HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017_1023_CRC Minutes Open_ApprovedCOUNTY OF KAUAI
Minutes of Meeting
OPEN SESSION
Annroved as circulated 11/27/17
Board/Committee:
I CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION
Meeting Date
I October 23, 2017
Location
Mo'ikeha Building, Meeting Room 2 A/B
Start of Meeting: 4:00 p.m.
End of Meeting: 4:47 p.m.
Present
Chair Jan TenBruggencate; Vice Chair Ricky Watanabe; Members: Virginia Kapali, Carol Suzawa, and Isaac Cockett
Also: Deputy County Attorney Adam Roversi; Boards & Commissions Office Staff. Administrative Assistant Lani Agoot;
Administrator Paula M. Morikami
Excused
Galen Nakamura
Absent
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
Prior to the start of the meeting, Administrative Assistant Eddie Topenio gave
the Oath of Office to new Commissioner Carol Suzawa.
Call To Order
Chair TenBruggencate noted that Marissa Sandblom, appointed to the
Mr. TenBruggencate called the meeting to order
Commission by the Mayor and awaiting Council confirmation, was in
at 4:00 p.m. with 5 Commissioners present.
attendance, however would not participate in the meeting.
Approval of
Meeting Minutes of September 25, 2017
Ms. Kapali moved to approve the minutes as
Minutes
circulated. Mr. Cockett seconded the motion.
Motion carried 5:0.
Business
CRC 2017-03 Proposed Charter Amendment to Remove Article IX Relating
to the Public Defender
Chair TenBruggencate noted that Article IX was no longer appropriate in
the Charter because there is a State provision in the Hawaii Revised
Statutes that says the State handles public defender duties. Chair
TenBruggencate asked if there were any members of the public that wished
to testify to which there were none. Vice Chair Watanabe shared his
support of the proposed amendment.
Chair TenBruggencate briefed the Commission on the process of proposed
amendments. Ms. Suzawa asked where the proposed amendment came
from to which Mr. TenBruggencate clarified that the Office of Boards and
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 2
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
Commissions provided him with several proposed Charter amendments
relating to measures in the Charter that are no longer relevant.
Ms. Kapali moved to refer proposed Charter
amendment relating to the removal of the Public
Defender to the County Attorney for review. Mr.
Cockett seconded the motion. Motion carried
5:0.
CRC 2017-04 Proposed Charter Amendment to Remove Article XXX
Relating to the Electric Power Authority
Chair TenBruggencate recused himself due to a conflict of interest and
turned the meeting over to Vice Chair Watanabe.
Vice Chair Watanabe stated that KIUC (Kaua`i Island Utility Cooperative)
was established shortly after Article XXX was voted into the Charter, which
deemed Article XXX irrelevant.
Ms. Kapali moved to refer proposed Charter
amendment relating to the removal of the
Electric Power Authority to the County Attorney
for review. Mr. Cockett seconded the motion.
Vice Chair Watanabe turned the meeting over to Chair TenBruggencate.
Motion carried 4:0.
CRC 2017-05 Proposed Charter Amendment to Remove the Zoning Board
of Appeals Article XIV, Subsection 14.12 - 14.14)
Chair TenBruggencate stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals was
proposed to the Charter Review Commission by the Planning Director and
was passed by the electorate in 2016. County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask
was asked to brief the Commission on the proposed amendment.
Mr. Trask stated that the Planning Department and the Planning
Commission have three (3) main concerns: time consuming due process
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 3
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
hearings, hearings officer expense, and burdening the Planning Commission
as well as applicants and the public, due to the length of meetings. The
decision was made to follow the City and County of Honolulu and create a
Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Trask said that the Office of Boards and
Commissions has been unable to find volunteers to serve on the Board due
to the time requirement and technical nature of the Board. He said there
would be a tremendous amount of due process and members would be
required to make difficult decisions that could potentially affect people's
lives. Mr. Trask shared that currently, there are fourteen (14) contested
cases before the Planning Commission for various types of TVR or Bed and
Breakfast Use Permit applications. One case in particular was assigned to a
hearings officer in June of 2015. There were approximately six (6) pre -
hearing conferences; the hearings on the merits of the case began in March
of 2016 and then there were five (5) additional hearings. An issue came up
via motion which delayed the hearing on the merits of the case and that
motion is currently before the Planning Commission. Mr. Trask said he
didn't see how the time issue could be resolved because a hearings officer,
who is a licensed attorney and knows how to deal with these cases, has
taken almost three (3) years and over six (6) hearings on this particular
contested case. He said he also didn't think a board of volunteers would be
able to deal with contested cases by meeting only twice a month and felt it
would require at least eight (8) hours a day, two (2) weeks a month.
Mr. Trask stated that the City and County of Honolulu has a fundamentally
different zoning process from Kauai. On Kauai, the Planning Director
receives permit applications and makes decisions. If the applicant disagrees
with his decision, they appeal to the Planning Commission; the Planning
Commission goes through the hearing process and makes a decision. If the
applicant still disagrees, they can take the matter to court. In the City and
County of Honolulu, certain permits are decided by the Planning Director
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 4
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
while other permits are decided by the City Council. Those permits include
Interim Planned Development Transit Permits, Planned Development
Resort Permits and apartments in Waikiki, Planned Development Use
Permits, Special Management Area Use Permits, and Zone Change Permits.
Mr. Trask summarized by saying that although it is helpful to see how other
counties work within the State, it was likely a false analogy to try to follow
the City and County of Honolulu. He said from a legal and technical
perspective, he didn't think the Zoning Board of Appeals would ever come
to fruition due to the fact that it would be difficult to effectuate. He stated
that he was not against due process and does not want to go against the
voters, however, there were real problems with the Zoning Board of
Appeals and it should probably be removed from the Charter.
Ms. Suzawa asked for clarification regarding the current process for
contested case hearings to which Mr. Trask provided that the Planning
Director makes a determination and, should the applicant disagree with his
decision, they are entitled to appeal his decision to the Planning
Commission. If the appeal is relatively basic, the Planning Commission
would handle the contested case. If it is more complicated, a hearings
officer would be procured to conduct the hearing; write a proposed Findings
of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Decision and Order; and send it back to
the Planning Commission for final decision -making.
Ms. Suzawa asked if anyone has asked why the Zoning Board of Appeals
has not been implemented to which Mr. Trask explained that the Office of
Boards and Commissions has been trying to fill the Board but has been
unsuccessful for reasons stated earlier, specifically time requirements and
the technical nature of contested cases. Ms. Suzawa commented that it may
be hard to remove the amendment because it was just voted on in the
previous election.
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 5
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
Chair TenBruggencate asked for public testimony.
Ms. Felicia Cowden stated that she was in support of the removal of the
Zoning Board of Appeals, and pointed out for the record that the original
amendment that created the Zoning Board of Appeals was not citizen -
initiated; it was initiated by the Charter Review Commission with very little
testimony from the public. She said there were no pros and cons provided,
and it was evident that it was just pushing the worst of the worst of the
Planning Commission's responsibility onto a new board. Ms. Cowden said
this could have been anticipated and testimony could have been heard
regarding how difficult it would be, and was disappointed when the
amendment passed. She said it was all the reasons that the Charter Review
Commission made it difficult in the last group, to have citizens not able to
propose their own ballot initiatives. She added that she hoped this could be
fixed without having to wait two (2) years.
Chair TenBruggencate clarified that the Charter amendment regarding the
Zoning Board of Appeals did not originate in the Charter Review
Commission. It was a proposal brought to the Commission by the Planning
Department.
Administrator Paula Morikami shared that she provided the Commission
with a letter from Planning Director Michael Dahilig that addresses the fact
it was very difficult to fill the Zoning Board of Appeals and that other
options needed to be looked at regarding the handling of contested case
hearings. Ms. Morikami said she met with Mr. Dahilig and Mr. Trask to
discuss her difficulties in trying to fill the Board's positions and was told
that the Board meetings would take sixteen (16) to twenty (20) hours a
week. She stated that she has been unable to find willing candidates to fill
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 6
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
the Board.
Mr. Trask addressed an issue that came up at the last County Council
meeting regarding the publication of Charter amendments, saying that under
Section 24.03(b) regarding the process for amending, the Charter states;
"Summaries of any new charter or amendment shall be published in a
newspaper ofgeneral circulation within the county and the entire text
published by electronic or online publication on the official website of the
County of Kaua `i not more than 30 days after its adoption. " He said there
has been some criticism that "pros" and "cons" on Charter amendments
weren't provided in the publication of Charter amendments and that not
enough information was provided to the public. Mr. Trask stated that the
Charter calls for "summaries", and believes it is inherently subjective and
may prejudice the record.
Mr. Watanabe moved to defer CRC 2017-05,
Chair TenBruggencate suggested that the Commission defer the item to the
relating to the removal of the Zoning Board of
next meeting and invite the Planning Director to provide further
Appeals to the next meeting agenda. Ms.
clarification.
Suzawa seconded the motion. Motion carried
5:0.
CRC 2017-06 Proposed Charter Amendment to Amend Article XIII
Relating to the Department of Public Works, Sections 13.01 - 13.03 bX
Changing the Title from County Engineer to Director of Public Works, and
Changing Job Description to Reflect Title Change
Human Resources Director Janine Rapozo stated that the last County
Engineer was Larry Dill who left the County on February 15, 2016. At that
time, Human Resources tried to attract people to apply for the position; they
received two (2) applications, one qualified and one did not. Currently,
Lyle Tabata is the Deputy County Engineer acting as the County Engineer
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 7
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
and he does not have a Professional Engineer's License. Ms. Rapozo said
that historically, Human Resources have had problems filling the position,
as well as Civil Engineer positions that require a license, and have been on
recruitment for over ten (10) years. Ms. Rapozo stated that the
Administration is considering removing the requirement for a Professional
Engineer's License for the County Engineer and is looking for someone with
leadership and managerial experience versus technical experience. The
Department of Public Works has three (3) divisions that have licensed
engineers; Waste Water, Engineering, and the Buildings Division. Ms.
Rapozo added that in reaching out to other counties, the Big Island is in a
similar situation where they have been unable to fill their County Engineer
position.
Mr. Watanabe asked how the change would affect the responsibility and
salary of the County Engineer to which Ms. Rapozo replied that the only
change would be that the County Engineer would no longer sign plans that
require a PE's (Professional Engineer) signature. Other positions within the
Division responsible for signing those types of documents could be
reclassified and have that responsibility added to their job description. Ms.
Rapozo stated for the record that all professional engineers on staff have
higher salaries than the current County Engineer's maximum salary. Mr.
Watanabe inquired if the County paid for the licensing or re -licensing
requirements to which Ms. Rapozo said yes, if it was a job requirement.
Mr. Watanabe asked if the title changed, would the Director of Public
Works' salary be less than the County Engineer to which Ms. Rapozo
clarified that their salaries are set by the Salary Commission, and that would
be something they would need to consider.
Ms. Kapali commented that she agreed with Ms. Rapozo's assessment of the
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 8
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
position as far as having a strong administrator because of the massive
responsibility of the County Engineer. She said through her years of
experience with the County, it was difficult to attract, recruit, and retain
people for the County Engineer position because the private market was
paying more than the County.
Mr. Cockett asked if the position title changed to a
managerial/administrative position, knowing that licensed engineers exist
within the system, would that increase the County's liability. He added that
if the County Engineer position were to be changed and focused on
managerial and administrative skills, he would be in support of the change
as long as there were adequate people supporting the County Engineer with
the technical aspects. Ms. Rapozo stated that with regard to County
liability, the Charter defines what responsibilities require a license as far as
signing documents.
Chair TenBruggencate said, with regard to salary, Public Works is one of
the biggest departments in the County and he wasn't sure he would
recommend that the Salary Commission make any downward adjustment
because it is a big job. He said the fact that the department head has
subordinates that have higher salaries, the position may be underpaid. Chair
TenBruggencate suggested inviting former County Engineer Larry Dill to
the next meeting for further information.
Mr. Watanabe commented that in the past four (4) months, the Department
of Parks and Recreation took over the maintenance staff from the
Department of Public Works, and didn't think they gained employees or
funds to help handle the transition to which Ms. Rapozo said he was correct.
Mr. Cockett asked Ms. Rapozo about the difficulties of filling the County
Engineer position to which she replied that there were a combination of
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 9
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
reasons, including security in a civil service position versus an appointed
position, licensed engineers are a hot commodity, the pay in the private
sector is generally higher, and the heavy responsibilities of the County
Engineer position.
Mr. Watanabe moved to defer CRC 2017-06 to
Chair TenBruggencate asked for public testimony to which there was none,
the next meeting agenda and invite Larry Dill.
and asked for a motion to defer.
Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion. Motion
carried 5:0.
Chair TenBruggencate invited Ms. Rapozo to attend the next meeting.
CRC 2017-07 Proposed Charter Amendment to Remove Article XXXII
Relating to the County Auditor
Mr. Trask briefed the Commission on the history of the County Auditor
position. Chair TenBruggencate suggested that because the County Council
employs the County Auditor, they should be consulted on this matter,
adding that the position has been vacant for some time. Mr. Trask said that
he was aware that the County Council could not fill the position because of
the salary and the skill set is not on the island. He added that audits do take
place every year per the Charter.
Mr. Watanabe stated that since 2009, the County has spent 7.2 million
dollars on the new amended auditor system for nineteen (19) audits; eight
(8) of those audits were already being conducted by the County Clerk's
office. He clarified that the position has been vacant for approximately
three (3) years. Ms. Suzawa suggested getting input from the County
Council and Chair TenBruggencate agreed to invite them to the next
meeting.
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 10
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
Chair TenBruggencate asked for public testimony.
Ms. Cowden said she appreciated what Mr. Watanabe shared and agreed
that a profound amount of money was spent. She recommended that the
matter be deferred to consult with the County Council, as well as the public,
adding that she routinely hears people questioning the integrity of one
branch of government or the other. Ms. Cowden said she appreciated that
the County Clerk's office effectively performs audits and that it was
important to bring that to the public in a very clear way. She added that
although she never met Ernie Pasion, she has heard his name many times,
and people that he subcontracted were profoundly opinionated on what they
feel they saw.
Mr. Watanabe clarified that the County Clerk's office oversaw the
comprehensive audits before the amended version of the Charter.
Mr. Watanabe moved to defer CRC 2017-07 to
the next meeting agenda and invite members of
Chair TenBruggencate asked for a motion.
the County Council. Ms. Kapali seconded the
motion. Motion carried 5:0.
Ms. Suzawa asked to go back to CRC 2017-05 regarding the removal of the
Zoning Board of Appeals, saying that the Planning Director and the
Planning Department was using another process in reviewing the appeals.
She suggested new language for the process they are using versus removal
of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chair TenBruggencate said he hoped they
could have a conversation with the Planning Director regarding other
options to solve the problem.
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 11
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
Mr. Watanabe stated that he was going to work with the Office of Boards
and Commissions regarding the Mayor's supplemental budget and the
necessity for having a public hearing on the day the budget is passed. Chair
TenBruggencate advised Mr. Watanabe to provide his proposed amendment
to the Office of Boards and Commissions or to him within two (2) weeks to
be placed on the next agenda. Ms. Kapali stated that she wanted to revisit
the idea of four-year Council terms.
Ms. Cowden was allowed time to address the Commission, saying that she
had an issue with the transparency of the Charter Review Commission. She
said the importance of the Commission was equal to the Constitution for the
State or the Federal Government. She stated that with a quorum of five (5),
it only took three (3) people to make a decision to which Ms. Morikami
provided that it was a total of seven (7) members on the Commission and
required four (4) votes for a motion to pass. Ms. Cowden said the level of
public outreach is very weak and you have to go to the County website six
(6) days before a meeting to read the agenda and minutes. She stated that
the Charter Review Commission was almost behind closed doors, and
pointed out that she was the only member of the public at the meeting and
had to bring her camera to feel confident that she would be treated with
respect. Ms. Cowden clarified that she was referring to past Commission
members. She said it was hurdle after hurdle, and where it might take a year
for the County Council to pass something, it only takes three (3) meetings at
the Charter Review Commission. Ms. Cowden stated that there has been
multiple times that she wanted to submit proposals as a citizen but there
hasn't been room, adding that there was no agenda item that allowed for
public testimony. Ms. Cowden stated that this was an end -run around
democracy. She said when the Charter Review Commission was created by
Bryan Baptiste, it was intended to be similar to the General Plan Update
where the public was involved, not closed with hand-picked Commission
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 12
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
members. Ms. Cowden stated that the Charter Review Commission dealt
with critical issues and it was disappointing that there was so little input
from the public, and that their input was not wanted or welcome.
Mr. Watanabe addressed Ms. Cowden saying that the next meeting was on
November 27th to which Ms. Cowden replied that she knew when the
meeting was, however, the agenda and minutes were not published. She
said she has applied to the Charter Review Commission many times because
she wanted to be a voice to the public but had never received a response.
Ms. Cowden added that she brought someone to a meeting who didn't know
what the Charter was and he was invited to be a member of the Commission
at the meeting by Chair TenBruggencate. Ms. Cowden stated that the
Commission was an inside group and not something that was open.
Mr. Trask stated for the record that he knew Ms. Cowden; respected her,
appreciated her mana'o, and that anyone who cared enough in a democracy
to participate should be applauded. He provided that all boards and
commissions meet the requisite legal requirements for meeting notices, and
didn't think it was an accurate statement that there was anything unethical
taking place or that there was a deliberate conspiracy to dis-inform the
people of Kauai. Mr. Trask clarified for the record that in his professional
capacity as a public official, he did not think the Charter Review
Commission was an inside group or that there was anything inappropriate
going on. He cautioned the Commission that if there was something
inappropriate taking place, he advised them to stop, and that if he was aware
of inappropriate behavior, he would be ethically obligated to ensure that it
stopped. Corrective action would be taken, including the removal of anyone
from a board, commission, or office; elected or appointed. Mr. Trask
thanked Ms. Cowden for attending and recording the meeting, saying that
unfortunately the County cannot afford to record all board and commission
meetings. He said ultimately, the responsibility in any democracy and what
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017 Page 13
SUBJECT
DISCUSSION
ACTION
made it a good form of government was the people, and that they need to
show up and get the work done. Mr. Trask stated again for the record that
to his knowledge, nothing inappropriate was taking place on the Charter
Review Commission, and thanked the Commissioners for their service.
Chair TenBruggencate stated that the Charter Review Commission was the
very exercise of democracy rather than an end run around democracy. He
clarified that Bryan Baptiste did not establish the previous Charter Review
Commission; the people of Kauai did. They voted in an election and the
majority voted to establish a ten-year Charter Review Commission.
Commissioners are nominated by the Mayor, who is elected by the people,
and confirmed by the County Council, whose members are elected by the
people and serve at the will of the people. Chair TenBruggencate said there
have been suggestions that decisions are made by less than a quorum and
stated that does not happen, clarifying that decisions require four (4) votes -
a majority of the full appointed Commission, regardless of the number of
members present. He added that the Commission meets at regularly noticed
public locations. Chair TenBruggencate said he has, on multiple occasions,
invited members of the public to testify, stating that transparency would
continue through his term as Chair and through the term of anyone elected
as Chair of the Charter Review Commission moving forward.
Announcements
Next Meeting: Monday, November 27, 2017, 4:00 p.m., in the Mo'ikeha
Building, Meeting Room 2A/2B
Adjournment
Mr. Watanabe moved to adjourn the meeting at
5:22 p.m. Ms. Suzawa seconded the motion.
Motion carried 5:0.
Charter Review Commission
Open Session
October 23, 2017
Submitted by:
Page 14
Lani Agoot, Administrative Specialist
() Approved as circulated.
() Approved with amendments. See minutes of
Reviewed and Approved by:
meeting.
Jan TenBruggencate, Chair