HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/2015 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
MAY 6, 2015
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to order
by Council Chair Mel Rapozo at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Suite 201,
Lihu`e, Kauai, on Wednesday, May 6, 2015 at 8:04 a.m., after which the following
members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Mason K. Chock
Honorable Gary L. Hooser (present at 8:05 a.m.)
Honorable Ross Kagawa
Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro
Honorable KipuKai Kualii (present at 11:57 a.m.)
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura
Honorable Mel Rapozo
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you know where Councilmember Hooser or
Councilmember Kuali`i is?
JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, Deputy County Clerk: I believe
Councilmember Hooser should be coming up in a few minutes. Councilmember
Kuali`i, the same thing.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Can we have the first item,
please?
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Councilmember Kagawa moved for approval of the agenda as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion?
The motion for approval of the agenda as circulated was then put, and
unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of
the County of Kauai, Councilmember Hooser, Councilmember Kuali`i, and
Councilmember Yukimura were noted as silent (not present), but shall be
recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
February 6, 2015 Facilitated Shared Priorities Workshop
March 25, 2015 Council Meeting
April 8, 2015 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2580
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded
by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
COUNCIL MEETING 2 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Any public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve the Minutes as circulated was then put, and
unanimously carried unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the
Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember Hooser,
Councilmember Kuala, and Councilmember Yukimura were noted as silent
(not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item. We are going to
take the Consent Calendar and then we will go into Executive Session. Can we have
the Consent Calendar, please?
(Councilmember Hooser and Councilmember Yukimura were noted as present.)
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2015-134 Communication (10/15/2014) from the Assistant Chief
Procurement Officer, transmitting for Council information, the Third Quarter
Statement of Equipment Purchases for Fiscal Year 2014-2015,pursuant to Section 17
of Ordinance No. B-2014-781, the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i for Fiscal
Year 2014-2015.
C 2015-135 Communication (04/20/2015) from Council Chair Rapozo,
transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution appointing Jade K.
Fountain-Tanigawa as the County Clerk of the County of Kaua`i for the term that
commenced on December 1, 2014.
C 2015-136 Communication (04/21/2015) from Councilmember Kuali`i,
providing written disclosure of a possible conflict of interest and recusal, with regard
to C 2015-124, Office on Violence Against Women Grant application by the Office of
the Prosecuting Attorney, as he is employed with the YWCA of Kauai.
C 2015-137 Communication (04/21/2015) from Councilmember Kuali`i,
providing written disclosure of a possible conflict of interest and recusal, with regard
to the grant application by the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney for the Kauai
Victim of Crime Act Expansion Project 13-VA-3, as he is employed with the YWCA of
Kauai.
C 2015-138 Communication (04/30/2015) from Council Vice Chair Kagawa,
transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution Urging The Administration To
Consider New Technologies To Manage The County's Solid Waste Challenges. The
proposed Resolution would encourage the Administration to consider new innovative
technologies in an effort to address our current solid waste challenges.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2015-134, C 2015-135, C 2015-136,
C 2015-137, and C 2015-138 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 3 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: I know that there are people who want to
testify on item C 2015-138, but if we are having that in the afternoon, then I think it
is alright. Otherwise, I would like to keep it out so that it is there for people to...
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not see anybody here, Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: No. So, is it coming out in the afternoon?
Council Chair Rapozo: The Resolution comes out later.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, and that will be in the afternoon?
Council Chair Rapozo: It all depends how long we take in Executive
Session. I would assume it is in the afternoon.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, that is good. Otherwise, I would like to
have the communication still on the agenda.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Kagawa: I think Councilmember Yukimura could ask
for us to table it until the end if they are not here when we have the Resolution. I see
no reason to keep two (2) items...
Council Chair Rapozo: Right.
Councilmember Kagawa: ...on the agenda for people to speak on.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, as long as we know that the Resolution
itself will be in the afternoon.
Council Chair Rapozo: Again, I cannot guarantee when it is going to
show up. It depends on this Council. Whether or not we keep the communication
does not matter. It is six (6) of one half(1/4)dozen of the other. It does not matter. We
have two (2) items for them to testify on.
Councilmember Yukimura: Alright.
Council Chair Rapozo: Let us just keep the Resolution open.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: If we have to, we can move the Resolution to
the last item of the day. I do not have a problem with that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any further discussion?
COUNCIL MEETING 4 MAY 6, 2015
The motion to receive C 2015-134, C 2015-135, C 2015-136, C 2015-137, and
C 2015-138 for the record was then put, and unanimously carried (Pursuant to
Rule No. 5(b)of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember
Kuali i was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative
for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. At this point, staff, could you read
the Executive Sessions, please?
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: This is on page 6.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-788 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kauai County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing as it relates to Defendant
County of Kaua`i in Tim Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. CV12-00523
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.
ES-789 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing as it relates to Defendant
Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho in Tim Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil
No. CV12-00523 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.
ES-790 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing and request authority for
settlement as it relates to Defendant Sheilah Miyake in Tim Bynum vs. County
of Kauai, et al., Civil No. CV12-00523 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.
ES-791 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of this
Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing as it relates to Defendant
Sheilah Miyake in Tim Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. CV12-00523 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.
(Councilmember Yuhimura was noted as not present.)
ES-792 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 and Executive Session with the Council to
provide the Council with a briefing regarding 1) the fact finding/investigation on
three parcels of real property, Tax Map Keys (4) 3-3-018-002, (4) 3-8-004-001 and
(4) 3-7-001-001, concerning each parcel's compliance with the Agricultural Dedication
COUNCIL MEETING 5 MAY 6, 2015
Ordinance and the Sediment and Erosion Control Ordinance (Grubbing, Grading and
Stockpiling) and related matters and 2) the process for an investigation pursuant to
Section 3.17 of the Charter of the County of Kaua`i 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.
ES-793 Pursuant to Hawaii 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 regarding Puhi Metals Recycling Center issues
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.
ES-794 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4,
92-5(a)(4), and Kauai 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
consult with the Council's legal counsel on questions and issues pertaining to the
Council's powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities regarding the
release of Executive Session Minutes of ES-722 from the June 25, 2014 meeting as it
relates to the County's insurance policy with Everest National Insurance Company
for attorneys' fees arising in connection with the lawsuit Tim Bynum vs. County of
Kauai, et al., Civil No. 12-00523 RLP (U.S. District Court), 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.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Can I get a motion to go into
Executive Session?
Councilmember Kagawa moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-788,
ES-789, ES-790, ES-791, ES-792, ES-793, and ES-794, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. You had a question?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. In discussing with Mauna Kea, there
may be a request later. So, I did not know if you wanted the motion to defer the
Bynum, Iseri-Carvalho, and Miyake settlements.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will entertain that in Executive Session.
Councilmember Kagawa: Later, if we need it? Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I would like to the County Attorney to give us
some public discussion on ES-792.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Mr. Trask.
COUNCIL MEETING 6 MAY 6, 2015
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: Aloha Honorable Chair
and Councilmembers. For the record, Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney.
Council Chair Rapozo: For the record, Councilmember Kaneshiro
apparently is recused from this item.
Mr. Trask: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: So, he is stepping out.
Mr. Trask: I can just use the time to grab my other
binder.
(Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as recused from ES-792; Councilmember
Yukimura was noted as not present.)
Councilmember Hooser: Did you want to introduce yourself?
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead. You had a question?
Councilmember Hooser: Yes, I do. Good morning.
Mr. Trask: Good morning.
Councilmember Hooser: This item, ES-792, you are going to be briefing
us in Executive Session. I just thought it would be good to have as much public
discussion about this item as is appropriate. So, I had some questions. I understand
that you might say, "This is going to be discussed in Executive Session," but I would
still like to put some things on the table.
Mr. Trask: Okay.
Councilmember Hooser: This item, is the item that stems from a year
ago or more when Councilmember Bynum started looking into concerns about certain
property owners not following the agricultural dedication laws and the Grading and
Grubbing Ordinance.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Councilmember Hooser: About a year ago, the Mayor acknowledged in
writing, that these concerns were valid and warranted further looking into. Mona
Clark, the Deputy County Attorney at that time, was assigned to investigate, and we
are here a year later. My question is, will the County Attorney's Office be
recommending because the Administration is the one who ultimately makes the
decision, I guess, whether or not these investigations are going to be pursued or
whether they are going to be dropped? That is the fundamental question. At some
point, is that question going to be answered or are we just going to keep going another
year having these meetings and that kind of thing?
Mr. Trask: So, your question is will...
Councilmember Hooser: I will restate the question.
COUNCIL MEETING 7 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Trask: PIease do. Thank you.
Councilmember Hooser: The allegations are that three (3) specific Tax
Map Keys (TMKs) have not complied with our agricultural dedication property tax
laws and have not complied with the Grading and Grubbing Ordinance. That is what
Councilmember Bynum raised and that is what Deputy County Attorney Mona Clark,
I believe, was tasked with investigating. So, we have that investigation, which is
being discussed in Executive Session, and we have all of the things that is on the
public record.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as not present.)
Councilmember Hooser: At some point, I think the Administration or
the County Attorney has to say, "These concerns are valid and we are going to pursue
them and collect the significant amounts of money that are alleged to be owed" or
they are going to say, "They are not valid and we are not going to pursue it." When
will that decision be made? It has been a year. We have the statute of limitations
running and we have County employees who are no longer employed by the County.
I just need to know if a decision has to be made or is it just going to linger.
Mr. Trask: Well, my understanding is that at the last
Executive Session, this was posted two (2) weeks ago, I believe. We were prepared to
discuss those matters at that time. It has been deferred to today. We are prepared
to discuss that today. You are right. The directive is to be made by the
Administration. I believe that will also be discussed today, but I cannot say for sure.
That is my impression.
Councilmember Hooser: Will the County Attorney's Office be making
a recommendation to either pursue or not to pursue, and if so, when will that
recommendation be made?
Mr. Trask: We will discuss that in Executive Session.
Councilmember Hooser: I do not need the details. I just need to know
whether or not there will be a recommendation made.
Mr. Trask: This is an investigative proceeding, you are
correct. There are allegations, you are correct. I think it is ill-advised to discuss any
more than that on the open floor.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Mr. Trask: I think if you want to seek enforcement on any
law that this County has the ability to enforce, you should do so in Executive Session
so as to not compromise your position in any enforcement action. Therefore, I am
going to answer those questions to say, "We are going to go into Executive Session
and discuss it." I also would like clear direction and clarity between both branches of
government. I think that is well-advised. But beyond that, I will not put the client,
body, corporate, or County at a disadvantage by discussing these matters at this time.
I just ask you for your indulgence in that and we will talk in the back.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: In Executive Session?
COUNCIL MEETING 8 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Trask: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further questions of the
County Attorney? If not, thank you very much.
Mr. Trask: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: The rules are still suspended. Let the record
reflect there are no members of the public in the audience.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Roll call. Hang on. We need to get Arryl back
in. Let us take the roll call on ES-792 and ES-793 right now.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-792
and ES-793, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
The motion to convene in Executive Session for ES-792 and ES-793 was then
put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 6*,
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Kaneshiro TOTAL — 1.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Kuali i was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion.)
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Can we get Arryl back in?
(Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Roll call on the remaining items.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-788,
ES-789, ES-790, ES-791, and ES-794, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa,
Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Yukimura,
Rapozo TOTAL — 7*,
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 9 MAY 6, 2015
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauaa,
Councilmember Kuali i was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion.)
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. At this time, we will go straight
to Executive Session. B.C., I cannot tell you how long it will be. I can say we will
more than likely be at least an hour. I would say one (1) to two (2) hours. So, just
hang loose. Recess into Executive Session.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 8:20 a.m. to convene in
Executive Session.
The meeting was called back to order at 11:57 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Kuala was noted as present.)
(Councilmember Kaneshiro and Councilmember Yukimura were noted as not
present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Let us just start with the Communications,
please.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2015-126 Communication (04/10/2015) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend additional funds up to $135,525 for Special
Counsels final billing for services rendered for Defendant County of Kauai in Tim
Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. 12-00523 RLP (U.S. District Court), and
related matters.
C 2015-127 Communication (04/10/2015) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend additional funds up to $130,189 for Special
Counsels final billing for services rendered for Defendant Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho in
Tim Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. 12-00523 RLP (U.S. District Court),
and related matters.
C 2015-128 Communication (04/10/2015) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend additional funds up to $56,480 for Special
Counsel's final billing for services rendered for Defendant Sheilah Miyake in Tim
Bynum vs. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. 12-00523 RLP (U.S. District Court), and
related matters.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Did you want them read for a deferral?
Councilmember Kagawa moved to defer C 2015-126, C 2015-127, and
C 2015-128.
Council Chair Rapozo: Before we make the motion...
Councilmember Kagawa: Oh, sorry.
COUNCIL MEETING 10 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the motion to defer C 2015-126, C 2015-127,
and C 2015-128.
Council Chair Rapozo: If there is anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on C 2015-126, C 2015-127, or C 2015-128. This matter will be deferred for
two (2) weeks. Any discussion? If not, Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to defer C 2015-126, C 2015-127, and
C 2015-128, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and unanimously carried
(Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Kaneshiro and Councilmember Yukimura were noted as silent
(not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2015-139 Communication (04/06/2015) from the Civil Defense Manager,
requesting Council approval to accept a donation valued at $30,512.30, of eight (8)
mobile radios from the State of Hawai`i Department of Defense, for use by the Kaua`i
Police Department: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-139 with a
thank-you letter to follow, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Any
public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: Did you finish the minutes?
Council Chair Rapozo: The minutes we did before we went into
Executive Session.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I need to ask for a reconsideration on
one. I will do that later.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any further discussion?
The motion to approve C 2015-139 with a thank-you letter to follow was then
put, and unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the
Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as silent
(not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please. Oh, I am sorry. Is Arryl
here? Let us just continue. We are at C 2015-140.
C 2015-140 Communication (04/10/2015) from the Fire Chief, requesting
Council approval to accept a donation valued at $14,210, of Olukai footwear (slippers
and shoes) from the Hawai`i Lifeguard Association, for the purpose of providing
effective foot protection for the Ocean Safety Bureau personnel while performing
COUNCIL MEETING 11 MAY 6, 2015
Water Safety related duties: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-140
with a thank-you letter to follow, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2015-140 with a thank-you letter to follow was then
put, and unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the
Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as silent
(not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2015-141 Communication (04/20/2015) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Period 9 Financial Reports — Detailed
Budget Reports, Statements of Revenues (Estimated and Actual), Statements of
Expenditures and Encumbrances, and Revenue Reports as of March 31, 2015,
pursuant to Section 21 of Ordinance No. B-2014-781, relating to the Operating
Budget of the County of Kauai for the Fiscal Year 2014-2015.
(Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to receive C 2015-141 for the record, seconded •
by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to receive C 2015-141 for the record was then put, and unanimously
carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2015-142 Communication from the Housing Director, requesting Council
approval for the following:
1. Acquisition under the County's Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) Program of a residential unit at 1620 Papau Place, Kapa`a, Kaua`i,
Hawaii, 96746 TMK: (4) 4-6-038-069, for a purchase price of not more than
$395,000, based on the fee simple market appraisal which will be obtained
through this transaction;
COUNCIL MEETING 12 MAY 6, 2015
2. Resale of 1620 Papau Street, Kapa`a, Kaua`i, Hawaii, 96746, by leasehold
for not more than the leasehold market appraisal, which will be obtained
through this transaction; and
3. Authorize the County Clerk to sign legal documents related to the
acquisition and resale transactions.
Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve C 2015-142, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2015-142 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
C 2015-143 Communication (04/21/2015) from the Chief of Police, requesting
Council approval to accept and expend grant funds in the amount of$9,693.11 which
is appropriated by the United States Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Funding Program for the Fiscal
Year 2014, and a local matching amount of at least 50% from the Kauai Police
Department (Account No. 001-1003-551.65-00, Collective Bargaining) for the
acquisition of bulletproof (protective) vests and related accessories to be utilized by
officers of the Kaua`i Police Department: Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve
C 2015-143, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to get assurance that they do not
need this money in collective bargaining for other things.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I believe the vests are collective
bargaining issue.
Councilmember Yukimura: Oh.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is a requirement under collective
bargaining.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: So, it will be used for collective bargaining.
Councilmember Yukimura: I see. Thank you. That is all I need.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further discussion?
COUNCIL MEETING 13 MAY 6, 2015
The motion to approve C 2015-143 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2015-144 Communication (04/21/2015) from the Chief of Police, requesting
Council approval to purchase Modular Office Space & Furniture, valued at
approximately $92,000, to be purchased with unexpended funds from Account
No. 001-1001-551.89-06, Public Safety Equipment, to create office space in an
underutilized portion of the Investigative Services Bureau for the Crime Scene
Specialists: Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve C 2015-144, seconded by
Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Any public
testimony? Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I just had a question
because it references this funding coming from unexpended funds from an account. I
just wanted to see if you might have further explanation about the account.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ROBERT GAUSEPOHL, Police Lieutenant: Good afternoon. Robert
Gausepohl, for the record. I am sorry. What is the question again?
Councilmember Chock: Can you reference the account? It is
referenced here, the ninety-two thousand dollars ($92,000), Public Safety Equipment.
Where does it come from? What is it about? Perhaps how much do you have in the
account?
Mr. Gausepohl: Actually, we went through our budget with a
fine-toothed comb and tried to save money in every part of it. This is a collection of
different accounts that we put together so that we could get the office space that we
need. Right now, it is an open area in Investigative Services Bureau (ISB). The
intent is to create modular office space following your lead, actually. We saw the
modular over here. It is an economical and viable way to do that. Again, we are
trying to save money while getting our needs met as far as office space.
Councilmember Chock: I just wanted to clarify it. So, what you did is
you took unexpended funds from special projects, lease equipment, collective
bargaining, and put it into this one (1) account that is referenced here?
Mr. Gausepohl: Correct. Yes.
Councilmember Chock: It was unclear for me just because of the
number. Thank you for mentioning it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any further questions? Thank you very
much.
Mr. Gausepohl: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 14 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: The rules are still suspended. Anybody
wishing to testify?
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Further discussion?
The motion to approve C 2015-144 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2015-145 Communication (04/22/2015) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend Federal funds in the
amount of $210,836, and approval to indemnify the State of Hawai`i, Department of
the Attorney General, for the Kauai Victim of Crime Act Expansion Project 13-VA-3
for the period of July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2016: Councilmember Kagawa moved
to approve C 2015-145.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I need to recuse myself. I see in part of this
grant there is a small amount that is written as a line item for consulting with the
YWCA, which is my employer.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
(Councilmember Kuali`i was noted as recused.)
Councilmember Kaneshiro seconded the motion to approve C 2015-145.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2015-145 was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:0:1
(Councilmember Kuali`i was recused.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please. Please call
him back.
C 2015-146 Communication (04/24/2015) from the County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend United States
Department of Transportation (USDOT) Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant funding for the Lihu`e Town Core Mobility and
Revitalization project, and indemnify United States Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration and Hawai`i Department of Transportation, if
awarded.
COUNCIL MEETING 15 MAY 6, 2015
(Councilmember Kuali i was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-146, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question, but I do not see anybody
here who can answer it right now.
Council Chair Rapozo: JoAnn, I am sorry. Go ahead. What was that?
Councilmember Yukimura: I just said I have a question about the grant,
but I do not see anybody here.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yvette just told me they have a PowerPoint
presentation. I am not sure if we need a PowerPoint presentation. We can have them
here to answer any questions.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not want to go into a whole presentation
on the Lihu`e Core Project for an application for a TIGER grant, but we can wait for
them.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just have a question.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is fine. We do not need to spend an hour
or half an hour on a presentation. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. My suggestion is that we have a lot of
hot topics on today's agenda. So, I would recommend that if we want to see that
presentation, that we refer it to Committee. I think that is better use of our
Committee Meetings. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I would agree.
Councilmember Yukimura: Mr. Chair?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Without them here, I think there is a grant
application deadline. So, we just need to be cognizant of that. Rather than act before
we have them before us, I would like to have them come here and then we can decide
whether we want to put it in Committee or not.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. They are on their way. So, let us take
the next item. The deadline is June 5th for the application.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
There being no objections, C 2015-147 was taken out of order.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 MAY 6, 2015
CLAIM:
C 2015-147 Communication (04/15/2015) from the Deputy County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Silvie Spackova, for the
loss of their personal items, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of
Kauai: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to refer C 2015-147 to the County Attorney's
Office for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by
Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to refer C 2015-147 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition
and/or report back to the Council was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
PLANNING COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PL 2015-10) submitted by the Planning Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2585 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE 14, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, NATURAL
RESOURCES PRESERVATION FUND,"
Councilmember Chock moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-EDIR 2015-03) submitted by the Economic Development &
Intergovernmental Relations_Committee, recommending that the following be
Received for the Record:
COUNCIL MEETING 17 MAY 6, 2015
"EDIR 2015-01 Communication (12/17/2014) from Committee Chair
Kualii, requesting the presence of the Director of Economic Development, to
provide an update on the proposed operations of the Kilauea Agricultural
Center,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion or public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-BF 2015-17) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2584 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING
TO REAL PROPERTY TAXES (Re-instate Credit Union Exemption),"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Chock, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next item, please. Hold on.
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Can I ask that we take up the Bills for Second
Reading before the Resolutions, if that is okay with the Council? My suggestion is
that we take Bills for Second Reading before Resolutions because I do not see any
problem with the Credit Union Exemption, and the Public Access, Open Space,
Natural Resources Fund, we have people here that have been waiting here from the
morning. I just feel like it would be nice of us to just take up that item and then head
for lunch.
COUNCIL MEETING 18 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: I have no objection to that, if everyone is okay
with that. I know Councilmember Yukimura, you may have told someone to come
back in the afternoon.
Councilmember Kagawa: Oh.
Council Chair Rapozo: So, what we will do is we can take the
testimony of the pubic that is here and then just recess until after lunch to make sure
we catch everybody that is here to testify.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: Great idea. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Let us start with the Bills for
Second Reading.
There being no objections, the Bills for Second Reading were taken out of order.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2584 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5A,
KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY
TAXES (Re-instate Credit Union Exemption): Councilmember Kuali`i moved for
adoption of Bill No. 2584, on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to
the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Well, let us start
with public testimony. This is the Credit Union Tax Bill.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. I want to thank the
members of the credit unions for again, making a strong showing. I would also like
to thank fellow Councilmembers for supporting the credit unions as well knowing
that it was not really about that money. I think they just wanted equal treatment
among other credit unions in the State. So, I just want to thank them. I know
Councilmembers have reservations being that there were studies done with the Cost
Control Commission and there was a beautiful big building built by Kaua`i
Community Federal Credit Union (KCFCU) at Kukui Grove. But nonetheless, I think
we all realize that credit unions should be treated as other credit unions in the rest
of the State. I thank the Council for supporting this.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Hooser.
COUNCIL MEETING 19 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: Chair, I am going to be supporting this. I do
want to point out though, that we have been talking a whole lot about tax reform and
about fixing the system. This is another piecemeal effort, in my opinion, and I will
support because I want to support reducing people's taxes. I would also like to
support reducing small business taxes and all kinds of other taxes. I think the way
to go about it is a comprehensive review. The budget tax rates are going to be coming
up and right now, it is projected to raise taxes. Taxes will go up for residents. I
believe the memorandum (memo) I got was something like thirty thousand (30,000)
properties would have their taxes going up. I think we need to look at the big picture.
You look at your tax bill and there must be twenty (20) different exemptions on the
back and different people paying different things. While I do not think this is the
right approach to do it piece by piece like this, I do believe that we should reduce the
taxes of as many taxpayers as possible. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further discussion? If not,
roll call.
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2584, on second and final reading, and that
it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Can we go back to C 2015-146,
please? I see the Administration here. If you could come up. JoAnn has a question
and hopefully we can get through this in the next two (2) minutes. We are back at
C 2015-146.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. I was going to say good morning,
but good afternoon. This is about the TIGER grant application. I want to begin by
commending you for going through all of the work. I know it is a lot of work to go for
these grants. I have heard about it during many Smart Growth conferences, and I
am really pleased that Kaua`i is moving to access some of these funds. I think this
project is good. You may have been coming over while we stated that we are not
really interested in seeing the PowerPoint unless this matter is referred to
Committee. But then there is the issue of your grant deadline. I would like to know
first of all, whether you feel it would be comfortable to defer this matter by referring
to Committee or whether it would be your preference to get it approve today.
LYLE TABATA, Deputy County Engineer: Thank you, Councilmember.
Lyle Tabata, Deputy County Engineer, for the record. Our previous attempt to come
for approval for a grant, we were late. This time we are here early. It is not an issue
right now for us to gain approval today, but we would like to get approval. However,
if we are referred to Committee, we are okay with that.
COUNCIL MEETING 20 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Very good. Thank you. I have one (1)
question in looking at your coversheet. The primary selection criteria for this
competitive grant is State of Good Repair, Economic Competitiveness, Quality of Life,
Environmental Sustainability, and Safety. I wondered if you could explain State of
Good Repair.
Mr. Tabata: I will defer to Lee Steinmetz, who is writing
the project details. We are coming in early, as we stated, and what we have presented
to you is a draft. We are working on the details for the final application because we
wanted to get here timely. I will defer to Lee to give you the exact details of the
project that we have to-date.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
LEE STEINMETZ, Transportation Planner: Thank you, Lyle. My
name is Lee Steinmetz. I am the Transportation Planner with the County. Good
afternoon. To answer your question about what the State of Good Repair means, that
had multiple meanings, actually, and there are sub-criteria associated with that. One
of the most obvious and the one that comes to mind the most is just the condition of
the roadways. So, roadways that have serious problems in terms of potholes and that
kind of thing. If through this project, we are improving the condition of the roadways,
that would be looking at State of Good Repair, or using better materials, for example.
That would be another example. So that the long term maintenance can be reduced.
Another part of State of Good Repair can be if we are adding facilities that do not
exist now. For example, on several components of this project we are adding
sidewalks or bicycle and pedestrian facilities. So, if we are adding those facilities, we
are also improving the State of Good Repair for those users. So, that also counts as
part of that criteria.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. I could go on, but I think...
Council Chair Rapozo: If you are going to go on, then we are going to
refer it to Committee.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is your call. I really appreciate when you
folks send over the information to back up the grant application, which is what you
did.
Mr. Tabata: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: It gives us a really good opportunity to review
it. I do not have any questions. I mean, the TIGER grant is a great resource for many
municipalities and it is very competitive as well. I appreciate the early request and
I wish you folks the best of luck getting that thing awarded. I am fine, but if the other
members want to hear more of the grant, we can refer this to the Committee.
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I want to see the PowerPoint. I think it would
be good, but can we just approve it today knowing that we all support going after
these grant moneys to accomplish this task? I do not know. We could put up another
communication or what have you to go over the PowerPoint as to what would happen
when we receive the grant, hopefully. I do not know.
COUNCIL MEETING 21 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Tabata: Thank you, Councilmember. We can set that
up. There are more details that we are working on for the final application. Right
now what you have is pretty much the details for the pre-application.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay.
Mr. Tabata: When the final is completed and we have our
"I's" dotted and our "T's" crossed more accurately, we could probably set up a
workshop to show you what we are applying for. There is a prioritizing process also.
Councilmember Kagawa: I guess what I would like is maybe not a
workshop, but just...
Councilmember Yukimura: A briefing.
Councilmember Kagawa: ...do it as soon as possible and get the full
presentation ready...
Mr. Tabata: Okay.
Councilmember Kagawa: ...of the final version, and let us have it in
Committee either in Public Works / Parks & Recreation or Planning, I would say.
Mr. Tabata: That works.
Councilmember Kagawa: We would give you half an hour or an hour.
Whatever you need. I want the whole public to see it, not just .individual
Councilmembers.
Mr. Tabata: Okay.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Perfect. Any more questions? If not, thank
you very much. Any public testimony?
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I guess there is a motion to approve on the
table.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, there is.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think that is a good idea to have them come
back when things are finalized for a full briefing would be excellent.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. That is what we will do. Any other
discussion?
The motion to approve C 2015-146 was then put, and unanimously carried.
COUNCIL MEETING 22 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Thank you very much. We will
go back to the next item, Madame Clerk.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: This is on page 5, Council Chair. Bills for
Second Reading.
Bill No. 2585 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6,
ARTICLE 14, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION
FUND: Councilmember Kuali`i moved for adoption of Bill No. 2585, on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I just wanted to say that I have a brief
presentation, which I can make after lunch.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. What I want to do is I want to get all
testimony of the public that is here today so that we can respect your time as well
and you have been here all day. So, we will take your public testimony, then we will
break for lunch, when we come back we will take care of the 1:30 p.m. items that are
scheduled, and then we will come back to this item. Councilmember Yukimura, we
can open up with your presentation and we will proceed. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: If I can provide further direction, since we will
be taking this item back after 1:30 p.m., if members of the public wish to attend that
session and watch the actual voting on that issue, then perhaps it would be in their
best interest to wait to speak after lunch. But for those like I know sometimes,
Branch, had to leave early and he had another appointment. That is why we are
taking up this item now so that if you do not plan on coming back after 1:30 p.m., at
least we can hear the mana`o you have to share right now. Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Very nice.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Alright. I will suspend the rules with
no objections. Do we have anyone signed up?
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: We have no registered speakers at this point.
Council Chair Rapozo: No registered speakers. The only thing I
would ask if there is anyone that is not coming back at 1:30 p.m., then you come up
first.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: Just state your name for the record for our
captioner, and you can proceed.
MAKAALA KA'AUMOANA: Aloha. I am Maka'ala Ka'aumoana. I am
testifying today on behalf of the Hanalei Watershed Hui. Mahalo for this opportunity
to testify now and not hang the day. I do have a couple of day jobs. Mahalo for that.
Aloha Chair Rapozo and Councilmembers. I offer testimony today on your bill to
reduce the contribution to the Open Space Fund from our real property taxes from
COUNCIL MEETING 23 MAY 6, 2015
one point five percent (1.5%) to point five percent (0.5%). The Hanalei Watershed
Hui implements a community authored Watershed Action Plan and the Hanalei to
Ha`ena Disaster Resilience Plan. It is in this context that we testify against the bill
to reduce our capacity to obtain open spaces on Kaua`i. We share the concern for
fiscal frugality and as a small community based non-profit, we understand the
economic pressures all too well. However, this approach to saving money is
short-sighted. Preserving open spaces and view planes is not a luxury we hold for a
time when we are flushed. It is a priority that must be funded even in the lean times.
The places we are able to preserve with this funding provide required respite and
access for just those folks who are feeling the stress of too many people, no place to
park, disappearing accesses and views, and no space to catch our breath. The
pressures of being a destination resort and the sequestration of the rich and famous
of our communities is already palpable. In my own family, the kupuna area reluctant
to join family gatherings in public places because so many eyes are on them. It is
uncomfortable. In many of our neighborhoods, it is hard to find a place to "look the
ocean." We need open spaces to be who we are. If not, we forget where we are. Open
space is as an important service to our people as any other the County provides,
maybe more. Once protected, it is forever. Not many things you do are forever. The
value of open space is right up there with healthcare and retirement. If you fund the
County employee retirement fund but our retirees cannot access their places expect
those were every tourist is, what have you saved? Where do our kupuna go to spend
their Hawaiian time? Walmart? Cutting the open space funding is not the pono
solution to your budget challenges. It is short-sighted and will have many unintended
consequences. Me ka pono.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next.
KALANIKUMAI KAMAKAULIULI `O NA ALI`I HANOHANO: Aloha
`auinala. Good afternoon. From Koloa, my name is Kalanikumai Kamakauliuli `O
Na Ali`i Hanohano, commonly known as Branch Harmony. I do represent Hui Hanai
I Ka Honua La`a, Nurtures of Sacred Space, and I am a volunteer steward of the
Koloa moku. From our olelo no`eau, translated as the land is chief to the man. Man
is subjected to the land because man can replenish and propagate. The land cannot.
If you do this action, I believe it is a betrayal of the public trust. I beg you to please
defer this and think about it more. In 2002, seventy-three percent (73%) of the voters
mandated a minimum of a point five percent (0.5%) of real property assessments be
allocated to the Open Space Fund intended to ensure quality of life, appreciation, and
urban planning; and acquisition and dedication of open space, public areas for
community use. It is not a luxury. It is essential to humanity and urban planning.
To reduce or raid this fund for the County operating budget is theft from the public
trust. The public, I am sure, will view this negatively for a long time. We worked for
years to try to get this set up.. The public came out for it. Yes, it is a minimum five
percent (5%). The word "minimum" means that it was anticipated to increase and it
stalled for years until 2012 when it was brought up to one and a half percent (1.5%).
Then it started bringing in money when our economy improved. I know the County
is struggling looking for ways to trim and gain revenues, but not to steal from the
land. The land is above the people. Do not be persuaded to diminish this vision. It
provides for our children and grandchildren to avoid squalled overcrowded worker
tenement ghettos. Uphold the mandate of the public. This fund did not become viable
until 2012. Now that it is generating funds, please, consider capping administrative
salaries instead of raiding the fund. I am sure that people can get by with seventy
thousand dollars ($70,000) or seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) a year for a
year or two (2) instead of the land being robbed. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much.
Mr. Hanohano: Mahalo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next speaker. After lunch?
Okay. With that, we will recess until 1:30 p.m. or shortly thereafter where we will
resume with our Resolutions, and then come back to this item. Thank you.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 12:28 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 1:30 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you everybody. Welcome back. We
will call the meeting back to order. At this time, we will take up Resolution
No. 2015-42. Could we have someone read that, please?
There being no objections, Resolution No. 2015-42 was taken out of order.
SCOTT K. SATO, Council Services Officer: We are on the middle of
page 5.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2015-42 — RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE COUNTY
CLERK OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI: Councilmember Yukimura moved for
adoption of Resolution No. 2015-42, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. I know it is lengthy Resolution.
Could you read it, please?
Mr. Sato: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. Appointment of the County Clerk.
Jade K. Fountain-Tanigawa is hereby appointed the County Clerk of the
County of Kaua`i for the term that commenced December 1, 2014.
SECTION 2. This Resolution shall take effect upon its approval."
Introduced by Mel Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Discussion? Well, how about
this? Public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: Ricky, I was going to call you up anyway. So,
I appreciate you coming up.
RICKY WATANABE: I would just like to commend the Council...
Council Chair Rapozo: State your name for the record.
COUNCIL MEETING 25 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Watanabe: Ricky Watanabe. I commend the Council for
their wisdom.
Council Chair Rapozo: The microphone.
Mr. Watanabe: It is on. In appointing Jade as the new
County Clerk. I have great confidence that Jade will be very good at being the Clerk.
We go back many years. So, I am proud to be here today. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Hold on Ricky, I am sure there are some
comments for you as well. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I want to take the opportunity as we
appoint Jade Tanigawa to thank you, Ricky, for your service to the County. How
many years has it been?
Mr. Watanabe: Over thirty (30) years.
Councilmember Yukimura: Long dedicated service. We wish you well,
and hope that will you enjoy your time of retirement.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. I just want to add my thoughts to Ricky.
Thank you very much for all the work you did. I worked with you fifteen (15) or
sixteen (16) years ago, however, long that was, and then these last three (3) years.
Most people do not understand what goes into the job of being the County Clerk. You
have to work, and this goes for Jade too. That is one of the reasons I am happy
supporting her. You have to work with seven (7) remarkably different individuals
and maintain the trust of each of us. You have done that phenomenally. I appreciate
that. We work on different things and privacy, confidentiality, and trust is important.
It is probably the most important element. Thank you for maintaining that all of
these years. Good luck in your future endeavors.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. When I saw that this was
the day we were going to appoint Jade, that is the first thing that came to my mind,
is that during that time, I wanted to thank Ricky for all of his years of service to the
County. Twenty (24) years ago, I worked here as well. I think my time with Ricky,
for the six (6) years that I was here, I think the two of us more than anything, we just
enjoyed a lot of laughs together because we both believe in good humor. Thank you
for all of those times, Ricky, and you taught me a lot too], as well. I credit that with
my current job here. Thanks to the experience that I gained and the things that you
taught me about the budget. I am trying to carry that out here. I thank you for that.
I wish you a happy retirement. Thank you.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you, Vice Chair.
COUNCIL MEETING 26 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock and then
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Ricky, for all
of your years of service. It was not too long ago we were going over your performance
report and you talked about something that I thought really stood out in terms of
your personality and how you lead. That is that you like to allow people the freedom
to thrive. I think that is shown through who we have as the next choice for our
Director here. So, I just want to thank you for being who you are and I hope you enjoy
a much deserved retirement.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Yes. I just wanted to say, I have known you
my entire life. I finally got into Council, I was excited to work with you, and I
appreciate the time I have spent with you. I am just going to thank you because I am
going to send you a list of things to do. I know you are retired so you will probably
have a lot of free time. So, I will give you a list of things to do. In reality, I just want
to thank you and appreciate you for who you are and just being a great resource to
me. Any time I need to talk, I can call you, and I probably will still call you. I want
to wish you the best on your retirement, and thank you for all your service.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Aloha Ricky. I too, just want to chime in and
say mahalo nui loa from bottom of my heart. With Peter Nakamura before you and
with you, both of you were always so easy to talk to and you were always there when
I needed something. People do not see, I think, the support that a person in your
position is to each of us and you help lift us up and help us do our jobs. We cannot
say thank you enough. The County, thirty (30) years of service, that is amazing. You
came right out of high school, right? We are excited and we are happy that what you
have done will continue with Jade. Mahalo.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. I wish I had known you were
going to be here today. Anyway, I did not know. We have something set up for you
later anyway. Thirty (30) plus years of service with the County. I think somebody
mentioned earlier that nobody really understands the job of the County Clerk. I will
say that even before I got elected my first term, you were very helpful to me as I was
often times on that side, testifying. You were very open to providing me information
even when it was not in agreement or concurrence of what the Council was debating
at the time. You did not discriminate. Whatever we asked for, you provided. Then,
I got elected and obviously, one of my mentors, my trainers from day one, trying to
keep that wild stallion mellow was your job. I used to think "just get out of my way
and let me do my work." In retrospect, I look back and I think, "Damn, I should have
listened to Ricky a lot sooner." However, the point I wanted to make today and it
filters down into today's Resolution as well is, I think you were the first County Clerk
that was appointed after a very strict process that required a written test, a typing
test, an interview, and writing samples. I mean, the County Clerk's position was
COUNCIL MEETING 27 MAY 6, 2015
intended to be a political appointment. Basically, a majority of the Council got
together, this happens everywhere, and whoever the majority likes would get
appointed. You were the first one that really broke that mold and we put it out there.
We had applicants from all over. We went through a process. Jade was actually one
of applicants. Came in a close second. But my point is this, it was a competitive
process and you were appointed not because the majority liked you, I think we did,
but that was not the reason. The reason was because you came in number one after
a very strict process. I want the public to understand that your appointment was not
because of politics. It was because you deserved it and you were the best candidate
for the job. I want to make sure that the public understands that. Of course, we
thank you for your service, Ricky. A huge loss when we found out you were going to
retire. But I believed that we did not need another process because Jade had already
gone through the process, number one, and number two, she has been acting in the
assistant capacity for a long time. I have absolutely no opposition obviously. When
the Resolution was posted, no one complained and said, "No. Let us go through a
process," which says a lot about you and it says a lot about Jade. Thank you, Ricky.
Thank you for training the staff, allowing them to grow, and do what they need to do
to expand their careers. You will be sorely missed. Thank you very much.
Mr. Watanabe: Thank you, Council Chair and
Councilmembers for the kind words. I am sure you guys look forward to having Jade
take over. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else in the audience
wishing to testify?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Well, there is no question that Jade
Tanigawa is the best candidate to fill the vacancy left by Rick Watanabe. In many
ways she has already been doing the work and doing it with such excellence. Her
extensive experience, her highly-honed management skills, her vast knowledge of the
County and its operations, and as Councilmember Hooser mentioned, her ability to
handle many different personalities and demands really makes her the best
candidate. I am very grateful that she is willing to do the job. As the Chair noted,
we are deviating from the process that we established the last time there was a
vacancy. He did a good job of describing what we went through to get to Rick
Watanabe, and it is a real testimony to Rick that he went through the process and
was chosen. That process really set again, as the Chair mentioned a new professional
precedent for this Council that we did not do it through politics, but we went through
the process and we were proud of it. I agree that in this case, we need to deviate from
it, and as the Chair pointed out, we have in effect gone through it. But I think we
want to say that we are doing this. It is a testimony to Rick's leadership that he
allowed Jade to do her job and more so, the succession is so smooth. It is a testimony
both to Rick and to Jade. In doing this, I think we are establishing another precedent
because I believe this is the first woman County Clerk Kauai has had. Yes. Is that
not great? I want to say that one of the most enlightening and satisfying parts of the
new process was our interview with then candidate Rick Watanabe, who became
County Clerk, because in his interview, Rick outlined his vision for Council Services
and we were able to discuss our expectations and concerns. I would like to ask Chair
Rapozo if we can schedule such a meeting with our new and already appointed Clerk
COUNCIL MEETING 28 MAY 6, 2015
within the next six (6) weeks so that we might have a similar conversation with her
and establish our mutual expectations and goals. I think it is very important to do
this and I know it will set a good foundation as we move ahead. Thank you, Jade.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. First of all, it is an easy choice for
me. Jade has given me excellent support and assistance in all that I have been
requesting since I had a chance to be on this Council. It is a very demanding time
right now. The County is struggling with finances. There is lot of hot topics out there.
I think this Council has taken them on and will continue to take them on. I think the
public wants us to take it on and it is our job to take it on, even if it is State kuleana,
Federal kuleana, or what have you. This is the venue that our constituents feel like
they have a chance to speak and be heard. Again, she has delivered and it is an easy
choice for me to deliver the County Clerk position back to her. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I want to add my support also. Both to Jade
and to Rick, I think the real testament is in the staff itself, the work that gets done,
and how smoothly this building runs in terms of staffing support. "The proof is in the
pudding." We have all worked for different organizations and have been involved in
things, which more often than not do not run as smoothly, especially when you have
many different people. You have drama, you have problems, and balls get dropped,
but rarely do we see that. I cannot remember seeing it here at all, actually. So, I
think it is a testament to the staff. Well, drama on the Council, but not drama with
the staff is my point. The workload that Jade and the staff carry is phenomenal. I
might send Jade three (3)to twenty (20) E-mails in a day sometimes and then imagine
multiplying that by seven (7) and then multiplying that by all the other people they
deal with. Somehow she is able to manage that information and make it all work. I
am very pleased to be able to offer my support and look forward to working with her
in future. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you, Councilmember Hooser. Anybody
else? Alright. It is time for that roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2015-42 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Mr. Sato: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Congratulations. At this time we are going to
take a short recess while we do the swearing-in. Let us take as long as it takes. We
are going to take a recess. We have to swear her in so she can become the official
County Clerk. Thank you.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 1:47 p.m.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 MAY 6, 2015
The meeting was called back to order at 1:54 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: One of the jobs or the tasks of the Clerk is to
appoint a Deputy County Clerk. The public can be assured that she was not
influenced by anyone on the Council. I made sure that Jade would have the sole
authority to appoint whoever she wanted. She has made her selection and that will
be her first administrative act to swear in the Deputy. So, we would like to do that
at this point. Jade, if you could identify or announce your Deputy.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Yes. Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. My
Deputy...
Council Chair Rapozo: State your name for the record.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Jade Fountain-Tanigawa, County Clerk. My
Deputy will be Scott Sato.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, Scott. Scott, why do you not go up next
to Jade and she can swear you in real quick? Scott did not want do this on camera. I
am sorry. Scott just made eighteen (18) years old today.
(Scott K. Sato was sworn in as the Deputy County Clerk.)
Council Chair Rapozo: If we could have the both of you come up real
quick, we will take a quick picture, and then we will get back to business. Thank you.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 1:56 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 1:58 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: We will resume where we left off, Ms. Clerk.
Resolution No. 2015-40 — RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MAYORAL
APPOINTMENT TO CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (Jeffrey S. lida):
Councilmember Kagawa moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2015-40, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Any public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Roll call, please.
COUNCIL MEETING 30 MAY 6, 2015
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2015-40 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Chock, looser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Can we go back to Bill No. 2585,
please?
Bill No. 2585 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6,
ARTICLE 14, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION
FUND
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we have three (3) registered speakers.
(Council Chair Rapozo was noted as not present.)
There being no objections, Council Chair Rapozo relinquished Chairmanship
to Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Hang on. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I did have a brief presentation that I wanted
to make, and I think the Chair said I could do that.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, I am the Chair now. You can.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: Proceed. I am no longer the Chair, again.
(Council Chair Rapozo was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kagawa returned Chairmanship to Council Chair Rapozo.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am making a presentation. Thanks. Is that
as bright as we can get it? Okay. At our Committee Meeting last week, Council Chair
Rapozo opined that the main purpose of the Open Space Fund was public access and
also mentioned that acquiring open space for parks was a little bit questionable
because it would cost more money to develop and maintain. I want us to look closely
at what the Charter says because this is what the people of Kaua`i voted for in terms
of what we want these moneys to be used for. So, the Charter says that, "In adopting
each fiscal years budget and capital program, the Council shall appropriate a
minimum of one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the real property tax revenues to a fund
known as the Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund."
Below, it lists all of the purposes for which the fund can be used. Let us look at that.
This was passed overwhelming in 2002, and the following purposes are: public
outdoor recreation and education, including access to beaches and mountains;
COUNCIL MEETING 31 MAY 6, 2015
preservation of historic or culturally important land areas and sites; protection of
significant habitats or ecosystems; preserving forests, beaches, coastal areas, and
agricultural lands; protecting watershed lands to preserve water quality and water
supply; conserving land in order to reduce erosion, floods, landslides, and run-off; and
improving disabled and public access to, and enjoyment of public lands and open
spaces.
If we look at the Open Space Fund, this kind of Charter amendment has been
passed in all Counties. You will see that in Hawai`i County, they have a two
percent (2%) set aside, Maui has a one percent (1%) set aside, O`ahu has a point five
percent (0.5%) set aside, and Kaua`i is proposing by this Bill No. 2585, to reduce the
one and a half percent (1.5%) that we have right now to point five percent (0.5%).
What we should notice is that while Oahu is at point five percent (0.5%), look at the
base. Oops, let me see here. Sorry. Where is the pointer? The base Oahu has is one
billion dollars ($1,000,000,000) in real property tax. You will see it in the right hand
column. The base we have is one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000). So, they
have a base that is far bigger and the five percent (5%) goes much further. As you
can see, they generate with a point five percent (0.5%), five million dollars
($5,000,000). We would be putting aside only five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000).
Now, let us look at what we want to acquire and protect, potentially. We have
recently heard that Waipa Foundation, which has been serving so many of our young
people and preserving the culture, is coming in with one million seven hundred
thousand dollars ($1,700,000) acquisition for their fishpond and central piece of land
in that ahupua a. Nukumoi, which is next to Kaneiolouma, will require about three
million dollars ($3,000,000), two million six hundred thousand dollars ($2,600,000).
Anyway, these are estimates based on market values. The Hoban Public Access has
been on the open space list for many years, and that is three million five hundred
thousand dollars ($3,500,000). Alekoko Fishpond, which is a huge cultural resource
that needs to be protected and perpetuated, is one million dollars ($1,000,000).
Kekaha Oceanfront, there is a beach access piece that is one million dollars
($1,000,000). Maha`ulepu, that has been a de facto place of the heart forever, but is
not permanently protected. Hanapepe River Mouth is also a nineteen (19) acre piece
that would be a really beautiful riverside ocean park. Black Pot expansion. There is
one (1) more lot that yet has to be acquired. Po`ipn Beach Park, there is a lot that
also could add to the expansion of the park. That is a total over thirty-one million
dollars ($31,000,000). What we have in the fund right now is just under five million
dollars ($5,000,000). So, you can see that the need is huge, and to just put aside five
hundred dollars ($500,000) a year will take us a long time to get there. For any one
of these, it is going to take a lot. Our bargaining power also, is much better. Our
credibility in negotiations is much better when we have money to back up. We have
to put our money where our mouth is. That is it. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kuali`i,
question?
Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. I am just wondering. Is this a
typographical error (typo), Hanapepe River Mouth, three thousand dollars ($3,000)?
Councilmember Yukimura: No.
Councilmember Kuali`i: The third from the bottom?
COUNCIL MEETING 32 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: No.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Nineteen and a half (19.5) acres,
conservation, three thousand dollars ($3,000).
Councilmember Yukimura: That is what the real property tax value is.
These are very conservative estimates. I think it is a flood area and it is conservation.
So, it does not have a whole lot of value. But I do not know if you place it on the
market, what it would actually go for. I think it is an area where the canoe clubs now
keeps their canoes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: It just seems odd for that to be lumped in with
the millions of dollars' worth of the need for the County to make that kind of
investment. You are saying that is a good thing, but for three thousand dollars
($3,000), let us just do it.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, all of these have to be negotiated. There
has to be a plan. There has to be a formal appraisal. You do not just go out and do
it. But what this list was meant to show is there is a whole variety, and this is a
partial list. We did not even know about Waipa and the opportunity for it until this
year or maybe last year is when it came up because I think the foundation and the
group there were trying for some other buyers and funders. But it is key properties
and there probably are many more like that. But we need to have a fund that is
growing. To say that we can find the money when the time comes, is not true if we
cannot even find the money to do it every year. A little bit at a time.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa, question?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. I am looking at the slide where we
compared the islands. It looks very impressive if you look at Hawaii Island two
percent (2%) contributing. I think we need an asterisk underneath all of the other
islands except Kauai because they are short-funding their Employer-Union Health
Benefits Trust Fund (EUTF) retirement fund. Kauai County, we are one hundred
percent (100%) paying our retirement obligations whereas the Big Island, Maui, and
Oahu, they have neglected paying their one hundred percent (100%). They are
paying the minimum twenty percent (20%) or what have you, and pushing that
burden to their future taxpayers. I think if we are going compare apples and apples
fine. But if we are going to compare apples and oranges, let us identify what is an
orange and what is an apple.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, each County has to set priorities. One
of the ways we set priorities is by putting set asides to the things that are really
important to us. I am very proud that we are funding our pension in full. That is a
good best practice. I would say it is a good best practice to set aside moneys for open
space as well because these opportunities, if we do not go for them when had they
show up, sometimes can disappear forever.
Council Chair Rapozo: I just have a question. Where are we, the
County, on any one of these parcels as far as acquiring them? I mean, aside from
putting them on paper that it is available, and this is not estimated market value.
You are saying this is County tax assessment value.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is correct.
COUNCIL MEETING 33 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: That is a big difference from market value.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, this is very conservative.
Council Chair Rapozo: This is very low. I guess my question is,
where are we as it relates to acquiring any of these parcels? If you cannot answer,
that is probably not for you. It is probably for Planning.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would say it should not affect how much we
set aside.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, that is your opinion. It does to me. You
are putting money aside for what? I mean, some of these parcels, we should have
already owned. We had the money in the fund. We had, and every year we get the
report from Open Space. But what has the Administration done to move to acquiring
these properties? Every year we wait, the price goes up.
Councilmember Yukimura: I agree that we should demand more action
from the Administration. These can also be done by groups like the Hawaiian Island
Land Trust, the Trust for Public Lands, Waipa, and even Kaneiolouma Heiau Hui or
team. I believe they are all moving us toward that. It may be that the groundwork
does not always show up right away, but it is happening and we need to have the
moneys to purchase these properties.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I want to support Councilmember Yukimura's
basic position. I agree that the Administration's process is too slow to acquire these
properties. We should move faster, but I do not believe reducing the fund is going to
help us move faster. It will actually help us move slower. We have less money. There
is tremendous opportunity right now. We could leverage these funds with the interest
rates that are there. Real estate prices still have not accelerated. It is really a
moment of opportunity here. I think Branch Harmony said it best in his testimony
earlier today, that this is about our priorities and this priority is every bit as
important as retirement and all of the other things that the County spends money
on. This is the only thing that is going to be here one hundred (100) years from now.
One hundred (100) years from now, these lands will still be public lands and all of
these other things that we are paying for will just be gone. As the original introducer
of the Charter Amendment that put this on the ballot and the people of Kaua`i so
wisely voted for, I think that this would be doing us all a huge disservice and a
disservice to the next generation, the generation after that, and after that. I think it
behooves this Council to think long-term, think towards the future, and think about
preserving that which is special to all of us. I just strongly encourage everyone to not
support reducing this amount. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa: I think we have got to realize and hopefully
we will get some numbers from the Administration, but we have acquired a lot
especially at Black Pot. We spent three million dollars ($3,000,000) out of the fund
for the Hodge property, Black Pot Beach expansion. We also spend five million
dollars ($5,000,000) of CIP park acquisition money for the Sheehan property, and
that one is not even in our hands yet. Nobody is using that park because it is tied up
in court right now. It is very dangerous when you go with eminent domain. You have
COUNCIL MEETING 34 MAY 6, 2015
to make sure that you try and avoid going to court over it because in the end, you are
going to end up spending a lot of money and nobody is going to be able to use it
because it is tied up. We can say we are right today, but until a Judge formally
declares it is ours, we will not be able to enjoy it. So, what is the sense of that? I
would rather have peaceful negotiations even if we have to pay, instead of just getting
into court. The point I am trying to make is that we have spent a lot on acquisitions.
But there is also another part, is how do we balance our budget? Reducing it to five
percent (5%) as the Mayor is asking us to consider, is following what was in the
Charter. What the voters approved us, he is just asking us to go back down just for
the time being not because it is not important, but because basically we are not sure
how we sit currently, financially. The Mayor submitted a major budget of thirteen
million five hundred thousand dollars ($13,500,000) in surplus or in our savings, but
yet we have eight million dollars ($8,000,000) next year in unexpended salaries that
need to be paid. You subtract that, you have five million five hundred thousand
dollars ($5,500,000). We are also hearing about costs that is going to come up with
our new landfill, Ma'alo. We have many things, lawsuits that may come up, and to
tie up that one million dollars ($1,000,000) when we might be at a breakeven point in
our budget, is scary. I do not budget my personal finances that way. I make sure I
have a little bit in my savings just in case the pipes break at my house and I have to
fix it. We cannot treatment our government's money like that also. We have got to
make sure that we have some reserve. Surely, if I was on this Council, three (3) or
four (4) Councils ago when we had fifty million dollars ($50,000,000), I would be
asking for two point five percent (2.5%) in the Open Space Fund. That is how
important it is to me. But right now, we do not have that kind of surplus. What do
we do? I say right now, we take the advice of the Mayor, let us make sure that we
get to next year, and let us re-evaluate it next year. If next year our surplus improves
and it shows that we can afford that extra one million dollars ($1,000,000) to go into
this very important purpose, I am all for it. But this is the first year in many years
that our expenses is not larger than our revenues. I think it is the first year in history,
I believe. Well, not in history, but for a while, the past twelve (12) years or so. So,
let us celebrate that, that we are finally not spending more than we get and let us not
try and spend this one million dollars ($1,000,000) so we will go back to how we were
before. Spending more than we have. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Just to correct some things. When we
condemn, we take possession immediately. So, we do have possession of the lands at
Black Pot and we are embarking on a park planning process. However, I do not think
that we want to start with a condemnation process and we did not in Hanalei. We
tried to negotiate. We want to work with willing sellers wherever we can. That
always has to be our first effort. I mean,just the testimony about how much we spent
on Black Pot shows how much money we need for open space acquisition. Just putting
aside five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) every year is not going to get us to the
amounts that we need. We are trying to save money.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, it also shows the ability for the County
to move money when we need to, that all the money does not come from this fund.
When an opportunity to purchase land comes up, there are opportunities through the
Park Fund to fund the acquisition. So, it is not if we do not fund this account we
cannot purchase land. I think that is erroneous, but anyway. What I will do, let us
take public testimony at this point.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 35 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: We will have opportunities for discussion
later.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The first speaker is Sharon Goodwin, followed
by Steven Yee.
Council Chair Rapozo: Sharon.
SHARON GOODWIN: Thank you. Aloha Chair and
Councilmembers. I am happy you are all here today. For the record, I am Sharon
Goodwin, a member of the Sierra Club. What I want to read to you has been composed
by the Executive Committee of the Kaua`i Group of the Sierra Club. Their logo
Malama I Ka Honua, Cherish the Earth. This is regarding Bill No. 2585, cutting
funding for the Public Access and Open Space Fund. The Kauai the Group of Sierra
Club urges the County Council to reject Bill No. 2585, which could would cut the
minimum funding level for the County's Public Access, Open Space, Natural
Resources Preservation Fund by sixty-seven percent (67%). The fund is truly the
people's fund as it was established by Kaua`i citizens to preserve important lands for
their children and grandchildren. These are lands that will be critical to the livability
of Kauai for future generations, coastal and agricultural lands, watersheds,
ecosystems and the habitats they provide, cultural and historic sites, lands for
outdoor recreation, and access to beaches and mountains. The fund is an important
investment in Kaua`i's future generations, and it is an investment that cannot be
postponed. The existing minimum funding level equal to only one point five
percent (1.5%) of the County's real property tax revenue, is already insufficient to
meet the many needs that the County has expressed. While cutting this already
small funding level might appear to some to be penny-wise, it would in fact be "pound
foolish." If Kaua`i real estate price were stable or declining, reducing the minimum
funding for the fund would mean postponing any number of important acquisitions
to some distant uncertain future. That is already bad enough. But the fact is the
pressures to develop Kaua`i's remaining open spaces remain relentless and the real
estate values for such lands are rising rapidly, even faster than the islandwide
average. That means that reducing funding for the fund would guarantee that the
County would fall further and further behind in its ability to preserve the lands that
need to be preserved. The County Council should not delude itself thinking that it
can cut the funding level today and catch-up in future years. It will clearly be
impossible to catch-up because it is clear whatever might be barely affordable today,
will be completely unaffordable tomorrow. The people of Kaua`i expressed their
vision for the future when they approved the county charter amendment that
established the fund.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Three (3) minutes.
Ms. Goodwin: Please do not allow County government to fail
in its duties.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is your first three minutes.
Ms. Goodwin: Oh, okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: You can come back after we go around.
Everybody gets their three (3) minutes.
COUNCIL MEETING 36 MAY 6, 2015
Ms. Goodwin: Okay. This is my one (1) last sentence. Shall
I just finish?
Council Chair Rapozo: If it is one (1) sentence, just finish up the
sentence.
Ms. Goodwin: Okay. Please do not allow County
government to fail in its duty to preserve or acquire the natural resources that are
the most important legacy that the people of Kaua`i can leave to future generations.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Ms. Goodwin: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next speaker.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Next speaker is Steven Yee, followed by Carl
Berg.
STEVEN YEE: My name is Steven Yee. I am Lihu`e resident
and President of Malama Hule`ia. Malama Hule`ia is a grassroots community
supported organization. We started out as part of the Kaiola Canoe Club and have
just become our own 501(c)3 corporation with a board. We just hired an Executive
Director and we are moving forward. I distributed a written statement, but I would
like to just summarize what Malama Hule`ia is about and then I think it will become
clear as to why we think this this Open Space Fund is so important and needs to be
fully funded. We have been working for the past two (2) years on a demonstration
site as part of the Kaiola Canoe Club. It is about two and a half(2%) acres. It adjoins
the Niumalu Beach Park and the canoe club hale. It has been overgrown almost
completely, with red mangrove, which an invasive species here in Hawaii. We have
labored with many volunteers to manually clear that land of the mangrove and other
invasive plant species. We have been replanting with native vegetation. We are
nearly complete with clearing that piece of land, which is public accreted land in front
of what used to be the Niumalu Beach. We are nearly completed with that and we
are turning our attention now to our primarily goal, which are to clear the mangrove
along the Hule`ia River all the way upstream for about two (2) miles and to clear
Alekoko Fishpond of the mangroves, which is completely surrounding the fishpond,
overgrown the fishpond wall, and it is slowly destroying that very precious cultural
heritage.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Yee, that is your first three (3) minutes.
Mr. Yee: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: You can come back and finish up after we go
through our first round.
Mr. Yee: Thank you. I think you got the point though.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next speaker is Carl Berg, followed by
Beryl Blaich.
COUNCIL MEETING 37 MAY 6, 2015
CARL BERG: Aloha Councilmembers. My name is Carl
Berg. I am speaking on behalf of myself today. But with full transparency, I am a
member of Surfrider Foundation Kaua`i Chapter and we have submitted a letter
condemning the reduction of funds for beach access, especially. I am also on the
Executive Board of Malama Hule`ia. I am the next door neighbor of Steve and support
Alekoko. The reason I came here today, I am in the capacity of a former member of
State Legacy Land Commission. I was appointed for two (2) years, two (2) terms on
that Commission, and then when my terms were up, the Governor even tried to
extend me a little further until I was able to get off that responsibility. I wanted
somebody to share in that. But it gave me a very good perspective of what is going
on in the State and what is going on with County of Kaua`i in acquiring beach access,
public parklands, cultural sites, et cetera. The graph that was put up there by
Councilmember Yukimura showed that the County of Hawaii with two percent (2%)
put away four million eight hundred thirty thousand dollars ($4,830,000). That was
very impressive. We mentioned that they may not do their pension fund. But my
perspective on that is looking at the past few years, is that the County of Hawai`i has
gotten from the Legacy Land Commission over six million six hundred thousand
dollars ($6,600,000). They put up only one-third (1/3) of that money and they got the
other two-thirds (2/3) from the Legacy Land Commission. What they were doing was
a planned purchase and conservation easement of the entire coastal line from Kohala,
Ka`awa, and Pao`o, and they saw that all of that land was going to be developed into
estate homes and resorts, and that it was going to be lost forever. So, what I just
mentioned, the six million five hundred thousand dollars ($6,500,000) is just what
County did. But then there are other private organizations like Malama Maha`ulepu,
Malama Hule`ia, and Sierra Club. Other organizations that went in bought up other
pieces of land for the Hawaiian Land Trust went in to protect that coastline. During
my time on the Commission, I was fortunate to see the Hanalei property, the Hodge
property come through. But that is the only property that this County has gone after
the Legacy Land Commission moneys and been able to secure. It was really
shameful. Why was my County not with my taxpayers' dollars, I am a property
owner, why are we not protecting more and more of this? This has become very
important to me more recently because my daughter and my two (2) grandsons moved
here. So, I would like to really stress that I think it is the fiscal responsibility with
the prices of land going up...
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Berg, that is your first three (3) minutes.
Mr. Berg: Thank you. That we should protect it. I will
be able to answer questions later, if you would like.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Berg: Thank you for the opportunity.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next speaker is Beryl Blaich, followed by
Makoto Lane.
BERYL BLAIH: Aloha Councilmembers and aloha to each and
every one of you. I am Beryl Blaih. I am speaking as an individual. I am on the
Board of Malama Mahaulepu and I had the privilege of being on the Open Space
Commission and to be the Chair in the beginning of the Commission. I am not in
support of Bill No. 2585. Really, it is because land preservation in Hawai`i and
certainly here on Kauai is particularly challenging. Land here is limited, it is far
more costly, it is deeply and vastly valued, and it is highly marketable. So, to be able
COUNCIL MEETING 38 MAY 6, 2015
to act to acquire land and easements in the mutual benefit of the public and willing
landowners, you have to be able to act rapidly. I want to emphasize "mutually
beneficial." It is not just about can we serve the public? It is like can we serve the
landowners who are willing? The kind of eminent domain we are dealing with at
Black Pot is the least desirable and most costly. You are so right about that.
Fundamentally, this means to participate in the real estate market, money has to be
readily and rapidly available whether for purchase of an easement or very frequently
as Carl said, to match and combine with other available funds. That is how it is
usually done. Landowners can rarely wait for the next budget cycle to make a deal.
That is why all over the nation, Counties with voter endorsement have established
open space funds that are really a savings banks. They are really opportunities for
emergencies, really, because each time something is available, it might not be on that
list. It is something else coming up and we have to be ready with the funds,
unfortunately. Kaua`i's open space program has developed slowly and steadily and it
is true we started with that point five percent (0.5%), and that is what the voters
approved. But I think we were a little naive. Right away the Open Space Commission
said, "Wow, we are going to need more money in this fund and we recommended it
every year, changes in the fund's allotment and also in other ways of leveraging the
money." Those were all accomplished in 2012. That has been real great progress. I
just want to say that I do agree that we are in a terrible crisis right now. I thought
the key words that you used right now, Councilmember Kagawa, was "for the time
being." Please, I want you to grapple with this and really think how you codify...your
long-term objective is to sustain this fund at its present level and grow it. Thank you
so very much.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Beryl, for your testimony. I was
just wondering if your time on the Commission, and thank you for your service. Did
the Commission, from the beginning, look at other ways of perhaps acquiring some of
those accesses like Hoban? We look at the price and say, "Come on. It is a walkway
and it is..."
Council Chair Rapozo: Point three (0.3) acres.
Councilmember Kagawa: Three million five hundred thousand dollars
($3,500,000) for that walkway. I am thinking to myself, is there another way of the
County acquiring this parcel? Say, we will exempt you from paying property taxes
for the next twenty (20) years. Seriously, has the Commission looked at some of those
alternatives rather than the County having to dish out that kind of cash for a
walkway? It just seems really high. I think the property owner knows that they are
either going to get illegal people crossing or they are really going to get a lot of hatred
from the locals who went through there for all these years. What is your response?
Ms. Blaih: I think we did not talk about specific
alternatives when I was on the Commission. But I think the longer the Commission
has been going forward and obviously the clearer the challenges have become, the
more they are as the Commission goes forward and clearer the challenges have
become, the more there has been that kind of discussion. That is really good and
important public discussion. One of the great things that the Commission can do now
is sponsor educational forums. At the time I was on the Commission, it was not
something that we could do. You could explore exactly that kind of technique. With
Hoban, I have to tell you that we thought we could do it for less. We thought there
was really readily available money for it. It is still very important and of course, it is
kind of a lesson because if you cannot get in there right away, it is only going to get
more expensive.
COUNCIL MEETING 39 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Ms. Blaih: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Hi Beryl.
Ms. Blaih: Hi.
Councilmember Kuali`i: If the original Charter amendment was
passed in 2003 that established this floor at point five percent (0.5%) and you are on
the Commission right then in the beginning?
Ms. Blaih: Well, it took us a couple of years to get
organized. So, I do not think the Commission actually started until 2004.
Councilmember Kuali`i: But then you had stated in your remarks that
you pretty much figured it out right way that it was not set at a level...
Ms. Blaih: We were putting in two hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($250,000).
Councilmember Kuali`i: So, then it took ten (10) years, and the only
movement came from Council action.
Ms. Blaih: Well, actually, no. It grew to the point of one
million dollars ($1,000,000).
Councilmember Kuali`i: No, but the rate changing going from point
five percent (0.5%), the floor.
Ms. Blaih: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Moving up from point five percent (0.5%) to
one point five percent (1.5%).
Ms. Blaih: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: But in those ten (10) years, and we have so
many wonderful community organizations that are doing the stewardship work in
different ways and some of them are doing it with little or no money to get us to the
point where the sweat equity can be leveraged with grants and Federal money, State
money, and County money; and we can achieve the things that we want to do. But it
is hard for the Council because we are having to make the fiscal decisions.
Ms. Blaih: You are.
Councilmember Kuali`i: But if the voters dictated like they did in 2003,
to move that point five percent (0.5%) to some higher-level, I think you all are in the
position to move that. I would probably, as a citizen, work with you and help you.
So, you have not done any of that as far as organizing the community to do yet another
Charter Amendment to put the rate at the level that you originally thought it should
have been, but it was set too low?
COUNCIL MEETING 40 MAY 6, 2015
Ms. Blaih: Well, I want to tell you that the change came
about as part of a process that was initiated by the Mayor. It was not just a single
Councilmember saying, "I think this should be changed." What really happened is
within the Commission, there were concerns about the effectiveness of the
Commission and the program. We said, "There is a fund, but there is a program."
Bless the Mayor. He got Nadine Nakamura on board before she was a Council person
and he initiated the process that talked to all the Councilmembers.
(Councilmember Kagawa was noted as not present.)
Ms. Blaih: Nadine talked to all of the Councilmembers,
talked to the administrative people, to the Open Space Commissioners, and
everybody weighed in on aspects of the program that they thought could be improved.
I really think that the one point five percent (1.5%) change kind of emerged from that
process along with something else she pointed out, which is that it should not just be
the County holding all of these lands and then responsible for maintaining all of these
lands and finding additional staff. You have groups out there who are committed to
this. The law got changed to kind of not to indicate, to stipulate, that it was possible
for other groups to apply and other groups to manage.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Then the last thing along the lines I think you
referred to Councilmember Kagawa's comments about"for now." I mean, you are now
speaking about the Mayor and Nadine having supported this in 2012. Well, now in
2015, the Mayor is coming to us as a Council and he is actually reacting to the Council
as well in last election where the people are stepping forward and saying, "First and
foremost, we have to make those tough decisions, fiscally responsible decisions."
Would you not trust the Mayor and this Council at some future point when we are
able to get back to where they went in 2012 because you trusted them then?
Ms. Blaih: I trust you guys. But do you know what? It
could be another Council. I would feel way better if you make some exact stipulations.
If you are going to make a change, it is for this duration and then you review it and
get to think about it again in the context because your tough decisions are now driven
by the specific financial situation and nothing changes more than that picture. Two
(2) things are certain. The land prices are going up and I know you feel the toughest
of your decisions is going up.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think 2008/2009 is when the inversion of
revenues and expenditures in the County changed. From 2008/2009 we started to
spend more than we brought in and people are saying, "Enough of that, stop. Get us
back in sync," and the Mayor has finally this year, the first year that the budget is
coming over in balance. But it does not come without a cost. You have to find the
money somewhere and the Mayor has said at this point that this is one of the sources.
It is unfortunate. Or we can continue on the inverted scale, which would not be
fiscally responsible either.
Ms. Blaih: I thank you for your work. But I do reiterate
what has been said before. This is an investment as much as it is an expense.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not disagree. Thank you.
Ms. Blaih: Thank you so much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next.
COUNCIL MEETING 41 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Sato: Our last registered speaker is Makoto Lane.
MAKOTO LANE: Hi all. Aloha.
Council Chair Rapozo: Aloha.
Mr. Lane: My name is Makoto Lane. I live in K51oa. It
is an interesting time right now on Kauai. We are at a crossroads. We are looking
at developing huge parcels of the island. In fact, we are looking at doubling our
population here. What I see going down right now at a significant rate, and all of you
see it too, is a loss of culture. Menehune Market in Lawa`i, gone. Sueoka's, gone. No
more snack shops. Now, Kukui`ula Shopping Village has to compete with ABC Store
right next door, and that is a loss of culture too. These are all experiences. I cannot
go hiking at ICpu Falls. I got turned away just the other day or a couple of weeks ago
to go hiking at the Knudsen Pass Ridge over by the St. Matthew's Lutheran Church.
They are blocking the way to Allerton Beach. I cannot go there. These all equate to
experience that we have. That is what is it to live on Kauai, along with these hikes.
You have all experienced that. Since we are going to be doubling the population,
doubling the hotel rooms, and doubling the houses, we should be doubling the
protected open space as well. It is really irresponsible. It is a really positive thing to
protect open space. All of you folks can put your names on it and in one hundred
(100) years from now, somebody will know and respect you for that, to protect open
space, the funds, and the money that go towards that. In conclusion, right now, I
have a scientific study. The study scientifically links open space to quality of life. So,
I will pass this out to you folks. I also E-mailed the article to all of you so you would
have it. But again, if we are going to double the population, double the open space.
Let us preserve the culture. Let us stop losing our culture. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. The staff will take it from you.
Anyone else wishing to testify? Please.
TED BLAKE: Hello. My name is Ted Blake. I sit on the
Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund Commission and a
lot of the priorities I saw there, I have not even seen yet. It has never come up on our
priorities. So, we are talking about a much broader list than what we have. The slide
that Councilmember Yukimura put up that showed the different percentages that we
have, we get a much smaller percentage than the rest of the Counties in State, but
our land values go up at the same rate. So, we are behind the 8-ball all the way. I
had a long talk with Councilmember Kaneshiro, who helped me get through the
budget crisis that we are having. I sat in on a meeting that the Mayor put up, also.
I know it is not easy. We have something to do. But open space is a part of our lives.
Many things that we have now are being private property. You cannot get on there.
Some of the access that we have, we have had fieldtrips to the west, from the Evans
property to Salt Pond to Kaneiolouma to the K5loa field system.
(Councilmember Kagawa was noted as present.)
Mr. Blake: On the east, we have gone to PApa`a and
Kahili fieldtrips. We have looked at the access, which looked great when I was
younger. Now that I am old, I need 4-wheel shoes just to get down. How do you come
back? That is ever present. I am looking at something that is saying, "How can we
work with the County?" We want to reduce it to point five percent (5%). I do not hear
anything about a sunset on this, whether it will be for two (2) years, one (1) year, or
an option to renew, which to me, makes me feel more comfortable if it happens this
COUNCIL MEETING 42 MAY 6, 2015
way. We five million dollars ($5,000,000). Actually, four million nine hundred
thirty-six thousand eight hundred sixty-eight dollars ($4,936,868) in the fund. Maybe
we have projects going on. Hoban, like you said. They know the County wants it and
they are coming up with just a ridiculous price with saying, "You are stupid" or the
other thing. What we have online right now that the documents that are being
prepared by the County Attorney probably uses up about I would say, three million
dollars ($3,000,000), somewhere around there. I mentioned maybe the Public Access,
Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund Commission should loan you the
one million dollars ($1,000,000) this year. You do not have to reduce the price. Keep
the one point five percent (1.5%), and then we can at least have some breathing room
all the way around. Maybe next year, you take another one million dollars
($1,000,000).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. That is your first three (3)
minutes. Let me see if we have anybody else. Did anybody else want to testify? You
can come back on the second go around.
Mr. Blake: I am pau unless you have questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: No. Thank you.
TESSIE KINNAMAN: Good afternoon. Tessie Kinnaman, for the
record. I would like the screen, please. Did I introduce myself already? Oh, yes.
Anyway, I do not support Bill No. 2585 for all the reasons that everyone before me
did express. I was really surprised with the slide that JoAnn put up, especially with
Hoban. I have been pushing the Hoban property for years and the market value is
up there. It said three...not market. I am sorry. Land value is three million five
hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000). We are just asking for a strip. So, it is not
three million five hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000). From the estimates that I
came across at the Public Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund
Commission meeting a few months ago, the property owners wanted six hundred
sixty thousand dollars ($660,000). The County assessment was one hundred thirteen
thousand dollars ($113,000). A year or two (2) before that, it was seventy-nine
thousand dollars ($79,000). I mean, that has been on the priority list for the past ten
(10) years since almost the conception of the Public Access, Open Space, Natural
Resources Preservation Fund Commission. As far as I know, documents have been
sitting on the Mayor's desk and supposedly was carbon copy (CCed) to the Council. I
do not know if you folks ever got any of that information. But I do not support
reducing the fund at this time. I would like to read what has been passed out, a letter
from Karma Lee Chirstensen-Knudsen to the Planning Department back in 2006
when there was this thing over Nukumoi wanting to build a miniature shopping
center down there on that site. It says, "To the Kaua`i County Planning Department
and Planning Commission, regarding honoring a promise to the King. Dear Planning
Director and Commission of Kauai, this is a this is a letter of pure information I
received from my husband, Valdemar L'Orange Knudsen, 1910 to 1990, who spoke to
me numerous times concerning the property across from Po`ipii Beach Park, the
acreage behind Brenneke's restaurant beyond Nukumoi gift shop. One hundred
forty (140) years ago, my husband's grandfather, Valdemar Knudsen, known to the
Hawaiians as Kanuka, purchased land from the King of Hawaii at this time. The
King said to Kanuka, "The Hawaiians are like children; however, there will come a
time when they will come together in agreement and strength and until that time,
this land was not to be sold or used for commercial use, only leased to non-profits. A
promise was made with a handshake..."
COUNCIL MEETING 43 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Tessie, I am sorry. I have to stop you there
because that is your first three (3) minutes. Is there anyone else that wanted to
testify that has not testified? Tessie, you will have to come back. First-time speakers.
RUPERT ROWE: Aloha Councilmembers. My name is Rupert
Rowe. I am the poi:, of Hui Malama 0 Kaneiolouma. Tessie was reading the letter to
you folks, but I am against taking the one point five percent (1.5%) away because it
would not give us the opportunity to go after this property. The time has come for us
to look at the Open Space Fund today and make a serious decision on purchasing
Nukumoi so that we will all be on the right track. Using this money, everything is
timing. The timing is right to purchase Nukumoi. We have been following this open
space from 2004. We has to malama the adna. By doing so, what you folks see down
Po`ipii is what we are going to give the world, this island, and this State, a history of
our past, a history of our future, and an understanding of our presence. So, I believe
my presentation today, it is time to shake the open space money and let it trickle
down to where it needs to be on purchasing Nukumoi so that Kaneiolouma will have
a visitor, interpreter, and a cultural center. Everything is in the works. That whole
area is zoned open public culture. We moved the State portion to the County. In
2010, the State transferred their share to the County. We worked on trying to
purchase Nukumoi, but to get to Nukumoi, we had to clean the rest of the place so
that everybody gets a visual of the property and understand the significance on
purchasing since the money is there. I do not know what else to say, but this is my
presentation from the hut,. We do not support taking away the one point five
percent (1.5%).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. I have a question. Rupert,
Kaneiolouma has received substantial funds from the County over the years.
Mr. Rowe: One (1) year.
Council Chair Rapozo: One (1) year, but multiple sources of revenue,
and that is a good thing. My point is that, that money did not come from the Open
Space Fund.
Mr. Rowe: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: The presentation was made to the County and
the County agreed that, in fact, that resource needs to be pursued and that money
was transferred from the Islandwide Agricultural Park System, four hundred
thousand something dollars from the General Fund CIP in the tune of eight hundred
five thousand dollars ($805,000). My point is this, if the opportunity to purchase land
or to provide funding for an attempt to protect the resource, the County has that
ability. None of your money came from the Open Space Fund.
Mr. Rowe: I know that.
Council Chair Rapozo: I just want to make is that point because I
think some of the testimonies I am hearing, the perception is that if we take it down
to point five percent (0.5%), that we only have that money for open space preservation,
and that is simply not true. Your project is a good example of that.
Mr. Rowe: The issue was not what you are saying to me
right now. Why we got the money from the County was to protect the resource of the
culture and the artifacts in the property.
COUNCIL MEETING 44 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: I agree.
Mr. Rowe: The eight hundred thousand dollars
($800,000) went around and put the security wall so that the general public...
Council Chair Rapozo: Rupert, I am not questioning the money. I
said, "It is a good thing that we did it." My point was we are not limited to any type
of purchases of open space or preserving open space by the Open Space Fund.
Mr. Rowe: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is all I am trying to say.
Mr. Rowe: Okay. So, anyway can I say one more thing to
you?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Rowe: That whole area was open public culture.
That is the zoning for that whole parcel of land from Manakalanipo, Kaneiolouma,
the State portion, and Nukumoi. All of these properties are zoned open public culture.
So, why I wanted to go after the open space money is because of the interpretation of
that word "open space." So, that is why I am here.
Council Chair Rapozo: I got it. Thank you very much.
Mr. Rowe: You are welcome.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify for the first
time that has not testified yet? Okay. Who wants to testify for a second time in the
order that you spoke? So, I think Mr. Yee was first, right?
Mr. Yee: Thank you. I just wanted to finish up the
story I was telling about Malama Hule`ia and where we are at. So, we are finishing
up with our demonstration project and by the way, our mission is to eradicate red
mangrove from the Hule`ia. So, we are turning our attention from two and a half(2.5)
acre piece of land to perhaps sixty (60) acres of mangrove growing on both sides of the
Hule`ia River and surrounding the Alekoko fishpond. This is going to take a lot more
effort. What we have done is we have ramped up our organization and hired an
Executive Director. We have just drafted a strategic plan and we will have two (2)
community meetings to go over that strategic plan on how to tackle this sixty (60)
acres of mangrove. We have just begun to contact landowners and among the first
that we have contacted is the Okada family, the owners of Alekoko. It is just been so
far a couple of tickler calls and they tickled us back. So, we are nowhere at a point of
knowing what they will require to allow us to work on mangrove and we do not know
yet what kind of partnership is possible. But our hope has been, all along, that we
will be able to draw on the Open Space Fund of the County in some way to allow us
access to that land, to the fishpond, and allow us to pursue our mission on Malama
Hule`ia. That is why it is important for us to maintain the current level of funding
for the Open Space Fund. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much, Mr. Yee. Next.
Mr. Sato: Mr. Berg.
COUNCIL MEETING 45 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Berg: My name is Carl Berg. I am continuing. I
think the one point that I would like to address is that the Open Space Committee, if
we are using the short term, was specifically set up and funded for the purpose of
preserving cultural sites, open spaces, beach accesses, et cetera. It is the one avenue
within the County budget that is directed for that purpose. If you get rid of that fund
or defund it, then we would have to go in and apply to the County in general, to
convince them to take money from other resources to fund something or get moneys
from places that are not directly and specifically directed towards open space
preservation. I think what we should view this Open Space Fund as is a savings
account that we do not necessarily need to draw on that every single year. I think
the County has been remised on drawing on it. There has been plenty of
opportunities. But it is a savings account that is giving us the potential to purchase
lands that are already greatly increasing in price. You mentioned the dip in the
budget earlier in 2009/2010. We see now the real estate prices are going back up
again. Real estate is becoming less available. I think that now is the time. We really
much act now to acquire these resources before yet another shopping center goes in
or before you have another beach resort goes in. Something like that. So, I strongly
support not passing Bill No. 2585, but rather maintain the level of funding as it is
currently.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next. Anyone else who wanted
to speak again for a second time?
Mr. Lane: Makoto Lane, Koloa. I just want to reiterate
that this funding goes to protecting culture. So, anything against this account that
goes towards accounting culture is against the Hawaiian culture and it is against the
Kauaian lifestyle. That is just an ill-conceived idea, in my opinion. If we are going
to double the population here on Kauai and if we are going to build twice as many
houses, twice as many hotels, we need twice as many parks and we need twice as
many walking trails. Not taking away. Not like closing Kipu Falls, not like closing
the Knudsen Pass Trail, and not like closing Allerton Beach. We need to protect
these. We need to protect them. We need to keep them open and we need to open up
more. When people live in a city or higher density areas, they need to get out. They
do not have vacant lots next door that they can just hike to the jungle or whatever.
They need protected and preserved trails and public spaces. Please, be for the
Hawaiian culture, be for the Kauaian lifestyle, and vote against this Bill. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Hang on. Question, Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Makoto. Thank you for your
testimony.
Mr. Lane: Yes, sir.
Councilmember Chock: I did receive that E-mail. I did not get to read
the whole thing that you sent today. I thought it was interesting. I was wondering
if you could help me understand more about it. In terms of understanding quality of
life and the need to balance having these open spaces, is there any information
because there is a lot of statistics in there, is it a population number based on how
many acres we should be preserving? Is there a formula? I think the reason why I
ask is one of the issues I think that we have been having with open space and we
have not been able to move on is the vision is not clear about how many or which
ones, one in each moku. I think that is the work that needs to happen for the
Commission in order to be clear about what it is the prize is for us.
COUNCIL MEETING 46 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Lane: Yes.
Councilmember Chock: That was interesting that you send that. I
just wanted to see if you had any more information that you can share publicly.
Mr. Lane: That paper that I passed out is really dense
information. Like you said, a lot of statistics and things like that. I would have to go
back through it and read it just to give you a specific idea or percentage or ratio of
open space compared to developed space. Then prioritizing what properties you want
to buy, I mean, that is a whole ball of wax in itself. It is like just prioritizing like you
folks are doing right now. Prioritizing the budget. Obviously, within each community
on the island there is going to be specific areas that are really choice and prime. One
of them being Maha`ulepu, I think, is prime for the whole island. Some will have
higher priorities for locals and some will be a higher priorities for vacationers. That
committee is going to work it. But it is really important not only to save this, but
bump it up.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Lane: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify? You had a
question?
Councilmember Kuali`i: I wanted to ask a question of Mr.Yee actually.
Council Chair Rapozo: Oh.
Councilmember Kuali`i: If he can come back.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Yee, would you come back up, please?
Councilmember Kuali`i: Is it Yee or Hee?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yee.
Councilmember Kuali`i: As you take your seat, I will just say when I
was a toddler, our family used to come out of Kipukai Ranch and stay with families
in Hule`ia River. When I went to a recent commission on water resource management
meetings, there was a young lady there talking about the Hule`ia River and lack the
water. When I look at this list that Councilmember Yukimura provided, when you
were talking about Malama Hule`ia, you were also talking about Alekoko Fishpond.
Then, I heard you talking about basic restoration and removing mangrove, which is
all incredible work. I am always moved by people's willingness to get on the `aina
and malama. In this list though, it lists Alekoko Fishpond has a one million dollars
($1,000,000) budget for fifty-five (55) acres. Is this a project that is affiliated with
Malama Hule`ia?
Mr. Yee: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Is that what you need? Do you need access to
restore or do you need fifty-five (55) acres? I am wondering if this is not more the
bullet under...because there are nine (9) purposes, right? The ninth purpose is
COUNCIL MEETING 47 MAY 6, 2015
"conserving land for open space and scenic value." Can we do it in a smaller way for
a smaller amount? You are already putting in all the sweat equity.
Mr. Yee: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Clearly, we should support it.
Mr. Yee: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Why has it not moved? Are you on the list
with the Open Space Commission?
Mr. Yee: I believe Alekoko has been on the list.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Alekoko, but what about Malama Hule`ia and
the specific restoration of mangrove removal?
Mr. Yee: No.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay.
Mr. Yee: But for us, Alekoko is integral to taking care
of Hule`ia.
Councilmember Kuali`i: So, you see it as all or nothing?
Mr. Yee: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: It is the whole pond, fifty-five (55) acres?
Mr. Yee: Yes.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Yee: Can I say something more?
Council Chair Rapozo: If it pertains to the question that he asked
you. Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify?
Mr. Sato: We have one (1) registered speaker, Tek
Nickerson.
Council Chair Rapozo: One (1) registered for this one? Okay.
TEK NICKERSON: Thank you, Council. My name is Tek
Nickerson. I have been an Environmental Land Use Planner for forty-four (44)years.
I got up to answer Mason Chock's question about the ratio of open space to population.
I was not prepared for this, but I can tell you that your Planning Division should be
able to access that information very quickly, perhaps over the internet through the
American Planning Association (APA). The American Planning Association, also
known as APA. The answer of your question has been around for decades. Thank
you very much.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you, sir. Question. Hang on
Mr. Nickerson. Oh.
Councilmember Yukimura: I actually have a question of Mr. Yee.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Yee. Please, if you folks have questions,
ask them when they are here.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry.
Council Chair Rapozo: Because it is not normal to bring the people
back up. Mr. Yee, you have become the resident expert today. So, you have another
opportunity.
Councilmember Yukimura: I want to know what you wanted to tell us.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am not going to allow. I am sorry Mr. Yee.
I apologize. That is not an appropriate question.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think...
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, do not test that,
please. I apologize.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think if we need more information and...
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, you can talk to him after or I will take a
short recess if you need to talk to him. But that is not appropriate. Mr. Blake.
Mr. Blake: Council Chair, please correct me if I am
wrong. But the eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) that went to Kaneiolouma
came from the Community Facilities District Fund. It was not Capital Improvements
Project (CIP) funds to our knowledge.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, it was the Community Facilities District
(CFD) funds that was deposited into the capital improvements budget. So, it was...
Mr. Blake: But was that part of the CFD?
Council Chair Rapozo: It was.
Mr. Blake: So, basically, it is not taking out of the CIP
funds?
Council Chair Rapozo: It is. The use of those funds had to be
approved by the County.
Mr. Blake: Okay. I just wanted to make the distinction.
That was it. I think we can find a way we can work this out. I feel bad about dropping
it to one point percent (1.5%) because it is going get so hard to get it back. But if we
can work through it with the funds that we have right now helping out the County, I
would feel much more comfortable about that. We have depleted our staff. We are
only one (1) meeting a month and it is really hard to get everything in, hard to
communicate, hard to prepare for it, and we are trying to do best we can. I can say
COUNCIL MEETING 49 MAY 6, 2015
that everybody takes their job seriously and we want to do best for Kauai. We live
here. There is a sense of place that we have to keep. I ask any one of you right now,
from Spouting Horn to Po`ipu Beach, anybody know the traditional name of any spot
along that coast other than Heroin, PK's, Acid Drop, Centers, or Middles?
Council Chair Rapozo: No.
Mr. Blake: Zero (0). This is where it comes into play.
There is no Po`ipu Beach. The name of the beach is Ho`oloeina kapua`a. There is no
Waiohai Beach. It is Haleoi`a. All of these things are important because their place
names adds so much to the area and we know about it. This is where I feel very
strongly about keeping the funds to purchase open funds. You have to have money
in the bank and you have to have money in your pocket when you go shopping. That
is where I stand on this. I know we can work it out.
Council Chair Rapozo: I appreciate the passion. I know we can too.
Remember, this sets the base. It sets the minimum. The Council will determine
during the final budget process, what goes into that account, not the Ordinance. The
Council will determine it. So, my message to the Open Space, and we had one (1)
Open Space Commissioner come up and testify that they were supporting the drop to
point five percent (0.5%). So, everybody has varying opinions.
Mr. Blake: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: But at the end of the day, I think the bottom
line if the Open Space Commission was moving on tangible things, you see it is like
this. We see aid whenever we have a horrible disaster in foreign Countries.
Everybody jumps in and they send crates of food. The food will rot on the dock
because they do not have the resources or they do not have the ability to transport
the food to where they go. So, it sits there and nobody can use it. That is how I
envision this. You put the money in an account but we are not using it. We are going
to be take one million one hundred thousand dollars ($1,100,000) away from
someplace else and maybe it is retirement like the other islands are doing. I think
that is irresponsible. But at the end of the day, this Council will determine it. The
Open Space Commission has a couple of weeks to come up with some kind of proposal
to convince this Council that hey, we need one point two percent (1.2%). We need two
percent (2%). If that argument is justifiable, if that argument is a tangible
opportunity, not just when we want to see, but this is what we have done. We have
done title search. We have done an appraisal. We have nothing except do not take
away our money. No. Go use it. We want them to use it. There are parcels on this
issue list of Councilmember Yukimura's that we have adequate funding for. Are we
pursuing it? That was my question. Are we pursuing it? Open Space Commission is
just one (1) function. I look to the Administration to making it happen. That is where
my message goes to, not the Open Space Commission, but to the Administration.
Mr. Blake: We do have things in the works. The County
Attorney has prepared documents. The staff is prepared to contact owners. I believe
we have had an appraisal on Hoban. If you want this, I will make a point to mention
at the next meeting, which is Thursday, and get those records to you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Blake: I mean, we have been talking about it and it
is muddling a lot of things. We have to go through so many things and we have to
COUNCIL MEETING 50 MAY 6, 2015
follow protocols when we submit something to the Administration because it is the
same problem everybody has.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, I know. We deal with it every day, Teddy.
My suggestion is pick a priority project and move on it.
Mr. Blake: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Pick a project and move on it. Do not pick
ten (10) and work little things on all ten (10). No. Pick one (1) and let us get it done.
That is my message to the Administration.
Mr. Blake: Hoban is the place in our...
Council Chair Rapozo: Then I suggest we start moving on that.
Mr. Blake: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Blake: We need the help of the Administration and
Council to move on this.
Council Chair Rapozo: I can guarantee you 7:0 vote on the funding
for that Hoban property.
Mr. Blake: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Guarantee.
Mr. Blake: Not for the price you like, but I am happy to
get it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I anticipate you folks working the price
down because that is crazy.
Mr. Blake: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Teddy, when you mentioned the funds from
the CIP, the source was not the General Fund or the general moneys.
Mr. Blake: No. Not to my knowledge.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right.
Mr. Blake: The source was...
Councilmember Yukimura: The Kukui`ula district.
COUNCIL MEETING 51 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Blake: The Community Facilities District agreement
worked out with Kukui`ula and the County.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. So, it was not funds that are available
to other projects outside of the district?
Mr. Blake: I believe that those funds are specifically for
K5loa.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: But not specific to Kaneiolouma.
Mr. Blake: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: No. That is what I was saying. The project
was of such importance to the County and Administration, that is where it went.
Mr. Blake: Right
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Although because of that, we had to forego the
lot next to Po`ipu Beach Park.
Mr. Blake: Like Council Chair said, you have to have
your priorities. Kaneiolouma, to me, is number one priority because of the impact
and what it represents.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. But if we had enough money, we could
have done both.
Mr. Blake: If we had enough money, we would not be here
today.
Council Chair Rapozo: Correct. We could have bought every open
parcel on the island.
Mr. Blake: That is right.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anybody that wants to testify?
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Ms. Kinnaman: Tessie Kinnaman, again for the record. If I
could finish the rest of the letter I was reading. "A promise was made with the
handshake and this promise was honored by three (3) generations of Knudsens
(Kanuka, Grandfather, his son Eric, and her husband Valdemar L'Orange). When
my husband died in 1990, the Knudsens heirs did not honor this promise. Not out of
lack of knowledge, but because of error of thought. This land holds more Hawaiian
artifacts than any other piece of property on Kauai. It is confirmed by Doctor Hal
Hammett, Archeologist on 0`ahu. Therefore, this acreage should be held in public
trust for conservation and preservation into perpetuity for the Hawaiians. Sincerest
Aloha. Mrs.Valdemar Knudsen. Copies to Knudsen Trust care of Stacy Wong, Kaua`i
COUNCIL MEETING 52 MAY 6, 2015
Planning Commission and Planning Director, and Kane I Olo Uma Trust. That is in
regards to the Nukumoi properties. Again, I stand behind the Hoban purchase. It is
supposed to be on the Mayor's desk from several months now and that was a top
priority. As far as I know, all of the paperwork was done and a copy was supposed to
be forwarded to the Council. So, I do not know where that it at. I do not know. If
you could follow-up on that.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will follow-up on that.
Ms. Kinnaman: Please, because that was a top priority for
quite a while ever since I was on the Open Space Commission from 2002.
Council Chair Rapozo: We actually have Mike Dahilig from the
Planning Department here. So, I will call him up to find out right now what the
status is.
Ms. Kinnaman: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify? If not, Mike,
if you could come up? Thank you for being here.
MICHAEL A. DAHILIG, Planning Director: Sure thing, Chair. Mike
Dahilig, for the record.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think you heard the question about the
Hoban.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is on the Mayor's desk for a few months. Is
it true?
Mr. Dahilig: No. It has actually been on my desk for a few
months.
Council Chair Rapozo: On your desk?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
Mr. Dahilig: I want to be clear that when we were
presented with a recommendation from the Open Space Commission, especially in a
situation where it is an adversarial situation, we take seriously when we have to ask
the Council to pass a resolution for acquisition specifically for the exercise of domain,
that we have to do our due diligence first. I think that is the process that our
Department, before we start sending priorities and money bills up to the Council,
that is one element especially when we are looking at an adversarial acquisition
situation that we have to ensure that if we are asking the Council to extend that very
sacred power of eminent domain, that we do so with all of our "T's" crossed and all of
"I's" dotted. Based off of the recommendations that we have gotten from the Open
Space Commission and again, as you are familiar the Open Space Commission
receives the public feedback, provides a recommendations, and we in turn as officers
the County look at whether or not something like they are proposing is feasible within
COUNCIL MEETING 53 MAY 6, 2015
the reasonable standards of what this body would be asked to pass an eminent
domain Resolution. We have serious concerns about it. What I am doing right now
is actually drafting up and doing a detailed response back to the Open Space
Commission explaining as why as Director, cannot recommend to the Mayor to
support acquisition because of the eminent domain situation as well as in the
pre-negotiations with the private landowner's attorneys, some of the liabilities that
would ensue should we not win in an eminent domain proceeding before a Judge.
Those are things that I have to look at. I take full responsibility if there was this
misconception that something is just being sat on and nothing because we are
actually working on something.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you for the clarification. Did you hear
that Tessie? Okay. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So, is that also the same situation with the
Nukumoi property?
Mr. Dahilig: That is the situation with Nukumoi. I think
when we crafted this particular budget together in evaluating recommendations from
the Open Space Commission, because they have made a recommendation to say, "Yes,
let us move forward." One of our outlays is asking the Council to hire Special Counsel
and move forward with eminent domain proceedings because we know it is a private
land acquisition that will need to be settled in court. So, again, not to give too many
specifics as to what we will be asking for as we move forward, but again, the hiring
of Special Counsel as well as eminent domain proceeding along with the situation
where we ask for a money bill from this Council requires three (3) Council actions.
We need to ensure that if we are going to move forward with the acquisition of the
Nukumoi property, that we do our due diligence appropriately. We are ordering
appraisals. We are also working with land trust to ensure that the County does not
bear the full cost of this if we are not able to just so that we are able to spread the
cost of this around. These are the things that kind of go into the calculus of something
like Nukumoi. It is not just here is the for-sale sticker on the property and pay this
amount. It is a very complicated legal dance that ensues especially when you are
looking at an adversarial situation.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: It would seem like the nature of every
acquisition is going to be adversarial when it comes to public access. Most owners
are not going to want to give away their property. I do not understand the resistance
to entering into an adversarial process when every acquisition is going to be
adversarial.
Mr. Dahilig: I would not say it is a blanket resistance. Like
anything, when we get recommendations, we bring it to the County Attorney's Office
and have discussion with them concerning what are about our abilities to win in court
and what is not capable for us to win in court when we have to go through that kind
of risk assessment before we bring anything before this body without any type of due
diligence. It is not to say that we are adverse to contentious litigation, but we have
to ensure that if we are going to bringing something before this body for an action
that we can win and that it is worth the value of that. So, that is the thought process
that we go through. Any time that we have, like you mentioned, an adversarial
situation. We do have other acquisition proposals that are not adversarial.
COUNCIL MEETING 54 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Mike, I am going to stop there because today's
Bill is for the Bill.
Mr. Dahilig: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: But I will ask at the next Planning
Committee, if we can get a briefing.
Mr. Dahilig: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: On the open space. I do not know. We got a
report from the Open Space Commission.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes, sir.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think everybody got a chance to take a look
at it. But let us go ahead and deal with that in the Planning Committee.
Councilmember Chock, if you do not mind.
Councilmember Chock: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: We can have the dialogue regarding the Open
Space recommendations and let us do it there because I think it is time we have that
discussion again.
Mr. Dahilig: Sure thing.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Trask, if you can be available to discuss
at that meeting, eminent domain in general terms. Okay. Any other questions it is
relates to...go ahead.
Councilmember Kagawa: I had one (1) question in consideration for
Mauna Kea to consider when we do discuss the Hoban and Nukumoi that may go to
court, is it appropriate to discuss status of those in open session knowing that they
will go to court at some point?
Council Chair Rapozo: I think that we will do is we will have the
broad overview from Open Space whether it is from Mike or whoever from the
Planning Department. If we come across a parcel that is contentious or potentially
heading to eminent domain, that I would not suggest we discuss it in the open. We
could post an Executive Session for a later time. I just want to get a much better
understand of the process. I think the public needs to have a better understanding
of the process. When a recommendation is made, what happens? It goes to Mike
Dahilig's desk and sits there. Let us tell everybody it is the Mayor's desk. I think we
all have to understand the process better and we can do that next week, if all are in
agreement. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 55 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: For this discussion here, I know we had a lot
of discussion after we introduced the Bill as it relates to the rule, we will start fresh.
Councilmember Kagawa: You folks can subtract my minutes. I did
discussion earlier. Just give me the light whenever I am done. Overall, I thank the
people for testifying. Their passion is for the betterment of Kauai. Who does not
want the County to acquire as much park space/access as possible? But the fact of
the matter is that we only have so much money every year to spend. Right now, it is
not a good time as far as us having the type of savings to be comfortable to say, "This
is just one million dollars ($1,000,000) for something really important. Let us do it."
I think right now looking at next year's salary increases of eight million dollars
($8,000,000), we have not even accounted for that. You just subtract that right away,
so that leaves us with five million dollars ($5,000,000). Who knows from now until
next June what else will come up and eat up the five million dollars ($5,000,000)
reserve that we have right now on paper. To minus one million dollars ($1,000,000)
at this point would bring it down to four million five hundred thousand dollars
($4,500,000). I am not comfortable doing that. I feel more comfortable keeping that
one million dollars ($1,000,000) in the saving and should we need to, like you said
Mr. Chair, we can add whatever we want at any time if we have a good project that
really, we have four (4) out of seven (7) members feel that is a wise decision for our
County, that we can do it at any time. But to just say, "Well we want to not change
the percentage because we want to keep that savings," I do not think we are in the
position right now. We do not have the savings that makes me comfortable doing it.
Mr. Chair, going back to what you said, we have a lot of properties that we have that
we are not improve and not upgrading. One example is right behind the airport. We
have that huge property right behind the airport that we got from Kaua`i Lagoons
that right now has a road, but there is no restroom. No nothing behind there. The
road is in bad shape, and that surely is an area that if we fixed up a little bit, I think
our local people could enjoy that area back there. Sure, there is not any sand beaches
back there, but there is some nice fishing grounds. To me, I think we should be
upgrading what we have at the same time as looking at acquiring. It is just as
important. We need to upgrade what we have and enjoy those things that we have,
not just look forward, keep acquiring more parcels, and we cannot upgrade or take
care of what we have already. It is a balance. I hope that at some point we can
acquire those easily accessible parcels such as expanding Salt Pond Park. I think we
can get this through Executive Order. Let us push for that. I would like to see that
happen. Salt Pond Park is all we have on west side as far as Hanapepe or as far as
being a big park that services all of the west side looking beyond Po`ipn Beach Park.
That, we can get for free. But are we willing to invest the moneys or to invest the
time to improve that area, if we acquire it or are we just going acquire it, just say we
have it, and not do anything with it? So, to me, to acquire parcels that we can get a
discount or for free should be a priority, not just buying at market value. We get less
"bang for our buck"because we still need to improve it. That is how I feel at this time.
There is a lot of opportunity. But certainly, when our County gets back to being at a
more healthy position, I surely have no problem increasing that one million dollars
($1,000,000) back in our budget. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have an amendment.
Councilmember Yukimura moved to amend Bill No. 2585 as circulated, as
shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1,
seconded by Councilmember Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 56 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Can you pass out the amendment?
Councilmember Yukimura: I can be explaining it as it is passed out. It is
mainly to set the percentage at one percent (1%), which is a halfway compromise.
Instead of one point five percent (1.5%) or point five percent (0.5%), it is at one percent
(1%). It addresses both the need to not take so much of our real property revenue set
aside, but it also puts aside a bit more than point five percent (0.5%). It is actually a
genuine compromise in the different priorities that have been talked about around
this table.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I will be supporting this
amendment. I see the place that we are in...
Council Chair Rapozo: Hold on.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: What is that? Somebody's doorbell.
Councilmember Chock: Five dollars ($5)?
Council Chair Rapozo: You got it? It sounded like it was coming from
over here. I apologize. Councilmember Chock, please start over.
Councilmember Chock: Just to reiterate, I totally understand the
position we are in terms of balancing our budget. It is one of our priorities that we
all agreed on that we want to work on. When I do look at our budget though, I
consider this fund part of our budget. I think that it is something that we have held
up high. I know that there are members that may not agree with it, but to me, it is
as important as the retirement fund and as funding Other Post-Employment Benefits
(OPEB). I that that what I would like to do is support something that is being
introduces as a compromise here for this next budget period. Just looking at the
figures and the communication that came back to me in terms of the projects, I think
the message I heard from some of our Commission members is that we have been
really hard on these things. Some are ready to move and will be moving. Nukumoi,
we did not get a timeline and it maybe we move into a litigious process for that. But
that still could be possible for use. The Evslin was not mentioned. It was two million
five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000); Wiapa, one million seven hundred
thousand dollars ($1,700,000). Even if we get a discounted price on Hoban, we would
tap this fund list this in tomorrow. I really believe the message that I heard really
loud and clear from the testifiers is that this is about quality of life. We need to have
the money in the bank in order to move on it. Let us do whatever we can since this
is a priority for us. I think we all agreed and we have said this on the floor, that this
is important for us, that we can meet this halfway. So, this amendment would bring
in about five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) in addition to what we agreed
upon. I think that whatever we can do to support it is going to be well-worth our time
and effort in the long run. Like I said or what other people have said, after we are
well and gone. Thank you for the introduction of that amendment.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
COUNCIL MEETING 57 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. I am actually somewhat reluctant to
support the compromise. But I think it is a good effort and compromise is the nature
of the business that we do. Again, I mentioned that I along with the new Senate
President Ron Kouchi, were the introducers of the original Charter Amendment. I
remember distinctly at that time, discussion about well half a percent (0.5%) is not
enough. But we knew that it was a starting point. It was a way to set up the
infrastructure to put things in place and then we could expand upon it there. It
saddens me to step back from the commitment of one and a half percent (1.5%). It
saddens me that we are going to put keeping paying the electric bill above acquiring
open space. I mean, the Open Space Fund is a capital fund. It is a fund that buys
real estate and access that is going to be around that we will never see again, or pay
for salaries. That is essentially, what we are doing. I think this is a good compromise.
I am hopeful that the majority of the Council would support it. We just gave back
money to the credit unions earlier today. Representative Roy Takumi once, and
again, he said, "A budget is a moral document. A budget is where our priorities. A
budget is where are values are expressed." I would hate to see this Council pass a
budget that says the preservation of open space is less of a value than all of the other
things that we do. I think it is just as important, as Councilmember Chock said, as
retirement, just as important as public transportation, and as paving our roads. I
would rather ride on bumpy road and have access to some of these special places. So,
I think it is a question of priorities. I hate to see us step backwards, but at the same
time, I recognize the reality of where we are at and will support the amendment that
meets us halfway. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you, Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Again, I understand the importance of the
Open Space Fund. I think with this amendment, we are splitting hairs again. I think
we are not raiding the fund. The fund has five million dollars ($5,000,000) in it right
now. We are not eliminating money we are putting into it. We are putting five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) into the fund. I think by doing the one
percent (1%), we are really splitting hairs. I think what it comes down to is a fiscally
responsible budget. Right now, when Charter was up and people voted on it, I think
our budget was a lot better than it is now. I think if we had to result on it vote on it
every year, the results would change every year on how much money we want to put
in based on our budget. I think if we put it on the ballot now and we said, "Do you
want to put an extra five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) or one million dollars
($1,000,000) into open space or do you want to put five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000) or one million dollars ($1,000,000) into the roads, I think we may get a
different result. So for me, I will not be supporting it. I think bringing it back down
to the point five percent (0.5%) is what the original intent of it was. For me, we saw
a whole list of projects and really, it is overwhelming because I can see a whole list of
projects, but I do not see anyone coming in and saying, "This is the project we want
to do and this is the amount of money we need." If we had that, then I could justify
looking at how much money do we have, is it something that the community wants,
and do we need to put more money into it? But right now, we are getting thrown the
number of thirty million dollars ($30,000,000). But I mean, there is no priority. There
is no need. To me, it is a lot of wants. We want to purchase all of these properties
and I want them too, but what is our need? What property is within reach? What
property is a property that we can actually do it, we can actually purchase? We will
not have to go to court. We will not have to fight. For me, I would love to see them
come and say, "These are our priorities, these ones we may have to go to court. Here
are some low-hanging fruit. These ones are ones where the property owner wants to
sell, we want to buy, and this is how much it costs." Then we can kind of come up
COUNCIL MEETING 58 MAY 6, 2015
with a decision. All I see is a shotgun of projects and really, there is no one coming
in and saying, "We need the money, this is how much we need, and this is the project
we are going do." Until I can see that, I am really hesitant to support an increase in
what is on the plate now. So, I will not be supporting the amendment.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: The whole reason for having this set aside and
this special fund is that you do not argue every budget about specific projects. But
you are saying open space is such a high priority that we are going to put aside money
so that we have them when the projects come up to us. To say we will do it with every
budget, actually contradicts the whole philosophy of having this fund and staying the
course and putting money aside, it is like if you say, a college education is important.
If you do not put aside an amount every year, then you are not going to get to that
college education. I think this whole Charter Amendment was this purpose of saying,
"No. This is a high priority for us." So, we have to put aside. Then to say, "Oh, if you
come with project, we will find it in the budget," but we cannot even find a smaller
amount to put aside every year. That does not make sense. We will find it if you
come to us. But no, we do not have any money right now that we can put aside in
small amounts. That does not make sense. I do understand the feeling around this
table about needing some concrete projects to come forward. I believe the
Administration is responsible for that and by not bringing forward projects in a timely
way, you jeopardize the fund. You almost give argument to not having the fund or to
lessen the amount put into it. I would really ask the Mayor and his staff to start
working on these projects. They have been languishing for many years. They have
been on the list for many years. I will also ask, we just had a management error that
is costing us about three million dollars ($3,000,000). If we did not have that error,
we would not even have this discussion. We could just put that money into our Open
Space Fund. That is where our problem is because all of this money has been
siphoned off and we are being forced to make these really tough decisions when we
would have the money if some of these other things would been taken care of.
Council Chair Rapozo: JoAnn, that is your second time. So, if you
want to say anything more, do it now.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. So, one percent (1%) is such a
small amount. You saw from the chart that I sent, we are going to be putting aside
less money than any other County every year. Big Island land is cheaper than Kaua`i
land because we are so small and we have these high-end investments being made on
our island by people who want to make money off of buying and selling land here. So,
it is going to go. We can always develop land once we have it. We can wait five (5)
years or ten (10) years, but once it is sold off, we cannot get it. I remember sitting in
this room while the subdivision of Anini Beach, all of these lands that now have fancy
houses. We could have bought those lands and made it a large park. But we did not
have the money, we let the opportunity go, and it is gone. That is what this fund
gives us, the power to take the opportunity when we have it, that window, and
preserve the land for many generations forever.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to say that I come from a family of
taro farmers and former taro farmers, and we currently still make salt. It is a little
COUNCIL MEETING 59 MAY 6, 2015
offensive when somebody comes up here and says that if we vote for this, that we are
voting against the Hawaiian culture and Kaua`i's lifestyle. We are born and raised
here. Running for Council, one of my main motivations in running for Council was
to stand up for our aina and our people together. It is very clear in the intent here
of the Open Space Charter Amendment, and I clearly one hundred percent (100%) in
my private life as a volunteer, I would work on these things: the preservation of
historic or culturally important land areas and cites; the protection of significant
habitats or ecosystems including buffer zones; the preservation of forest, beaches,
coastal areas and agricultural lands; protecting watershed lands to preserve water
quality and water supply. But the most personal thing for me is this one about
improving, and they each have their own number. Number 7, improving and
number 8, acquiring. Improving and acquiring public access to, and enjoyment of
public land and open space. Enjoyment. That is a nice word. But for me, it is more
than enjoyment. It is livelihood. It is sustenance. Our people hunt. They fish. They
gather. Over the years, we have lost access. So, we need to focus on access. We do
not need to be buying ten (10), twenty (20), or fifty (50) acres of beautiful to look at
lands. We need those smaller pieces all over the island that give our hunters, our
fishermen, and our gatherers the right to get on the aina to get the sustenance for
their families. To say that now I know why I was elected. I was elected to be fiscally
responsible in a tough time when our Mayor for years, maybe was not doing what he
should be doing. I ran on the platform of saying, "No. Enough. The people have
spoken. We need to tighten our belts and we need to make those tough decisions and
those tough votes." There is no vote tougher than this one as far as pitting fiscally
responsible against the environment and the aina. Let us be real. Our Open Space
Committee needs to do a more effective job. Why is it that the first three (3) attempts
at properties are all adversarial and all costing way more than it should? What about
the small projects? What about the small access places for our hunters and our
fishermen? Even Makoto complained about no longer being able to hike in certain
area. Let us focus on public access. Let us focus on helping as many people as we
can. This 9th position about scenic values, I am sorry. It does not mean that much to
me. We live on one of the most beautiful places on planet and I can look out from my
toilet and see beauty. I do not need to own Alekoko Pond to not see the beauty. We
all own it. It is like air and water. If we had all the money in the world, we could
buy it all. But as it is, we need people like Mr. Yee and their groups that are willing
to step forward, and Rupert to do all of that sweat equity. Then we need to leverage
against that. We need State funds. We need Federal funds. We need that sweat
equity. Just do the multiplier effect. Our part as the County is there and we are doing
the best that we can, and we will do better in time as the budget gets better. I do not
feel this budget we have gone far enough. We have a ways to go yet, but we are at
least moving in the right direction. We cannot ask the Mayor to start doing his part
and then when he puts this forward, jump ship. This is temporary and ultimately,
this is reinstated what the voters approved. So, at a floor, at a minimum, we will put
aside point five percent (0.5%) for this purpose that we deemed so important that we
are supporting it. We are not putting point five percent (0.5%) aside for
transportation. We are not putting it aside for housing and all of those things are
important too. But we have the tough decisions now. I am not just in the community
doing my volunteer work with one group. I am here sitting on the Council and I have
got to make this tough decision. I hope people can understand that. I am doing it
with a Hawaiian heart, somebody who has full appreciation and understanding of my
Hawaiian culture.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser.
COUNCIL MEETING 60 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. We are still speaking on the amendment,
is that correct?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Just real briefly. I mean, there is
clearly diversity of opinion and different values, a lot of passion and thought around
this table. The amendment that is before us is an attempt to bridge those passions.
I think it is an attempt at genuine compromise to say yes, we have to be fiscally
responsible but yes, we also want to honor the values of everybody around the table
and they audience that took their time out today. That is really what we are starting
talking about. We are starting down a path these next couple of weeks. We are going
to be voting on lots of things and there is going to be lots or things and passion, and
we are going to need to compromise as a body. I would just encourage all of the
members to think today about that forward, and talk about and think about how we
might compromise to work together to honor each our values and passions as we sit
around here today. It is a long haul that we have for the next couple of weeks and
this start of it. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else?
Councilmember Kuali`i: I will be brief this time. I would just say that
for me at this time, we are making a decision for now. Things can change next year.
Things can change in two (2) years. I am. I am compromising my own values to be
fiscally responsible to respond to the people and do what is right. It is a tough vote.
But that is the vote I am making.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Anyone else? I will just say this, the
Open Space Commission has a few weeks to convince this body to put one and a half
percent (1.5%) in the budget. I am not going to be supporting the amendment because
I think as long as I have been here, which is as along as the fund has been here, we
have never lost a property because we did not have enough money. We have not lost
a property because we did not have money. We lost the properties or have never
gotten properties because we have never gone after them. So how they say "tough
love?" This is my tough love to the Open Space Commission and the Planning
Department. You folks want more money in that fund, as Councilmember KipuKai
said, you have to be more effective. Planning Department, Mike, you and your team,
advise and guide them. Give them the tools and resources that they need and not
this shotgun approach. We want all of these properties. Now, you guys in Planning,
you folks go figure it out. No. Let us prioritize these projects and then let us go after
them because we cannot do it all. We know that. So yes, it is tough love. It is to the
point where Councilmember Yukimura said it best. When you start not using the
funds, you build the argument of the necessity of the fund to begin with. I mean, I
think that is very well-articulated and that is where we are at today. We are not
using it, but we want more. Please, do not take this personal on any Commissioner
or what. I am just saying the process is flawed and we need to fix it. We need to
utilize this fund as it was intended to. Councilmember Kuali`i spoke very
passionately about the hunting and the fishing accesses. That is what I thought we
were going to go after. That is what I thought we were going to secure, the beaches
along Secret Beach where we could go freely and we cannot anymore. Those are
pedestrian walkways that even going eminent domain, would not be that expensive.
But no, we are going for the big things. So, discipline ourselves. Hunting and fishing
accesses we have lost. Makoto, he talked about that. I cannot go here. I cannot go
there. But that is not on the list. None of that is on the list. No. We have got
COUNCIL MEETING 61 MAY 6, 2015
fishponds and Hanapepe River Mouth. Let us go for the things that we have lost.
Those are the low-hanging fruit. There is enough of lost traditional accesses that I
think if we checked them all, we could find something we could get down and maybe,
if argument on that side of the aisle was, "Hey, we have spent sixty-five percent (65%)
of the fund and we could do much more if we had more money," maybe I could buy
that argument. But with no purchases with no activity other than a report we get
every year, that is not enough for me. I apologize, I will not be supporting the
amendment. With that, the vote is on the amendment. Let us do a roll call, please.
Council Chair Rapozo: Roll call vote on the amendment.
The motion to amend Bill No. 2585 as circulated, as shown in the Floor
Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1 was then put, and
failed by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,Rapozo TOTAL — 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Mr. Sato: Three (3) ayes, four (4) nos.
Council Chair Rapozo: Back to the main motion. Councilmember
Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Mr. Chair, I would like to entertain another
amendment for us to consider as a body.
Council Chair Rapozo: Let me do this because we need a caption
break in five (5) minutes. I am envisioning it is going to be more than five (5) minutes
to go through your amendment.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Councilmember Chock: I am fast.
Council Chair Rapozo: I know you are, but I am not concerned about
you. Let us take a ten (10) minute caption break right now. Thank you
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 3:53 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 4:03 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I have an amendment to
consider for the body, that basically would give us the ability to entertain where we
want the fund in the future. So, this amendment addresses the end of the point five
percent (0.5%) after the proposed fiscal budgetary year returning it to one point five
percent (1.5%) thereafter. One of the strong messages that I heard today was that
for many of the people, even if we can work towards some agreement and some
assurances that the things that they have worked hard towards achieving can be
reestablished, I think, is something that they would like to consider. In fact, this
amendment gives us that opportunity to get back on track and give us a chance to
COUNCIL MEETING 62 MAY 6, 2015
really look at how it is we see our budget in the future. So, my hope is that our
Councilmembers will consider it and give us the opportunity to do that. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is that a motion?
Councilmember Chock moved to amend Bill No. 2585 as circulated, as shown
in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2, seconded
by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Further discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Just a question of clarification. What this
amendment proposes to do is to leave the percentage at point five percent (0.5%) or
what Bill No. 2585 is proposing, but that it would be at this percentage just for this
fiscal year?
Councilmember Chock: That is correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: It would go back to one point five percent
(1.5%) next year unless we changed it again with a law. So, honoring the position of
those who want Bill No. 2585 who say just for now for this temporary time.
Councilmember Chock: That is right. What I heard our
Councilmembers talk about is right now it is a hard time. We need to look at our
budget and be fiscally responsible. But it is really a temporary thing until we start
to build our capacity. I would like to be able to, at the very least, look at this every
year instead of let this get lost in the future. That is what the consideration is. Thank
you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion? Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: My only thing is that we are days away from
making the decisions on this year. I mean, instead of looking at this every year, I
would prefer to look at it every two (2) years. I would prefer to support the Fiscal
Year 2015-2016 and 2016-2017.
Council Chair Rapozo: The reality is that you look at this every year
anyway. The reality is that every budget session, the Council determines how much
money will be put into that account. There is no requirement except it cannot go less
than point five percent (0.5%). This year, if the Council felt we wanted to million, we
could. We wanted to put one million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000), they
could. Next year, if they could put two million dollars ($2,000,000), they could. They
just could not put less than point five percent (0.5%). It is something that is going to
be visited every year every single budget cycle. Any other discussion? If not, any
public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: If not, roll call on the amendment.
COUNCIL MEETING 63 MAY 6, 2015
The motion to amend Bill No. 2585 as circulated, as shown in the Floor
Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2 was then put, and
failed by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,Rapozo TOTAL— 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: 3:4.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are back to the main motion.
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2585, on second and final reading, and that
it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL—4,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Four (4) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Resolution No. 2015-43 — RESOLUTION URGING THE ADMINISTRATION
TO CONSIDER NEW TECHNOLOGIES TO MANAGE THE COUNTY'S SOLID
WASTE CHALLENGES
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Can I get a motion, please?
Councilmember Kagawa moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2015-43,
seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Let us do this, is there anyone in
the audience wishing to testify?
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question about the Resolution to the
maker of the Resolution, to clarify.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead and ask your question. Do we have
anyone signed up?
Councilmember Kagawa: If possible, I would like the Resolution to be
read first.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
Councilmember Kagawa: It is not that long.
Mr. Sato: This is a Resolution Urging The
Administration To Consider New Technologies To Manage The County's Solid Waste
Challenges.
COUNCIL MEETING 64 MAY 6, 2015
WHEREAS, the County of Kauai ("County") is considering new and innovative
technologies to manage its solid waste challenges; and
WHEREAS, currently utilized technologies like incineration minimize
baseload reduction and decrease the County's ability to employ diversion activities;
and
WHEREAS, the County faces a solid waste challenge with less than 10'% years
of capacity at the existing landfill; and
WHEREAS, the proposed new landfill site faces permitting challenges and
high construction costs; and
WHEREAS, although the Environmental Protection Agency requires the
County of Kaua`i to build a new landfill, the concept of a new landfill is in itself not a
zero-waste activity; and
WHEREAS, a new landfill could cost the County approximately seventy three
million dollars in construction costs and three million each year in operational costs;
now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI,
STATE OF HAWAII, that it strongly urges the Administration to consider deploying
new innovative technologies in their effort to solve our current solid waste challenges;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council urges the
Administration to consider technologies and partners who offer dual diversion
activities as part of the solution to our solid waste challenges; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council urges the
Administration to consider technologies that provide for the maximum net output of
green energy in any proposed solution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Administration is urged to consider a
public-private partnership as a low to no-cost option for the resolution of our solid
waste challenges; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this Resolution be
transmitted to the Mayor of the County of Kaua`i, each Board of Director for the
Kauai Island Utility Cooperative, the Chair of the State Senate Energy and
Environment Committee, and the Chair of the State House Energy and
Environmental Protection Committee." Introduced by Ross Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa, did you
want to take this time or wait?
Councilmember Kagawa: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura, you have a
question?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. It is not clear to me what the new
technologies are that are being referred to here.
COUNCIL MEETING 65 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: I think my response is that we held a Request
for Information (RFI) process. I think we had eight (8) people and I am not sure, I
am just quoting what I heard because I have not reviewed or I have not been provided
any documents on all of the people who have shown interest. There is a nice interest
in trying to help to divert some of our waste at Kekaha landfill. Eight (8) people or
eight (8) different companies submitted requests or RFIs or responses. All I am trying
to do is trying to urge the Administration to speed up the process knowing that we
have anywhere from six and a half(6%) to ten (10) or twelve (12) years left at Kekaha
landfill. I would think that any of those eight (8) people who responded to the RFI
will have some residuals that will need to be stored at the landfill. So, at a certain
point in time if we have four (4) to five (5) years left, I would assume that none of
them would be interested because where are you going to put your residuals?
Councilmember Yukimura: I am still not clear what "new technologies"
means because if it is referring to thermal conversion, these are old technologies and
we have dozens of studies already say that they are not economically feasible for the
scale of our island.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, if we continue that attitude, we will
have no diversion and Kekaha landfill will fill up without us even showing any effort
in trying to divert the waste.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am trying to define what "new" is because
thermal conversion is not new. Are you referring to thermal conversion processes?
Councilmember Kagawa: I am not singling out any of the eight (8). I
would hope that all eight (8)...
Councilmember Yukimura: Eight (8) is a brand or a company. Thermal
conversion is a category of waste processing. So, is that what "new and innovative"
means? You are asking us to vote on something that is not even defined. I do not
even know what it means. We need a chance to evaluate, learn, and read about it.
But "new and innovative" gives no guidance to me, as to what these are.
Councilmember Kagawa: "New and innovative" to me, means anything
different that the County is doing other that what it is doing right now. We currently
have those green bins that are used for recyclables. We currently turn our green
waste into mulch. We recycle metals by collecting them and putting them on a ship.
We also have areas like what used to be called Abe's, that takes white goods. So,
anything new that will reduce the amount that we bury, I think, would be considered
"new" to me. Something new that Kaua`i County does not do that would be a
significant decrease to the amount that we are burying is what I would consider
"new." As you all know, a Resolution has no teeth. It is merely a position and I believe
in this Resolution, we are saying please hurry because time is running out, and that
is all. It is a request basically, but in a formal way, of just saying to the
Administration, please hurry. We are running out of time. We have not taken up
any significantly new idea in forty(40)years. We primarily bury rubbish or we gather
what we can and gather it together and put it on a ship. I believe that is not the best
way to handle it, but I am not an engineer. I will leave it to Larry and his
professionals to decide what is best. If the best way to handle our rubbish is to gather
it and put it on a ship and so forth, the Administration will not be going against the
Resolution. I am just asking them to proceed further and try and see if we have
anything to help Kaua`i in the near future because time is running out. That is the
COUNCIL MEETING 66 MAY 6, 2015
only way I feel that being on the legislative side, that is the only way I feel I can give
the Administration a nudge, is just a formal request to please hurry.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, I have a question.
You mentioned thermal...what did you mention?
Councilmember Yukimura: Thermal conversion.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is that in the Resolution?
Councilmember Yukimura: I am asking if that by the words "new and
innovative technologies," which is what this Resolution is urging.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: Whether that is included?
Council Chair Rapozo: Oh.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to know what"new and innovative
technologies" actually is.
Councilmember Kagawa: If we do not have thermal, it is a new
technology in my definition. Does that make sense? Anything different than what
we are currently doing.
Council Chair Rapozo: New and innovative means new and
innovative. I mean, the Resolution leaves it up to the experts to determine.
Councilmember Kagawa: O`ahu may be doing it, but it is new to Kauai.
We are not doing it.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are you suggesting then that we should
abandon our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan because you are saying
anything that we are not doing and what we are doing is in accordance with the
Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, which we spent three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000) at least on?
Councilmember Kagawa: I am in no way in this Resolution telling the
Administration how to handle our rubbish except that I want them to hurry up in
trying to take the next step after asking for the RFI. That is all I am trying to do.
Time is ticking and let us see what is out there because as you all know, science
changes. H-Power is a thirty (30)year old technology. Is that what is best for Kauai?
I do not think so, but it is not my opinion. It may be the best one.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will be bringing up Larry in a very short
time. If you had any more questions for the introducer.
Councilmember Hooser: I do.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Go ahead.
Councilmember Hooser: If I may? For the public and everybody, RFI
is? Request for information, is that it?
COUNCIL MEETING 67 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: You are right.
Councilmember Hooser: The Administration has put out an RFI and
they have gotten eight (8) responses?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, you are correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Are you familiar with the eight (8) responses?
Councilmember Kagawa: I am not. I am familiar with two (2). Two (2)
of the eight (8) have met with me personally.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Which go are those?
Councilmember Kagawa: Energyia and Pelletron.
Councilmember Hooser: Energyia?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, they are a waste diversion like a Metals
Recycling Facility (MRF).
Councilmember looser: And Pelia...
Councilmember Kagawa: Pelletron.
Councilmember Hooser: Pelletron. What does Pelletron do?
Councilmember Kagawa: They are a defense contractor. It is a plasma
arc type that is a much improved version of plasma arc.
Councilmember Hooser: So, plasma arc, is that the similar technology
to the heat transfer?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. So, plasma arc.
Councilmember Kagawa: But supposedly much improved version. But
who knows? It is up to Public Works to go and dig deeper into all of them.
Councilmember Hooser: I know plasma arc, those technologies have
been pitching their services for many years to all of the Counties. I am not aware of
any municipal solid waste commercial facilities that are operating anywhere in the
community like ours. Are you aware of those?
Council Chair Rapozo: This Resolution does not specify the
technology. So, maybe we can get Larry up to explain about the eight (8) companies
that has come up.
Councilmember Hooser: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not want this forum to be a negotiation or
a breakdown of the eight (8) applicants. That is not our job to do that.
COUNCIL MEETING 68 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: If I may. If the Resolution is supporting
Pelletron or anybody like that...
Councilmember Kagawa: It is not.
Councilmember Hooser: I need to know that. If we are voting on
supporting a company that is proposing, then I want to know what exactly we are
supporting. It is very broad.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is.
Councilmember Hooser: To me, I do not know.
Council Chair Rapozo: We received testimony from Pat Gegen, who
made a horrible, what I call an allegation, that this was directed to support one
company. I challenge anyone to show me in this Resolution where a specific
technology and that is what it sounded like Councilmember Yukimura was trying to
incite that response.
Councilmember Hooser: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: But there is nothing in this Resolution that
refers to a specific technology or a specific company. It tells the Administration,
"Take a look at the new and innovative technologies and let us start moving in that
direction." That is what it does. There is no reference. I would rather not discuss
even the companies at this point because they are going to go through the competitive
process at some point. But today, it is just the Resolution, which is asking the
Administration to consider new technologies to manage the solid waste.
Councilmember Hooser: The reason I bring up my experience with
plasma arc is because they are not proven technologies. The discussion we have had
in the past is about risking the County on new innovative technologies that why
should we be the early adapter and be totally locked into some technology? So, it is
a very important distinction. It sounds good. Let us adopt innovative technologies.
But at the same time, it may not be so good. That is the discussions that have been
done historically.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, there is no way the Administration can
move on any technology without the CounciFs approval. There is just no way. They
need funding.
Councilmember Hooser: Because part of the Resolution talks about
public-private partnerships and that is also kind of troubling to me. I do not know
what that means.
Councilmember Kagawa: Can I respond?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, a public-private partnership is going to
be required no matter whom is selected because the partnership will involve the
County giving authorization to whoever is the selected person to have our rubbish.
We cannot have the rubbish without a public-private partnership. So, that is just
basic. It is not going towards any particular vendor. I am just trying to see if we can
COUNCIL MEETING 69 MAY 6, 2015
hurry up so we have more time for the operator, whoever is selected or maybe nobody
is selected. But if we do not hurry up, the window of opportunity to try something or
try and engage in a contract that can significantly extend the life of the Kekaha
landfill and not have to open Ma'alo is running out as we speak. So, I am just trying
to put it out there for the Administration. It is a nudge. It has no teeth. It has no
teeth whatsoever. It is just telling them to please hurry up. You folks did Step 1 and
move on to Step 2 as soon as possible. That is all it is really saying. Thank you.
Councilmember Hooser: Just a brief follow-up. Thank you very much.
I guess part of my challenge is that this is the first...I did not know the County put
out an RFI, had gotten eight (8) response, and we are preparing to select a contractor.
Did I miss a briefing on that?
Council Chair Rapozo: No. The RFI was just a request for
information.
Councilmember Hooser: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: So, the next step should the Administration
decide to move, would be a Request for Proposal (RFP). So, we are far from selecting
anyone. The RFI was just a request for information.
Councilmember Hooser: Has this Council been briefed on this?
Council Chair Rapozo: No.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Then that is part of the point, I guess.
Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I believe there is fifty thousand
dollars ($50,000) in the budget that was part of the Solid Waste briefing that is part
of our budget proposal to go ahead with the RFP. We are totally unbriefed on what
the possibilities are or why we are doing this. Yes, new technologies. But I mean,
there is always new technologies and we have had at least a couple of studies that we
have paid a lot of money that has said basically, waste-to-energy is not feasible for a
community our size. Big Island spent two million dollars ($2,000,000) to do an RFP
process and came to the same conclusion after spending two million dollars
($2,000,000). Even Maui County. I do not know that they really found a solution and
other communities have gone broke with a put or pay contract.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I want Larry to be able to verify this
because in the discussion of the fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), what I thought I
heard was that a portion was going to be used for a consultant to get the RFIs
together, get the codified information, and actually present something. So, it seems
to me like this is coming before that. I just wanted to see where we are with that in
order to make a decision on this. That is how I think, it would inform me on where
we should be putting a Resolution together.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Let us do this. Let me get Larry up
here. I will suspend the rules with no objection.
COUNCIL MEETING 70 MAY 6, 2015
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Council Chair Rapozo: Sure.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to respond to Councilmember
Chock. We do not have twenty (20)to thirty(30)years left. If you guys are all shocked
by the Resolution showing up, it is because time is running out. At some point, you
need to do something or else just live with it and let us plan for Ma'alo. If that is
what we are going to do, then let us just plan for Ma'alo and let us not stop. But as I
sit here each Committee Meeting and we talk about Ma'alo and I hear all of the
reservations, I say we have to look for some solution that we can extend Kekaha
another ten (10), twenty (20), or thirty (30) years. This is the nudge that I feel is
appropriate because it has no teeth. It does not force the Administration to do
anything. They can look at it. They can throw it in the rubbish can if they want, but
least they are hearing from the Council that we unified feel like let us go to Step 2.
We did Step 1. We have had more people than we thought that would show interest.
Let us go to the next step, if possible. If they find with their expertise that it is totally
a waste of time, then just tell us. That is my feeling. It is just keeping the
communication lines open instead of just talking behind closed doors. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Dill. You have heard the discussion. If
you could just state your name for the captioner.
LARRY DILL, P.E., County Engineer: Sure, for the record, Larry Dill,
County Engineer.
Council Chair Rapozo: Tell us what you know.
Mr. Dill: Okay. It will not take very long. First of all,
let me start by saying that the Administration supports this Resolution. We support
it because we feel it behooves us to look at and investigate alternative means of
managing our solid waste. As has been said by the Council, our existing landfill is
running out of airspace and we need to find a solution. We are right now as we sit
here today, one hundred percent (100%) commit to the Integrated Solid Waste
Management Plan adopted by the County several years ago and we are moving in
that direction. But while we do so, because things have changed and technology
advances as was pointed out, a type of incineration was looked at several years ago
and deemed not to be feasible because at the time at least, you needed a large waste
stream in order to make something like that feasible, which we do not have. We stay
in touch with what is going on in the world of solid waste and it has been brought to
our attention that there are other types of technologies that are out there. Plasma
arc was mentioned though plasma arc has struggled. But there are folks who say
that they have beaten the problems. It does not take more energy now than you can
get out of the process. But there were different technologies that were presented to
us as well. Some, they had themes that are variations on a theme. You should be
aware that when the RFI went out, we requested the responses to include information
on how they would support our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan when it
comes to waste diversion activities. So, many of them included a package, which
included a MRF as part of their proposal. Some were a dirty MRF and some were a
clean MRF. Right now, as Councilmember Kagawa said, as there is no teeth in the
Resolution, there is no commitment on part of this County right now to do anything
with any of those submittals. We received them. I think there are eight (8) of them,
as the Councilmember mentioned, and we are in the process of getting a consultant
on board to analyze these and report back to us because a lot of these are technologies
COUNCIL MEETING 71 MAY 6, 2015
that we are not familiar with. So, we need some help in that regard. The end of the
work by the consultant would be analysis and recommendation on what looks feasible
and to begin the job of outlining a possible RFP should the County choose to move in
that direction based on the analysis that has been done.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I did get informally briefed
by two (2) of the submitters for the request for the RFI. I guess kind of the red-flag
for me is that it does seem like it does not state their name at all in here, but it does
seem and I have nothing against them. I would move in that direction. They had a
good presentation. But it does seem like there is specific language in here that averts
to what is that they presented, that does concern me. The public-private partnership,
which is something good. The idea that this has got to be done with KIUC, which we
need to. Incineration. Anyway, these are things for me, I am a little bit afraid to
move forward on because I have not felt like we have gone through an equal process
on all eight (8) and been presented with them because it does not say anaerobic
digestion or anything, and yet, that was part of what was presented to me in another
provided. That is kind of where I am wondering for me, it seems premature. Can we
at least get the results of the RFI so that we know what it is the County has narrowed
down to look at? I would like that before we pass this and if that is ready, let us look
at it now so that we can work on this and make sure that I can support it. But that
is where I am with it.
Mr. Dill: Okay. I will respond to that by saying I
believe that this is generic enough in its current form that it is something that we
feel comfortable supporting here before you with Council.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Mr. Dill: Also, the RFI we received eight (8) responses.
I think that is the right number. The RFP will not be limited to those eight (8) and
there are other folks that have approached us since that time and indicated a strong
interest. We may come up with some other technologies when we get to the RFP time
as well if we decide to pursue this. We are not going to be able to come before you
and say, "Here are the technologies we are looking at. There are the ones we might
choose from." They are multi-faceted. So, there are many variations on the themes
as well. It would be very difficult for me to sit here and say, "We are going do A, B,
and C with this." Right now, we are throwing this open to the whole world and every
possible technology that might be out there that might help the County of Kauai.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are we going to able to get the report from the
consultant and read it?
Mr. Dill: I would think so, yes. Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: And have an open discussion about all of these
different possibilities?
Mr. Dill: Absolutely. Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: If this has no teeth, why do you need it?
COUNCIL MEETING 72 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Dill: It would be nice to know the Council's position
on this.
Councilmember Yukimura: How can we have a position on it when we do
not know what we are talking about?
Mr. Dill: At least all I need to know, I can tell you this
is, the first paragraph after the last whereas says, "It strongly urges the
Administration to consider deploying new innovative technologies in their effort to
solve our current solid waste challenges." Just asking us to consider those. I think
that is worthy of our consideration.
Councilmember Yukimura: But at such an expense and with such a track
record of having gone out for an RFP twenty (20) years ago, and people like
Mr. Kennit from Olokele Plantation, spent eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000)
or something to do an RFP and then we never even awarded anything. I mean, that
is a huge expense of time and energy. Why would we do it unless there is something
that really justifies us moving from the direction we are going in? It is like nothing.
There is just a vacuum. Oh, it is a new technology. There is no indication that it
might actually be economically feasible, that it is actually new. Anything of this. I
mean, you are asking us to support something that is a total vacuum as far as I am
concerned.
Council Chair Rapozo: No. Councilmember Yukimura, he is not
asking us to support this. We are introducing it. He is not introducing it.
Councilmember Yukimura: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are introducing the Resolution. He came
up to say he supports it.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry, Chair. But he just told us, "We
would like to have direction or we would like to have Council support." So, he is
asking us, and answer my question.
Mr. Dill: Well, certainly before we go to the stage where
we want eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) or some large amount of money
from the Council, we would be here on the floor having a robust discussion about that
issue. I think it would be negligent of us not to look at alternatives for managing
solid waste knowing the current expense and the future expense we are going to
endure going in the direction we are currently headed in.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, then come back to us. We will defer this.
Come back and tell us what the possibilities may be. If we are going to do the RFP,
we need to know what we want. We are not going to say, "Tell us what we want."
You make such a big open RFP. The value of the RFP is that you have done a lot of
work on it so you really know what to ask for and what kind of conditions and so
forth. Otherwise, you waste so much money and time.
Mr. Dill: Councilmember Yukimura, we are going
through the stage right now. As I said, all we are asking is for your support to
consider these things. If you do not think we should consider them, then do not
support the Resolution is what I am saying.
COUNCIL MEETING 73 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Then share with us what you got from the RFI
so we have some idea of the possibilities. You have given us nothing except a general
concept that maybe there is something better than what we are doing. But no concept
of what the community has done with these new technologies that might serve as an
example of what we might do.
Mr. Dill: Well, we will certainly be here at some point
in the process if we think it is something to pursue. This was introduced by a
Councilmember and we are supporting it because we think it is worthy of
consideration.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: First of all, I want to thank you for your
presentation, not presentation, but your agreement. Obviously, you are pointing out
that it is to consider that the County is considering new and innovative, and then the
"Be It Resolved" is where it says it all. We urge you to consider some options. I guess
my question, you said eight (8) people have submitted RFIs, but it is likely we could
get more people once the RFP goes out?
Mr. Dill: That is correct.
Councilmember Kagawa: By reading this Resolution, the anaerobic is
included in this?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: We are wide open right now.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: This is a question also, the RFP will focus on
how much waste is taken away from the landfill from being having to be buried and
what will it cost the County, right? Are those two (2) major factors?
Mr. Dill: Two (2) major factors, and also environmental
concerns.
Councilmember Kagawa: And how much pollution it is causing, that
will be weighed also with a score?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Trask, you look bothered.
Mr. Trask: Yes. It was echoed earlier by this body. For
the record, Mauna Kea Trask. We are here for Resolution and the Resolution states
what it states, and that is what we are specifically here for. The discussion has been
had, but I would like to taper it off at this point because RFP processes is a
procurement process. It is not a legislative activity. At the time of funding budget or
a subsequent time, it could be discussed. I just wanted to emphasize that fact that
one, we are not agendaed to talk about RFPs and procurements today. It is not a
COUNCIL MEETING 74 MAY 6, 2015
legislative kuleana. I understand it is a difficult thing to say, but it is true. It is an
administration process from Public Works and Finance, largely. So, I just wanted to
say that out for the record and not go too much further down that road.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Dill, you say we have hired a consultant?
Mr. Dill: We are in the process of getting one on-board.
Council Chair Rapozo: That consultant will do an analysis and will
submit recommendations to the Administration?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: At that point, I am assuming you would be
able to come to this body and do a presentation with the recommendations of the
consultant?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: And those recommendations will tell us what
you found out from the RFI?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. So, I agree that an RFP is an
administrative proposal, but it is usually an administrative proposal implementing a
policy that has been set by the Mayor and the Council. I mean, because RFP
processes costs a lot of money and time. If it is not been vetted as a policy direction
from the Council, something is wrong.
Council Chair Rapozo: At the appropriate time that you come to the
Council...
Councilmember Yukimura: Mauna Kea, that is a question for you.
Mr. Trask: Well, at the appropriate time, yes, budget.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Trask: That is the policy statement of this body.
Councilmember Yukimura: No. Okay. So, the budget is now though. It is
fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).
Mr. Trask: Yes, but we are not talking about the budget
today. We are talking about this Resolution today.
Councilmember Yukimura: We cannot make a policy decision without
information. We were told at budget that we could not get the information from the
RFI. I asked for it.
COUNCIL MEETING 75 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Has that been formally requested,
Councilmember Yukimura?
Councilmember Yukimura: No. I formally requested it on the floor and
was told it cannot be provided, is that not true?
Mr. Dill: I do not recall that.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will send it over.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Very good.
Council Chair Rapozo: Officially.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Because I do not see why we would be
prohibited from looking at an RFI.
Mr. Dill: The one thing I would add is some the
submittals included what was considered proprietary information. So,we would have
to keep that confidential.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, you just redact what you have to redact
or keep back what you have to keep back. But I think maybe the technology might
be proprietary, but the services, I do not think that is. Again, this Resolution is to
consider. We are not asking you to take a technology. We are not asking you to enter
into an RFP. We are saying to consider new technologies. When you come back with
this consultant report and recommendation, at that point, the Council is going to have
to make the decision whether we are going to go forward with RFP because it does
involves money, or not. That would be the appropriate time. But this Resolution is
just such a benign. It is just asking you to look at alternatives with new technologies
and whatever you folks find, you inform us, and then we make the determination.
Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I think it is legitimate to discuss the context
in which this Resolution is being proposed. I think that is what we are trying to do
and that is why the RFI discussion led which led to the RFP discussion. But it
certainly seems like legitimate information for this Council to ask questions on and
get clarity on the context. Resolutions strongly urges the Administration to consider
deploying. So, we can say, "It is no big deal." Well, if it is not big deal, why should
you need it? We should not have to tell the Administration to explore our options. I
am certainly not comfortable not strongly urging them to do something that I do not
know what is contained within the definition of"new innovative technologies." I want
tried and true innovative technologies. I do not want to be the test case for
technologies. If it is not necessary, I do not know why we are even have the
conversation. Why does the Administration....you can just go do this, right?
Mr. Dill: Absolutely, yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. You are already doing this, right?
Mr. Dill: We are already dong this.
COUNCIL MEETING 76 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: You are already considering deploying new
and innovative technologies, right? You are doing that now?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. I do not know why we are having the
conversation.
Council Chair Rapozo: Exactly. Can we vote?
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Hooser: I am not ready to support it. They are doing
it. They do not need me to strongly encourage them.
Council Chair Rapozo: Exactly. I think that is why a lot of this
discussion is really, I mean, they are doing it. Whether we pass this or not, they are
doing it and it is going to move forward. Again, it is a Resolution. So, the Council
will vote and the majority will prevail. That is how it works. That is how it works.
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: If you are already doing this, this is
meaningless.
Mr. Dill: To me, it is not.
Councilmember Yukimura: Why?
Mr. Dill: I would like to know that the Council is
supporting the Administration's efforts to look at options to manage our solid waste.
Councilmember Yukimura: But we do not know what those options are
that you are looking at.
Council Chair Rapozo: Neither do they.
Mr. Dill: You do not seem to want to consider them
though.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I just had put some time into it. From
the title, just so you get my answer. I support the direction that you folks are going
from with this Resolution as it is titled. I do have some concerns about it. I did create
some amendments if this body is willing to address and review them. If I can
entertain that motion now.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, we need to be called back to order. What
I want to do is I want to take care of the public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 77 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: When we will come back to order, we can
entertain any amendments. But I want to make sure, does anyone have any other
questions for Larry? Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: When will the Council be briefed?
Council Chair Rapozo: I am sorry.
Councilmember Hooser: When will the Council be briefed on the
eight (8) technologies or RFIs? When will someone be telling us all fancy new
innovative things that are being proposed? To me, that would be the time that we
would have that discussion and then decide whether we want to support them to not.
Mr. Dill: I do not have with me off the top my head the
schedule for the consultant's work. I would guess it is a couple of months,
approximately. But if you send over a request, then we can certainly respond and let
you know when we are ready to make a presentation to Council. But I would think
around that timeframe.
Councilmember Hooser: A couple of months for you to present the top
tiered ones?
Mr. Dill: No, the results of the consultant's analysis.
Council Chair Rapozo: Of the RFI.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: So, the consultant is analyzing the eight (8)?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: And will then report on that analysis?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: In terms of the feasibility and all of that kind
of stuff?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: How much are we paying that consultant
again?
Mr. Dill: Fifty thousand dollars ($50,000).
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 78 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: You are saying we can get the information
from the RFI now and then we will get the report later, the consultant's
recommendation?
Mr. Dill: I believe so. As far as I know, I am now aware
of any reason why we cannot release the RFI submittals to you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Well, where is the attorney?
Council Chair Rapozo: We are going to send it over formally and they
will make the determination. I do not know if that violates anything. But we will
send it over and have the attorneys look at it.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any more questions for Larry? Thank you,
Larry. Are you catching the bus?
Mr. Dill: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I do not want you to miss that bus that
is why. Anyone in the audience wishing to testify?
Mr. Sato: First registered speaker is Pamela Burrell,
followed by Tek Nickerson.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you for your patience for waiting so
long.
PAMELA BURRELL: Interesting. My name is Pamela Burrell and
I was under the assumption first with this Resolution that you are introducing, that
it was a waste-to-energy plant that you had in mind and I came prepared to speak
against that. But what I am in total agreement of yes, we need to expedite and get
something new. As far as I can see with our Integrated Solid Waste Management
Plan as it is, we have not put that technology into place yet. We need that MRF. I
mean, that will divert easily seventy percent (70%) of our waste. So, that I think it
needs to be fast-tracked, otherwise, I feel like we are diverting, wasting our time,
wasting energy, and wasting valuable resources to just sit on. I just feel very
impatient because it was 2011 when the Council passed the Zero-Waste Resolution.
We paid the consultants already to make a plan for our solid waste. I think it is a
good plan. So, San Francisco is at well over eighty percent (80%) now and with the
goal of zero (0) by 2020. That is the technology that we should be looking at, people
that are being successful and green.
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you know that San Francisco has waste-to-
energy?
Mr. Burrell: No, they do not.
Council Chair Rapozo: Oh yes they do. I visited the plant. They do.
Ms. Burrell: They do?
Council Chair Rapozo: They do, but they divert as well.
COUNCIL MEETING 79 MAY 6, 2015
Ms. Burrell: Okay. Well, I was not aware of that.
Council Chair Rapozo: I visited the plant personally.
Ms. Burrell: Okay, and they probably have a lot more.
Council Chair Rapozo: They do.,
Mr. Burrell: Yes. That is not my written my testimony,
but that is my new testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you have a copy of the Resolution itself?
Ms. Burrell: I do, but not with me.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa, did you have a
question?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Thank you, Pam, for your testimony.
One of the big problems with achieving that seventy percent (70%) is that as we try
and recycle these products and sort them out, San Francisco does not have to ship it
across the ocean.
Ms. Burrell: I understand.
Councilmember Kagawa: So, that may well be the solution that Larry
picks out. But you understand there is a need to look at all options?
Ms. Burrell: Right.
Councilmember Kagawa: Because we have the ocean to go over. Put it
on a barge, shipping it, and burning fossil fuel. Although we are not burying it here,
is that taking care of the environment and the 'Ulna? I do not believe so, that putting
it on a ship and shipping it across the ocean is the best way. But everybody has
different opinions.
Mr. Burrell: Again, it would be interesting to see what
these are. I just felt we had something moving forward on the slow-track.
Councilmember Kagawa: No. Somebody read between the lines and
tried to cross the "T" that was not even there. So, I think you were fed some
information that was wrong. It is just an open-minded Resolution that just urges
solid waste to move a little quicker now that they have got their RFIs in.
Mr. Burrell: Okay.
Councilmember Kagawa: If that makes sense.
Mr. Burrell: Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? Thank you very much
for coming.
COUNCIL MEETING 80 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Sato: Our last speaker is Tek Nickerson.
Mr. Nickerson: Thank you, Council.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Nickerson: Again, speaking as an Environmental Land
Use Planner with forty-four (44)years consulting municipalities on this subject. I see
there are two (2) schools of thought here. One is about incineration and the other is
about recycling. Now, it is not an accident that all of Europe has gone the route of
cradle-to-cradle and you folks are talking about incineration, which prevents
cradle-to-cradle. This Resolution says "incineration" in the second paragraph. You
have put blinders on the consultant to only look at incineration. If you said
"cradle-to-cradle and incineration," we would like to have RFPs for the whole range,
then you would have a balance. But you have not. Now, I would like to share with
you my experience, my hometown's experience, which is very similar to Kaua`i's
regarding the issue of municipal waste conversion to electricity versus recycling. My
hometown in Connecticut was one (1) of eight (8) municipalities. By the way, I made
the same testimony in 2009, word-for-word. One (1) of the eight (8) municipalities
desperate to find alternative to trucking waste to landfills in western Pennsylvania
and Ohio at enormous expense. We were recycling more products than Kauai and
still faced a catastrophe. When Enron offered to contract to generate electricity from
the solid waste of our region, we were eager to take the bait. What we did not foresee
is that we were contracting to supply a minimum amount of solid waste on a regular
basis. That meant we were forced to consume, consume, and consume in order to feed
the incinerator. We could not reduce our consumption without paying a financial
penalty nor increase our recycling from cradle-to-cradle. It became an addiction.
Only Enron's collapse rescued us from this grave misjudgment. To quote Pam Burrell
in 2008, "what we discovered locally is that by recycling our discarded resources we
are saving more energy than what we could possibly gain by burning them. We were
then told about successful zero-waste strategies all over the United States (US) and
Europe. No new incinerators have been built the last ten (10) years, now fifteen (15)
years, yet," perhaps the one you are talking about is an exception. "Yet our County
continues to funnel more of our taxpayer money to hire a consultant, which was three
hundred eighty-five thousand dollars ($385,000) to study waste-to-energy or to send
County Councilmembers to London on misguided junk, in my opinion, when the
money could have been better spend hiring a recycling coordinator, a waste diversion
program advisor, designing materials..."
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Nickerson, hang on real quick.
Mr. Nickerson: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing
to testify? Okay, you can have your second three (3) minutes.
Mr. Nickerson: "Designing a materials recycling facility,
starting a green waste curbside pickup program, and expand the public
pay-as-you-throw system to support recycling efforts. Japan lives and breathes
recycling. Its attitude to the planet is literally irrelevant and so must ours." Thank
you.
Councilmember Kagawa: I would just like to respond to the London
reference.
COUNCIL MEETING 81 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Nickerson: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: I am the Public Works Chairperson. It is my
second term as Public Works Chairman. It is typical for people who are interested in
trying to help the County or do business with County to contact the Public Works
Chairman. When Pelletron invited me to go to London to meet with British Airways
and see why British Airways has bought into Pelletron's system, I thought it was
worthy of investigating. I thought that perhaps this is the solution, this is the new
technology that can help solve probably the world's largest problem here on Kaua`i
first. I think it was well worth taking that leap and trying to determine if this was a
concept that I could support. As of now, I will not disclose how I personally feel
because it is not in the best interest of the County for me to say my position before
our professionals and our engineers come up with their recommendations. I think
the trip that I went to with the Mayor in trying to solve Kaua`i's biggest problem, the
world's biggest problem, was legitimate. It was not done to enjoy a free trip to
London. I just wanted to clarify that. I respect your comments.
Mr. Nickerson: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura. Oh, I am sorry.
Tape change. Five (5) minute tape change. Sorry about that. It always happens with
you, JoAnn.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 4:56 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 5:01 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Tek, thank you for being here. I
would like to explain cradle-to-cradle because I do not think most people hearing it
understand what you are talking about.
Mr. Nickerson: Thank you. Cradle-to-cradle refers to a
philosophy and commitment that when you are planning and designing something
such as a bottle or a building, that you are also planning on its destruction, it is
recycling, and how you are going to use it. Now for instance in my hometown in
Connecticut, you cannot put up a building that does not come with a bond to destroy
it in fifty (50) years or whatever it is life expectancy is. So, we understand that the
cradle-to-cradle means. Now in Amsterdam in Holland, same idea. When you are
purchasing a car, you are purchasing also the cost of recycling it when its life
expectancy is gone and you are going to turn it in. The plan is already in place to
destroy it and recycle it. Cradle-to-cradle.
Councilmember Yukimura: So basically, it is zero-waste. You do not
create any waste when it comes to the end of its life? Is that what you mean?
Mr. Nickerson: I believe that is correct. Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: The beginning of our work of the construction
and demolition bill that is coming from solid waste to see that we can divert a lot of
our construction waste from the landfill, is an effort to move into that cradle-to-cradle
paradigm, if you will?
COUNCIL MEETING 82 MAY 6, 2015
Mr. Nickerson: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. It is reduce, reuse, and recycle. So, the
reduce part is what the cradle-to-cradle or that Amsterdam law is talking about, that
you require that when something is created, there is the plan for what happens when
it comes to the end of its life such that there is no waste created?
Mr. Nickerson: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not think that is true.
Mr. Nickerson: No?
Council Chair Rapozo: The car does not disappear.
Mr. Nickerson: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: You pay for the destruction of that.
Mr. Nickerson: You pay for the destruction.
Council Chair Rapozo: It does not remove the waste. It does not
mean that the waste no longer exists. It is just that you are getting the people to
fund its recycling or disposal. That what it does.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, it also goes into, I believe, the materials
that are used to make the car. That is why Toyota, I believe, is working on a
completely recyclable car.
Council Chair Rapozo: But anyway, we are talking about a
technology and the Administration exploring technologies so let us focus on that. We
are not here talking about zero-waste or recycling.
Councilmember Yukimura: We are.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are here to talk about asking the
Administration to look at new technologies to take care of our solid waste.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but Chair, that is why this Resolution is
not adequate because it...
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, well, then can vote against it, JoAnn.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. But I also have the right to engage in
questions and answers about...
Council Chair Rapozo: You do.
Councilmember Yukimura: ...the alternative ways to divert something
because it might be the more cost-effective and job creating alternative.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, do you have a question?
COUNCIL MEETING 83 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: My question was what cradle-to-cradle was
and you are explaining that basically the cradle-to-cradle paradigm ends up with no
waste in the end?
Mr. Nickerson: It is materials recovery. My point was that
your proposal here is only limited to incineration and therefore, you are hobbling the
consultant to only look at incineration and not consider the wider view of
cradle-to-cradle.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I was just going to clarify. I am not sure
where it says we can only use incineration. I know it says, "Currently utilized
technologies like incineration." But I did not know anywhere in it where it said it. I
think we are just leaving it open.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask a question of Larry Dill.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else have any questions for
Mr. Nickerson? If not, thank you very much, sir. Mr. Dill.
Mr. Dill: For the record, Larry Dill, County Engineer.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are the responses that you got in your
requests for information basically incineration or waste-to-energy burning type of
proposals?
Mr. Dill: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: In your requests for information, did you ask
for all types of diversion?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are you going to be comparing it against the
diversion plans of our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Is the consultant going to have the
background to do that?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: It will not be just an Engineering Solutions
Consultant?
Mr. Dill: I am not sure what that question means
really. He is an Engineering Solutions Consultant.
COUNCIL MEETING 84 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. But because our Integrated Solid
Waste Management Plan and Zero-Waste Plan is not an engineering solution per se.
It is a behavior change policy approach that creates diversion from the landfill. So,
are you going to have a consultant that is aware and knowledgeable about that aspect
of diversion?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions for Larry? Thank you
Larry. Do not go too far. Anyone else wishing to testify?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? There is a motion? Correct,
there is a motion. Go ahead, Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I think it was circulated,
four (4) amendments.
Councilmember Chock moved to amend Resolution No. 2015-43 as shown in
the Floor Amendment, which is incorporated herein and attached hereto as
Attachment 3, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Go ahead and explain your
amendment.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you. I looked at the Resolution. I
wanted to see where perhaps I could protect us a little bit more in terms of how this
Resolution was moving forward. The first amendment speaks to us in terms of
appropriate scale for Kaua`i because I know one of the concerns has been can we
ensure that we can develop or invest in something that is going to be appropriate and
handle the needs of Kaua`i and not have to, like Tek you said, "feed the machine." So,
that is what number 1 is again. I wanted to look at more inclusivity in it. Number 2
is really about adding "proven diversion activities" that I think are important to
include. Number 3 just strengthens it with rather than "dual" maximum activity
because I think we are committed to that in our solid waste plan. Then number 4,
adding "savings" and also "to minimize the destruction of non-renewable materials
that may be able to continue to provide value in the future." So just kind of again,
alludes to the conversation we are talking about with cars and so forth but looking at
being able to at least include that kind of verbiage to consider. So, those are four (4).
Actually when I look back at the Resolution, there is probably more. But this is what
I am proposing at this time.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any questions for the introducer or
comments?
Councilmember Kagawa: Comment.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
COUNCIL MEETING 85 MAY 6, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: I think the purpose being that we were so
early, we had the RFI process completed, and as Larry said, it does not mean during
the RFI process there will not be a lot more. I think I tried to draft the Resolution as
broadly as possible to bring something new that we are not doing currently. I think
this amendment seems to close the door on being open. I will not be supporting it. It
goes against why I even pushed for a Resolution. I want us to look at all, including
more to come. I do not want to close the door. What is the sense? We close the door
and not hear what is out there? Science is ever changing. We have got to be
open-minded and let our engineers and his staff vet all of the proposals. There is no
guaranteed best way to solve the world's largest problem that has not been solved
yet. So, let us keep an open-mind and if we want to go with the safest, we just MRF
it. Stack it up, put it on a ship, and we will pay up the yin yang. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Just in response to Councilmember Kagawa.
I appreciate what he is considering. Again, I have not deleted any of the verbiage
that he has put together. Again, I am looking at more inclusivity and adding to the
language. But I totally respect where he wants to go with this. This is his Resolution.
This is just how I could more or less buy into the direction that this is going.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Actually, this makes it more inclusive rather
than narrow. It allows us to look at the proven diversion activities, which we should
look at too. Without the amendments, it actually shuts it down more and narrows
down the focus. By allowing us to look at the things we are doing as potentially
positive too, it is saying we are looking for something that works and we are going to
measure everything against what is most workable rather than just what is new.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I think for me, I guess the hesitation is on the
"proven" part where I kind of understand where Councilmember Kagawa is going. I
do not understand what the "proven" part means. I mean, is it that they are doing it
on a scale somewhere else in the world similar to what we are doing it? When it
comes to "proven" I think I just have a hard time with the word "proven" because it
may be a technology that maybe they are doing larger-scale in California or someplace
and they say if we scale it down, we could do it here. But I do not necessarily think
it is "proven" because it is not our scale. So, that is where I feel like I think it maybe
narrows it a little more where they could be doing the technology on a bigger-scale
and I guess it is not proven because they are not doing it on a smaller-scale is there
is a technology that could do it on a smaller scale. That is my only hesitation on the
"proven" part. I do not know.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock, go ahead.
Councilmember Chock: I can respond to it. Honestly, just looking at
we want to invest in things that we know we can rely on. I think that we can take
that any way you look or work on it further. Really, I was just looking again, to see
how we can diversify this request. If it was up to me, I think this Resolution could
have more work on it and I would be willing to do that. But this is where it is for me
at this time and what I could offer in the time that we had. Proven for me just on a
COUNCIL MEETING 86 MAY 6, 2015
personal level, would mean that the company can prove that they can honor what we
have in terms of the capacity that we have on the island and take care of our needs
that way. So, if they have done it elsewhere on a larger-scale, to me, that is okay as
long as they can scale it down to what our needs here. But you will see that it is in
the first two (2). Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: For both Councilmember Chock and
Councilmember Kaneshiro, do you not think that there has to be some level of proof
in a technology? I mean, are we going to be guinea pigs for something that has not
been done at all, scale aside? Has it ever been actually done in a working operating
plant? That is not important? No. I am asking those two (2) first.
Councilmember Chock: Yes, that is important. I think what I said
was I am looking for reliability as well, if that is how you determine proven. But I
want efficiency if we are going to invest in something. But again, I was referring to
his question, which was in this particular amendment and to me, it was about scale.
So, that is how I had proposed the amendment. Do I think it should be proven that
we should rely on something that we can trust? Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Just to respond to putting "proven" means it
is success, look at Big Island. They went with something that was proven and what
did they do? They wasted two million dollars ($2,000,000)because they reneged when
it came time to do it. To compare to scale to a County in California, that is comparing
apples and oranges. They can just bring whatever paper goods or what have you to
a processing plant nearby. They can truck it over. In Kauai, we have to ship it across
the ocean to get to a processing plant for cardboard, paper goods, lumber, or whatever
you are talking about. If you folks do not want to do it, let us give Larry the direction
because I think actually if I look back at Public Works and the County Engineers
prior, they have made the right decision not to go with a waste-to-energy proposal for
forty (40) something years because there is nothing has been presented to them this
that made sense. We are at a time now, it is coming to fish or cut bait or go home or
whatever with Ma'alo. Really, if we are intent on just doing what we are doing, then
we better pass a Resolution to proceed more vigorously for Ma'alo. But here is my
last option because I do not want to go there, not yet. I feel we have one (1) last
chance. Let us have our engineers, our professionals, take one (1) last swing and try
and see if we can extend the life of Kekaha. Honestly and sincerely, that is my hope
that this Resolution is pushing them in that direction. I am elated that he is sitting
here today saying that he is open and wants to spend more time going to that next
step. I just really hope that the Council can support this either now or let us just
make up our mind that waste-to-energy or waste diversion or MRF or what have you
will never happen and let us just get ready to Ma`alo because I think it is coming
down to now or never, really.
Council Chair Rapozo: We were there a while ago.
Councilmember Kagawa: We were there a while ago, but we have
another opportunity. But this is the final expansion. I talked to Troy earlier today.
He said, "This last ten (10) or twelve (12) years that we have. That is it." There is
nowhere else to go. No higher. No wider. Kekaha is done. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 87 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I forget what I was going to say.
Councilmember Yukimura: About proven.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: The proven part. I mean, I do not know what
makes it "proven." They have a large facility, they run the financials, and tell you at
the end the financials this is what we came out to. If we scale it down, this is what
rubbish. When I read it, as far as proven and scale appropriate, I do not know if it
means appropriate to Kauai. I do not know if it means that you need to have a facility
that is intact, same size as Kauai, and I guess the proven part is just hanging me up.
Of course, I have faith that the proven part, Larry and the Administration is going to
go through and they are going to sort out all of the information and they are going to
make the decision on we believe this is the technology for us. The proven part is going
to be part of it. When it says "proven and scale appropriate to Kaua`i," it is kind of
hard for me to put my head around it as far as what necessarily necessitates what is
proven in scale to Kauai.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I am getting more confused with the
conversation as we go forward.
Council Chair Rapozo: Rewind a little bit then.
Councilmember Hooser: I would think we would want something that
is proven. I have a hard time saying that we want to support something that is not
proven and that is not to scale. I mean, we want to have proven technology. We are
going to invest our entire future solid waste in unproven technology that is not built
to scale? I mean, that is a totally reasonable attempt to improve the Resolution. It
must be proven and scale for Kauai. So, we want something that is good for small
communities, not something that is built for Chicago and they are going to bring in
over here and we are going to pledge all of our solid waste for the rest of our life to
them and pay them tipping or hauling fees or whatever. I cannot understand why
we are arguing over the word "proven." I find it interesting that the only two (2)
testimonies in support seem to be from Pelletron or their support people. The
amendment is an attempt to improve the Resolution. I do not know. The amendment
is an attempt to improve the Resolution. I do not know why there is so much
resistance to improving the Resolution. But let us go forward. It has been a long day.
Council Chair Rapozo: It sure has. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Because I think information is so important, I
am hoping that Councilmember Kagawa is filing a trip report so that we can learn
from his trip too because I want to know what was learned there on taxpayer money
so that we can use that information too.
Councilmember Kagawa: I am happy to provide that, and you provide
me with every trip you went on also.
Councilmember Yukimura: I will.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 88 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Alright. The amendment
was moved and seconded. I will just say, I think this Resolution is to consider, and I
do not want to limit the Administration to consider anything even unproven
technologies. Look at it all. Then obviously, I would not support the Administration
moving forward on something unproven. I mean, that is so subjective, unproven or
proven. But I would assume at that time when we make the determination it will be
on a proven technology. I want you to take a look at all of them, even the ones that
may be crazy. But I want you to at least take a look at it and then we just whittle
them away as you determined. As far as the second proven diversion activities and
as far as the third and fourth amendment, I do not have a problem with that. I think
that is important. I think that it is vital to minimize the destruction of non-renewable
materials that have value. Yes. I think we need to definitely look at keeping as much
as we can and reusing. I fully support that. But I do have a problem with the proven
because I want everybody to have an opportunity to basically share their mana`o.
You never know. Tom Brady was a sixth round draft pick. He did not go first round.
He had not really proven himself yet, but they took a shot and he is a Hall-of-Famer.
Sometimes you do not know. We just want be able to look at everything.
Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, just so you know, if proven is implied
by this body and it is known, I am okay taking out if in fact we are moving towards
trying to vote on this amendment and move it forward.
Council Chair Rapozo: Like I said, I do not have a problem. I will
support it if the first amendment is taken out simply because I think the second, the
third, or the fourth go without saying. I think they actually should be doing that now.
If there is consensus, we can whip up that amendment. We can actually do a verbal
amendment.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we just take in seriatim and vote on each
one?
Council Chair Rapozo: We can do it that way. Good idea. Okay. We
need a motion to take it ad seriatim.
Councilmember Yukimura moved to take the amendment ad seriatim,
seconded by Councilmember Chock, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Let us take the first amendment.
The first amendment is the addition of"that must be proven and scale appropriate to
Kaua`i to be considered." Okay. Roll call.
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 1st paragraph
to read as follows: "WHEREAS, the County of Kaua`i ("County") is considering
new and innovative technologies that must be proven in scale appropriate to
Kaua`i to be considered to manage its solid waste challenges; and" was then
put, and failed by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Mr. Sato: 3:4.
COUNCIL MEETING 89 MAY 6, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Next amendment, "and proven diversion
activities." Roll call.
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 7th paragraph
to read as follows: "BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY
OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, that it strongly urges the Administration to
consider deploying new innovative technologies and proven diversion activities
in their effort to solve our current solid waste challenges; and" was then put,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: 7:0.
Council Chair Rapozo: The third. "Or savings." It is the addition of
or savings and the removal of"green."
Councilmember Yukimura: No, we are 3.
Councilmember Kuali`i: 3.
Council Chair Rapozo: 1, 2, 3...oh, maximum. I am sorry. "Urges the
Administration to consider technologies and partners who offer" removal of "dual"
and the inclusion of"maximum."
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 8th paragraph
to read as follows: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council
urges the Administration to consider technologies and partners who offer
[dual] maximum diversion activities as part of the solution to our solid waste
challenges; and" was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 6*,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kagawa TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauaa,
Councilmember Kuali`i was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for
the motion.)
Mr. Sato: Six (6) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Then, the fourth. Let us do the fourth. I think
we can do it all in one. "Urges the Administration to consider technologies that
provide for the maximum net output," addition of"or savings," of...removal of"green."
So, it would just say "provide for the maximum net output or savings of energy and
minimize the destruction of non-renewable materials that can continue to provide
value as an item or as a feedstock for years to come." Roll call.
COUNCIL MEETING 90 MAY 6, 2015
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 9th paragraph
to read as follows: "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council
urges the Administration to consider technologies that provide for the
maximum net output or savings of[green] energy and minimize the destruction
of non-renewable materials that can continue to provide value as an item or as
a feedstock for years to come in any proposed solution; and" was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Hooser, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 6,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kagawa TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Six (6) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Back to the main Resolution, as
amended.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2015-43, as amended to Resolution
No. 2015-43, Draft 1, was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 4,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Four (4) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. That concludes the business
of today. Thank you very much for your patience and your participation.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
A!:
S`OTT K. SATO
Deputy County Clerk
:aa
ATTACHMENT 1
(May 6, 2015)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2585, A Bill For An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Article 14, Kaua`i
County Code 1987, As Amended, Relating To The Public Access, Open Space, Natural
Resources Preservation Fund
Introduced by: JOANN A. YUKIMURA
Amend SECTION 3 of Bill No. 2585, to read as follows:
"SECTION 3. Section 6-14.1 of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as
amended is hereby amended by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
(a) In adopting each fiscal year's budget and capital program, the
Council shall appropriate a minimum of [one and one-half percent (1.5%)]
one percent (1.0%) of the certified real property tax revenues to a fund known
as the public access, open space, [and] natural resources preservation fund
("fund"). The moneys in this fund shall be utilized for purchasing or otherwise
acquiring lands or property entitlements for land conservation purposes in the
County of Kauai for the following purposes:
(1) Public outdoor recreation and education, including access
to beaches and mountains;
(2) Preservation of historic or culturally important land areas
and sites;
(3) Protection of significant habitats or ecosystems, including
buffer zones;
(4) Preserving forests, beaches, coastal areas and agricultural
lands;
(5) Protecting watershed lands to preserve water quality and
water supply;
(6) Conserving land in order to reduce erosion, floods,
landslides, and runoff;
(7) Improving public access to, and enjoyment of, public lands
and open space;
(8) Acquiring public access to public land, and open space[];
(9) Conserving land for open space and scenic values."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2015\2015-521 05-06-2015 Bill No 2585 Open Space JY_JA_mn.docx
1
ATTACHMENT 2
(May 6, 2015)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2585, A Bill For An Ordinance Amending Chapter 6, Article 14, Kaua`i
County Code 1987, As Amended, Relating To The Public Access, Open Space,
Natural Resources Preservation Fund
Introduced by: MASON K. CHOCK
Amend SECTION 3 of Bill No. 2585, to read as follows:
"SECTION 3. Section 6-14.1 of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as
amended, is hereby amended by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
(a) In adopting each fiscal year's budget and capital program, the
Council shall appropriate a minimum of [one and one-half percent (1.5%)]
one-half of one percent (0.5%), in fiscal year 2015-2016 only, of the certified
real property tax revenues to a fund known as the public access, open space,
[and] natural resources preservation fund ("fund"). Thereafter, in adopting
each fiscal year's budget and capital program, the Council shall appropriate
to the fund a minimum of one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the certified real
property tax revenues. The moneys in this fund shall be utilized for
purchasing or otherwise acquiring lands or property entitlements for land
conservation purposes in the County of Kaua`i for the following purposes:
(1) Public outdoor recreation and education, including access
to beaches and mountains;
(2) Preservation of historic or culturally important land areas
and sites;
(3) Protection of significant habitats or ecosystems, including
buffer zones;
(4) Preserving forests, beaches, coastal areas and agricultural
lands;
(5) Protecting watershed lands to preserve water quality and
water supply;
(6) Conserving land in order to reduce erosion, floods,
landslides, and runoff;
(7) Improving public access to, and enjoyment of, public land
and open space;
(8) Acquiring public access to public land, and open space[.];
(9) Conserving land for open space and scenic values."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2015\05-06-2015 Bill No. 2585 Open Space MC JA_cy.docx
ATTACHMENT 3
(May 6, 2015)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Resolution No. 2015-43, Resolution Urging The Administration To Consider New
Technologies To Manage The County's Solid Waste Challenges
Introduced by: MASON K. CHOCK
1. Amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 1st paragraph to read as follows:
"WHEREAS, the County of Kaua`i ("County") is considering new and
innovative technologies that must be proven in scale appropriate to Kaua`i to
be considered to manage its solid waste challenges; and"
2. Amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 7th paragraph to read as follows:
"BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI,
STATE OF HAWAII, that it strongly urges the Administration to consider
deploying new innovative technologies and proven diversion activities in their
effort to solve our current solid waste challenges; and"
3. Amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 8th paragraph to read as follows:
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council urges the
Administration to consider technologies and partners who offer [dual]
maximum diversion activities as part of the solution to our solid waste
challenges; and"
4. Amend Resolution No. 2015-43, by amending the 9th paragraph to read as follows:
"BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Council urges the
Administration to consider technologies that provide for the maximum net
output or savings of [green] energy and minimize the destruction of non-
renewable materials that can continue to provide value as an item or as a
feedstock for years to come in any proposed solution; and"
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. Material to be added is underscored. The
amendments are intended to be incorporated into Resolution No. 2015-43, and are
not meant to amend any other portion of the Resolution.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2015\Resolution No 2015-43 Floor Amendment (MC) PM_dmc.docx
1