National
Historic Preservation Act that such accessibility alterations would significantly
alter whatever the term I just read was. Say that the exemption would be
appropriate. We would then approach DCAB to provide us with a determination
letter or Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). DCAB would then comment on the
plan and any exception that is implied for, but that does not mean that we would be
at that point protected from... a suit could still be filed against us for whatever
reason, but we would utilize that exception 202.5 in our defense. We would do that,
approach SHPD, get essentially their okay, go to DCAB and enter into that
dialogue, and hopefully come out the other side with the historic bridge if providing
access would significantly affect or alter it. That is the process.
Ms. Yukimura: SHPD will give the first response and
review. If they find that the accessibility will significantly affect the historic
character of the bridge, they will approve the plans that we have submitted, and
then it will go on to DCAB?
Mr. Trask: Yes, "approve" in quotes. I do not want to
put any legal...
Ms. Yukimura: Right. Technically, it is not approval, but a
review.
Mr. Trask: It is something to that effect, yes. It is
interagency dialogue.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Thank you, Mauna Kea.
Mr. Trask: I just want to say in qualification of that, the
legal standard you deal with when looking at ADA is alterations to the maximum
extent feasible. Again, this is a preexisting site and it preexists the implementation
date of the Act, which is approximately 1991. We may not get total clearance. The
bridge could be altered to the maximum extent as feasible in order to provide
access, as well as preserve the historic integrity. That is why we had to get into
discussion.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Larry, Phase One is expected to be
completed by January of next year?
COUNCIL MEETING 53 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: For Phase One, look at slide four (4). Right
now, we are working on the acquisition of the access easements.
Ms. Yukimura: That is good.
Mr. Dill: Once we have them in place or some
assurance they will be in place, then we will move to the next part, which is in
March. We will bid and award the contract for Phase One, so we would be able to
move construction on that schedule, July of 2014. That would be Notice to Proceed
on Phase One construction.
Ms. Yukimura: In the meantime, you will be contracting for
Phase Two design?
Mr. Dill: There is some overlap. Looking at February
of 2014, to a contract for Phase Two design. Sorry, the schedule kind of dovetails
that Phase Two construction would happen immediately upon completion of Phase
One construction.
Ms. Yukimura: But that is pending an appropriation for
Phase Two construction?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Are you hoping to come forward with that in
the budget for next year?
Mr. Dill: We are hoping that by the time we get to
next year's budget, that we would have some firmer numbers to come to Council for
budgeting purposes. Also, one of the positive things about working with the Kapaia
Foundation—there are a 501(c)(3). As you know, we have been talking about a
Stewardship Agreement with them. There may be opportunities for some grant
funding through that avenue. It remains to be seen, of course.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: I am going to interrupt on this piece. We
redo the two (2) towers, and then we are looking for one million two hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($1,250,000) for Phase Two. The towers are up. We are rebuilding
the walkways. If I built a one thousand (1,000) square foot home at two hundred
twenty-five dollars ($225) a square foot, with that money I could build five (5)
homes. Larry, I want the footwork that goes over the towers, and you kind of
agreed with me that that is some excessive money, but now we are letting that
proposed budget be the driver of the time until we find the money, and so forth. We
rebuild the two (2) towers, and we have eighty thousand dollars ($80,000) left, I
would think we could build the rest of the yellow brick road. I just want to make
sure that you understand where I am coming from. Do not hold the project up for
the consultant. Let us sharpen the number for the foot and walking portion of the
bridge because those dates might change. That is what I want to say. Mr. Kagawa,
you have the floor.
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. For Phase One, we have
one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000). Under Phase One, if I look at page
four (4) of your handout, it includes from next month to March 2014 to acquire
COUNCIL MEETING 54 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
access easements. Those amounts of acquiring the access easements are not
included in the one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000), right?
Mr. Dill: That is correct.
Mr. Kagawa: So do we have a projected number?
Mr. Dill: No.
Mr. Trask: I can speak briefly on that. For the record,
Deputy County Attorney, Mauna Kea Trask. On or about August 28th, I believe I
met with Lorraine Moriguchi, Roy Goo, Joe Rosa, Jerome Freitas, and David
Monasevitch. I drafted up a Grant of Easement document that would be entered
into and between us in the Kapaia Swinging Bridge Foundation of Save Kapaia
Bridge Foundation. Everyone thought it was a County road for a long time. People
drive in and out. I think we provide refuse collection services there. Because of the
agreement between the community and the County to do this, we are hoping to get
this easement gratis or something very low in order to facilitate the completion of
this project. I think as Chair said, every little bit counts, and the higher that price
tag goes up, the longer it could possibly take. I do not want to speak for
Ms. Moriguchi because she is here, but they indicated that they were agreeable to
that but of course, they did not sign or commit to anything. In fact, they were
encouraged to take that draft back to their foundation and speak about it, have a
lawyer review, et cetera. That is what we are looking to do... with Hongwanji and
Grove Farm, as well.
Mr. Kagawa: Next question. What is the most recent
swinging bridge that we repaired that is similar to Kapaia? We fixed up Hanapepe
recently, but is that much longer than the Kapaia Swinging Bridge?
Mr. Dill: Compared to this work, we did some very
minor repairs to the Hanapepe Bridge. I was told that we did a significant rebuild
on the Hanapepe Bridge after Hurricane `Iniki, so I am trying to find out some cost
information from that. Of course that will be twenty (20) year old information, but
it will be something.
Mr. Kagawa: What is the comparison in length with
Hanapepe Bridge and Kapaia Bridge?
Mr. Dill: Hanapepe would be longer, but exactly how
much longer, I could not tell you.
Mr. Kagawa: You are replacing the towers. Those are no
good... they are not plum or not stable?
Mr. Dill: Correct. A lot of timber has rotted and as a
result, they are not stable.
Mr. Kagawa: But the cables are in good shape?
Mr. Dill: Right now, the consultant is recommending
that we replace the cables as part of Phase Two.
Mr. Kagawa: Why?
COUNCIL MEETING 55 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: The cables are past their service life.
Mr. Kagawa: He is saying that the cables are basically not
in good condition to be reused.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Kagawa: Okay. That is all for now.
Chair Furfaro: Mel, you have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Larry, I thought a
while back in one of our meetings when the structural engineer did an assessment
of the bridge, he said that the suspension system was still good and that we could
actually reuse that, and that it was only the wood. That is what I remember and
maybe...
Mr. Dill: I cannot remember the exact discussion, but
I remember we discussed that issue. I know that after further investigation, he has
come to the conclusion because we specifically told him to sharpen his pencil on that
and look at it to make sure that we was comfortable as a structural engineer
recommending that we keep those cables. He went back to his investigation and
came back and said that he recommends that we replace it.
Mr. Rapozo: That is the same structural engineer?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Well, I specifically remember being told that
the suspension systems would not have to be changed. I do not know. It is what it
is, I guess. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, on that subject matter, before I go
back to Mr. Kagawa, could you get us a specific line item number for that? I
remember the same as Mr. Rapozo, but if now we are changing those cables, I would
like to know what that amount is.
Mr. Dill: Out of one point two million dollars
($1,200,000), it is one hundred sixty thousand dollars ($160,000). As part of the one
point two million dollars ($1,200,000), I think there is a twenty-five percent (25%)
contingency as well, so that would be one hundred sixty thousand dollars ($160,000)
plus the contingency.
Chair Furfaro: I think I have shared had before with the
Administration that I do not like anything more than a ten percent (10%)
contingency in it because that makes the number be so flexible. We really want to
drill down the number, and then have a ten percent (10%) contingency. If we have a
twenty-five percent (25%) contingency on one million dollars ($1,000,000), then that
is two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000). You have to drill that number
down.
COUNCIL MEETING 56 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Mr. Dill: Sometimes we are going to have a higher
contingency on a project that is a non-standard project which involves rebuilding a
historic structure.
Chair Furfaro: I disagree with you on that, Larry, because I
do want to let you know that I want the detail to be so good that the contingency
should never be more than ten percent (10%); not padded by twenty-five percent
(25%), and then we have to ask separate questions on "how much is the cabling?" I
want to know. I think I have been through enough of these things when it drills
down new roofs for hotels, swimming pool retiling, and so forth to know that the
contingency should be ten percent (10%) of the project. The only exception would be
for some kind of additional freight for equipment because the number has been
drilled down, whether it is historic or not. That is my opinion. Mr. Kagawa.
Mr. Kagawa: Larry, regarding ADA accessibility, it is not
going to be ADA accessible, right?
Mr. Dill: I will defer to Mauna Kea. We are not at a
point right now where I can tell you what the final Scope-of-Work will be on this
project because we still have to have those discussions, both with SHPD and with
DCAB.
Mr. Trask: I guess the best way I can answer because of
course, the County of Kaua`i would never discriminate against individuals with
disabilities. The County of Kaua`i would never provide programs that are not
accessible to people with disabilities. The County of Kaua`i embraces all members
of the community that have disabilities; however, we do not want to threaten or
destroy the historical significance of this bridge. What we are trying to do is find an
appropriate bridge that would maintain the historic significance. It would not alter
it. That is the best I think we should say.
Mr. Kagawa: Well, for me and Mel... I think it was three
(3) weeks ago when we walked over the Waimea Swinging Bridge. Obviously, that
is not ADA accessible. I am familiar with the Hanapepe Swinging Bridge. We
talked about it last time that it is not ADA accessible. I just wanted to ask it
because I know that the people from Hanapepe were here regarding the Hanapepe
Bridge and it is another agenda topic which we are done with, but basically for that
situation, we made an administrative decision that the ADA accessibility was
perhaps more important than keeping the historic nature of that bridge basically
the same. It is like we have two (2) different sets of opinions on an issue. Not to
say that I believe a swinging bridge can be restored and made ADA accessible just
because of the nature of the swinging bridge aspect... it is not permanent and it
would actually be dangerous to encourage wheelchair crossings over that. Anyway,
that is my take. Thank you, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: We need to do some pencil sharpening. I am
very certain that we need to get a really drilled down number that fixes the bridge.
That is what I would like to see next time around. If you could break out this new
addition that we were not aware of earlier with the replacement of the cable, I
would like to know what cost that is.
Mr. Dill: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 57 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. I will call the
meeting back to order. I believe I had asked for public comment earlier and there
was no one to testify.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Chair, I guess maybe after our questioning
the public may want to speak. Since we have a lot of time today, we may want to
give them that opportunity to speak now, I guess.
Chair Furfaro: I want to make sure that we understand that
we are establishing dangerous precedent when opening it for public comment, talk,
and then open it up for public comment again. I will do that at your request, but I
want to make sure it does not become consistent.
Mr. Kagawa: It will not. Thank you, Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Is there anyone in the audience who wants to
speak now? Joe, you can come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
JOE ROSA: Good afternoon, members of the Council. For
the record, Joe Rosa. After hearing all of this talk about the Kapaia Swinging
Bridge, we had a meeting last month with Mauna Kea and the Kapaia Bridge
Foundation. It was simply decided that they wanted to have the bridge restored
and it was stressed that it was just restoring the towers by excavating around it
and beefing it up, and making it so it would be a usable tower. I do not know why I
keep hearing JoAnn always stressing about the ADA. I know at the meeting that
we had when the lady was present, I confronted her and she said there are
exceptions to the rules about the ADA because I asked her, "Would an ADA person
on a wheelchair be able to negotiate on a swinging bridge?" Like it was mentioned,
all the other swinging bridges are not ADA compliant. JoAnn, put yourself together
and forget about the ADA on the swinging bridge because I would like to see you get
on a wheelchair...
Chair Furfaro: Joe, one moment. The discussion, which you
were not present went to the County Attorney to ask them to give us a definition
between a "repair and maintenance item and when ADA triggers," versus "a rebuild
of an item such as the Hanapepe Bridge and when that triggers." In all fairness to
the Councilwoman, that question was asked today. I am sorry you were not here,
but we are going to get legal clarification.
Mr. Rosa: Okay. That is understood.
Chair Furfaro: You have the floor.
Mr. Rosa: Like I say, the ADA should not be an issue.
Just like what you were saying, Jay, and the contingency funding; that money is
always available for as built or as constructed changes on the job. You need a
contingency fund. I agree with you, but I keep hearing the ADA, and like you just
mentioned, Waimea, Hanapepe, and I think the Keapana one; none of them are
ADA. I do not see why it comes up. What they want to do is have that bridge
COUNCIL MEETING 58 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
restored as a memento. At one of our meetings, the Mayor said, "That is what they
want, a memorial." Exactly. They want it restored as part of the history in that
valley there. In the olden days, wheelchair people never did... I never did see
anybody walk with a crutch across that bridge, when in the olden days we had
crutches more so, and not like these modern day wheelchairs. Actually, this thing
been lingering and lingering, for time and time again. There are a lot of things.
Like I say, the Council, Parks and Recreation people...
Chair Furfaro: Joe, that is your first three (3) minutes. Go
ahead.
Mr. Rosa: They should get together and make this
thing be a reality and complete it once and for all, and go on with other things that
need to be done here in this County. It started out like I mentioned before of the
roadway. You had a roadway that was County, then somehow everything came in
jeopardy, in limbo, and all of that kind of stuff coming out with roads. Why is the
County giving up a lot of roads that were given by way of a gentleman's agreement
and handshake? Now, they have to go and buy it to make it a legal document
roadway again. There are a lot of roads. I am beginning to find out, "Oh, that is in
limbo." The County is giving away all of the road they had at one time because of
things that they do not understand the old law by way of a gentleman's agreement
by the plantations to the County. Look into it. That is why everything is costing so
much money. I hope that they come to some conclusion. They just want the bridge
restored as a memento to the people of Kapaia who live in that area and who want
to preserve the history of Kaua`i that the tourists look forward and like to see those
things. We do not want those modern highways that they are trying to do around
here that I see now. This `Eiwa Street thing is only because of the flowers they are
going to put in the parking lot area in the front there. They needed parking on
`Eiwa Street so they took it the way they did. I have good foresight. That is one
thing with me. I do have not only hindsight, but foresight. Anyway, get that thing
done and forget the ADA because those other swinging brings are not ADA
compliant. I leave you with that. I thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you, Joe. If you would like to meet
with me next week, I would be glad to go over the documents that we got on the
Roads in Limbo going back to 1927. I would be glad to share that with you, but
please understand that the County is not bowing down and losing roadways.
Mr. Rosa: No...
Chair Furfaro: Let me finish, Joe. I did not recognize you.
We repaired the Moloa`a Bridge after the big flood. That is one of the bridges that is
in limbo. We challenged access through Knudsen's property in Koloa that the
Blakes had worked so significantly on. Finally, the State stepped in and said, "That
is their road." We have not just folded our hand. I want you to know. Number two
(2), I thank you for repeating the fact that if the first phase of the repair deals with
making the bridge a monument that it is functional, but it is a monument to the
town and to the community; I think we understand that. The next phase is what
should be in Phase Two (2), trying to get access and other things which are not easy;
it is complicated. I thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Rosa: Like I say, that was a road, as far as I know
working because to make the maps for the tourist industry and everything, the
State had the duty to do...
COUNCIL MEETING 59 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair Furfaro: Joe, before you walked in, we got an
overview from Mauna Kea that resolving that road with State is not that easy. I
will be glad to meet with you separately and go over Roads in Limbo with you.
Mr. Rosa: I am telling you something because it was
something that I experienced when we did Ma`alo Road and...
Chair Furfaro: I appreciate that and you do have foresight,
as well as hindsight. Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this
item? If not, I will call the meeting back to order. Mr. Kagawa, you have the floor.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Mr. Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. Again, I would like to
thank Larry for the update. It looks like we are finally moving into the right
direction with timetables and a solid plan that hopefully we can follow and finally
get this bridge fixed. It is kind of sad that on the front page, we have this picture of
the bridge. It is like a piece of our property. We own a house and we had damage to
it, we would do all we can to fix it as fast as possible. It definitely is very important
to people in the Kapaia community. Lorraine manages to come every time we have
this item. She has been here for years. It comes to the point where a lot of things
on Kaua`i is in bad need of repair. I just drove on `Olohena Road the other day. It is
terrible. I wish we could pave it right away. There is so much traffic that goes on
there and the list just goes on and on. I think Public Works is going to be faced with
having enough money to do all of these things because money is really the key
ingredient to get things done, and get things done quickly. We are at a point where
our reserves are pretty much gone. I think it is incumbent on us as
Councilmembers to begin looking for new ways and working with our State
Legislature to try and find new sources of money, so we can fix those things that we
have that need repair. It definitely is going to take a cohesive team effort to work
with Public Works and Administration to try and catch up on a lot of these repairs
that are desperately needed. I am really troubled by the fact that the list keeps
growing, yet our reserves keep dwindling. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any further discussion? Mr. Rapozo, go
ahead.
Mr. Rapozo: I just have a little bit. Thank you,
Mr. Chair. My comments from the morning session still holds true for this one as
far as in my opinion, the priority of the cultural preservation. I would expect and
ask the Administration to keep that in mind. It seems like there is a rule because it
does not seem that long ago when we had the same discussion, much like the
Hanapepe Bridge. Lorraine has been here since, I believe 2006, when this Council
first brought this to the floor. In early 2007, we appropriated two hundred
thousand dollars ($200,000). Again, that was based on the estimate from Public
Works that to restore the bridge was one hundred ninety thousand dollars
($190,000), so the Council put in two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). If my
notes are correct, back in February of 2007. That is almost close to seven (7) years
ago. Over the years, we have seen that number go as high as four million dollars
($4,000,000). I am not here to shoot the messenger, Larry, because I know you guys
try your best. My question is who in the world is our consultant? I cannot believe
that this bridge would cost one point two million dollars ($1,200,000). I think the
COUNCIL MEETING 60 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
Chair's analogy of the ability to put together five (5) homes with plumbing,
kitchens, restrooms, roofing, and all of those things; you could build five (5) of those
homes for what this consultant is telling us that we can build for a four hundred
(400) bridge... I do not know how long it is. That is after the pillars have been
restored. I think that is the toughest part, which is restoring the pillars. We
restore the pillars and then we get now to lay down the wood... and I could not
remember, so I went online to pull up my old notes from meeting back in... I think
this was back in August of 2011. One of the testifiers, which I have no reason to
doubt, had taken the original blueprints and had gone to the local market... the
building suppliers. According to him, his estimate of the retailers for all the wood
on the bridge as it was in the blueprints was nine thousand dollars ($9,000) and the
suspension cables would be about three thousand dollars ($3,000), so that is twelve
thousand dollars ($12,000). He went even further to some local contractors who
estimated the totaled repair or restoration was at about twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000). I can live with that. I think I can deal with that. I am not even
sure how we even picked this company, but if there is any way we could get the
word out to our local contractors... one point two million dollars ($1,200,000)— I
think if we are buying that, it is a shame. I am not a contractor. I am not an
architect. I am not an engineer, but how do you get away from the analogy that the
Chair has put out? That is the work it takes in to build a home and we are not
talking about easements, but just talking about construction. If this consulting firm
is saying that to construct that short wooden bridge is going to cost one point two
million dollars ($1,200,000), then my suggestion is we fire that consulting company
and hire another one. That one point two million dollars ($1,200,000) is just
absurd. Keep in mind that back in 2006... and I understand that we had gone
through the real estate boom, and back down now where it is actually lower now.
The construction costs are lower. We were told on this Council that one hundred
ninety thousand dollars ($190,000) was going to do the job of everything, so the one
point two million dollars ($1,200,000) is unacceptable in my opinion. I would
definitely check the credentials and qualifications of this company. I intend to do
that because that is definitely not acceptable. Mr. Chair, you know my frustrations
with the project because it has been going on for eight (8) years. I do not want to
keep bringing this up, but people need to know. In that same eight (8) years, we
have put out miles and miles of concrete bike path, and we cannot even do a bridge,
which has historical and cultural significance. We have done everything else on
this island except address that matter. I am frustrated. I am hoping we can move
this project forward. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Is there any more discussion? First of
all, thank you, Mr. Dill, for agreeing with me that the number just to build the
bridge needs to be revisited. That is something that we are asking of you folks to
do, along with a separate number for the cable. It has been seven (7) to eight (8)
years. Déjà uu translates to "seen before." Let us see if we can bring this to a close.
The motion to receive C 2013-319 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Mr. Bynum and Ms. Nakamura were excused).
Chair Furfaro: I believe our business is concluded for the
day. Thank you everyone.
COUNCIL MEETING 61 SEPTEMBER 25, 2013
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
e : •ctfu, y submitted,
Ir
JAW.%. FO NTAIN-TANIGAWA
Deputy County Clerk
:cy
ATTACHMENT 1
(September 25, 2013)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2502), Relating to Standards, Permits, and Fees For Work
on Buildings, Structures, and Property Damaged by Hurricane `Iniki
Introduced by: JOANN A. YUKIMURA
Amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2502) by amending Section 2 to read as follows:
"SECTION 2. [Ordinance No.] Ordinances Nos. 642, 649, 653,
689, and 716 [is] are hereby repealed."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2012-2014 term\PDB 2502 AO:aa
PP1>