HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/18/2015 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
NOVEMBER 18, 2015
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to
order by Council Chair Mel Rapozo at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street,
Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, November 18, 2015 at 8:51 a.m., after
which the following Members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Mason K. Chock
Honorable Gary L. Hooser
Honorable Ross Kagawa
Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura
Honorable Mel Rapozo
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Councilmember Kagawa moved for approval of the agenda as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Due to some scheduling conflicts, we are
going to be taking up C 2015-287, C 2015-288, and C 2015-289 up front to
accommodate the Department of Public Works. I am sorry, did we approve the
minutes? Can we have an approval, please?
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
October 7, 2015 Council Meeting
October 21, 2015 Council Meeting
October 21, 2015 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2597 and Bill No. 2598
November 4, 2015 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2599 and Bill No. 2600
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve the Minutes as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Chock, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: As I prematurely stated, we are going to be
taking C 2015-287, C 2015-288, and C 2015-289 out of order to accommodate the
Department of Public Works scheduling conflicts. With that, Madame Clerk, can
we go to C 2015-287?
JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Yes. This is on page 3,
C 2015-287.
There being no objections, C 2015-287 was taken out of order.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2015-287 Communication (11/05/2015) from the County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend State of Hawai`i
Department of Transportation Safe Routes to School (HDOT-SRTS) program
COUNCIL MEETING 2 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
funding, which are federal funds provided by Section 1404 of the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),
as the HDOT is seeking applications to plan, develop, and implement eligible Safe
Routes to School projects: Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve C 2015-287,
seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Does anyone have any questions?
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we just get a brief summary?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. The rules are suspended with no
objections. Go ahead, Mr. Dill.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
LARRY DILL, P.E., County Engineer: Good morning. For the record,
Larry Dill, County Engineer. We did give a pretty good write-up in the package to
you, but we also brought along a PowerPoint today to give you a better idea
specifically where these projects are at and a better description of the program and
how it works. We have been successful in the pass in acquiring these funds to do
some important projects, especially to assist kids in traveling to school, biking and
walking, and we are moving in those lines again to get more funds from outside of
the County to do more of that type of work. I will allow Lee, our County
Transportation Planner, to run through the presentation with you and give you a
better description of what we are looking for.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Chair, I think the normal process is that we
do lengthy presentations in Committee, so I do not know what the timing aspect of
this is.
Council Chair Rapozo: I was just going to ask how long this
presentation is because if it is going to be a lengthy presentation that entails a lot of
questions from Councilmembers, then I would ask that this be referred to the
Committee because we have a pretty jam-packed agenda today. How long is the
presentation?
LEE STEINMETZ, Transportation Planner: Lee Steinmetz, Transportation
Planner with the Planning Department. There are about twenty (20) slides. It is
your discretion whether you want to see the PowerPoint. If you would like me to
just give a brief description based on the Council transmittal, I would be happy to
do that, and then you can decide from there.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. I just do not want to spend a lot of time
at the Council Meetings on this, but I do want to make sure that the
Councilmembers are satisfied. I did read what came with the packet and basically I
am ready to support it. If Councilmembers have any questions, please feel free to
ask. If it is a twenty (20) plus slide presentation, then we will definitely do that in
Committee. It is the call of the Council.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would just like a brief verbal description of
what this covers, if you do not mind, and the public will appreciate it also.
COUNCIL MEETING 3 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Steinmetz: Sure. I would be happy to do that. Again,
Lee Steinmetz, Transportation Planner with the Planning Department. First of all,
just to give you a brief overview of this program, these are federal funds that go
through Hawai`i Department of Transportation (HDOT). It is part of the old Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users
(SAFETEA-LU) program, which has been replaced by Map-21. The way it is set up
is the maximum amount of any one application is five hundred thousand dollars
($500,000) and there is no local match required. Anyway, that is a significant
aspect and advantage of this particular grant program. This ties into some grants
that we did previously a couple of years ago that we were awarded. Let me just talk
about the ones that we are doing this year, which is at the end of your Council
transmittal. The first one is King Kaumuali`i Elementary School Phase II. We
were awarded a Phase I in the last round of grant applications. This is to really
kind of complete both ends of what we did in Phase I. For example, we are putting
a sidewalk or pedestrian walkway on Hana Street, which is part of their safe route
that they use when they are doing walk to school days. We are going to extend that
over to the highway at Laukona Street just to complete that end. On the other end,
we are doing improvements on Hanama`ulu Road in front of the school. We will be
extending those in the makai direction, going further down Hanama`ulu Road,
which will then extend to the new development that is going to be going on and they
will be constructing a sidewalk on their extension of Hanama`ulu Road, so now we
will have a sidewalk all the way on Hanama`ulu Road coming from both directions
to the school. That is kind of a gap-filler project.
At Kalaheo Elementary School—first of all, I should say on Phase I, we are
putting in a rapid rectangular flashing beacon crosswalk, one of the flashing light
crosswalks, at the intersection of Papalina Road and Pu`u Road. That is an
important pedestrian crossing for kids trying to get to Kalaheo School. In this
phase, there is an existing sidewalk on Pu`u Road, but it is not in very good shape.
There are not very good crossings. There are private roads and public roads, so we
will be improving all of those crossings. We will be improving that sidewalk, which
is kind of falling apart, all the way from Papalina Road on Pu`u Road to the school.
In addition to that, Hokua Road is a side street that is near the school that goes to
the highway and people have requested another place, kind of a remote drop off,
remote park and walk location, so not everyone has to drive to the school. We are
going to be constructing sidewalks on one side of that road and that will serve as a
remote park and walk that is pretty close to the school and has easy access to the
highway.
At Kilauea Elementary School, the primary concern of the school there is
behind the school where there is Kamali`i Street and Momi Street. The official
drop-off is in front of the school, but a lot of parents still come and drop-off in the
back of the school, which creates a problem because a lot of kids walk. That is the
major walking route for kids within the neighborhood. What we are proposing are
some improvements to those streets. Some are just painting a line, which creates a
pedestrian and bikeway on the existing road without building a sidewalk, and then
another location on Momi Street actually building a sidewalk while protecting the
swale that is there and maintaining all existing on-street parking in the swale so
that we are not losing parking. Basically, what we are doing is improving what is
currently a route to school and also discouraging drop-off in the back of the school.
At `Ele`ele Elementary School, there is Laulea Street, which comes from the
park that is behind the school and then connects to the highway. There is an
existing sidewalk on that street, but it is pretty narrow. So what we are doing is
COUNCIL MEETING 4 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
proposing to widen that sidewalk, going over from the park to the highway so that
that could be used both by bicyclists and pedestrians, so we would make it eight (8)
feet wide instead of four (4) to five (5) feet wide right now. This also ties into other
projects, so HDOT actually has a project to improve the intersection of Laulea and
the highway that will include improved pedestrian crossings, a signal so kids can
walk without waiting...so that is a signalized control intersection instead of cars
stopping at the crosswalk. It includes bus shelters as well. On the other side of the
highway are existing State housing and the Habitat for Humanity project, and
possibly in the future the Lima Ola project, so we will have improved access to the
school that will serve those projects as well. That is kind of linked to other
improvements that are planned, in terms of pedestrian improvements on the other
side of the highway as well. Within the park, there is a narrow sidewalk right now,
so we would widen that to be wide enough for kids to be able to bike or walk, so that
becomes a continuous route from the highway all the way to the school for both
bikes and pedestrians.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. I have a quick question. Are you
going to be applying applications for each project or is it one (1) application?
Mr. Steinmetz: Each project will be a separate application.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, so you are asking to submit
applications for these four (4) separate projects, which each project can get us five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) each total funding? Do you believe we can do
these projects with that money with no additional funds?
Mr. Steinmetz: Yes. We are still working on our cost
estimates and finalizing them. If one of them exceeds five hundred thousand
dollars ($500,000) when we do the estimate, we have a choice before we apply to
either reduce that scope or divide that into two (2) projects and actually submit
two (2) applications that are each below five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So we are applying for a total of two million
dollars ($2,000,000).
Mr. Steinmetz: We have not finalized the cost estimates, so
assuming that each of those projects are five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000)
or less, the total will be two million dollars ($2,000,000) or less, but we do not know
the full amount yet.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. You mentioned bus shelters that are
part of the `Ele`ele Safe Routes to School. Are they going to be built for school buses
or are we coordinating with our bus shelter program?
Mr. Steinmetz: Sorry, that is not part of the Safe Routes to
School application. That is a separate project that HDOT received funding for to do
intersection improvements, and that is for the Kaua`i Bus. The bus shelters really
are not part of this. I was just trying to describe what the HDOT project includes.
Councilmember Yukimura: I see. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 5 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? If not, thank you very
much.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have one more question. You cited statistics
in your third paragraph of the background. Do you have any local statistics?
Mr. Steinmetz: I do not have them with me today, but we
are taking statistics locally. Every year, we do a survey with each school that
participates in our program, so we do have local statistics as well.
Councilmember Yukimura: Do you know how many people are walking
to school or being transported in cars at each school? Are you getting some baseline
data?
Mr. Steinmetz: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can you provide that to us?
Mr. Steinmetz: Sure.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone in the audience wishing
to testify? Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: For the record, Glenn Mickens. Would it be
possible to be able to put a yellow flashing light near Kapa'a Middle School. Right
now, the speed limit says "15 MPH When Children Are Present." What does that
mean? Only when you can see the kids? When they are in class? It is confusing to
the public. They put these speed traps out there. There is a big fine for going over
fifteen miles per hour (15 MPH), but anytime the light is flashing, say school is in
session, that is when it is fifteen miles per hour (15 MPH), not only when children
are present, which means absolutely nothing. You look around and there are no
children present, which means now you go twenty-five to thirty miles per
hour (25-30 MPH) by the school. I do not think so. If they had that yellow light
flashing, it would be clear when the speed limit is fifteen miles per hour (15 MPH).
When the light is not flashing, it is not. It seems like that would be obvious, but I
never heard these guys talk about that particular thing. Anyway, that is my
opinion. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else?
JOE ROSA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Rosa. I
agree with what Glenn said because in Honolulu on School Street, there is a school
there and I told that long before to the highway system in Kekaha and wherever
they have schools to put flashing lights. It can easily be done. There are ways of
doing things, but somehow, "Oh, we have to look for funding." They should have a
contingency fund there that they could do things instantly, not waiting for the
Legislature for a couple thousands of dollars. Again, the signs used to say, the ones
in Honolulu, "When Lights Are Flashing — 15 MPH." Then the school would knock
it off or somebody would knock it off about 8:30 a.m. or so and it would go back to
twenty-five miles per hour (25 MPH). There are things that can be done today.
There are so much electronic things that can be programmed and taken care of.
Why not do things as such? Also, if you are going to walk to school, everybody
COUNCIL MEETING 6 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
walks. I walked eight (8) years from the old Lihu`e Theater to where the
Department of Water is now. We used to go to school rain or shine and we walked.
We did not have our parents to take us to Lihu`e Grammar School where the
Department of Water is. We walked and we were nice, slim kids. There were no
obese kids. We had our exercise. If you are going to stress something, do not worry
about the buses. People can walk. We were not late and we had good physical
bodies. Like I said, we were not obese like the big, fat kids that just sit down and
ride from Molokoa to Wilcox Elementary School. I see that in the morning. It is
crazy. If you put emphasis on walking, you walk. From 1939, seventy-six (76) years
these sidewalks were here and it is not even filled the way the kids used to walk
from Camp A, going down to Lihu`e Grammar School. If you are going to stress
something, stress walking, not riding the bus. The bus is going to cause trouble to
all the kids around. Who is going to be afforded to pay all of those buses? I know I
had to pay the bus to go from Lihu`e to Kaua`i High School. Have better input and
not just pushing things like the bus. Honolulu is getting rid of buses. They are
going to have electric buses. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? If not, I am calling the meeting
back to order. Further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: I wholeheartedly support this project and I
want to thank the people who worked so hard on creating safe routes to school. The
whole theory behind the Built Environment Committee is that we would create our
built environment in such a way that it is safe to walk and bike in the normal
course of our lives like walking to work or biking to school. With these projects, it
will be safe to walk to school. I concur with Joe Rosa that just being able to walk
every day is what will keep our population and our kids fit and healthy. It is a
wonderful thing. It meets many goals. I think there is even research that shows
that kids do better academically if they have exercise before they study and learn.
It is a very good project and to not have to do any match means that we get all the
money that we need to do the project and we do not have to put up our local
resources. It is a wonderful thing and thank you to those who worked on this like
Lee, Larry, and Bev.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I, of course, support this as well. I just
wanted to make the point that even with our grant request, we need to be mindful
of the difference between "need to have" and "nice to have." I think that some of the
improvements here in this immediate town center is "nice to have" and that some of
these improvements for our children at the schools is more "need to have." The
priority of putting the "need to have" first...I think we need to be constantly be
working on that and thinking about that, because with the grants, there are no
guarantees, too. We need to get the ones that we really need first, and then move
for the things that are nice to have. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. As a follow-up, I would just ask
that we be realistic in the estimates so that we do not commit to this grant, get the
funding, and then have to come to Council later and say, "Hey, our estimates were
too low, so now we need another one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000) to
COUNCIL MEETING 7 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
complete this project." Let us be realistic and if we cannot do it within the five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), then we cannot do it within the five hundred
thousand dollars ($500,000). I just cannot support anymore additional funds. As
Councilmember Kuali`i said, let us do what we need to do. These projects as I see
on this report are great projects that I believe are needed, so just make sure we get
realistic estimates. Staff, Mr. Mickens made a request about the flashing lights at
crosswalks and school zones. I am not sure if we do that, but I agree that "when
kids are present," I am not sure what the means. "Present" in my mind means that
you can see them, but let us work on that and figure out a way. When lights are
flashing then there is no dispute, but with that other sign, I am not sure. That sign
has been around forever, but let us figure out a way we can do that. Thank you,
Mr. Mickens. Let us go to the next item, please.
The motion to approve C 2015-287 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next item is C 2015-288.
There being no objections, C 2015-288 was taken out of order.
C 2015-288 Communication (11/06/2015) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council consideration, an amendment to Ordinance
No. B-2015-797, as amended, relating to the Capital Budget of the County of Kaua`i
for the Fiscal Year 2015-2016, by revising the amounts estimated in the
Development Fund CIP to establish the project "Koloa/Po`ipu Intersection
Improvements," as identified as condition #24 in Use Permit U-2005-32, Class IV
Zoning Permit Z-IV-2005-38 for Po`ipu Realty Partners, LLC, and Kiahuna Mauka
Partners, which was approved by the Planning Commission at its meeting held on
December 19, 2005. (Koloa/Po`ipu Intersection Improvements, Po`ipu Realty
Partners, LLC— $41,000): Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2015-288 for
the record, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I would say that if there is a lengthy
discussion or presentation that needs to be made before we feel satisfied to approve
this, then I would say that this should go to Committee.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. We will have the Bill up this
afternoon and it will definitely go through the process. If there are any burning
questions, the Department of Public Works will not be here this afternoon.
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. The rules are suspended with no
objections. Again, this is a first reading Bill, so we will have an opportunity to have
the discussions in the Committee. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: This is pursuant to a Planning Commission
condition, right? It says, "Kiahuna Mauka Partners shall work with this County
Council to establish a community facilities district to be applied to traffic
improvements for intersections within the Koloa/Po`ipu area only." Is this one in
which this is going to be our final appropriation, and then you will not be coming
back to us with specific projects and specific appropriations?
COUNCIL MEETING 8 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KEN M. SHIMONISHI, Director of Finance: Ken Shimonishi, Director of
Finance. That is correct. The exaction on this permit is similar to what was
previously passed for another developer, which requires the developer to pay this
two hundred fifty dollars ($250) per unit based upon sale occupancy, etcetera. What
we are asking for is approval of the project in its entirety; however, appropriations
will be based only upon the receipt of payments so that we do not get ahead of
ourselves. This forty-one thousand dollars ($41,000) is what the total project is
estimated to bring in, in terms of exactions. Yes, we are asking for approval of the
total project.
Councilmember Yukimura: What did you say the total amount is
projected to be? Forty-one thousand dollars ($41,000)?
Mr. Shimonishi: Forty-one thousand dollars ($41,000) on this
particular exaction item.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. It says "apply to traffic improvements
for intersections within the Koloa/Po`ipu area." So the Council will not be involved
in setting priorities like we did with the Community Facilities District (CFD) in
Kukui`ula. We did specify which projects we wanted it to be spent on.
Mr. Steinmetz: Good morning. Lee Steinmetz,
Transportation Planner with the Planning Department. We have been working
with the Department of Public Works on this as well and as you may recall, we did
a Po`ipu Road Design Charrette a couple of years ago, which was a community
planning process to decide what Po`ipu Road might look like in the future from all
the way through Koloa Town and over to the Grand Hyatt Kaua`i Resort and Spa.
Now that project has been put on the State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP). We are currently in more detailed planning and environmental clearances
and engineering for that project, and will be working through that and going into
construction following that. That is all based on the community design charrette
and that includes several intersection improvements like pedestrian crossing
improvements, a roundabout at Kiahuna Plantation Drive, and roundabout at the
eastern bypass. What we are proposing to do with these funds is use...the STIP is
twenty percent (20%) local funds and eighty percent (80%) federal funds, so what we
are planning to do when we get to the point of construction is use these funds as
part of our local match, which would be consistent with the intersection
improvement language, but also help us with our local match towards completing
the Po`ipu Road project.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, then why do we not say that in the
Bill? Do we say that it shall be used for the Po`ipu Road intersection?
Mr. Steinmetz: I think what is in the Bill currently is based
on the language of the Planning Commission condition, which is intersections
within Po`ipu and Koloa area.
Councilmember Yukimura: I know, but that is very general and I would
personally prefer to make sure that it is spent for what you are saying is going to be
spent for. We are not tied to the Planning Commission language. I feel much more
comfortable saying that it will be part of the match for the Po`ipu Road because that
COUNCIL MEETING 9 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
is a priority and you are doing designs on it already. If it is specified for that, then
we are part of setting the priority. I do not disagree with what you are saying, but I
would like to tie it down in the appropriation bill for that purpose.
Council Chair Rapozo: I have a lot of questions and I will just ask
Staff to figure out if there is a way that we can do the Committee Meeting before
the public hearing. Right now, this is just an appropriation money bill and I am
reading the communication that talk about the CFD. Are they going to pursue a
CFD? Is that something that the developer is going to pursue?
Councilmember Yukimura: That is a huge effort.
Council Chair Rapozo: I guess I do not understand. We are talking
about transferring the money for these projects, but yet the communication says
that Kiahuna Mauka Partners shall work with us on the CFD, which we all know is
a very long and intense process. Rather than just send this money bill to a public
hearing, I would like to have a lot of questions about the CFD process before we go
to a public hearing. I am checking with Staff if that is even possible. All this talks
about is taking money from the Assigned Fund Balance and moving it to an
account, but I do not want to spend today talking about the details because this is
not where it belongs. I am just curious. Are we going to pursue a CFD?
Mr. Shimonishi: I think we have to follow-up on that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Shimonishi: We were just trying to get the mechanism in
place to accept these funds as they were starting to be paid by the developer.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
Mr. Dill: For the record, Larry Dill, County Engineer.
My understanding of this project is that there is no intent to pursue a community
facilities district for this point because we are doing what is consistent with the
exaction that was given to the developer and using it in the manner that was
established by that condition of approval. Our request, as was mentioned today,
was that we be allowed to put those into a fund that we could use that towards the
purpose that was identified in that community design charrette. I would be open to
what Councilmember Yukimura suggested, which we tie it down to be consistent
and ensure those funds are used in that manner. Today, we just wanted to allocate
them into a fund identified for that purpose, and then when we identified that
Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) for construction, then we can access those
funds for that purpose. I agree with you; you are correct. A CFD would be a long
and arduous process that I do not think was the intent when that exaction was
established.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: It does not appear that a CFD is necessary
and given the amount of work, time, and money that a CFD requires, why should
we do it if it is not necessary to achieve and accomplish? I think somebody should
go back to the Planning Commission and amend the condition so that it is clear,
that we proceed to do this Bill, but make it clear where the moneys will be spent
and not just any intersection in Koloa/Po`ipu.
COUNCIL MEETING 10 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you for the clarification, Larry,
because that makes me more at ease. I would agree that it is kind of ridiculous to
go through a CFD for that kind of project, but I would assume that there is going to
be further developments that they are going to need going forward that they may
consider doing the CFD process. But for right now, I think you are just looking for
the placeholder where we can hold the funds so we can utilize.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. We are okay. Let us just do that and
get it to a public hearing so it can go to Committee. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask that maybe our Staff
work with the Finance Department and the Department of Public Works to create
an amendment for the appropriation bill when it comes before us.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone from the
public who would like to testify on this item? Mr. Mickens.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you. For the record, Glenn Mickens.
Let us not keep talking about federal funds as "free money" like matching funds.
Whether it is federal, state, or local, it is our tax money and it should be treated as
such. Any money should be used on a prioritized basis. If it is needed, then okay. I
do not care whether it came from the federal government or not, if it comes out of
this pocket or the other pocket. When we keep on saying that it is "free money," we
are getting it from the federal government...
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Mickens, let me just clarify real quick.
This is not a grant. This is developer money.
Mr. Mickens: It is not a grant?
Council Chair Rapozo: No, it is not a grant or federal money. This
is developer money that was based on the condition of the zoning. It is not a grant.
Mr. Mickens: Okay. I guess it was on the other issue when
they kept on talking about it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, we need to stick to this issue.
Mr. Mickens: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? If not, I will call the meeting
back to order. Further discussion? If not, next item, please.
The motion to receive C 2015-288 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next item is on page 4, C 2015-289.
There being no objections, C 2015-289 was taken out of order.
COUNCIL MEETING 11 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
C 2015-289 Communication (11/06/2015) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council consideration, an amendment to Ordinance
No. B-2015-797, as amended, relating to the Capital Budget of the County of Kaua`i
for the Fiscal Year 2015-2016, by revising the amounts estimated in the
Development Fund CIP to establish the project "Koloa/Po`ipu Intersection
Improvements," as identified as condition #24 in Use Permit U-2006-10, Project
Development Use Permit P.D. U-2006-11, Class IV Zoning Permit Z-IV-2006-13 for
Kiahuna Fairways, LLC, and Kiahuna Mauka Partners, which was approved by the
Planning Commission at its meeting held on March 17, 2006. (Koloa/Poipu
Intersection Improvements, Kiahuna Fairways, LLC— $47,750) : Councilmember
Kagawa moved to receive C 2015-289 for the record, seconded by Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? This is
similar to the previous item.
The motion to receive C 2015-289 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Does anyone have any questions on item
C 2015-285? When we last approved this, it was a request for funding for a
one-year period. That was an error. It was actually a two-year grant period, so this
is a technical fix. We have asked the questions. I do not want to keep them here if
we do not have to. This is just really correcting what we approved from a one-year
term to a two-year term. Are there any questions for the Prosecutor's Office? If not,
thank you very much. Can we have the item read, please?
There being no objections, C 2015-285 was taken out of order.
C 2015-285 Communication (10/30/2015) from the Prosecuting Attorney,
requesting Council approval to correctly reflect State contract amounts and time
frames from agenda items (C 2015-152, May 19, 2015 Council Meeting and
C 2015-265, October 21, 2015 Council Meeting) as follows:
1. Apply for, receive, and expend state funds, in the total
amount of up to $74,434, to fund one (1) Victim / Witness
Trainee for the period of July 1, 2015 to September 1, 2015,
one (1) Victim / Witness Counselor I for the period of
September 2, 2015 to September 15, 2015, and one (1) Victim
/ Witness Trainee for the period of January 1, 2016 to
June 30, 2017, and fringe benefits, for the Kaua`i Victim
Witness Assistance Program 16-VW-03 Year 1 and Year 2,
for the term July 1, 2015 through June 30, 2017; and
2. To receive and expend State funds in the total amount of up
to $222,628, for the period of July 1, 2015 through
June 30, 2017, for the continuation of the Kaua`i Career
Criminal Prosecution Program. The funding will be
expended on the salary and partial fringe benefits for the
Special Prosecuting Attorney of the Career Criminal
Prosecution staff; and
3. Indemnify the State of Hawai`i Department of the Attorney
General for the aforementioned program grants.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-285, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion? Public
testimony? If not, next item, please.
The motion to approve C 2015-285 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Likewise, we have the Police here. Are there
any questions for C 2015-286?
Councilmember Yukimura: I do.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry, for C 2015-284, not C 2015-286.
Council Chair Rapozo: C 2015-284 was for the Fire Department. Do
we have questions for C 2015-284?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: What about C 2015-286?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, then let us go back to the agenda.
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Before we start, I can foresee that there is
going to be some discussion on the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center on
C 2015-278, so if we can clear out the Police and Fire Department, I think they have
more important things to do than to listen to us discuss that item and I want to see
them working instead of sitting here.
Council Chair Rapozo: So do I. I cannot envision much discussion
on C 2015-278 because we have had the discussion already.
Councilmember Kagawa: Actually, I do foresee because there is an
amendment that has been proposed by one Councilmember.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. With that, let us do that and take up
C 2015-284.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this is on page 2, C 2015-284.
There being no objections, C 2015-284 was taken out of order.
C 2015-284 Communication (10/21/2015) from the Fire Chief, requesting
Council approval to accept a donation of eleven (11) APX 7000XE portable radios,
valued at eighty-four thousand dollars ($84,000), from Motorola Solutions, Inc., in
honor of Kaua`i Fire Department's 2010 and 2014 Benjamin Franklin Fire Service
Awards for Valor, which will be used to enhance the communication ability of the
COUNCIL MEETING 13 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Kaua`i Fire Department: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-284 with
a thank-you letter to follow, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Can we have the Fire
Department up, please? I will suspend the rules with no objections.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KILIPAKI VAUGHAN, Lieutenant: Good morning Councilmembers.
Kilipaki Vaughan, Lieutenant for the Kaua`i Fire Department (KFD).
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning, Lieutenant. Thank you for
being here. I think I have an easy question. This is a wonderful gift, eighty-four
thousand dollars ($84,000) worth of portable radios in recognition of amazing
performance by the Kaua`i Fire Department. My only question is whether these
Motorola radios fit easily into the arrangement of communication that we already
have and that there is not going to be any problems with the interfacing of these
radios. We already hopefully have these kinds of radios and they are just additions.
Mr. Vaughan: For the record again, yes. These
APX 7000XE are P-25 compliant, fully interoperable with all of our communications
and operations that are out there right now.
Councilmember Yukimura: Do we know how to repair them? Is there a
difference in how we repair the others that we have?
Mr. Vaughan: There will be no difference. They are
actually very compatible with the other grant Motorola radio equipment that we
received under Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG) from the previous year, so
we are really expanding our cash.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right, wonderful to hear.
Mr. Vaughan: Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have a quick question. Kilipaki, thank you
for being here and for getting this donation. Is it all brand new radios?
Mr. Vaughan: Yes, these are all brand new radios.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any public testimony on this
item? If not, I will call the meeting back to order. Further discussion? Let us go to
the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) item now.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 14 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
The motion to approve C 2015-284 with a thank-you letter to follow was then
put, and unanimously carried.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this is on page 3, C 2015-286.
C 2015-286 Communication (11/04/2015) from the Chief of Police, requesting
Council approval to receive and expend funds from the State of Hawai`i Enhanced
911 (E-911) Board, pursuant to Section 138-5, Hawai`i Revised Statutes, for the
following:
• Non-recurring funding, estimated in the amount of
$2,300,000, for next generation Public Safety Answering
Point (PSAP) software suite which includes integrated
Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD), Computer Aided Mobile
(Mobile), Records Management System (RMS), and
associated necessary hardware and software.
• Estimated recurring costs associated with the PSAP:, which
includes Master Street Address Guide (MSAG), Imagery
License Agreement, CAD Maintenance, Trunk Charges
(Primary and Alternate PSAP), Long Distance, Text to 911
Service Charges, and Alternate PSAP Call Routing Services
for the following fiscal years (FY):
• FY 2016 - $755,729
• FY 2017 - $760,517
• FY 2018 - $941,704
• FY 2019 - $953,698
• FY 2020 - $953,698
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-286, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, can you give us a
brief overview of what this is all about, and then we can open it up for questions.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ROBERT GAUSEPOHL, Assistant Chief: Good morning, Robert
Gausepohl for the record. Basically, through Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS)
Section 138, we are able to seek funds from the E-911 Board to maintain these
items that were mentioned. We are seeking now to update our Computer Aided
Dispatch (CAD), Computer Aided Mobile (Mobile), and Records Management
System (RMS) system, which is in dire need of being updated.
Council Chair Rapozo: The E-911 fund comes from everyone who
has a phone and they take out that charge every month on your bill that goes into a
fund that law enforcement can...
Mr. Gausepohl: There is a surcharge on users. There are
some exemptions, but most users need to...they are going to pay a surcharge.
Basically, it is pay per use. If you are going to use this service, which is quite
complex, there is an automatic number identification and automatic location
COUNCIL MEETING 15 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
identification, so if someone is in trouble and all they can do is dial 911, we want to
be able to get the appropriate people to help.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further questions?
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So are we paying these estimated recurring
costs or is the fund paying?
Mr. Gausepohl: No, the fund reimburses us for these costs.
They are directly related to maintaining the Enhanced 911, so they would pay those
recurring costs that are listed in the request.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. The reimbursement process is pretty
quick. We do not have to be concerned about extending.
Mr. Gausepohl: No, the fund has quite a high ceiling and
quite a bit of revenue.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so you say it is for an upgrade and we
have talked offline about this, and I am very grateful for the thought, research, and
quality of thinking that has gone into this system. In fact, this is not just an
upgrade; it is actually a replacement of things we have already paid for.
Mr. Gausepohl: Well, yes and no. We have not paid for it.
The E-911 board paid for it. This is the dated system. Any software system that is
four (4) or five (5) years old, we are going to have problems with. Unfortunately,
there have been some problems with the existing vendor in support and we have
this fantastic opportunity to move to a vendor that does support the software and
they do four (4) free updates annually and they have never charged in their twenty
(20) year history.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is not County moneys, but it is money from
the public who use cell phones, and not just cell phones, right?
Mr. Gausepohl: It is a user fee for people that use them.
Councilmember Yukimura: All phones; all communication systems.
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: From what I understand, it is not just an
upgrade, the system that we had, and we paid one million dollars ($1,000,000) for,
never really worked.
Mr. Gausepohl: Well, it is working...we are not able to do the
things that we need to do with this system.
Councilmember Yukimura: Then it is not working.
Mr. Gausepohl: Well, technically it is working, but not as
well as we would like to be able to serve the public and community much better
than this system is allowing us to do.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I am going to vote for this, but I do
want to request another item on the agenda because it is about millions of dollars
that have been spent and it is not by these two (2) officers, who I feel are exemplary,
but it is about how we spend our public's money. I would like to understand what
went wrong in order that we not repeat the errors and put safeguards into place. I
think we need to have Information Technology (IT) and the County Attorneys here.
So that would be another agenda item, but not to distract at this point from the
matter before us.
Mr. Gausepohl: Just a little background, we had Brandon
Raines, the head of IT, over at our department for six (6) months straight, full-time.
We have been in constant contact with IT. What we are doing and what we have
tried to do to make this system work is all with IT's approval and understanding.
We would not dare to think that we could do it on our own.
Councilmember Yukimura: But I think the previous Administration did.
I do not know how much communication and work in terms of interface and that
kind of thing was done. I understand that IT has been involved like it should have
been previously, but in your case, this proposal is coming out of a very well-thought
out, integrated process. Thank you for that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have a similar type of question. How do we
stack up statewide, as far as the other islands like Maui, O`ahu, and Hawai`i island
as far as their 911 capabilities, like you said a 911 call comes in and the system
knows where that call is coming from.
Mr. Gausepohl: Actually, very, very well. The State board
has pretty much brought all the counties together and we are all in the same boat
as far as those services that you are talking about. We contract with Hawaiian
Telcom, who subs with Intrado Inc., which is a nationally known company for those
types of services. We also have pictometry and Akimeka, LLC, does the Master
Street Address Guide (MSAG), which is extremely detailed and very good. For what
you said in how we stack up, before we had any funding or anything else, we did a
study on if this system was the best we could do or is there something else out there
better? The conclusion we came up with is the same company, same vendor, that
Hawai`i island just went into contract with. That will be half the counties in the
State that are on the same vendor if we are able to move forward.
Councilmember Kagawa: My second question was that part of the
problem was that the previous vendor did not offer that service that we had hoped
for, so I am wondering because you said earlier that the new vendor, you feel like,
will give us better service and therefore would lead to a better system regarding
911. What gives you that confidence? Just being that they service Hawai`i island or
do they have a proven track record?
Mr. Gausepohl: We did a lot of research. Unfortunately with
the vendor we picked initially, they got bought out by another company one (1)
month into implementation. That is never a good scenario because they are going to
try to develop their own system. That is why I do not think we go the support. I am
not going to throw any vendors or people under the bus. I think a lot of work was
done upfront on the initial vendor that we picked; however, circumstances beyond
anybody's control, they got acquired by a larger company. Since then, that company
COUNCIL MEETING 17 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
is now part of Insight, which is an international conglomerate of software, so I think
there are problems there that I am not sure their commitment to public safety is
what it was when the initial people did their research. However with this company,
it is privately held and there are no stockholders they have to answer to. Our
research and Hawaii island's research was comprehensive and we both come to the
same conclusions independently led us to believe that there is a great deal of
confidence that we are making the right move.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Mr. Gausepohl: No software is perfect, as we all know. We
all work with software and none of it is perfect. But we are quite confident that this
is the best we can do.
Councilmember Kagawa: I think from our standpoint here on the
Council is that we want you to make the best decision possible so that our residents
have the maximum safety out there and we want you folks to use things like track
record and stuff when you are picking these types of vendors. Mahalo.
Mr. Gausepohl: The system we have in place now is working;
it is just slow and difficult. It is not integrated the way this new system is. In
other words, the components are not on one platform; they are on separate
platforms. IT has been very innovative and has actually created a workaround that
helps us greatly. Stacy and David went to their conference and they were actually
mentioning how the work that we have done with them they felt has helped them
innovate and make their product better. It is a very difficult situation. I do not
think there is anything to blame in the past and think it is a good idea just to move
forward. The board pretty much understands what is going on. It is very difficult
with software vendors.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So you said that the previous vendor did not
offer the service we need. Did we ask for the kind of service we needed in terms of
speed and response, etcetera?
Mr. Gausepohl: To me, it is impossible to do that to say that
you have to perform at this level. I do not know. I cannot honestly say that I know.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I hope you are going to have some
performance standards in procuring this software.
Mr. Gausepohl: Absolutely.
Councilmember Yukimura: The other question is did we have a contract
that made payment contingent on performance so that when there was not
performance, we did not have to pay for it?
Mr. Gausepohl: I believe we did, but we might have got
misled in what was happening.
COUNCIL MEETING 18 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, our performance contract has to make
sure that we do not get misled.
Mr. Gausepohl: It does.
Councilmember Yukimura: If you say, "We expect this performance and
if you do not perform it, we do not pay," then whether we are misled or not...
Mr. Gausepohl: That is built-in to the contract. There are
payment milestones based on their performance. They have to perform, and then
we are going to pay them.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are there clear performance standards?
Mr. Gausepohl: Absolutely clear. There is no question about
it. "If you do not meet this milestone, you do not get this payment."
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Gausepohl: We have been working with the County
Attorney in creating a document.
Councilmember Yukimura: Very good.
Mr. Gausepohl: We do not want to repeat these mistakes. I
do not want this to be my legacy that I screwed this up, so we are being very, very
careful and thorough.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I appreciate that, but that is the same
reason why I am asking the questions I am asking.
Mr. Gausepohl: I understand.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Mr. Gausepohl: It was an unfortunate set of circumstances
that led to where we are at now.
Councilmember Yukimura: It was a very expensive set or circumstances
of public moneys.
Mr. Gausepohl: We are using the product. Is it the best
product for us? Is it the most advantageous? To get information out of this product
is extremely difficult. When we get a request from anybody for statistical data, it
takes Stacy hours and hours of work to get that information, where this new
product...we have seen it working. They have gone into a PSAP that is operating it,
where the Kaua`i Police Department is operating it, they have gone to their
headquarters, and it is a far superior product.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, that is very excellent. It says to me
that the previous system was not working and not meeting our needs. I would like
to ask for a copy of the previous contract and the amount of money spent on the
system. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 19 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Gausepohl: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Sorry if I missed this earlier, but our current
system is getting paid through this E-911.
Mr. Gausepohl: That is correct, Enhanced 911.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: In the future, it looks like we have funding
for five (5) years, but eventually at that time, we may need to upgrade the system
again and we probably have a...
Mr. Gausepohl: No, there are free upgrades with this system.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Okay.
Mr. Gausepohl: In their twenty (20) year history, they have
never charged for an upgrade. That is one of the big advantages to go with this.
With the current vendor, we could probably upgrade, but it is difficult to trust that
that upgrade is going to satisfy our needs.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Typically, the E-911 funds are going to pay
for the recurring costs in the future, too.
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, that is built into the recurring costs for
the system as well.
Council Chair Rapozo: I was going to say that nothing is free.
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: What assures us that this new vendor is
going to comply? I am sure that when we had the discussions with the old vendor,
they made a bunch of promises as well. The first question is what assurances do we
have from this vendor that when they are done with the upgrade, replacement, or
whatever you want to call it, that this system will be compatible and interfaces will
work?
Mr. Gausepohl: Well, there are payment milestones, so they
do not get paid unless they perform.
Council Chair Rapozo: I understand, but the fact that they do not
get paid, will our system work? That is my concern. I am concerned about the
money, too, but I am more concerned that when somebody dials 911, your phone
rings.
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, that component of it will maintain. The
PSAP duties are beyond just 911 answering. You have to send it out to Mobile,
communication with police officers, and run criminal history checks, and everything
else that is involved.
Council Chair Rapozo: That right now, you are saying, is not
connected, so you have to do different...
COUNCIL MEETING 20 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Gausepohl: It works in the PSAP, but it does not work in
the Mobile environment, which means that it is not optimal and not working the
way we feel it should.
Council Chair Rapozo: The other question is did the prior vendor or
previous breach a contract?
Mr. Gausepohl: No.
Council Chair Rapozo: So we did not agree to upgrade...you are
saying that they did not do some of the things that we thought they would do.
Mr. Gausepohl: It does not work the way we believe that it
should work, but by the letter of the contract, it is going to be very difficult to...we
would have to take them to court.
Council Chair Rapozo: I understand. I am just saying that if there
is no breach, then we have to do better with the contract.
Mr. Gausepohl: In talking to the County Attorney and
talking to Brandon Raines, we would be in a long drawn out legal battle that would
involve our resources and there is no guarantee that we would win.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: The contract can be written in a way that it
is easy for us to recover costs. They talk about liquidated damages and so forth, so
hopefully this new contract will be done in that way so that if we need to have
recourse, we can get it pretty easily.
Mr. Gausepohl: Sure. That is all built into the contract.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Gausepohl: The County Attorney is deeply involved and
their attorney is involved.
Council Chair Rapozo: The County Attorneys drafted the last one,
too, so we have to make sure that we tighten up those pukas. We learned from the
last contract that we can come up with a much better one.
Mr. Gausepohl: We are not going to make that same mistake
again.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is all I am suggesting.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, it may have been a different county
attorney even though it was the same office. This is, as you pointed out, not just
about 911 responses, but it is about records management. I sent a letter to the
Chief recently asking him for the statistics to back up his statements about how
many criminal cases had been sent to the Prosecuting Attorney, but not resulted in
convictions or plea agreements that took care of the problem for the community. He
told me that the Records Management System (RMS) did not give him the kind of
COUNCIL MEETING 21 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
statistics that I was asking for. If this system goes into place—those are key
statistics, right? Will we be able to get those statistics with this new system?
Mr. Gausepohl: I think the Prosecuting Attorney would have
a better grasp on the statistics that you are talking about, what they received and
what they...
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, but the records management system
hopefully includes or is interfaced with the Prosecuting Attorney's cases as well.
Mr. Gausepohl: I do not know if we get that statistical data
back on what they do with the case.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are the Prosecuting Attorneys included in
the planning for this record management system?
Mr. Gausepohl: They have their own records management
system.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, is somebody looking at the interface
between the two (2) records management system?
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, I have been talking to Art Williams
about it.
Council Chair Rapozo: I want to make sure that we...the RMS you
are talking about is the 911? Or are you talking about KPD...
Councilmember Yukimura: It is everything...
Mr. Gausepohl: It is inclusive in everything.
Council Chair Rapozo: Of all of the RMS at KPD?
Mr. Gausepohl: Right.
STACY M. PERREIRA, Police Officer: Stacy Perreira for the record.
When we are talking about a records management system that we are talking
about, it is primarily Police/Fire AMS, CAD (inaudible) AMS, and Mobile. When we
talk about our records management system, they have a completely separate set of
needs that we track. We track up until the point of when it gets sent to them and
upon that we get a return letter saying that either they are pursuing it or declining
it, or that is as far as what we get back from the Prosecutors in terms of statistical
tracking. How that case progresses—when you talk about interface, we do have the
opportunity, so they are able to access our information and get what they need out
of our system. There is in the future talks about how that can integrate with what
they need versus what we need. Their needs are completely different from what we
track. Their depth of tracking is way beyond what we track in the Kaua`i Police
Department.
Councilmember Yukimura: Understood, but that is the importance. If
we just did our records system within our own systems...but we need to track for
decision making purposes, we need to know what the results are of these cases that
go through the entire criminal justice system.
COUNCIL MEETING 22 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Ms. Perreira: I think that is what we are talking about in
terms of...
Mr. Gausepohl: The Prosecutor's Office should be able to
track that.
Ms. Perreira: We have that information...we should.
Councilmember Yukimura: But I want to make sure that whatever
interfaces are possible or at least the ease so that the cases have all the same case
numbers throughout this system, both in your records management and their
records management.
Ms. Perreira: No, when they get a case, they assign their
own case numbers. Our case numbers are ours. They get a case number and the
court gets their own case number. Everybody gets their own case number.
Councilmember Yukimura: Whatever the case numbers, there has to be
a system that connects them so we can track each case and the outcome of the case
through the Police Department and through the Prosecuting Attorney's Office to the
courts and the result in the courts.
Mr. Gausepohl: If that is the case, then they are going to
need to push information to us and I am sure the system would be able to receive it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Hang on. First of all, Councilmember
Yukimura, you need to ask a question. We can have the discussion. If you want to
have this discussion with the Prosecutor's Office then that is fine, but we heard that
they keep their own RMS and the Prosecutors keep their own, so that is where it
ends. Let us not tell them how to do their job.
Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, but this is a County and we are
all part of the County. When we need data and the results of the criminal justice
system, that includes the Police Department and the Prosecuting Attorney.
Council Chair Rapozo: You need to ask a question, Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are there discussions about how your data
will interface with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office data so the tracking of those
cases can be seamless?
Ms. Perreira: Yes, there is discussion.
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, there is.
Ms. Perreira: If that is going to take place within this as of
today, I do not think so.
Councilmember Yukimura: Why not?
Ms. Perreira: That is not how...out of all vendors we have
seen, what you are asking, none of them do that.
COUNCIL MEETING 23 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, IT should be concerned about this
interface.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, that is enough.
We are going to stop here because that is not a question. Again, they have
answered your question. They do their records management system and the
Prosecutors do their own. No one connects to each other. When we ask the Police
Department for statistics, they are going to provide us, like they said, all the way up
until the case gets sent to the Prosecutor or not. If you want statistics on how they
are prosecuting, you ask the Prosecutor. We did that in the budget and he told us
that he does not keep it, so that is not their problem.
Councilmember Yukimura: So does the Police...
Mr. Gausepohl: I would be happy to open the dialogue with
the Prosecutor's Office to see if we could make something like that happen, because
I see the logic in that and it should be more global. Let us work on it and see if we
could try to find a way to make that happen.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you very much because I would guess
that the Police Department also has a stake in the information because it is that
feedback loop that the Chief was talking about. If there was something in what...
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, you need to ask a
question.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry, we are having a discussion.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, we are not having a discussion. This is a
question and answer period. You have discussion when we have the discussion.
Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, Chair, but this is very important
to the operation of the County and the Chief has said sometimes...
Councilmember Kagawa: Point of order, Chair. This is not a question.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry...
Council Chair Rapozo: We are in a recess.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 9:56 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 10:08 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: The meeting is called back to order.
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, I would like to finish.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Yukimura: When the Chief came to talk about the
problem of having the cases not prosecuted, he also said that there were times
where finding out what happened in court helped the police understand if there had
COUNCIL MEETING 24 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
been a change in law, how they gather evidence, and all those kinds of things.
There needed to be this feedback loop to find out what happened in the cases and
that the police actually have a stake in finding out what the results of their work
was, so it seems like there is a need for both entities, the Prosecuting Attorney's
Office and the Police Department, and us, to know this trajectory until the end of
the case. If we could have an information system, that would be very useful. Thank
you for your willingness to look into that, but if I am clear now, that is not included
in what is being proposed.
Mr. Gausepohl: That is right; that is not included.
Councilmember Yukimura: But if you were to figure out another module,
you could go back and possibly ask for funding for that.
Mr. Gausepohl: No, that would not have a nexus to PSAP.
The E-911 board by Section 138-5 has guidelines that they can fund and what you
are asking for is statistical data, which would not qualify.
Councilmember Yukimura: But what about records management
system?
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, that is all tied in as one integrated
platform, so records management houses things that directly affect the PSAP and
the officers in the Mobile.
Councilmember Yukimura: In talking to the Prosecutor and Attorney's
Office, does that mean that you would also have to talk to IT?
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes, absolutely, and the County Attorney as
well.
Councilmember Yukimura: If these E-911 moneys will not apply, then if
we want to make those data management links, then we would have to fund it from
some other source?
Mr. Gausepohl: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: So as you go along through this...I guess we
can either expect a joint proposal from you and the Prosecuting Attorney or from
the three (3) of you, IT, Prosecuting Attorney, and Police, to fund that connecting
link. Okay.
Mr. Gausepohl: I think anything is possible, so we will have
to look into it. Of course there are going to be costs.
Councilmember Yukimura: It just seems like a critical link, so thank you
very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Are you familiar with any other jurisdiction
that has that where the prosecutors and the police department share the same
RMS? I am not.
Ms. Perreira: I am not familiar.
COUNCIL MEETING 25 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Gausepohl: I do not know one way or the other if they do
or they do not.
Council Chair Rapozo: Maybe you can check. Any other questions?
If not, thank you. Any public testimony? If not, I will call the meeting back to
order. Discussion? Councilmember Kagawa.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kagawa: I just want to briefly talk about why I called
a point of order about asking questions. My reasoning for calling it is because we
need fairness, having all seven (7) members have fair time so we all have five (5)
minutes to speak during discussion time, to not ask questions, to say what we feel is
right. The public has three (3) minutes for the first time and three (3) minutes for
the second time. The public has six (6) minutes to speak on any item and we have
five (5) minutes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Point of order, Chair. It is not relevant.
Council Chair Rapozo: This is relevant. This is discussion.
Councilmember Kagawa: When a Councilmember chooses to discuss
during question and answer period, what you have is unfairness where one
Councilmember has twenty (20) to thirty (30) minutes to speak and we only have
five (5). I played sports and I played for teams, so I know what a team concept is,
which is that everybody has a fair opportunity. Maybe some people do not know
that. It is called "individualism." I think we have to remember that rules are made
to keep things fair, not to be broken. Let us play by the rules, play like a team, and
I think we can be more harmonious here. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, Councilmember Kagawa's point of
order did not even have a point because there is no rule that says we cannot engage
in dialogue with the Administration and people. They are not public witnesses.
They are not subject to the three (3) minute rule and to the "no question" rule. This
is a dialogue that is very important to the operations of the County and the decision
making that we have to do. There was not even a point to have a point about. My
questions and dialogue were totally legitimate.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion before we take the
vote? If not, I want to thank KPD for being here. I think it is important for the
public to know that these funds are there for a purpose, that everybody that has a
phone line pays a percentage of their bill. You see it on your phone bill and you are
always wondering, "What the heck is that?" That is where it goes, into a big
account and we get to use those funds to upgrade or work on our 911 system.
Thank you to the department for pursuing these funds. I do want to say that when
we are talking about the RMS, KPD has a RMS and that thing is a mess. I think
we have had some issues for many, many years and it just costs money to keep
fixing it piecemeal. There is going to come a point where we are going to have to
invest the money and build a new system, but hopefully this will incorporate well
with what we have. As far as the Prosecutor's Office, that is a separate issue; that
is a whole different process, in my opinion. They should not be sharing information
COUNCIL MEETING 26 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
with KPD as far as that goes, and neither does KPD should have the access to what
the Prosecutors are doing as far as prosecutions. I do believe that the number of
cases that gets sent over from KPD to the Prosecutor's Office in the RMS should
match with the Prosecutor's numbers when they tell us, "We have received `x'
amount of cases from KPD." I think you have to have two (2) well-working systems,
so when Councilmember Yukimura asked the question, "I want to know how many
cases you got from KPD's sex assaults, how many were pending, how many are
prosecuted, how many were dismissed, and how many were declined." The
Prosecutor's Office should be able to do that, not KPD. That is what is lacking right
now. We heard it from the Prosecutor during the budget, "We do not keep those
stats," which is remarkable that they do not because they should. It is not where
KPD should be responsible for what the Prosecutor's Office is doing. That is their
function. We need to get the data from them. I am not sure what they have.
Maybe we need the discussion here with all of the members here and all the parties
involved so that we can get to some kind of resolution because Councilmember
Yukimura is exactly correct. When we are asked to fund all of these projects for
KPD or the Prosecutor's Office—when we ask a question on statistics, we should
have it and it should be relatively quick for us to get that. KPD has that and they
were able to provide it. There is this question about, "I do not know how the Chief
got that information." That should not happen. What you said that you sent to the
Prosecutors should be the same number that they said they received from KPD, and
if that is not right, then we have some major, major problems. Maybe that is
something we can pursue. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: If I recall in the Chief's answer, he was not
sure exactly how many of the cases went to the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, but he
had a personal file that he kept, but he did not get the statistics from the records
management system. I am not advocating information that should not go one way
or the other, but I am thinking that an information system will block and find out
how to jive the right things and how not to share the things that should not be
shared, but there has to be an interface, we have to have consistent numbers, and
we need to know the results from the time of arrests to the court cases and what
happened to them.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Again, let me just clarify that
asking the police for closure rates of the Prosecutor is like asking the Prosecutor for
arrest rates for KPD. It is two (2) separate entities and they keep separate files.
The function of the Prosecutor is to prosecute. I guess the bottom line is that we
have to figure out how we, as this legislative body, can get accurate information in a
timely matter. Next item, please.
The motion to approve C 2015-286 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Councilmember Chock: I have a process question before we move on
and since we are on the discussion of how we do business around here, I just wanted
to be clear that I do think that dialogue is good with the Administration and I think
it is within our rules, but I also believe that what we should probably be looking
towards is more of a practice of inquiry based questions to make a request for what
it is you are looking for instead of making an argument that can lead towards
adversarial outcomes. I think that would make it a lot easier for us to get to some
solutions, rather than the back and forth. That is my request. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Can we go to C 2015-278,
please?
COUNCIL MEETING 27 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: This is on the first page, Chair.
C 2015-278 Communication (10/20/2015) from the Mayor, transmitting for
Council consideration for inclusion in the 2016 County of Kaua`i Legislative
Package, A Bill for An Act authorizing the issuance of General Obligation Bonds
and making an appropriation, in the amount of$7,150,000 for the following:
• Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center
(Construction & Site Improvements) — $5,000,000
• Centralized Auto Maintenance Facility
(Planning, Permitting & Design) — $550,000
• Kaua`i Fire Department Helicopter Hangar
(Construction) — $500,000
• Salt Pond Master Plan — $400,000
• Veterans Cemetery Facility Construction & Improvements —
$700,000
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-278, seconded by
Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask that the Adolescent Drug
Treatment and Healing Center be taken separate.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i, can you
withdraw your motion, and Councilmember Kagawa your second.
Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew his motion to approve C 2015-278,
Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his second.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will take that one item separately.
Councilmember Yukimura, do you want to make that motion?
Councilmember Yukimura moved to take the Adolescent Treatment and
Healing Center separately, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and carried
by a vote of 6:1:0 (Councilmember Kagawa voted no).
Council Chair Rapozo: Can we get the next motion, please?
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve all items, except the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Discussion? Public testimony?
Please come up. The rules are suspended with no objections.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING 28 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
MATTHEW BERNABE: Matthew Bernabe. Can I speak on anything
or just that one item?
Council Chair Rapozo: You can speak on the whole item.
Mr. Bernabe: Okay, I just want to speak on one. I just
want to go back on the record again to say that as far as this five million dollars
($5,000,000) goes, I do not know if there is a plan yet or get the money first then do
the plan, but I object. I want a bidding process because maybe we could get this
lower. The reality is that I am still going to advocate for a self-sufficient youth farm
facility that teaches our youth some very good skills and train the workforce for
these farms that we have on Kaua`i so that we do not have to import people that are
wolfing or making excuses that we do not have the workforce. I think some
responsibility and hands-on activities will help a lot more than just having a one
million dollar ($1,000,000) annual maintenance fee for this facility on top of these
five million dollars ($5,000,000). Has anybody come across a bidding process? How
many people have put in a plan to meet what we need? Is this just getting the
money first? I am all for the facility; do not get me wrong. I, myself could have
been one of these youth statistics, but like I testified in the past, I worked, I had
responsibility, I had a few individuals that mentored me and learned some skills,
which those skills brought dignity and a bunch of other things that is the lead out of
the path of what these kids are in. As far as the ones that are so wayward that we
need to house them, well, we should be having a farm-to-table to restaurant-to-store
program to help fund that. This to me is a jobs program for somebody who has
already got the contract. I have not seen any evidence to counter what I am saying,
so until that happens, to me this is a fixed rig going to some individual and we do
not even have a plan made yet. I am all for fixing a problem, but let us do it correct
the first time. Let us not waste these five million dollars ($5,000,000). Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify? If not, I will
call the meeting back to order. Discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: Based on the information we know, it will be
a waste of money to build a building for five million dollars ($5,000,000) when we do
not know how we are going to pay to operate it. The projected cost is one million
two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000) and the Administration has not
given us any reliable, credible plan as to how this will be operated in terms of
money, much less in terms of expert oversight, which is really needed and has huge
liabilities if we do not do it correctly. We have no understanding and no expertise
on how to run a 24/7 residential drug treatment center and we have no clue how to
build one either, and without that kind of information, we will be wasting the
money. There is a track record of two (2) such residential treatments on neighbor
islands that have closed down over the past six (6) years, and we are going to go on
that same pathway without good design, good planning, and good expertise. It
makes no sense at all to me when we could use that money, one million two
hundred fifty thousand dollars ($1,250,000), and create this continuum of care,
which our feasibility study said was necessary to work on prevention and the less
intense counseling, even the kind of program that Mr. Bernabe is suggesting, that
would benefit far more than eight (8) people, because that is the number of beds
that we are projecting, eight (8) to ten (10) beds. We could help so many more kids
and even prevent them from needing this most intense treatment, which the
COUNCIL MEETING 29 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
feasibility study also says will not work unless we have the continuum of care that
they can return to in a community and in a family that has learned to be supportive
and has the connections. It makes no sense at all to me and I will be voting against
it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. I just want to say that
the problem of our youth drug and treatment programs is huge, and to say that
Kaua`i County and Kaua`i's State Legislature should not look at improving the
situation and helping more youths so they lead on to a better life is, for me, an easy
answer. I ask myself, is Bobby Benson, Youth Challenge, etcetera on O`ahu helping
the majority of our kids that need the help? My answer that I know is no. They are
helping a few of our kids. There are a lot of local children that need help and what I
am saying is that this is an opportunity to get the State to pay all of the costs up
until now for this facility. Meanwhile, the County needs to get their information
together with the feasibility study, etcetera, should we have the funding
appropriated by the State Legislature. I think we need to prove to the Governor
and the Legislature that we are ready to move; otherwise they will not release the
funds. My feeling is that if we do not pursue this money, we will just say,
"Residents of Kaua`i, the way you can fix the problem is that you have to send the
kids to Oahu into these programs available there." Yes they are working, but how
much of our children are going there? Very few. I would like to know what
percentage are being helped because I think if we do not help them, what we will
have is a lot of them getting kicked out of their houses, end up homeless, and cause
more terror and problems in our community. We already have a large homeless
problem. I think Council Chair said that we are going to be addressing that
problem. There are huge camps in Hanapepe Valley, Lucy Wright Park in Waimea,
and Ahukini, just to name a few. There are also lots in Kapa`a. Some of them are
our children, our keiki, that were not helped by O`ahu or not helped by Kaua`i
facilities. How do we reach them? The problems that they will cause in the future
will not be helped by us not doing anything at this point. I think Matt's suggestion
is a great suggestion. You cannot just house kids and expect that they will get
better by counseling. How do we get them get ready for work? How do we get them
ready to support a family? I think I will leave it up to the experts and the feasibility
study to say whether Kaua`i County is ready to do it or not, because if we wait for
the State, we will be waiting forever. I think the State feels like our option is 0`ahu
and so be it, but how much kids are they helping and how much kids are they not
helping? That is my question. My feeling is that we are not helping. We are just
helping a small, little percentage. There are a lot of our youths that need help and
can get the help, and if we have something that works here, I think we will have a
better future for our island. I will be supporting it and I will be looking forward to
more communication from the Administration as we move forward. Thank you,
Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: As far as when I look at the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center, what it comes down to is the will of the community.
Does everything we do become feasible? I could argue not and argue that the bus
system is not feasible, but is it something that the community wants and needs?
Yes. For me, it is a matter of the will of the community. Is this facility something
that the community wants? Will it cost us money? Yes, it could possibly cost us
money, but there are other things that cost us money too at the County. It is what
COUNCIL MEETING 30 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
does our community want and need? What do we feel like we our community needs
to move forward or better our community and our citizens? For me, that is why I
am willing to support the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center. We are
asking the State for money. That is a great thing. I would rather ask the State for
money than have the County to pay for it. Again, is everything we do feasible? No.
But do the things we do help the community? Yes. I think transportation is a
great example like the bus system. Do we make money off of it? No. We use
general funds to help subsidize it, but does it help the community? Yes. I think
that your Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center may be in the same situation
and may be able to find funding once they have the treatment center up. People
might be willing to fund a facility like that or run a facility and get grants for it.
Ultimately what it comes down to is the will of the community on this and I think
right now we are still in the preliminary stages. As it gets closer, I think we will see
if this is something that the community wants or is this something that the
community thinks we should hold off on a little while longer. I think that is the
bottom line and I am willing to support it now.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: We are voting on these separately, right?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Personally, I think it is premature to ask for
the five million dollars ($5,000,000). It is not a statement of whether or not the
validity of the drug treatment facility is needed or whether it is not needed or
whether it is important because I think all of us recognize that this is a very serious
issue and it is very important for our community. I think the reality of it is that we
are not ready to spend five million dollars ($5,000,000) and we have many other
needs where I believe we are ready to spend the money. Not too long ago, the word
was "shovel ready" and I think that still applies when appropriating money from
the Legislature. They are looking for projects that we can spend the money on
tomorrow and I do not believe this project is anywhere close to being "shovel ready."
I have strong doubts that it would be funded. Therefore, it seems like we are
wasting bullets, if you would, on a request from the Legislature when we could be
asking for funding for other projects, whether it would be for transportation,
affordable housing, or other infrastructure needs that are pressing at this time
while we work on the feasibility study and other details needed to move the drug
treatment facility available, which I think everybody understands those details are
lacking right now. I do have some concerns about this and we will be voting
accordingly to those concerns. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you, Chair. I am voting in support. I
believe we need an Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center and I believe we need
it now; we needed it yesterday. I support the Mayor and his Administration moving
forward to secure funding. It is going to take more than five million dollars
($5,000,000), so let us try and get the first five million dollars ($5,000,000). I do not
want to be pessimistic and not put some level of faith in the Administration and say
already that they cannot do something. They are trying and they want to. It is up
to them to develop the design and the plan and to find the right experts. It is not
my job as a Councilmember to get so deep into the detail and to try and
micromanage what they are doing. Either we have some basic level of trust in the
COUNCIL MEETING 31 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Administration and the Mayor to do their job or we do not. We can help, criticize,
question, add, and suggest, but to totally kill something that is needed with a
pessimistic attitude of "you will never do it; you will never make it." We have to
make it. This is just the start. Our families and youth require us to step forward
and do what we can. It is a request of the State, so hopefully the State will step up.
Who knows what the Administration's strategy is. Maybe this is a year where the
State is going to consider compassionate human services type of funding over
transportation, and we have other pots for transportation like all of our federal
moneys. Let us not overly try to micromanage the Administration and let us put a
little bit of faith in them and support them and move forward. This Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center is critical and important to our community and our
families.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I will be supporting this
as well. I do agree with some of the comments made. I think that "putting the cart
before the horse"—I am looking forward to hearing the plan in December or as early
as January on how we are going to move forward on this. I do expect it to be more
solid in what it is we are currently looking at right now. We will find it more
difficult to continue supporting it for further expenditure if we do not see our State
partners come to the table, step up, and be a part of this initiative. The
Administration has its right to put this in and make a request, as we do. I have
heard of an amendment moving forward from Councilmember Yukimura that at
face value looks very good and is something I would support also. From a personal
standpoint, which one has more priority? That is not the question today. The
question is that people have said that this is what they want. I actually have not
heard that many providers say they do not want it. While the initial feasibility
study was against it, there is a strong interest from this Administration to move it
forward, so I will not stand in the way, but we will find it more increasingly difficult
to support it if it is not followed through properly. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Somebody said that we are in the
preliminary stages of the project. We have been in the preliminary stages since
2011 and I have been asking for the information since 2011. How are we going to
operate it? How much is it going to cost? Show us how we are going to do this.
Feasibility does not mean that it is going to make money or even breakeven.
Feasibility means that we are going to be able to keep it open. What good is it if we
start it like the other two (2) on the neighbor islands, Maui and Hawai`i island, that
operated it for one (1) or two (2) or four (4) years, and then closed down. We spent
money on building a building that is really far away, not close in to town where it is
more usable. We have to make it. I think Councilmember Kuali`i said that we have
to solve this drug problem among our kids. Absolutely. I am totally committed to
it. Councilmember Kagawa said that we have to help people get ready for work.
Hale `Opio has this program where they teach kids how to go through interviews,
how to do resumes, and how to save money. They do that, but we are not funding
them. They probably could expand. The Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center
will not be focusing on teaching kids how to get ready for work. That has to happen
at a much earlier point in the continuum and it has to happen with many more than
eight (8) kids per year. The question is how do we do effective drug treatment? It is
not just intense treatment; it is this whole continuum that we should be looking at
and supporting, and that the feasibility study said we should do before we go to
COUNCIL MEETING 32 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
effective, intense drug treatment. Finally, the kids who need this intense treatment
can get it and they can stay in contact with their families through this program that
the State is funding now. It sends parents or families to Oahu once a month and
arranges for Skype conferencing and other ways to keep in touch with family. It is
not like these kids cannot get this adolescent drug treatment in its most intense
form. We actually have the service for the kids who need it and we do not have a
way right now to really build and operate in an expert function with the moneys to
keep it open.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? This is your last
chance. If not, it is tough to wrap up my comments in five (5) minutes, but first of
all, Matt, five million dollars ($5,000,000)—there is no contract. This will go out to
procurement; it will go out to bid. It sounded like you were under the impression
that we already chose the builder, but that has not even been done yet. We do not
even know if we are going to build yet. We are basically asking the State for funds
so that when we are ready, we can build. An hour or so ago, this body sat here and
told the Department of Public Works that you have our blessing to go and apply for
four (4) or five (5) applications of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) a piece
for sidewalks. What is the cost estimates? "We do not know yet. We are working
on that. We do not know how we are going to tie it into this project, but we want to
apply and spend this money." Most of us said, "Good job. Thank you. That is a
great program." Up to two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) like
that—State and Federal money...no County match. We are asking for a State grant
in aid of five million dollars ($5,000,000) to build a facility. If anyone sitting here
tells me that we do not need this, then something is wrong. We are not talking
about the kid who smokes dope at Kalapaki Beach that needs to learn life skills; we
are talking about kids that cannot function. Acute residential therapy—eight (8) a
year? No, there is more than that. They are not coming forward. When they find
out that they have to get off this island and be separated from families and say, "No,
we are going to bring this care into the home." How many of these kids have
homes? How many of these kids have parents that are drug free? For me, I do not
get it. Then there is this whole other argument about why we are going to do what
O`ahu failed to do? I do not really give a rat's butt about Oahu. Why would we
follow a program that has failed? We are stupid, and I am talking to the
Administration. If you folks choose a program to spend our money on that has
failed, then you folks are nuts. Matt, you are right on target. I am saying that we
should be innovative. Let us find a program. Do you know what is lacking in all of
this? That is why I quit being on those drug boards because we do not listen to the
people that need the help. We do not listen to the kids that need the help. No, we
have a bunch of experts with Master's Degrees and Doctorate's Degrees and we are
listening to these people who never smoked a damn joint in their life, tell us how we
have to fix the problem of Crystal Methamphetamine and Oxycontin. We are
having people who are brain smart that are trying to make the decisions, rather
than bring the kids in an ask them what is wrong? "What do you need to succeed?"
I get emotional with this because I have asked for that. "No, no, no. We are going
to tell the kids what they need." No, let us work backwards and have the kids tell
us what they need and provide it. I do not want to hear about Oahu failing. I do
not care. Again, you sit in those board meetings and do you know what you hear?
You hear all of the nonprofits tell you, "Yes, we can help." "How much can I get?" I
do not care about that. It is not about the money. It is about the kids that are
dying in the street today from suicides or running away from home. Those are the
kids that we have to help and we are here asking for five million dollars
($5,000,000)...get the State to commit. Hey, get some buy-in, State, you big mouths.
You folks want to spend a lot of money? Bring it here so we can at least have a
COUNCIL MEETING 33 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
chance. Give us a shot. But do not follow a program that has been proven to fail. I
agree with Matt that we should get the kids in the dirt, get their feet deep in the
dirt and growing stuff. It is going to take some intense care and treatment and
some intense working with them, but that exists. Matt, what you said today was
right on track. You get them in the soil, they produce those products, and get them
in the market and they make money. That is how you fix this problem. You give
the kids some ownership and some purpose in life, a purpose that is more rewarding
than getting high. Somebody told me a long time ago, "Mel, do you know how hard
it is to get somebody off of ice?" This was what a recovering ice addict told me, "It is
the best feeling in the world to get high on ice. It is better than sex." How do you
convince a kid that that is bad for them? You are not going to do it by teaching
them how bad drugs are. They get high. I wish you folks the best. I agree with
Councilmember Kuali`i—let us stop talking about how this is not going to work and
let us start figuring out how we can make sure it works. Two million five hundred
thousand dollars ($2,500,000) for sidewalks? Hey, of course we need that. We have
to make this work. We do not have an option. I beg you folks to please support this.
State, you need to get onboard and claim some ownership of this problem. With
that, can I have a roll call? This is on the Adolescent Treatment and Healing
Center.
The motion to approve the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center was
not previously made, but a roll call was taken and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL — 6*,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Yukimura 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 Kauai,
Councilmember Hooser was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative
for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Actually, the motion to approve was for the
first four (4) items, right? Everything but the Adolescent Treatment and Healing
Center, right? If I remember correctly, that was the motion. You might want to
reconsider your vote because you just voted against the four (4), Councilmember
Yukimura. I do not think that is what you wanted to do, right?
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I would ask that you make a motion to
reconsider.
Councilmember Yukimura: Why were we talking about the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center?
Council Chair Rapozo: No, we were talking about the entire item.
We are going to vote separately, but we are not going to do separate discussions. It
is one item.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. You are right. I am voting for
all four (4), but the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center.
COUNCIL MEETING 34 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I would ask for a motion to
reconsider.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to reconsider the motion to approve on the
Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center, seconded by Councilmember
Kuali`i, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, motion carried. The items up for the
vote is the Centralized Auto Maintenance Facility, Kaua`i Fire Department
Helicopter Hangar, Salt Pond Master Plan, and Veterans Cemetery Facility
Construction & Improvements, which a motion and second was made earlier. Roll
call, please.
The motion to approve the Centralized Auto Maintenance Facility, Kaua`i
Fire Department Helicopter Hangar, Salt Pond Master Plan, and Veterans
Cemetery Facility Construction & Improvements was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7*,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
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 Kaua`i,
Councilmember Hooser was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative
for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Now we are back to the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center. Roll call.
Councilmember Yukimura: There needs to be a motion made for that.
Council Chair Rapozo: You are right. Thank you, Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve the Adolescent Treatment and
Healing Center, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 6*,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Yukimura 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 Kauai,
Councilmember Hooser was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative
for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, let us take a five (5)
minute recess.
COUNCIL MEETING 35 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 10:47 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 10:54 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: The meeting is called back to order. Can we
have the next item, please?
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this is on page 2, C 2015-283.
C 2015-283 Communication (10/20/2015) from the Director of Finance,
requesting Council approval to dispose the following government records from the
Department of Finance — Real Property Assessment Division, pursuant to
Section 46-43, Hawai`i Revised Statutes and Resolution No. 2008-39 (2008) as
amended, which has been kept for over seven (7) years and are no longer of use or
value:
• P-2 Forms (2006 and prior);
• P-64 Conveyances & Transfer Deeds (2006 and prior);
• Income Exemption & Circuit Breaker Applications (2006 and
prior);
• Permanent Home Use Dedications (1993 and prior);
• Copies of construction plans (all copies — no requirement to
save);
• Appraiser working papers (2006 and prior);
• Long-Term Affordable Rental Applications (2006 and prior);
and
• Miscellaneous files (2006 and prior).
Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve C 2015-283, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any discussion or questions?
The motion to approve C 2015-283 was then put, and carried by a vote of
6:1:0 (Councilmember Hooser voted no).
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, there has been a request to take
Bill No. 2599, a bill for second reading, on page 7. This is relating to the Kaua`i
Fire Department Aerial Apparatus Vehicle.
There being no objections, Bill No. 2599 was taken out of order.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2599 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2015-796, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING
BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS
ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND (Kaua`i Fire Department, Aerial
Apparatus Vehicle 10% County Match — $71,909.00): Councilmember Yukimura
moved for adoption of Bill No. 2599 on second and final reading, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
COUNCIL MEETING 36 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Public testimony? Seeing
none, roll call.
The motion to for adoption of Bill No. 2599 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.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next items would be on page 4,
C 2015-290 and C 2015-291, which are Executive Session requests, and C 2015-292
from Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Can you read that item, please?
There being no objections, C 2015-292 was taken out of order.
C 2015-292 Communication (11/12/2015) from Councilmember Yukimura,
transmitting for Council consideration for inclusion in the 2016 County of Kaua`i
Legislative Package, A Bill for An Act authorizing the issuance of General
Obligation Bonds and making an appropriation in the amount of $5,000,000 for the
purchase of the Courtyards at Waipouli affordable housing project: Councilmember
Yukimura moved to approve C 2015-292, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am proposing this as an additional item to
the County's Legislative Package. It would be five million dollars ($5,000,000)
toward the acquisition of Courtyards at Marriott, which was an inclusionary zoning
requirement that in exchange for zoning for eight hundred fifty (850) units at
Kaua`i Lagoons, the developer was required to build one hundred (100) plus units of
affordable housing. However, it is a limited affordability period and when the
affordability expires in 2019, that means that people will be figuratively evicted
because they will not be able to afford the market rents of those units. We will be
behind rather than moving ahead in the provision of affordable housing. It would
be up to the Housing Agency to negotiate...we have the first right of refusal to
purchase those units, so this would be contributing towards the purchase of those
units.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Can you repeat how many units there are
again?
Councilmember Yukimura: Eighty-two (82).
Councilmember Chock: Okay. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 37 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Right now, I think there are forty-one (41)
that are affordable because the Council in 2009 removed many of the affordability
requirements. I think at least half of them right now are affordable.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have a question for Councilmember
Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Kagawa: I was wondering if you have heard in the
past or recently what the Housing Agency's plan is for this being that it is going to
expire in 2019. Did they have a plan? Was there plan to just let the time expire
and not acquire it?
Councilmember Yukimura: I have been asking them about this at every
monthly meeting that we have. They did proceed to get an appraisal done and they
have been in conversation with the owner, so that is all I know right now. I have
offered my help in developing a plan. I know that they want to acquire it. For
example, there was a Watase housing that was built close to where the Kapa'a
Transfer Station is and the thirty (30) year affordability went up and we got calls
from the tenants there saying, "We cannot afford the market, but because the
affordability time is up, our rents will not be affordable anymore." So that was one.
Lihu`e Gardens, the elderly housing project behind McDonalds, also came up for a
thirty (30) year expiration of affordability and thankfully the State stepped in to
make some kind of agreement so they continue to be affordable. Otherwise we
would have had at least forty (40) to fifty (50) elderly who would have been out of
affordable housing. That is how difficult these expiration dates are.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have another question. Where exactly are
these Courtyards at Waipouli?
Councilmember Yukimura: It is right next to Kintaro Restaurant on the
main highway.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions for the introducer? We
will take public testimony soon, but I have a couple of questions. We have two (2)
options: we can send this to Committee...actually, we cannot send it to Committee
because we do not have a Committee Meeting until December 9th, but I do want to
get some questions answered by the Housing Agency. Can we move this until after
lunch and have the Housing Agency come by? I kind of want to know when the
affordability expires and what the current rents are there, the affordable rents
versus the market rents, and how many units of each. I think it was ten (10) years,
right? Councilmember Yukimura, was it ten (10) years affordability?
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I have the lease here with me, which
you are welcomed to look at and a response from Housing and they say that the
expiration is 2019.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
COUNCIL MEETING 38 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: It seems like it was more than ten (10) years.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Just for the Council's purpose, I want to
know what the options are. Is there a possibility of adding an amount up to the five
million dollars ($5,000,000) to be an addition to the package or is the package done;
we already approved it for the total amount? I was just wondering what the options
are. Is this just to get more information and see how we will proceed with it in the
future? I would suggest that we send this to the Housing & Transportation
Committee to get the full analysis and explanation of what it entails because I think
it is all important to Councilmembers that that project there keeps that certain
amount of affordable units. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: I agree that to lose the affordability of these
units...two (2) things will happen: number one, like Councilmember Yukimura said,
more than likely, there is going to be forty (40) families that are going to have to
leave because the rents there are not cheap. I do not know if you have even been
there, but this is high-end product. I understand that the market rents are out of
this world. The normal person cannot rent there, so I am curious to see what the
affordable rents are. The second thing that will happen is either they will sell those
units, which I envision that is what they will do, because that developer is not into
the rental market. I think what will happen is that they will sell those units at
market value, which you know what that does to the real estate economy. I think
we have to be real careful with this and hopefully we can. This is one way we can
do that, at least the units that we can purchase. The other thing is to be on the
Kaua`i County Package, we have to get the Mayor's blessing and sign off. That is
something that will need to happen before we approve it because we cannot approve
it if the Mayor does not agree. Do you folks understand? Typically what happens is
the Administration coming over and saying, "This is what we want to see on the
County Package," and we say what we want and what we do not want, then it goes.
In this case, we are approving something on the County Package that we do not
have the authority to because we do not have the Mayor's blessing. We would have
to get that blessing and have the Administration come up and say, "We approve of
this to be on the County Legislative Package," and then we can move. I do not know
if they are prepared to do that today. I cannot imagine them saying no, but we do
not know. If we can move this until the later part of the day, maybe we can get it
accomplished. If not, it is going to have to go to the Committee. Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I guess the other question for the Housing
Agency is, is that five million dollars ($5,000,000) enough to purchase all of the
forty-one (41) units, because if I divide five million dollars ($5,000,000) by forty-one
(41), it equals to one hundred twenty-one thousand dollars ($121,000) and I am not
sure that is enough. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is not enough. It is far below the appraisal
price that we got, which I prefer not to discuss on the table because it is subject to
negotiations, but it will not cover the entire price. This would contribute to a pot
that the County would have to pull together in order to purchase. There could be all
kinds of configurations of the agreement, so it will take some real negotiation, but
COUNCIL MEETING 39 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
this would be a big contribution to push the conversation forward. We are putting
down some money, and then we are going to have to find more money.
Council Chair Rapozo: Kind of like what we did with the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center.
Councilmember Yukimura: Except that it is already built and it is
within our kuleana. It is not outside our expertise.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i, then Councilmember
Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kuali`i: The other thing though is that the expiration
is 2019, so five million dollars ($5,000,000), to make the purchase now really does
not need to happen for a few more years. I spoke to the Managing Director on her
way out and I believe we will hear from Housing and the Administration later this
afternoon that they are not ready to include it in this year's package and that they
are probably going to include it in either next year's or the following year's to still
make the 2019, but I guess we can ask the Housing Agency. They are as
passionately behind maintaining this in affordable housing as we are. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro, then
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: My question for Housing would go along the
lines of what Councilmember Kuali`i said, "What is the plan?" For the Adolescent
Treatment and Healing Center, we have had them up here numerous times and we
have heard a lot about what they are trying to accomplish. Since being on here, I
have not heard anything about this project or what the plan is, so for me it is hard
to vote on something not knowing what the plan is moving forward. Again, I was
looking at the 2019 date and maybe they have the wheels ticking, but it is not ready
for fiscal year 2016 and maybe it is something they are looking forward to doing
more in the future. I would just like to hear what the general plan is with these
units.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, then
Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Yukimura: I agree that we need a plan and I have been
asking Housing Agency for a plan for many months, if not for a year, but the longer
we wait, the higher the price and the more difficult the negotiations. That is why it
is important to start today or sooner because the closer it gets the momentum is
toward losing it basically.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I think housing needs to be on the top of the
list. It impacts everything, in terms of the drug treatment and homelessness; quite
frankly a desperate situation many people were in and I think we need to put it at
the top of the list and treat it with the urgency that it deserves. This is a plan that
is standing there waiting to be taken. It does not take a lot of work to buy a
property that is already built and already designated for housing, already in a
location where people can walk and bike to work. There are major employment
centers there, it is on the main highway, and there are no infrastructure needs. To
COUNCIL MEETING 40 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
me, it sounds like a great opportunity and I commend Councilmember Yukimura for
putting it forward. I also want to point out that the further plans that are needed
to make this thing happen...we have a number of months, to May if you would,
when the budget is finally concluded. The way the process works is we submit the
bill, the request is made, and then the Administration and the Legislature will ask
questions. So we have at least until February before those initial questions get
asked, and then May before the final answers. Assuming we were so fortunate to
get it approved, it is still another year, or who knows how long, to get it released.
Looking at 2019, now is the time to ask for that money and I think it is a great
opportunity and we should jump on it. This could be used as kind of an impetus, if
you would, to get us to start thinking about affordable housing and homelessness
and about the various solutions that may be offered. I am going to be supporting
this enthusiastically. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Again, just to reiterate, if the plan is that we
cannot include it in the Legislative Package, as you stated, that the Mayor would
have to submit the recommendation and then we approve it. It seems like it is moot
that it can go on the Legislative Package. I think we should refer this to Committee
or maybe in a separate communication because it will no longer apply to the Kaua`i
Legislative Package, and let us have that in-depth discussion of how we are going to
move forward and the plan of housing and where we go from here. I would say that
my recommendation would be to receive this item.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Maybe it would need a separate transmittal,
but we could make it part of the Council's Legislative Package. We can show the
leadership and say this is the top priority for us and at least keep it alive in
conversation with our legislators.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, I should have caught that when it came
through that we should have did it as a Council and/or...
Councilmember Yukimura: I should have caught that, too.
Council Chair Rapozo: But that is fine. Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: We might consider sending it over to the
Mayor today. Like you said, you cannot imagine him not supporting it, but if he
wants to say he is not supporting it, then he can say that today and we can move
forward with the other option. I would think it would be stronger coming over as a
County package.
Council Chair Rapozo: Absolutely. That is why I am suggesting
that we move this to the end and give the Administration an opportunity. At the
end of the day, if we say affordable housing is an issue...I think you brought it up,
Councilmember Hooser, when this first hit the floor, the two (2) issues that are vital
was housing and homelessness that were not addressed. This is an opportunity.
The other real important component...I am not sure if you were here,
Councilmember Hooser, when we did that zoning amendment for Kaua`i Lagoons
when we made them go out and buy this land. They came up and said, "We do not
COUNCIL MEETING 41 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
have the land," and the Council said, "Go find the land," so they had to purchase the
Kintaro property and build this thing. Their intention at that time was, "We are
going to build a nice project, one that we can sell." After the affordability, it made
no secret of it. That is what these folks do, but it is a nice property. The other thing
is that we do not have to wait until 2019. The fact that their requirement is until
2019, we do not have to wait for 2019. We have the first right to refusal, but we
could start the negotiation today and call that owner up. I am sure he wants out.
Whether or not we could do it for five million dollars ($5,000,000), I do not know.
Like Public Works...the knowledge of how to go secure these federal
funds...whatever these projects Community Development Block Grant (CDBG),
whatever is available to make up the difference. If we do not take advantage of
repurchasing this or gaining the affordability of this project, there is going to be a
huge impact in more ways than one, so I would like to give the Administration an
opportunity today to say if that is something...at least they can consider or
hopefully they can give us to okay today so we can approve it. If they need time, we
can send it to the Committee. I do not want to wait until 2019 because it would be
too late by then. I can imagine that he is probably the owner. If I was the owner, I
would be looking at, "What am I going to do with this property in 2019?" I would
guess that he is probably trying to find buyers right now, but my concern is that the
price of those units are going to be substantial and I do not know if we would be
able to afford it, but we have to try. With that, are there objections to moving this
at a later time? Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I was just going to say that this came up
during the discussion about the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center and
about the Mayor's County Package, and that they talked about this seven million
dollar ($7,000,000) total, so we need to hear their plan because if we now up that
total to twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) and they said that the Legislature is
likely to only fund in the neighborhood of seven million dollars ($7,000,000), then
we would be putting this housing sale now up against the Adolescent Treatment
and Healing Center and we may lose the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center
money. The sale does not have to happen right now, so it could be in next year's
ask. That is all I am saying. I think that is what we will hear from the
Administration, so that is why I can imagine them saying possibly, "No, not now,
but yes for sure."
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Before Housing, I just wanted to make a
brief comment because I do have some experience in this. Typically what will
happen is as the budget committees come together working on the capitol budget,
they will go to their senators and representatives, Kaua`i's senators and
representatives, and say, "This is what we have. We have ten million dollars
($10,000,000). We have five million dollars ($5,000,000) of it and three million
dollars ($3,000,000) for your district. What do you want to do with it?" Those
members will huddle, speak to the Mayor and speak to the Council if it involves
County priorities, and they basically give us that hard advice, "What do you folks
want?" I think adding additional items does not preclude anything because we
really will not know until the budget is almost finalized on how much money there
is going to be available for any of these projects. It just gives us another choice
down the road. We do have the Senate President on our side and some very active
House Members, so I would rather over-ask then under-ask, in my opinion, in terms
of strategy. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 42 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: We have Housing here. Are you here to
answer our questions? Are you prepared to answer questions today?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GARY MACKLER, Acting Housing Director: I will do my best. Good
morning, Chair Rapozo and Members of the Council. My name is Gary Mackler,
Acting Housing Director. I will be happy to try to answer your questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Gary, thank you for being here.
Congratulations. What is the status of the Courtyards at Waipouli affordable
housing and where does the Housing Agency stand? What is your strategy? Do you
plan to acquire it prior to the 2019 expiration? If so, what is your plan of action
going forward? Thank you.
Mr. Mackler: In response to your question, we are very
interested in acquiring the Courtyards at Waipouli. To that end, we have been
talking with the owner of the property for the last several months, Kevin Showe.
Kamuela Cobb-Adams has met with Kevin on several occasions, both here and on
O`ahu, to talk about the acquisition. We recently had the property appraised to see
whether or not the asking price, which is twenty-four million five hundred thousand
dollars ($24,500,000) would be supported by an appraisal, which it is. We have a
number of issues related to this acquisition. I do want to mention first that the
County has never gone out to buy a twenty-four million dollar ($24,000,000) rental
project. That is not the model we have used to produce rental housing in the past,
but it does not mean that we should not explore it and pursue it, but it is somewhat
novel to us to make the attempt to buy an asset of that value, but there is potential
to buy it because if you look at the asking price and the number of units that are
there, which is an eighty-two (82) unit project, it works out to about a two hundred
ninety-eight thousand dollars ($298,000) per unit, which is very close to what it
costs to build from new. The idea of acquiring a property is something that we are
looking at very seriously. We would not have had it appraised if we were not. I can
tell you that buying a project and finding the financing for it is daunting. It is not
just identifying an amount of money that you can say we can use to acquire a
property. We really have to look at so many layers of issues on this project.
Typically in a rental project, if you are serving a low income population, which is
eighty percent (80%) and below, to keep the project financially sustainable based on
the revenues that you can generate from the rent structure, you need about
seventy-five percent (75%) soft money, money that does not require repayment,
basically grants or equity that can come through, programs like the low income
housing tax credit program. If you do not have that level of soft money into the
project, you will have problems later on with the financial stability of the project
long-term. It is very important to flush out those issues and look at the financing
picture and look at the model for financing and look at whether you can sustain that
project. If you cannot sustain it, somebody is going to be coming back in here to ask
for more money down the road. We have tried to be very careful as to how we
approach our rental projects, going back from Pa'anau Village, which by the way
ran into several years of distress; Kalepa Village, which has been very stable; as
well as the other rental projects that we have done since then. It is a very
important part of the process. We have a project, which is unique there because
forty-one (41) units are restricted and forty-one (41) units are market. If we buy a
project with forty-one (41) tenants who are in market rentals, how do we treat
COUNCIL MEETING 43 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
them? How do we handle that? We have never dealt with that as a Housing
Agency. If we bring in federal money, for example, we could have a trigger of
relocation assistance under the Uniform Relocation Act (URA), depending on the
type of federal funds that come in. We could have requirements for accessibility or
we may have to come back in and modify five percent (5%) of the units to meet the
requirements of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. We may have deferred
eight (8) years or nine (9) years of reserved funding that is not there now that is an
additional cost if we are going to try and keep the reserve funds accumulated to the
point where they need to be. I am just laying some things out for you to let you
know that it is just not that simple to buy a project like that.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have one follow-up question. At this point,
are we undecided as to whether the County wants to purchase this property for
twenty-four million dollars ($24,000,000)? If we should ask the Mayor to put this in
the Legislative Package, would you say it is premature to ask the State when we
are unsure that it is financially feasible and workable?
Mr. Mackler: We are undecided. We want to buy it, but we
are undecided on whether we can. We still have a lot to look at and a lot to
consider. My personal take right now is to ask for money given all the questions
that linger. I do not know if that is the proper timing to do that. One of the ideas
that Kamuela had talked about with this is to put out a Request for Qualifications
(RFQ) to look for a third party entity who can come in and look at whether they can
bring the financing to the table to help the County acquire this property and to keep
it in affordability long-term. We have not taken that step yet, but that is something
we are thinking about doing to see if there is anybody out there who can actually
put a deal together. If someone were to do that and have, let us say, a gap leftover
to where they need so much money to actually make the deal work, then I could see
asking for the funding.
Councilmember Kagawa: I guess my last question for now is if the
County put this in the package and received five million dollars ($5,000,000) from
the State, the price tag, if at market value, would come down to nineteen million
dollars ($19,000,000), would that make this "a no-brainer, we are going to pursue?"
Mr. Mackler: No.
Councilmember Kagawa: No, not yet? Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I think the context of the conversation is
buying the entire project, all of the units?
Mr. Mackler: Yes. That is what has been offered.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. I would think that the County would
have the ability, given the willing seller or whatever, to just purchase the forty-one
(41) units through condominium scheme, if you would.
Mr. Mackler: I believe that decision would be up to the
seller. I think the agreement that the County has with the owner of the property
will allow them to sell portions of it, but it is really the decision of the owner as to
COUNCIL MEETING 44 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
how they wish to offer and how much they wish to offer of the units that are there.
Right now, what is on the table is the entire eighty-two (82) units.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so that would be another negotiable
item I guess.
Mr. Mackler: Could be.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Gary, you said that for a project of this size
and cost or projected cost, you would need seventy-five percent (75%) soft money,
which is defined as "we do not need to pay it back."
Mr. Mackler: Yes, because it can only really carry...we
have run proformas on this project in the past. You really cannot carry more than
twenty percent (20%) of its costs as debt.
Councilmember Yukimura: So would five million dollars ($5,000,000)
towards the soft money help?
Mr. Mackler: If it was soft money, it would certainly help
in the acquisition, but the real question is where does other nineteen million five
hundred thousand dollars ($19,500,000) come from and when can we find it if it can
be found?
Councilmember Yukimura: I know where it can be found. Would it not
be helpful to have? Would the five million dollars ($5,000,000) help to get that
additional nineteen million dollars ($19,000,000)?
Mr. Mackler: I do not know if it could be used to leverage
that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Why not? If you put out a proforma and the
private sector has to raise nineteen million dollars ($19,000,000) instead of
twenty-four million dollars ($24,000,000), is that not helpful?
Mr. Mackler: Well, helpful is one thing, but as was said to
me this morning, "Dreams cannot always be financed," and that we simply do not
know. As I look at this project, if we can make a go of it, I would look at asking for
money to fill a gap that is needed to make the deal work once you know you have
the other financing, tentatively or permanently committed to doing the acquisition.
I think that is the way I would recommend approaching it because I think if you
were to ask for money now and the deal could not be done or you could not find a
way to do it, you would look back and say, "Maybe we should not have made that
request."
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, you could use the five million dollars
($5,000,000) for some other thing if you worded the appropriation more broadly and
more flexibly.
COUNCIL MEETING 45 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Mackler: If it were not project-specific to the
Courtyards?
Councilmember Yukimura: Project-specific, but also possibly used for
other affordable housing projects in the County.
Mr. Mackler: Well, we could always use more resources.
Councilmember Yukimura: Exactly.
Council Chair Rapozo: The twenty-five million dollar ($25,000,000)
question is, and I am not sure if you are in a position to answer it...I think I heard
what the Housing Agency's position is, but is that representative of the
Administration's position?
Mr. Mackler: It is. I have discussed this project with the
Mayor and he very much wants to acquire this property and wants to have
permanent affordable housing inventory for the east side of Kaua`i if it could be
done.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: If he wants this, then why would we not go
for moneys that said "for East Kaua`i housing?"
Council Chair Rapozo: I would ask that you ask that of the Mayor
and not Mr. Mackler, please.
Councilmember Yukimura: Could you please ask that of the Mayor?
Mr. Mackler: Certainly.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? Thank you very much
for coming over.
Mr. Mackler: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any public testimony? Mr. Mickens.
Mr. Mickens: For the record, Glenn Mickens. I just want
to congratulate the Housing Agency, Gary in particular. They always look at the
big picture before they do anything. It is not "ready, fire, aim." I respect them
because it has always been that way with the Housing Agency. When they come up
here, they do their homework. It has been that way before and Gary has taken over
and it is that way now. I think that if this whole government of ours was ran in
that same respect, we would have a lot more efficiency. There is no doubt about it.
Anyway, I just wanted to say thank you to Gary for his efforts. They are behalf of
what the people need. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else?
COUNCIL MEETING 46 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Bernabe: Matt Bernabe for the record. The year 2009
was a real cheap time to build, so it did not cost them much to build those
apartments. I think the County should have put some guidelines and provisions in
there, and along their grace period, we are sold out. Do we get to go back and take
back part of the zoning that we gave them? I have to tell you that as a public
member, if I would have known that we only had ten (10) years of affordable
housing out of that deal, I would have been adamantly against it. That is a bad
deal. To me, that is a very bad deal; that is a sellout. They get to go and max out
profits on the sale after they get whatever they want out in their zone...I do not
even know the particulars. As far as this purchase back at twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000), I am assuming that is eighty-two (82) units, right? Forty-one
(41) and forty-one (41)? Okay, I see you shaking your head. Why can we not sell
half of them to first time buyers to help offset this and rent the other forty-one (41)?
These folks come up and look very professional, but to me, I do not know why we did
not have a thirty (30) year plan in place. Why is this ten (10) year plan in place? To
me, that is a bad deal. We got suckered. The reality is that they went and built
those apartments super nice at a time when materials and all the things and even
the loans to build were down. All these experts that come and tell you their opinion
saw this bubble coming years. I have lawyers and they told me not to buy anything.
In 2004, my lawyers told me not to buy anything until 2008 or 2009. So if my
lawyers are telling me that, these folks' lawyers told them that. I am just saying
that we got bamboozled. We better do a better job in negotiations. That is all I am
saying.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify? If not, I will
call the meeting back to order. Discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: On this project, when the Council was asked
to...actually, the Administration asked us to accept from the developer twenty-five
thousand dollars ($25,000) per unit as fulfilment of their obligation. Mr. Bernabe, if
you think that ten (10) years of affordability was bad, the original proposal was
twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) per unit, just money. There were three (3)
new councilmembers on this Council at that time: Councilmember Rapozo,
Councilmember Yukimura, and Councilmember Iseri-Carvalho; and we stopped the
approval in committee and we figured out that the actual cost of building a unit, if
the County were to accept money, was two hundred fifty thousand dollars
($250,000). When we asked the developer to pay us that amount, he said, "I will
build it myself. I can build it cheaper." To his word in no time, he had found
property, which was excellent property, the old Midkiff property, and built those
units. The Council actually modified a very bad proposal from the Administration
and made it better, but what it did not do, as I think I asked them to do, was make
it affordable in perpetuity instead of just ten (10) years, and the Council could not
go that far, but it would have made a lot of sense. Those eight hundred fifty (850)
resort units are permanent. They are on our island forever and we needed
affordable housing that was going to be forever, too. We failed to do that and that is
why we are here today to try to buy it so that it can be affordable forever. We need
a plan, so I have been asking Housing for a plan. I hope they are going to put it
forth sometime, figuring out the financing. We need to do it and we need to be
really creative. As Councilmember Hooser pointed out, that is ideal affordable
housing because it is close to jobs, right on the bus stop, close to schools, and close to
COUNCIL MEETING 47 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
the beach. It is perfect affordable housing and we really owe it to our community to
figure out how to purchase that and keep it permanently affordable.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion? The motion is to
approve. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: For me, hearing from the Administration, I
am all for affordable housing and I am all for us looking at opportunities where it is
cheaper for us to buy a unit than to reconstruct it. At twenty-five million dollars
($25,000,000), I do not know if that is the case. Could we ask for twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000) and do something else with it? Possibly, but I am not really
clear yet on what we are getting. To ask for five million dollars ($5,000,000) when
we need twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) to make it happen, it is really
hard for me to go with it right now until we have a further plan. That is just my
feeling right now. I think it could be a great opportunity, but again, I am not really
picturing how it will work. We are going to be offering affordable units, yet they
still need to pay common area maintenance because you want to keep the project
nice. They are going to have to paint, put in money for roofing, and do all of these
things. I do not really know what the ending number comes out for a person
staying in that unit. Are we going to have to subsidize that unit even further after
purchasing the property to cover these types of cost? It is really hard for me to tell
right now with the information that we have. I am all in support of looking at these
opportunities, but for us to say, "Let us five million dollars ($5,000,000) for a
twenty-five million dollar ($25,000,000) project, but we need twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000) to make it work"—I am not really in agreement with it right
now.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I talked to people around the island or they
talk to me about what their concerns are and three (3) things come up: jobs, traffic,
and housing, but not necessarily in that order. When I think about priorities and
what we should be looking into, housing is a big item and I think we need to look at
whatever we can to move the needle forward. I understand and concur that there is
a lot of planning that needs to go into this one, just like some of the other projects
we just passed to move forward. I will be supporting this. I think it is worth the
continued discussion. I would like to see a little more effort forthcoming from
everyone involved to put a plan together in how we are going to address this and I
think we should start now. If this is a catalyst to make that discussion occur, then
that is even better. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think we should put this in our package
and ask the Administration to come back with a plan by mid-January, which is just
the time that the Legislature opens, because if they do not put a plan together now,
I do not know when they will. Time is of the essence. So have a plan ready when
the Legislature opens so that we can explain to them how we will use those five
million dollars ($5,000,000) and how it fits. I am willing to work with the
Administration on that because I have been speaking to people and have even
offered the Administration some experts who can help us figure that out.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: I certainly love that site. It is already built
and I know some residents that live there and they love it, but when I divide it on
my calculator, I see the price of twenty-four million five hundred thousand dollars
($24,500,000) and you divide it by eighty-one (81) units or eighty-two (82) units and
it comes out to a whopping six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) per unit. I
certainly take a step back and say that with twenty-four million five hundred
thousand dollars ($24,500,000), I think we can double the amount of units
elsewhere. I certainly know that Housing will pursue other options to bring that
cost down and bring in third party financing to possibly get the County and State
portions down, so I am certainly not ready to jump in and tell the Legislature at this
point that this project makes sense. Therefore, I will not be supporting it at this
time, but I want to support Gary and his Agency further looking into how we can
make this work because we have a good property. It would be very helpful to the
community instead of building further units in that area that is already congested.
I want to also support the Housing Director right now in his caution to jump at the
market value, which is definitely too high. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I just wanted to clarify my position a little
more. Affordable housing is a number one priority right now, but for me, if the plan
is to get twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000), then we should be asking for
twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) and not only five million dollars
($5,000,000). I am all for affordable housing. Again, if Housing was coming here
and saying that we need five million dollars ($5,000,000) for this twenty-five million
dollar ($25,000,000) project, I would be all for it. I have faith in the Housing Agency
and I have faith in how they approach things. If they are saying that they are not
ready, then I am not comfortable voting for it. If they come later and say, "Now we
are ready and five million dollars ($5,000,000) is enough or three million dollars
($3,000,000) is enough." Maybe we need twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000),
but if they are coming here and saying, "We are ready to get this money," then I
would be more comfortable supporting it. Right now, it is not that I do not support
affordable housing; it is just that I do not think it is the right time. Housing has
said that they are not ready for it and I have faith in them in moving projects
forward and doing what is best for the island. Maybe they want to put money
towards Lima Ola or some other affordable housing project that they could use more
effectively. I do not know. If they came here and asked for a certain amount of
money, I think it would be more comfortable for me to approve it than for us to tell
them, "Here, let us throw this money at this project and you guys make it work."
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: It is an unfair thing to say, but as far as the
number one concern, but I think in many ways our number one concern is multiple.
We need to create an economy with more jobs, we need to address drug treatment,
especially for our adolescents, we need affordable housing, and we need to address
traffic congestion. With all of that and with everything else that we do as a County,
we need to be more fiscally responsible to spend the people's money more wisely and
more carefully to get more "bang for our buck." With this particular issue, as
important as affordable housing is and as important as it is for us to try and bring
our heads together and figure out where we can find the funding to retain, to own,
this property in perpetuity, so we can have affordable housing in perpetuity. I do
not even know if it is about a plan in general. The motivation is there. It is about
money. Why would we ask for five million dollars ($5,000,000) for something that
COUNCIL MEETING 49 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
we are not ready for, for something that we need three (3), four (4), or five (5) times
as much? There needs to be just a basic plan on where we can find the funding. If
we are going to ask for five million dollars ($5,000,000), at the same time we better
be asking for the other pieces or having a plan for it to really happen before the
deadline of 2019. The bottom line for me is that this is a Kaua`i County Package
and we need the Mayor's support. We have already supported the full package that
they put before us of the seven million dollars ($7,000,000), which includes the five
million dollars ($5,000,000) for the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center. So
now to add this to it, it would only be fair if we were doing this in our own separate
package. Even that, how does that look to the Legislature that this Council and the
Administration cannot work together in what we ask? Ultimately, that may be the
case, but can we put that off until next year? Where was our initiative to put this
forward when we were putting our own package together? We are now trying to
hijack the Mayor's package and turn it from seven million dollars ($7,000,000) into
twelve million dollars ($12,000,000), and to make the ask...I guess in their opinion
they might say unrealistic. I do not know. They have sat with the legislators. This
is their seven million dollar ($7,000,000) package. It does not include these five
million dollars ($5,000,000). We have heard from the Acting Housing Director that
basically they are not ready and that they are looking for other options; they put out
an RFQ. I cannot support this item, as it is before us, at this time.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Thank you, Chair. I am speaking in
enthusiastic support. I think we need to have a strong voice in support of housing
and I differ with some of my colleagues here at the table, but I think that good
people can look at the same facts and come to different conclusions, so it is not a
personal difference; it is policy difference. I think the package that we are talking
about is the County's Package. It is not the Mayor's package or our package. If the
Mayor wanted to put his package forward, he could very well do that, and we are
looking at a joint package that was proposed entirely by the Mayor. I believe that
we are two (2) branches of government and we should do more than just say yes to
the Mayor or no to the Mayor. We should initiate actions that we believe are
important. In the spirit of teamwork, the Mayor could look at those and decide
whether or not he wants to join in that effort or not. But I think we should not be
shy or timid in terms of proposing our own initiatives and our own priorities. I
think that to a large extent, that is what this is about. I think we should make the
statement loud and clear today that affordable housing is important to us and
should have been included in this package. Could we have done a better job and talk
more about it and put other affordable housing? We certainly could have, but what
we have is what we have and I think it is a good project. I agree that we need to be
fiscally responsible and I think asking the State for money is doing just that. It is
money that we do not have to spend and I think it is important to realize also that
in the negotiating process, the County has tremendous power and authority to
negotiate above and beyond what a private party would have. We have legal
authority above and beyond a private party. We have taxing and zoning authority.
We have all kinds of tools that we can use to encourage the seller to sell us at a
price that benefits the public, and if the State was able to give us five million dollars
($5,000,000) to support our housing effort...and it is my understanding that Senate
President Kouchi, who will have a big say in this, was also involved in the original
project, so he may very well be motivated and have relationships that can help us
with this. I cannot tell you how...we all know this...we all have friends and family
members who cannot find a place to live. We drive by the County Building and
there are homeless people and over by the old Big Save, there are lots of people
COUNCIL MEETING 50 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
without houses. We need to treat this with the urgency that it needs. We can plan
this to death and we can argue about whose idea it is or whose package it is, but we
need to move forward in support of affordable housing. A five million dollar
($5,000,000) ask from the Legislature may be a longshot in terms of them funding
us, but I think we need to ask, and with those five million dollars ($5,000,000) in
hand, then we cut the best deal that we can and if it is reasonable and makes sense
at that time, we do it; similar to what the same argument that has been made on
the Adolescent Treatment and Healing Canter. Let us get the money and make it
work. Well, let us do the same thing here. I think it is an opportunity to make a
statement and to make a tangible request from the Legislature that impacts a very,
very important part of our community needs. To me, this is more important than a
hangar for a helicopter. All of these other things that we are asking for, I think pale
in comparison to the need for affordable housing and I just strongly encourage the
Members at table here to vote in support, and then follow through with that vote
and we continue supporting the Housing Agency to make this thing happen. Thank
you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to add to my earlier comments
and just say that we are put here to make tough decisions and to add another five
million dollars ($5,000,000) for an affordable housing project to the County Package
would mean that we are putting the Legislature in the decision-making chair to
decide whether they are going to give us the five million dollars ($5,000,000) for the
Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center or are they going to give it for this
affordable housing project, or if they are going to give any of it to us at all. So I do
not think it is wise to take such a longshot that could be risky that means if you
believe that the priority is to move forward, as we have voted earlier, to the
Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center and you believe the Administration
saying they are not ready now and maybe they can be ready next year, it makes
more sense for us to work together better and to do what is in the best interest for
our community. I believe it is risky to leave that important decision up to someone
else.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? It is difficult for me to support
this today because the Administration clearly does not support it in this form. I
would expect or ask Councilmember Yukimura to resubmit a request for the next
Council Meeting for the County Council Package, because I do agree that we need to
make a statement. I would ask that it also be broader in scope just so that it is
structured in a way that they will definitely assist us in, if not getting this property,
getting something anyway. I am not sure if anyone has actually spoken to our
Delegation as well like our Senate President, which I plan to do. You want to show
solidarity with the Administration when these requests go up to the Legislature
because they want to make sure they are going to be providing, should they agree,
to funds that are not going to be disputed by the mayors and the councils. I think
former Senator Hooser probably can attest to this. They are not going to allocate
some funds knowing that the mayor and the council does not agree, so we have to
show some sort of solidarity. By the Council sending over a package including five
million dollars ($5,000,000) and the County package not showing that five million
dollars ($5,000,000) is a clear message to the Legislature saying, "Hey, there are
some questions between the Administration and the Council regarding this specific
funding request," and it does put the decision making in their hands. I am not sure,
depending on how they feel that day, how they vote. I think as far as approving it
for the County Package, number one, I think just process-wise, we cannot put it in
COUNCIL MEETING 51 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
the County Package without the blessing or approval of the Mayor. So for those
reasons, I am not going support this one because I think it is clear that the
Administration does not support it right now. But I do want to send a message to
the State Legislature that this Council is serious about requesting funds for
affordable housing and let them decide what they want to do. That is my position
today. With that, we will take a roll call vote.
The motion to approve C 2015-292 was then put, and failed by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL — 3,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL — 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: Staff, please note if you can work with
Councilmember Yukimura to get that on for the next meeting. Thank you. Next
item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next item is on page 4, Legal
Documents.
(Councilmember Yukimura is noted as recused.)
LEGAL DOCUMENTS:
C 2015-266 Communication (10/01/2015) from the Director of Parks &
Recreation, recommending Council approval of a License Agreement with Boys &
Girls Club of Hawai`i, a non-profit Hawai`i corporation, for three (3) portables and a
portion of the grounds immediately surrounding the portables located at the Kaua`i
War Memorial Convention Hall in Lihu`e, Kaua`i, Hawai`i, being a portion of Royal
Patent 4480, Land Commission Award 7713, Apana, Part I to V. Kamamalu, to be
used for youth-related activities in the Lihu`e area.
• License Agreement
Council Chair Rapozo: Before we make the motion to defer, let me
check if there is any testimony from the public on that item. Just for the record,
Councilmember Yukimura has left the room because she is recused. She did not
walkout because she is upset. She looked like she was upset because she just
stormed out, but then I realized she is recused for this item.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Bernabe: I thought it was pretty civil. Matthew
Bernabe for the record. We are on the Boys & Girls Club License Agreement, right?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes we are.
Mr. Bernabe: Okay. There is nothing controversial here. I
support them. They provide a service to many struggling families with daycare. I
used to take my daughter to After-School Plus (A+), but it became taxing and I had
another kid. Right when I thought I was done with A+, I had another one go in and
I was like, "Oh my goodness." To be honest, the services are actually better at the
COUNCIL MEETING 52 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Boys & Girls Club. They get food and mentoring and allow the kids to be leaders
with other groups, whereas A+ was just basically sitting there and doing your
homework, and when you are finished you can play. I support this expansion.
From what I read, these are the grounds in front of the three (3) buildings, right?
Yes, this should not be controversial in my opinion. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you, Mr. Bernabe. Anyone else? If
not, I will call the meeting back to order. Any discussion? The request to defer has
been made by the County Attorney's Office because they are still trying to get
signatures on the legal documents on the Boys & Girls Club side.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kagawa moved to defer C 2015-266 to the December 16, 2015
Council Meeting, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Can we get Councilmember Yukimura back
in and go to the next item, please.
C 2015-293 Communication (10/23/2015) from the Housing Director,
recommending Council approval of a Second Amendment of Ground Lease with Rice
Camp Partners, LP, and Ground Lease with Rice Hoala Partners, LP, for the
Development of Rice Camp Senior Housing Phase II, Tax Map Key (TMK)
No. (4) 3-6-009-001 and (4) 3-6-004-009, Lihu`e Kaua`i, Hawai`i, to include the
following:
1. Execute a Second Agreement of Ground Lease with Rice
Camp Partners, LP, to acknowledge the assignment, amend
portions of Section 18 in the Ground Lease which will no
longer be applicable to Rice Camp Partners, LP, and replace
Exhibit "A" Property Description with a new Property
Description for the Phase I Parcel;
2. Execute a Ground Lease with Rice Hoala Partners, LP, as
Lessee for the Phase II Parcel, granting site control under
the same terms as the Ground Lease dated March 17, 2014,
for the portion of land described in Exhibit "A" Property
Description as the Phase II Parcel; and
3. Authorize the County Clerk to sign lease documents for
recordation with the Bureau of Conveyances.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve C 2015-293, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Public testimony? None?
Councilmember Yukimura: What are we on?
Council Chair Rapozo: We are on C 2015-293 on top of page 5.
COUNCIL MEETING 53 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I have questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. The rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Mackler: Good morning again. Gary Mackler for the
record.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you, Gary. I know that and very glad
that we are proceeding on the second phase of Rice Camp. Can you just give us an
overview of how long the lease is and the terms in general?
Mr. Mackler: Sure. For the second phase, it is a sixty-five
(65) year lease term.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Why is it sixty-five (65) years?
Mr. Mackler: It is sixty-five (65) years because...if I may,
Chair, I would like to invite Makani Maeva to join me. She is the Vice President of
Vitus Group and she is the Director of their Hawai`i office and she is the developer
director for both phases of the Rice Camp development. I believe, and she will
correct me, that the term is based on the request that was made for the low income
housing tax credit financing. I believe she requested in her application a sixty-five
(65) year affordability period.
MAKANI MAEVA, Vice President of Vitus Group: Good morning, Chair and
Members of the Council. My name is Makani Maeva for the record. Yes, the
sixty-five (65) years is compliant with the tax credit program. What that allows you
to do is to have a sufficient time beyond the end of the first amortization period to
do a refinance. This is a term that both our lenders and investors in these types of
programs look for.
Councilmember Yukimura: So the longer the lease, the more attractive it
is to the buyers of the tax credit?
Ms. Maeva: That is correct. The lease term needs to be
at least forty (40) years to establish with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
ownership. Ownership is required in order to qualify for the tax credits and allocate
those from the limited partner.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry, it must be at least forty (40)
years and what?
Ms. Maeva: The term of the lease needs to be at least
forty (40) years; the longer, the better. The reason for forty (40) years is because the
party, the limited partner, who is investing in the tax credits, needs to establish
ownership and that is why they can take the tax credits because they own the asset,
so that is the IRS standard for ownership.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so we are adding another twenty-five
(25) years. The longer, the better for whom and why?
COUNCIL MEETING 54 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Ms. Maeva: The longer, the better for the lender. The
lender wants it to extend beyond the term of the loan so that it potentially can be
refinanced.
Councilmember Yukimura: Oh I see. Okay. To Gary, what are the
stipulations or the requirements to make sure that the project is managed in a way
that gets the units to the people that we want it to get to?
Mr. Mackler: The requirement for the affordability and
insuring that the units are leased with those who are within the income target is
through a development agreement. This lease does reference back to the
development agreement that is executed between the County and Vitus. That
agreement provides and requires long-term affordability. We own the property; the
County is a fee simple owner of the Rice Camp parcels and it controls the long-term
affordability through the ground lease provision.
Councilmember Yukimura: And basically through the development
agreement?
Mr. Mackler: Yes. They are companion documents.
Through both documents we control long-term affordability.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so if we, as Councilmembers of the
County who owns the land, gets complaints that the units are not going to people
who are not qualified that maybe they have higher incomes than the eighty percent
(80%) median income or that there is discrimination of some sort, and I am not
implying that there is any of this, but I do know that sixty (60) years is a long time
and probably none of us are going to be here in our present capacity in sixty (60)
years, so it could be someone who is not managing it correctly or it could be
somebody in the County who is not managing the contract correctly. I am just
asking what the mechanisms for enforcing are or making sure that the mission of
the project from the public standpoint is properly fulfilled.
Mr. Mackler: If those kinds of complaints and those kinds
of situations occur, it would require County intervention under the terms of the
lease. If there were a material breach of the lease, then the County would have to
take whatever steps were appropriate at that time to correct it or to go beyond that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are there mechanisms in the development
agreement that specify those procedures?
Mr. Mackler: There are provisions in the lease. Again, the
lease references back and incorporates the development agreement provisions as
well.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think that is good enough for now, but I am
concerned about the long-term achievement of our mission. I guess I will be looking
into this further. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Questions? Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you for being here, Gary and Makani.
How many units are there for Phase II? Twelve (12) units?
COUNCIL MEETING 55 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Ms. Maeva: Phase II is thirty (30) units.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thirty (30) units?
Ms. Maeva: In some cases, it is three (3) stories and in
other portions of the parcel, it is two (2) stories.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. How much is there in Phase I?
Mr. Mackler: Sixty (60).
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay, so sixty (60) units and an additional
thirty (30) units.
Mr. Mackler: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: Is the demand there for the additional thirty
(30) units?
Ms. Maeva: We rented up the first sixty (60) units within
the same month that we received certificates of occupancy. We have a waitlist for
residents for Phase II. We do not anticipate that there will be any problem.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: What are the rents for the one-bedroom and
two-bedroom units?
Ms. Maeva: This is a senior property, so the rents are set
at fifty percent (50%) at the Area Median Income (AMI). Off the top of my head, the
AMI moves, but I believe it is six hundred eighty dollars ($680) for the
one-bedrooms and eight hundred twenty-seven dollars ($827) for the two-bedrooms
and that includes your utilities.
Councilmember Hooser: AMI?
Ms. Maeva: I am sorry, fifty percent (50%) of your area
median income, which is adjusted every year. Interestingly, in 2015 it went down.
Council Chair Rapozo: Did the rents go down? When the feds
changed their Housing and Urban Development (HUD) numbers or AMI's, and we
have that issue coming up later today, does that move your rents down as well?
Ms. Maeva: In fact, there is a "Hold Harmless" rule, so
your rents stay the same so that I can stabilize my financing, so your rent stays the
same, but I leased it at the lowest rent at the 2015 rent, so I did not have to adjust
downwards because we are talking about something that was just leased up.
Phase I was just this year.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right, but these ones that are coming up,
these new units, that will be based on...
COUNCIL MEETING 56 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Ms. Maeva: It will be based on this year's rents. I set
them for that and financing is complete on this property.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: If it is fifty percent (50%) of AMI, that means
it is for seniors with income of one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200) or one
thousand six hundred dollars ($1,600)...
Ms. Maeva: The income levels were adjusted by unit size
and family composition, so the number of residents in the unit, and your area
median income for a family of four (4) on Kaua`i is eighty-six thousand three
hundred dollars ($86,300), so what you would do is basically divide that in half, so it
is forty three thousand one hundred fifty dollars ($43,150) for a family of four (4).
Again, these are senior units, so generally they would not have a family composition
of that size.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, so it would go down into the family of
one (1) or two (2) usually.
Ms. Maeva: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is the median income for a family of
one (1) or two (2)? It must be half of that.
Ms. Maeva: It is not exactly half of that. There is a
variation based upon the number of people and the unit size, so I cannot tell you if
there is one (1) person, two (2) people, or three (3) people. I can tell you what the
four (4) people are because that is the only thing I memorized.
Councilmember Yukimura: Do you know, Gary?
Mr. Mackler: Not offhand, I do not.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you very much. We are very
pleased that it is going forward.
Mr. Mackler: Chair, I would just like to say about this
project that it is a two (2) phase project, and when the first phase was under
construction, Makani was already working proactively to move into the second
phase, so when the first phase opened its doors in March of this year, Council
approved HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) funds, we are
providing five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) of HOME assistance earlier this
year through our HOME action plan that was in April when the Council approved
the appropriation. In July, Makani was successful in receiving tax credit financing
through the Hawai`i Housing Finance & Development Cooperation, so she has put
this project together in record time, yet again, and I believe that your plans are in
for permitting or I do not know if they have gotten approval yet.
Ms. Maeva: Yes, we submitted plans in August for
building permits and we are waiting for approval.
COUNCIL MEETING 57 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Mackler: I just want to say that we really appreciate
her efforts for moving it quickly because under our development agreement for
Phase II, we basically gave them until January 2018 and here we are in
November 2015, and they are ready to reach the point of construction, possibly later
this year or early next year. I just want to give her credit and also thank the
Council for giving this project your support.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any other questions? If not,
thank you very much.
Mr. Mackler: Thank you.
Ms. Maeva: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone in the audience wishing to testify? If
not, I will call the meeting back to order. Further discussion? I just want to say
thanks to Gary and Makani. I think we all know Makani as a miracle worker. I do
not know how you do these things, but you get it done quickly and efficiently and
the turnaround is just remarkably quick. Thank you for your work and working
with our Housing Agency.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2015-293 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next item is on page 5, C 2015-294.
CLAIM:
C 2015-294 Communication (10/30/2015) from the County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Haley Kuntz, for
damages to her vehicle and personal injuries, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of
the County of Kaua`i: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to refer C 2015-294 to the
County Attorney's Office for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded
by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony?
The motion to refer C 2015-294 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition
and/or report back to the Council was then put, and unanimously carried.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
PUBLIC WORKS / PARKS & RECREATION COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2015-16) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
"PWPR 2015-08 — Communication (10/21/2015) from Council Chair
Rapozo, requesting the presence of the County Engineer to provide a briefing
COUNCIL MEETING 58 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
regarding the Kawaihau, Hau`a`ala, and Ma'ilihuna Complete Streets
project,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? Okay, the
rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Bernabe: Matthew Bernabe for the record. I just
would like to say since the last meeting, I have been through that whole area one
thousand (1,000) of times and I am really looking forward to the "peanut," but I just
want to reiterate that whenever this starts to get phased in, they really...what is
the name of the street for St. Catherine's? I was born and raised here, but I do not
know the street names over there. Hau`a`ala? That one needs a sidewalk because
the very next day, which I believe was Friday, I went and picked up my keiki and I
go down that road. Afterschool, it is horrible. In the morning, there is a few on that
road, not as much, but afterschool, that is a mass transit because even the ones that
do not walk home walk down to the town to go and eat a sandwich or drink coffee or
whatever they are doing. I hate to say it, but they are all on coffee. I was telling
my kids, "I was just talking about this." I gave them my ten (10) minute lecture on
how unsafe it was because they are all over that place. I just want to say that I like
this project and I really would like whoever is in charge to incorporate a sidewalk
for that lane. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? If not, the meeting is called
back to order. The motion is to approve.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously
carried.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT & INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-EDIR 2015-07) submitted by the Economic Development &
Intergovernmental Relations Committee, recommending that the following be
Received for the Record:
"EDIR 2015-02 — Communication (10/21/2015) from Council Chair
Rapozo, requesting the presence of the County Engineer to provide a briefing
regarding the Kawaihau, Hau`a`ala, and Ma`ilihuna Complete Streets
project,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? The rules are
suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING 59 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Bernabe: Matthew Bernabe. This is another one
where I just want to reiterate my position. As far as the strategic plan, some of the
amenities that we advertise as Kaua`i's gems, some of these outdoor activities, I
really believe could be offset if we had more cultural centers; but not only that, a
place that has nightclubs or some other eateries where they can go and expend their
energy and money so that they do not always wake up bright and early with all the
energy in the world and they want to go and drown on our beaches where there is
nobody at and walk on our trails and get stuck. I have to tell you that it is not a
laughing matter, but how many would not walk Kalalau if they woke up with a
hangover and had a late start to the day. But they are not because there is nothing
to do at night, so they are in bed early after dinner, and they are up at bright in the
morning and they are going. I would just like to reiterate that if we could get some
of these amenities, and I say that as Kalalau is an amenity that we offer as a tourist
destination, so I think we need more of that stop-off. Back in my day, we had the
hula show at the Coconut Marketplace center stage every day and we do not even
have that anymore. Maybe some of these practitioners can pick that up wherever it
is; but not only that, let us get some nightclubs and some eateries so we can get
them a little bit inebriated and charter them home on some shuttles.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? If not, I will call the meeting
back to order. The motion is to approve.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-BF 2015-37) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee
recommending that the following be Approved as Amended:
"Bill No. 2600 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, SECTION 5A-11A.1, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO THE BENEFICIAL TAX RATE FOR
PROPERTY USED FOR LONG-TERM AFFORDABLE RENTAL,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
A report (No. CR-BF 2015-38) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee
recommending that the following be Approved:
"Bill No. 2599 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2015-796, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
OPERATING BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF
HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH
JUNE 30, 2016, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS ESTIMATED IN THE
GENERAL FUND (Kaua`i Fire Department, Aerial Apparatus Vehicle 10%
County Match — $71,909.00),"
COUNCIL MEETING 60 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE:
A report (No. CR-COW 2015-14) submitted by the Committee of the Whole
recommending that the following be Approved:
"C 2015-278 Communication (10/20/2015) from the Mayor,
transmitting for Council consideration for inclusion in the 2016 County of
Kaua`i Legislative Package, A Bill for An Act authorizing the issuance of
General Obligation Bonds and making an appropriation, in the amount of
$7,150,000 for the following:
• Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center
(Construction & Site Improvements) — $5,000,000
• Centralized Auto Maintenance Facility
(Planning, Permitting & Design) — $550,000
• Kaua`i Fire Department Helicopter Hangar
(Construction) — $500,000
• Salt Pond Master Plan— $400,000
• Veterans Cemetery Facility Construction &
Improvements — $700,000,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Chock, and unanimously carried.
BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2607) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2015-797, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL
BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS
ESTIMATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT FUND (Koloa/Po ipu Intersection
Improvements, Po`ipu Realty Partners, LLC — $41,000): Councilmember Kuali`i
moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2607) on first reading, that it be
ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for December 16, 2015,
and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? If not, roll
call, please.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2607) on first reading,
that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
December 16, 2015, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was
then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
COUNCIL MEETING 61 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2608) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2015-797, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL
BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2015 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2016, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS
ESTIMATED IN THE DEVELOPMENT FUND (Koloa/Po`ipu Intersection
Improvements, Kiahuna Fairways, LLC — $47,750): Councilmember Kuali`i moved
for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2608) on first reading, that it be ordered to
print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for December 16, 2015, and
referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? Seeing none,
roll call, please.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2608) on first reading,
that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
December 16, 2015, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was
then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Your next item is Bills for Second Reading,
Bill No. 2600, Draft 1.
(Councilmember Hooser is noted as recused.)
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2600, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, SECTION 5A-11A.1, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS
AMENDED, RELATING TO THE BENEFICIAL TAX RATE FOR PROPERTY
USED FOR LONG-TERM AFFORDABLE RENTAL: Councilmember Kuali`i moved
for adoption of Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, on second and final reading, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa moved to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, as
circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto
as Attachment 1, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Kagawa: If I may, Chair, I am going to briefly state
my reason for this amendment. First of all, my amendment is of no disrespect to
Councilmember Kaneshiro, who really put a lot of time on this into his original
amendment. It came after analysis and meeting with Tina Sakamoto and Dorothea
COUNCIL MEETING 62 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Hayashi, and what this amendment does is it moves the eighty percent (80%), as
was in the original Bill, to one hundred percent (100%) of the Kaua`i median
household income. I have a memorandum from Tina Sakamoto, who did an
analysis after working with the Department of Finance and from 2006 through
2010, the County used one hundred twenty percent (120%) of the median income for
purposes of the cap so that people could apply for the affordable tax rate. From
2011 to 2012, they used one hundred percent (100%). From 2013 until present, we
used eighty percent (80%). So using different percentages is not something new.
Let me point out my main reason for wanting to support this amendment. If you
look at what our current amendment or previous amendment in Committee wanted
to do was we wanted to keep it stable to the 2015 eighty percent (80%) rate, which
means you could rent it. In 2016, you could rent it at the eighty percent (80%) rate
or what you rented it out prior to the eighty percent (80%) dropping, as was very
unusual. If you compare the eighty percent (80%) at 2015 for a studio that was one
thousand twenty-six dollars ($1,026), if we used one hundred percent (100%) of the
2016, it would be one thousand thirty-six dollars ($1,036), meaning a ten dollar
($10) increase for a studio, which I think is reasonable. For a one-bedroom, from
one thousand one hundred eighty-one dollars ($1,181), it will go up eleven dollars
($11) to one thousand one hundred ninety-two dollars ($1,092), so in 2016, you
would be able to increase your rent eleven dollars ($11). For a two-bedroom, again,
just a thirteen dollar ($13) increase. For a three-bedroom, you would be allowed a
twenty dollar ($20) increase from one thousand five hundred seventy-two dollars
($1,572) instead of one thousand five hundred fifty-two dollars ($1,552). For a
four-bedroom of a twenty-two dollar ($22) increase and for a five-bedroom would be
a twenty-eight dollar ($28) increase, which would be the largest increase. Again, I
think when we talk about today's topic, which was "how do we increase affordable
housing," and my views are that last year we had one thousand one hundred (1,100)
people that got the tax incentive. This year, we have one thousand one hundred
(1,100) that applied and if you minus the two hundred (200) that normally get
disqualified, we heard that there are several in here that spoke that already said
they got disqualified, we would have a nine hundred (900) or so amount of people
that would qualify for the tax rate. That is a decrease of two hundred (200)
affordable houses that meets the affordable rental program. I am saying if we are
in an affordable housing crisis, we should try to increase that number, not decrease
that number. We want our local families to take advantage of that homestead rate,
but follow some guidelines for affordable rentals. I believe the one hundred percent
(100%) increases that I am supporting in my amendment is not unreasonable. I
think they are reasonable increases and we want to encourage more people. I hope
we have four hundred (400) or five hundred (500) people who say, "I am going to
participate in the program." We talked about being willing to spend five million
dollars ($5,000,000) to start getting back forty-one (41) affordable houses in
Waipouli. We are talking about impacting hundreds of people that could benefit
from affordable rentals with this legislation. I hope we can get the support. If this
amendment does not pass, I will support its original intent of just going back to
2015 rents. I am open, but I think this is a better deal. This is a proactive
approach to targeting affordable housing and increasing the affordable housing.
Like I said, I think the increases from the 2015 eighty percent (80%) to the 2016 one
hundred percent (100%) of median income is very reasonable increases, very small
ten dollar ($10) up to twenty dollar ($20) increases. Again, I hope that we can get
this legislation passed. We have a deadline that to me is today because we are
extending a deadline that has already past us and December 31st would be the last
day that these people can apply. I ask the Finance Department that we can try and
nip this in the butt a little bit earlier than waiting until the due date has past
COUNCIL MEETING 63 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
before we see the results. Thank you. If you have any questions, I will try my best
to answer.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: To the introducer of the amendment, if it is
ten dollars ($10) a month, then it is a one hundred twenty dollar ($120) increase a
year, right? Or if it is twenty-eight dollars ($28), I think that was your biggest
increase...
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, for a five-bedroom.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is like three hundred thirty-six dollars
($336) more per year. For those families that are on lower incomes, that is a big
jump per year.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, the fact of the matter is if you look at
the total number, if it is at the five-bedroom, one thousand eight hundred
seventy-five ($1,875) was last year's rent, what they could rent out for a
five-bedroom. Under eighty percent (80%) of 2015, that would move to one
thousand nine hundred three dollars ($1,903) and I would say that the one
thousand eight hundred seventy-five dollars ($1,875) already sounds outrageous to
me as rent, but we allowed that to be an affordable rental for a five-bedroom last
year and I see an increase of twenty-eight dollars ($28) as not that significant if you
look at the cost of a renter and his utilities, etcetera.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I guess that is where we disagree. I
think for a family already paying one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800), to
add another three hundred dollars ($300) is a lot, but we can leave it at that.
Councilmember Kagawa: I understand. My concern is that if it drops
out of the program or if they do not qualify, they have additional property taxes, if
you assume five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) property of one thousand five
hundred dollars ($1,500). Again, as I reiterated in the previous Committee
Meeting, where is that additional one thousand five hundred ($1,500) of taxes going
to go to? Is it going to come out of the owner's pocket or is it going to come out of the
renter's pocket? I say that our best way to encourage affordable housing and our
local families to take advantage of that program is to reduce taxes as much as we
can. That is how we directly reduce rents.
Councilmember Yukimura: The thing is that we are reducing their taxes
because they are giving a big subsidy to the families that need the low rents the
most. If you raise the rent threshold, then those families that need it most will not
be covered. They will go to the next level of renters.
Councilmember Kagawa: I understand, but as I explained from the
2015 eighty percent (80%), we are talking for a studio, ten dollars ($10) and
one-bedroom, eleven dollars ($11). I think that is very insignificant increases that
we are talking about. I believe ten dollars ($10), eleven dollars ($11) is reasonable.
In the past, we went up to one hundred twenty percent (120%). How do we bring up
our numbers of people participating? I think that is a direct way that we can
increase affordable housing for our people. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 64 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any other questions of
Councilmember Kagawa or the Administration? We have Mr. Hunt here if there
are any questions for him. The rules are suspended with no objections.
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you, Steve. What is the
Administration's position, if any, on this proposed amendment? Did you get to look
at it?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
STEVEN A. HUNT, Real Property Tax Manager: No, this is the first time
seeing it and I have not discussed it with the Administration, so I am going to give
you my opinion, just the brushstrokes that I have seen on this. The final number
that we received, we finally have been able to process all of the current long-term
affordable applications for 2016. There were one thousand two hundred forty-one
(1,241), of which one thousand one hundred forty-five (1,145) were approved. That
means ninety-six (96) were denied for various reasons. Not all of them are because
of the rent levels. Some of them may have two (2) kitchens and may not qualify
based on the applications they submit, so we are still reviewing. There are three (3)
that potentially could still be approved. We are sending appraisers out to verify the
structures. We are talking anywhere from a loss, if those three (3) additionally are
wrapped into the program, we are losing one hundred fifty-five (155) compared to
last year or one hundred fifty-eight (158) if those three are denied, but those
numbers are still much higher than it was in 2014 where we only had about nine
hundred (900) that were in the program. My concern about increasing it to one
hundred percent (100%) is I do not necessarily think those one hundred fifty-five
(155) to one hundred fifty-eight (158) will all come back in just by raising it to one
hundred percent, (100%), but what we might see is those people that are already in,
those one thousand one hundred forty-five (1,145) now can raise the rents on their
tenants, so we may have no additional inventory, but higher rents based on the one
hundred percent (100%). Really, this is a landlord's bill, not a tenant's bill because
the people who we are trying to protect, which are the tenants, will be pushed up. If
we can guarantee that we are going to have more inventory participating, I would
be supportive of this, but I think this merely opens the opportunity for those that
are already participating to raise the rents.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: In some case where landlords go out of this
program, it just may be that they made a decision because they are able to get rents
so much that going up to one hundred percent (100%)...maybe that is just what you
were saying, that it will not pull them back into the program.
Mr. Hunt: I think the ones that have left, and we do not
have an exit survey of why they left, which I wish we had that information, but in
many cases, I think the market rents are so much higher than having the rents
under this program that even if they are paying the higher taxes, a month and
month and a half rental differentials are already paid for the tax differential and
everything else that other ten and a half(10.5) months or so is gravy to them. That
is additional income.
�.� Vim
COUNCIL MEETING 65 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, so in a rising rental market, the drop
out may not be due to our adjustments or lack of thereof. It might be because the
market is so...
Mr. Hunt: It is the dynamics of the market and I think
that was also the case when we saw the decrease, because at one time we were at
one hundred twenty percent (120%), then we went to one hundred percent (100%),
but what we saw during those periods where there was inversion at one hundred
twenty percent (120%) of median income, the cap level rents exceeded market rents.
We were able to charge one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200) when the
market rent was one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800). There was inversion
during a soft period and conversely now we are seeing more leave because it is much
more enticing to charge market rents in this upswing.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Can you explain to me again on why this
would not increase the inventory at all?
Mr. Hunt: I would be hopeful it would, but in my mind,
if you were renting for say one thousand six hundred dollars ($1,600) a month and
fell within one of the categories and the market rent was two thousand dollars
($2,000) a month for that same unit; four hundred dollars ($400) difference when
you figure out the tax rate on the differential on the five hundred thousand dollar
($500,000) home, say when you are talking about one thousand five hundred dollars
($1,500) in taxes when you are making four hundred dollars ($400) a month, by the
time...in this case, it would be about three and a half (3.5) months into it you have
already paid for the taxes and anything beyond that, you are now in the black. You
are making more money charging market rent than participating. This program
was never meant to subsidize the difference between market rent and keep the rent
low; this was a program aimed at keeping primarily eighty percent (80%) and below
because that was the biggest demand in that program. We wanted to keep rentals
available and incentivize them. In many cases, people just like the tenants, they
have been long-term tenants for a while, they want to keep them, and they cannot
afford to take the hits to market, so this was a way to entice those homeowners that
are basically doing good work, charity work in many cases, to continue to do that
and not put their tenants out on their feet.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Steve, if our goal with this program is to
control rents or incentivize rents at eighty percent (80%) and below, why did the
Administration not tell us when this problem occurred, where in order for an owner
to receive a tax credit, they would have to decrease their rents? Why did you folks
not tell us that there is a problem this year? We had to figure it out because of
complaints and come up with an amendment. If you folks were truly making for
making this program work and providing affordable rents to people of eighty
percent (80%) median income or less, why did you folks not come to us when you
saw that problem come up where the median income went down, and we would not
have to rush at the end with this type of legislation?
COUNCIL MEETING 66 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Hunt: Again, we are following the ordinance. The
ordinance says eighty percent (80%), so it is only perceived as a problem when you
are getting the calls. Had rents gone up, you would not have perceived it as a
problem. I do not necessarily want to come back and say, "Do you know what? It
looks like there are some sales in Hanalei that are up this year. It could be fifteen
percent (15%)." That is not something that I would come to the Council with
because that is just part of the daily operations that we are dealing with.
Councilmember Kagawa: But did you folks expect that a reduction in
the median income would not affect the participation in the program? If they were
renting out at the max eighty percent (80%) level last year and they found out,
"Hey, for a one-bedroom this year, I have to reduce my rent by ninety-three dollars
($93)," I would think that should have raised a red flag. Again, if you folks are
working within the lines with the Housing Agency and saying, "How do we
encourage affordable housing and participation in this program?"
Mr. Hunt: I think that should be the line that we are
going to draw, the differential. We are administering tax policy. Real Property
Assessment is not participating in housing requirements and what is the affordable
range and all of that. We get fed information from the Housing Agency. They are
the ones that are driving that. All we say is, "What is affordable based on Housing
Agency's opinion," or in this case it is HUD. If you are following HUD and HUD is
the level of assistance that you are getting subsidies from to help provide housing
and what those levels are this year. They provide us a report. It used to be early
enough and get it in November, but now we are getting it in January/February, so
we are not even getting that information until HUD provides it to Housing who
provides it to us and now we are getting it in February.
Councilmember Kagawa: I totally understand; it is just that in your
testimony, you said the eighty percent (80%) is really important and you folks failed
to work together when we had this unusual circumstance that happened and now
we are trying to fix it.
Mr. Hunt: I wish I had foresight as to what the next
report is going to show, whether it is going to be an uptick again in median income
or not. I cannot answer that.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any questions? If not, thank you very much.
Anyone wishing to testify on this matter? If not, I will call the meeting back to
order. Further discussion? We are on the amendment. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kaneshiro: This is probably a discussion point, but you
are also deleting the multiyear portion?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. I think the best way that I can analyze
this is that this is a large band-aid and I do not want to leave the band-aid on for
more than one (1) year. I think this is a large band-aid to try and encourage more
affordable housing. I really think that this should be all in that tax reform that I
hope we will begin very soon. Hopefully we will address everything, like this credit
COUNCIL MEETING 67 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
and property tax values. That is my intention. I have heard again from some of the
naysayers that said it is not going to be successful like a three (3) year commitment.
I am just taking it out for now, but I do not really have as much an issue with that.
It is just getting something done, either if it was the amendment that passed in
Committee or the amendment today, I am just happy that this Council is trying to
increase the numbers of participants and trying to bring some fairness to what had
happened from last year to this year.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Sorry, Chair. Actually I do have some
questions about this amendment as well.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Before we do that, we are going to
break for lunch. Can somebody let Mark know that we are running a little late and
that we will reconvene around 1:45 p.m., just so that we are not having them wait?
We will break for lunch and be back at 1:45 p.m. and do the certificate presentation
for Mark Oyama and come back to this Bill.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 12:38 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 2:09 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: The meeting is called back to order.
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his motion to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1,
as circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached
hereto as Attachment 1, Councilmember Chock withdrew his second.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, as
circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto
as Attachment 2, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: You may explain your new amendment.
Councilmember Kagawa: This is the same amendment. The only
difference is that we are now opening up the door to anyone to apply for this credit
based on the one hundred percent (100%) of the Kaua`i median household income.
If we left the old amendment on the books, it would have only applied to those that
fell out of the program because the median income had decreased their ability to
rent at the same amount that they had got in the credit for the prior year. I think
this is much fairer to the entire community. I think I read it on a news article or a
blog on why were we introducing an amendment just for a specific group and why
did we not look at the entire island and try to increase affordable housing
opportunities? I think this is a good amendment. Hopefully, this is something that
we can spend more time earlier next year on as we try to find that happy medium
where we can increase the number of participants, yet still keeping those rents
affordable as we see it, enough to deserve a credit from a six dollar ($6) rate to a
three dollar ($3) rate.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 68 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Chock: I have a question. What it would do is open
it up to everyone to be eligible to apply for this, but they would only have until
December 31st to do so. Is that correct?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, correct.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: If they missed the December 31st deadline,
they will have to wait until next year. Again, we are putting the Finance
Department under a real tight due date to get these things done, but I think we
want to do our part to encourage affordable housing opportunities.
Councilmember Chock: To clarify, this is kind of like a one-shot deal.
Come next year, we will have to relook at this and determine how we move forward
on a rate or fixing rates, correct?
Councilmember Kagawa: Correct.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else before we open it up for public
testimony? If not, I will suspend the rules with no objections. Anyone in the
audience wishing to testify? You may come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
DOROTHEA HAYASHI: Dorothea Hayashi. Council Chair and
Councilmembers, I would like to express my appreciation that you gave your time
that we came here and tried to explain what we felt was...the only word I can think
of was discrimination in the sense that it was only going to help just a bunch
of...how should I say it...those who applied with last year's. I appreciate that you
were able to see what was happening to the median income families, which we are
trying to really accommodate. Section 8 will always have help. Of course, they
have to live up to their contract and that is the part that I think is kind of "iffy"
with a lot of us. I really appreciate that you are helping the people that are left out
of Section 8 that are really desperately looking for housing. I know from my
experience that some families live in one (1) room each because they have to return
home to their parents and I know I cannot accommodate everyone because I only
have two (2) homes, but I thank you for giving me this chance, at least to keep my
present tenants whom one of them I had was for twelve (12) years. If it passes, I
appreciate it. I know it still has to be voted on. Thank you for your efforts.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else?
TINA SAKAMOTO: Chair, Vice Chair, and Members, Tina
Sakamoto. It has been a long project working on this. It is a compromised
amendment, but the best solution. It was an attempt to correct an oversight
without a band-aid, but really do a thorough reanalysis of what the oversight may
have posed as a problem and reducing the affordable housing available. I feel that
this is the best solution to reopen it at one hundred percent (100%) and get back on
track. Hopefully, we will offer the island a greater number of affordable housing on
COUNCIL MEETING 69 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
an immediate basis. I thank you and support this amendment and encourage that
you do vote in favor of it. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify?
If not, I will call the meeting back to order. We are on the amendment. Any further
discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a chart that the Housing Director
Kamuela Cobb-Adams presented to my Affordable Housing Advisory Committee
that I wanted to show. It is a bit dated and I think the numbers have increased, but
I do not think the proportions have changed that greatly. You see that the greatest
bulk of need in terms of housing is for the eighty percent (80%) and below, in the
two (2) groups below fifty percent (50%) and between fifty percent (50%) to eighty
percent (80%). Eighty percent (80%) to one hundred twenty percent (120%) is much
smaller. I would be for raising it to one hundred percent (100%) of median income if
it did not take away from the lower income groups, but because it means that people
will be incentivized to raise their rents to one hundred percent (100%), that means
we are going to be negatively affecting people in the eighty percent (80%) range who
are not able to afford one hundred percent (100%) type of rents. I am hopeful that
perhaps when we institute a more comprehensive reform, we can look at how to
incentivize on a proportional basis those who provide affordable rentals, but not as
low as where the bulk need is. I think that is one of the problems. We have
targeted the eighty percent (80%) and below because that is a fairly deep subsidy
that landlords are giving to the most needy group and that is why we felt an
incentive or credit was due...it is not a credit; it is a differential tax rate. When you
raise the rents that qualify to one hundred percent (100%), the incentive is going to
be to take away from the eighty percent (80%) group. It may seem like one hundred
twenty dollars ($120) a year or three hundred dollars ($300) a year is not that big of
a jump, but for this family, they are counting pennies so that they know whether
they can eat or pay for gas. I think it makes a big difference and we should really
know the impacts of what we are doing before we do that. Also, just to remember
that as Mr. Hunt pointed out, sometimes as the market heats up, the incentive is so
great that just moving it to one hundred percent (100%) is not going to keep
landlords in the affordable housing category because they can make so much by
renting marketwise that it exceeds whatever they can get in a tax break. It is a
really tricky marketplace.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. The problem stems with
the median income, which I guess by surprise reduced from 2015 to 2016. So you
could say theoretically, "Well in 2015, the eighty percent (80%) was the perfect
amount. It reached the maximum amount of people in the way intended." But
when it drops the next year, that means that that eighty percent (80%) is no longer
eighty percent (80%). It is less than eighty percent (80%). What this amendment
does, exactly as Councilmember Yukimura said, for a studio it would go up ten
dollars ($10) over 2015 by going from eighty percent (80%) of 2015 to one hundred
percent (100%) of 2016. It would be eleven dollars ($11) for a one-bedroom, thirteen
dollars ($13) for a two-bedroom, twenty dollars ($20) for a three-bedroom. To me, I
look at this as do we want to not do anything and save people one hundred twenty
dollars ($120) a year and do not open a door to get more people participating. I
COUNCIL MEETING 70 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
value more affordable housing as a higher value than saving individual families one
hundred twenty dollars ($120). We have to weigh our decision. We do not know, as
Mr. Hunt did not know until today, what the number is. We will not know what the
number is when we pass this legislation, but as we have an affordable housing
crisis, I will support opening up the opportunities to support more families, rather
than say, "Well, I am worried about this one family paying ten dollars ($10) or
eleven dollars ($11) more per month." It is a tough decision. It is not an easy
decision. We were left with trying to fix a problem that was really obvious. The
problem was the fact that from 2015, the eighty percent (80%) change to 2016's
eighty percent (80%); for a studio, you had to rent your place out for eighty-nine
dollars ($89) less. For a one-bedroom, you would have to rent your place out for
ninety-four dollars ($94) less. For a two-bedroom, you would have to rent it out for
one hundred four dollars ($104) less. Where do you see deflation in the housing
market on Kaua`i and say that is fair? Inflation is common in the housing market.
Again, we try to correct a problem that was obvious, and we are correcting a
problem, whether we go with today's amendment or whether we revert back to
Councilmember Kaneshiro's amendment in the Committee. I am inclined to
support today's amendment because I am willing to take the risk that will open up
more affordable opportunities for more local people to decide, "Hey, I am going to
get out of the regular market, save one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) in
property taxes, and I am going to reduce my rent because I like my tenant and I
want to keep my tenant because he is a responsible tenant. He fixes utilities on his
own, out of his own pocket because he appreciates me, as a renter, keeping his rent
down. I think there are a lot of those cases out there. Ms. Silva, the teacher, talked
about wanting to keep her tenant. She had him for twenty (20) plus years. If we
forced her to go in the market, she said she would have to get rid of him. I think we
have to be very careful that just these numbers will make people increase rents. I
think a lot of people want to help their fellow families and friends. I think it is
worth the risk. "Everything is a risk," as former Chair Furfaro used to say.
Everything is a risk. We just have to weigh the risk and today we cast our vote on
how we fix the problem by using Councilmember Kaneshiro's amendment, as done
in Committee, or using my amendment today and taking a larger gamble. Thank
you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, then
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Yukimura: Councilmember Kagawa, the problem that
your amendment is seeking to address where it is now the median income has
dropped, so the rents are needing to qualify at eighty-nine (89) or whatever, that is
also addressed by Councilmember Kaneshiro's amendment without the higher risk
of affecting negatively the eighty percent (80%) of the median income. Is that right?
Councilmember Kagawa: If I can kind of summarize the change, the
problem with the amendment that Councilmember Kaneshiro has was that it would
only apply to people who got the credit last year.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right.
Councilmember Kagawa: The second part is financially, it will mean a
ten dollar ($10) effect per month for a studio, eleven dollars ($11) per month for the
one-bedroom, and so on. That is what it will mean as far as dollar-wise. You are
correct that if you multiply that by twelve (12), you are talking about one hundred
twenty dollars ($120) to one hundred thirty dollars ($130), but what is the amount
COUNCIL MEETING 71 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
of people that may join in? Maybe even people who did not participate in the past.
We do not know until we try.
Councilmember Yukimura: But they still might set it at a higher rate
than the eighty percent (80%) of what median income people are able to afford. If
the statistic is right, and it is possible while prices go up, income goes down. If that
is true, then we are creating a really difficult situation for the eighty percent (80%).
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I have a question.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Chock: Really, the ones that we are worried about
are the ones who are already applied, who with this amendment passes would go
back and raise the rent to one hundred percent (100%). So if Councilmember
Kagawa's amendment passes, it would open up the door for everyone to reconsider,
reapply, and get to a higher rate. Is that correct? So that is really where the risk
is, which are the people who have already applied and been approved, and now have
an opportunity to come back and reapply for...
Councilmember Yukimura: It allows anybody to come in, even if they did
not have a rental agreement previously, but it also allows those who had a lower
rent to raise it to a higher level, those who are now satisfying the eighty percent
(80%) group to raise it to a level where it would be difficult for the eighty percent
(80%) and below to afford.
Council Chair Rapozo: I would guess that the ones who have
already applied and got approved are set, that their leases are intact. For them to
go back and redo the lease, I do not know if that will happen for ten dollars ($10) or
eleven dollars ($11) a month. What this does is opens it up. I think the bigger part
of this amendment is that it opens it up for more participants. If someone is on that
threshold where if they can drop their rent two hundred dollars ($200) a month,
depending on what the tax is, if it is three thousand dollars ($3,000) a year, then
you are talking about a savings of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) a
month. Can they drop the rent enough to make it a financially feasible change to
join the program? That will be up to them. I believe there are people out there, and
I actually know that, and I think you folks are examples of it, as well as Ms. Silva,
that they are not into making a lot of money and they just want to help families. I
am looking at this thing as a "half-full glass" and I am hoping that this will give or
empower people that want to help an opportunity to help families. Yes, they may
lose a potential three hundred dollars ($300), four hundred dollars ($400), five
hundred dollars ($500), or one thousand dollars ($1,000) a year, but in return they
get that reward of helping a family move into a home who otherwise would not be
able to. I am looking at it in that context that I am hoping that this will give people
an opportunity to join in on a program to help the situation, rather than just tell us
that we need to do something about it. Again, it is a risk. I could be wrong. If
everyone turned around, went up, and raised their rents because they could then
shame on them. That is just my personal opinion. I do not know if that answered
your question, Councilmember Chock. I just see the biggest part of this amendment
is opening it up. Hopefully, more people will join in. It does come with a financial
cost to the County, but we could go out and build six hundred (600) units tomorrow
and spend millions and millions of dollars. So what are the options?
Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 72 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Yukimura: What is the financial cost if we go to one
hundred percent (100%)? Do we know?
Councilmember Kagawa: We do not know. It just depends on how
many people participate. If we go based on hoping that we reach last year's
numbers, all you have to do is multiply that by one thousand five hundred (1,500) to
get a rough estimate. So you go one hundred twenty (120) or whatever times one
thousand five hundred (1,500)—I do not know what that number comes out to.
Council Chair Rapozo: Like I said, it will come with a cost, but if
you want to put more people in homes. We do not know that. It is very hard to tell
because there are so many variables. Somebody's property tax may not be three
thousand dollars ($3,000). It may be one thousand two hundred dollars ($1,200) or
one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800), so your impact is nine hundred dollars
($900) for that house, as opposed to one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500). It
is moving target. There is no way you are going to be able to...there is an "x" and a
"y." Without knowing one of them, it is very hard to make that determination.
Councilmember Kagawa: If I times one hundred twenty (120) to get
back to about last year's number, times a typical benefit of one thousand five
hundred dollars (1,500) for a five hundred thousand dollar ($500,000) house, it
comes out to one hundred eighty thousand dollars ($180,000). One could say that
we are risking giving some tax relief to hopefully open the door to some affordable
housing opportunities for more families.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I have gone back and forth on this, and when
I thought about the amendment, I thought real hard what are we trying to
accomplish? What was the original intent of this bill? It is a moving target. That is
why it is hard to nail down what we really want to do. Obviously, if we set
something somewhere, someone may say, "Maybe it should be a little more, then
you could get more people." We can never make everyone happy, but for me, when I
look at this and when I did it originally...I know what Councilmember Kagawa is
trying to do, too, and I appreciate that, but for me, it does come down to risk and
what you are comfortable with. For me, I was comfortable with my original
proposal because when I think about this Bill, I think about the intent, and I think
the intent was to help the people in the eighty percent (80%) level, as shown on the
graph. If we deviate from that, then we are basically saying that we are going to
dictate every year where the rent should be based on our own discretion. Maybe
only this year it is ten dollars ($10) and maybe next year it might bump up real high
at one hundred percent (100%). We may be looking again, but it is on our discretion
as far as what do we think is fair rent to be charging for this. That is a hard thing
for us to do every year and pick a number and say, "Should it be eighty (80), ninety
(90), or one hundred (100)?" For me, I think the intent was to help the eighty
percent (80%) and that is where I am just going to hold steadfast on it. This is for
the eighty percent (80%). We cannot force all landowners to do this. This is a
voluntary program to try to incentivize land owners to offer a reduced rent. We are
never going to satisfy everybody and it is a double-edged sword because HUD goes
up and down. I think that is why we offer the multiyear to keep a little consistency
and predictability. Again, if we just pick a number every year, it is under our own
discretion and to just look at how many people are in the program, I do not know if
it is a good indicator of how successful the program is. If the intent is to reach the
eighty percent (80%), then we leave the rents at the eighty percent (80%). If the
COUNCIL MEETING 73 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
intent is to get a lot of people involved, then we increase the rent, but then we are
hurting the eighty percent (80%). You increase the rent allowable and we will get
more people in. Again, I think it is a double-edged sword. You want more people
involved, but you are increasing the rent. It is difficult and there is no easy answer,
but I think the intent of this Bill is to help the eighty percent (80%). If we want to
do a policy to kind of help affordable housing in general...I think this Bill is just
one (1) tool in our toolbox of how we are going to try and address our affordable
housing, and this is trying to address the eighty percent (80%) and below. I think
there is an opportunity with community help and housing help to say, "Hey, I think
we may be missing a gap and missing these folks that want to rent to one hundred
percent (100%) or maybe one hundred twenty percent (120%)." I do not think we
can force it all into this Bill because we are essentially raising rent on the eighty
percent (80%), which are the ones that we are trying to help. That is my own risk
assessment. The intent of the original Bill was to keep rent the same and not have
it increased for the tenants. Although the eighty percent (80%) went down last
year, I did not want it to increase, so we kept it at the same rate or if they want to
offer...which a lot of people still did join the program at the lower rent...I think it
was one thousand one hundred (1,100) people. For me, do I think we are going to
get a flood of people coming in with this ten dollar ($10) difference? No, but I think
it is just based on policy-wise and for my risk, I do not want to go one hundred
percent (100%). I am willing to stick at the eighty percent (80%) because I think
although housing markets are going up, we are not looking at the housing market
price; we are looking at what people are able to afford today. You look at their
median income, not the real estate value of houses. If you stay with what people
can afford, then you are staying with the eighty percent (80%). That is what people
can afford today and that is why I think I am in favor of the original amendment
and I will not be voting for this new one.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to point out that over eighty
percent (80%) of the need is in the eighty percent (80%) of median income and
lower. There are about nine hundred (900) families versus two hundred (200)
families in the eighty percent (80%) to one hundred forty percent (140%). So of one
thousand (1,000) plus people, the greatest need is in that eighty percent (80%), so it
makes a lot of sense to target it at eighty percent (80%). We are going to move it for
a much smaller group and risk hurting the eighty percent (80%) group. As I said, if
we can find a remedy or an incentive that does not negatively impact the eighty
percent (80%) group, then I would really look in favor of it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: It has been a struggle to figure out what is
the best thing to do and what is our intent, but I also remember when our Housing
Director Kamuela Cobb-Adams was here and he was not in favor. I know we are
throwing around this one hundred percent (100%) rate, and from his standpoint he
was not in favor of increasing it to one hundred percent (100%). Again, it was based
on who was our target market? Who were we trying to target, who we are trying to
help, and how are we trying to help them? Again, I do not think we can solve all of
our problems with this one Bill. If there is another target market that we want to
try and help, then I think it may need to come in a different policy so that we do not
incentivize people to go to the one hundred percent (100%) rate and increase rent on
the eighty percent (80%) people.
COUNCIL MEETING 74 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Let me just start by saying
that although I appreciate the numbers that were presented by the Housing
Agency, those numbers are 2011 numbers, which was a different time back in 2011.
Just go and get a copy of a 2011 newspaper and look at the rental prices.
Interestingly, I just came across an old newspaper that I found, and I think it was
2010, and I went straight to the classifieds because I was curious. It is a different
time. To use those numbers today...I would argue that I believe the numbers for
the one hundred percent (100%) group is a lot more today. I would argue that. I do
not have the scientific data, but neither does the Housing Agency. They are using a
2011 study that to me I think is outdated. I could be entirely wrong. I do not know.
Without the scientific data, it is very hard... just using that study in 2011 is not
very responsible because we do not know what it is today. I just know that in my
own personal experience in talking to people, I believe the need is greater. I also
believe that people here are generally helpful people where they are not going to go
out and raise the rents. I am hoping that they will keep their tenants in place, and
hopefully we can get a few more of the people that are not able to qualify now to
lower their rents one hundred dollars ($100) a month to save one thousand five
hundred dollars ($1,500) a year, or even drop it one hundred fifty dollars ($150) a
month to help a family. I am hoping that will happen, but again, I could be entirely
wrong. I am going to be supporting the amendment. All of these things that we are
doing today is really...in the last few months actually is really addressing a broken
tax problem that we have to address and an affordable housing problem that we
have to address. I am going to be supporting the amendment and I am hoping that
the others will do the same. We will see what happens. With that, on the
amendment, roll call.
The motion to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, as circulated, and as shown in
the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2 was then
put, and carried in the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Chock, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL — 4,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Kaneshiro, Yukimura TOTAL— 2,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Hooser TOTAL — 1.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are back to the main motion.
Councilmember Yukimura: Is it main motion as amended?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. No discussion? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to say that we often...I think it
has been brought up, "What are our elected officials doing about the affordable
housing crisis?" Today is a step in that direction and it is opening up opportunities
for our renters to participate in affordable housing opportunities here for our
residents. I think any time government gives a tax break, it reduces the amount of
taxes that it could collect; it is opening up an opportunity for more service, and I
think this is exactly what it does. Again, it is a risk. It takes a chance. We do not
know how many people are going to take advantage of it, but we definitely are
risking government funds to open up the doors for opportunities for more affordable
housing. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Kaneshiro.
COUNCIL MEETING 75 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I do not want my vote to be perceived as "I
am not supporting affordable housing." I think I am just trying to make it clear
that I wanted the policy to support the eighty percent (80%) people. I did not want
the rents to increase on the eighty percent (80%) because that is the target we were
going for with this Bill. I am all in support of affordable housing and I think
keeping it at the eighty percent (80%), you are keeping the rents lower for the
people to afford it. If you go up to one hundred percent (100%), you are allowing
landowners to increase the rent, which is kind of a double-edged sword. You want
to offer more rentals at a lower rate, but what is the number? I think that is what
it comes down to. What is the number it should be? For me, I was more
comfortable at the eighty percent (80%).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: This has been a hard one for me because I
can see the double-edged sword that Councilmember Kaneshiro was talking about.
I do think that what we have to stand is learning something from it, so I am really
looking forward to what happens after we make this move in January, and I would
love to hear what the outcome was because that will give us information about how
it is we are going to move forward. What are people's interests? How are they are
responding to it? I understand the risks. I did have a chance to talk to the Housing
Agency at lunch, too. I just called and asked, "What do you think about this? If
there is a chance of increasing some of the housing, would you be supportive of it?"
The answer was yes. Do we know what it is going to do? No, we do not really know.
I do not think anybody does. Again, I will be supporting this moving forward, but
my hope is that we do this much earlier and get a handle on what it is that we need
to do ahead of time and do the reform if necessary. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I share the sentiments of Councilmember
Chock. Next year when we overhaul this, I do want us to get back to eighty percent
(80%). I see this as a one (1) year temporary fix and that is why I can support this.
Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: In addition to the fact that this could hurt
eighty percent (80%) of median income renters and below, the fact that it takes out
the multiyear means that those who had this agreement last year at the higher rate
for eighty percent (80%) will not be able to apply because rental leases must have
been in place by October by other parts of the ordinance. So the multiyear provision
addressed these people who were caught with that lower and now we are taking it
out? So we are not even helping the people who got hurt by the lower median rate.
Councilmember Kaneshiro's multiyear thing does address that and allows them to
stay at their higher rate, but keep the better tax rate for them. That is why the
multiyear thing is so important. If those of you who voted for this Bill want to have
any impact at all, I would put the multiyear thing back in at least.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I actually have the same concern.
That is why I thought we might be taking this one in seriatim. If that is still an
COUNCIL MEETING 76 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
option, I would like to see if we could move. I do not know what the votes are like
for supporting...I am not as supportive of this second amendment as I have been
from the beginning, but was for the first.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, well we already approved the
amendment, so that is done.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, you can move to amend again.
Council Chair Rapozo: We would have to do a new amendment or
withdraw that amendment, reconsider it, and do it in seriatim. What was the
reason for removing the multiyear, Councilmember Kagawa?
Councilmember Kagawa: I think there was some concern by several
members if this is a good plan, period, going forward and there are a lot of questions
as to whether the one hundred percent (100%) is something we would like to keep
for more than one (1) year, and I think as Councilmember Chock said, let us do it
for one (1) year only to fix this problem that came up because somebody from the
Administration did not tell us that there was a problem with the median income
going down. Rent is expected to go down one hundred dollars ($100). This is a
temporary fix and I do not think you do long-term legislation on temporary fixes.
Like Councilmember Chock said, I think you evaluate at the beginning of next year
to see whether this is working or not. It just makes no sense to go into multiple
year legislation on something you are not sure of the results.
Council Chair Rapozo: Oh, so your concern is that people would
enter into a three (3) year, one hundred percent (100%) agreement and if it is
negatively impacting or affecting the eighty percent (80%), then we are stuck?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I understand. If that is clear, I guess
I would agree with that. I am not sure how we fix that if you allow the one (1) year,
one time only for the one hundred percent (100%), then we really start messing up
with this thing, but I see your point. I think I would agree with that. We can
extend it if we need to, but it protects us from locking people into three (3) years at
one hundred percent (100%). Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: The original intent of the multiyear thing...I
was under the assumption that we were going to stay at the eighty percent (80%)
and the multiyear was a fix that I think would be a permanent fix because it was in
there to allow some predictability for the renters and the owners. Whatever it is, if
it is one hundred percent (100%) or eighty percent (80%) or whatever it is, if our
rent is able to qualify for this long-term affordable rental credit, can I lock my
tenant in for two (2) years and both I and the tenant know that our rent will not
change for two (2) years. HUD goes up and down, rather than saying, "This year,
we have to reduce it," or, "This year we have to increase it." I was thinking that the
multiyear thing was more of a...it was not so much a band-aid, but if an owner
wants to lock their tenant in for two (2) years or three (3) years, they have a great
tenant, they have them in their house for multiple years already and they just want
to move forward and lock them in at a rate that will still get them the affordable
long-term credit, then that is what it was there for. Again, it comes down to risk.
We are assessing, "Is the one hundred percent (100%) right? Should we lock
tenants in there?" I think we just think about the year at-hand. If we think the one
COUNCIL MEETING 77 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
hundred percent (100%) is a reasonable rate for tenants to lock people in now for
two (2) years or renters and tenants can agree, then I think the multiyear is a
benefit to both parties, just by having the predictability.
Councilmember Yukimura: We could do a multiyear for eighty percent
(80%).
Councilmember Chock: That is what I was thinking.
Councilmember Yukimura: So I so move.
Councilmember Chock: Second
Council Chair Rapozo: So move what?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: What is the language? That is not a friendly
amendment, Councilmember Yukimura. That is a brand new amendment.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I move to amend the amended draft
that is on the table right now to allow multiyear contracts at an eighty percent
(80%) median income rent level.
Council Chair Rapozo: Staff, can you prepare something like that?
Staff will prepare that amendment. Basically, the one hundred (100) year will be
limited to a one (1) year.
Councilmember Yukimura: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: And the eighty percent (80%) will be up to
three (3) years. Staff will work on that amendment.
Councilmember Yukimura: In the meantime, can we ask Steve if there
are any administrative problems with that?
Council Chair Rapozo: We should probably ask him first before we
prepare an amendment. Steve, can you come up?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Hunt: Steve Hunt, Real Property Tax Manager for
the record. Where to begin?
Council Chair Rapozo: The question is will it be a burden if we the
eighty percent (80%), multiyear and one hundred percent (100%), one (1) year.
Mr. Hunt: For the one hundred percent (100%), one (1)
year, are you talking about one (1) year or changing it permanently in the ordinance
for all applications that are one (1) year leases?
Council Chair Rapozo: The amendment that just passed would be
locked in, so that is it...
COUNCIL MEETING 78 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Hunt: The way I read the amendment, just to
clarify, the eighty percent (80%) becomes one hundred percent (100%) permanently
at this point. We are going to get the HUD figures in February and we are going to
create new forms for the seventeen (17) applications. Are we using the one hundred
percent (100%) for those applications going forward? This is coming up relatively
soon, so I need to know if this is a one (1) year, amend it for 2016, or is this a go
forward as well? If rents swing back up, assuming HUD numbers come up, it is
going to have that expansion because we were increasing rents, not the ten dollars
($10), because it is actually more like one hundred dollars ($100) to one hundred
seventy dollars ($170) from the current levels in 2015 with the depressed rents. If
they swing up, we can anticipate probably about that kind of rent increases on the
one hundred percent (100%) going forward, so we are going to need to know that for
next year. If we are talking one hundred percent, is it just this one (1) year or are
you changing it one hundred percent (100%) go forward for all years. That is just
the way I read it.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is for the 2016 tax year.
Mr. Hunt: Okay. I am reading the definition and it just
says "one hundred percent (100%)." It does not say "2016" in that definition section.
That is my concern. It looks like it is fixing at one hundred percent (100%) go
forward.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is, unless we change it. I am agreeing
with you on the effect, but I am not agreeing that is what we should do.
Mr. Hunt: I am just clarifying the ordinance language
as we would implement it. The way I am reading this is we would now go to one
hundred percent (100%) go forward.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Hunt: So when we get the new rents from HUD, we
are going to prepare our 2017 based on one hundred percent (100%). You are saying
for one (1) year only, so people that are coming in for a one (1) year, they only have
a one (1) year lease, they would be allowed to charge one hundred percent (100%)
for a 2017 year as well, but someone who comes in for 2017 with a multiple year
application would only be allowed eighty (80). So we would have two (2) sets of
applications and two (2) sets of rent levels and we would have to kind of review who
was applying for what. There would be some challenges administratively to get
that information out and know what the owner is applying for when they come in.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, so your recommendation basically is
you keep it either multiyear or annual?
Mr. Hunt: I like the multiyear to be honest, because
from an administrative standpoint, it is easier if we are not having to process the
application every year and we are just getting an affidavit saying, "Yes, we have the
same rents and we have the same tenants," or, "We have a different tenant, but
same rents, and we are still honoring it through the period." At least we have
something that will streamline some operation. This would potentially add
complexity to it. That is my concern. The other thing about this amendment that
just passed, as Councilmember Yukimura mentioned earlier, it does not supersede
other sections of the ordinance. It still has to be effective as of October 1st at least,
COUNCIL MEETING 79 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
because that is the date of value. October 1, 2015 is our date of value for the 2016
assessment, so we are not encouraging more people to come in with brand new
leases to lower the rents and get more in, at least not in 2016 because they would
not have met the October 1st deadline, so it sets it up for 2017 as an incentive, but it
is not going to do anything for 2016, other than bring in people who have existing
leases that are already providing that service and give them lower taxes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, you have people that are already
providing that existing service, but for the ones that are doing it within the one
hundred percent (100%), that could not...
Mr. Hunt: Correct, so the ones of the one hundred
fifty-five (155) that may be out this year, if all of them are out only because of that
threshold between eighty (80) and one hundred (100), some of those can come back
in, presuming they have not gone to market or done other things that are much
higher. That would give them the opportunity and an incentive would give them a
break and continue their program, but it would not bring in more because you had
to have had leased that property already at that level, unless there are others out
there were also participating, that never participated to meet the threshold.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right, but those could come back in if they
have an existing...
Mr. Hunt: If they have it as of October 1st. They cannot
do a new lease, and then come in and apply.
Council Chair Rapozo: Correct.
Mr. Hunt: As I am reading this, that is the other thing I
want to get out there, that this might set up 2017, but may not have much impact
on 2016.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: This is not just for 2017; this is for every
year after it unless we change it. We are not saying "it shall be one hundred
percent (100%) for the year 2016 or the year 2016 and 2017," we are saying, "one
hundred percent (100%) indefinitely unless we change it."
Mr. Hunt: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: The other thing is...I think I was mistaken,
but those who have existing leases that did not qualify this year because of the
HUD drop, as long as they have a lease as of October 1st of this year, they will be
able to come in, but they cannot change it to one hundred percent (100%).
Mr. Hunt: Well, yes, if you are going to break your lease
with your tenant, I do not think the tenants are going to voluntarily say, "I am
going to pay more and break the lease."
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. So we do not need the multiyear to
allow them to come in?
AdW
COUNCIL MEETING 80 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Mr. Hunt: No. What the multiyear did, and even if we
went back to just allowing grandfathering the 2015 rent levels as opposed to going
to one hundred percent (100%), it just allowed them to come in and say, "We still
met the threshold. We have a multiyear lease." Based on what happened with the
HUD rents, we fell out, but now by setting it back, we are back in. The one hundred
percent (100%) pushes it up a little more because if they have a lease that was
anywhere from ten dollars ($10) to eighty-four dollars ($84) or whatever that
difference was, then they could now potentially come in at the one hundred percent
(100%). But my bigger concern was...I do not know...I cannot predict, but I think
the HUD median income will likely have a swing back, so you are going to pick up
that rent loss and you have now set it at one hundred (100), which now adds one
hundred dollars ($100) to two hundred dollars ($200) more per month going into
2017.
Councilmember Yukimura: Which could hurt the eighty percent (80%)
even more because it is setting the one hundred percent (100%) at much higher
than we were anticipating.
Mr. Hunt: If the median rents increase, that is correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: But it could go down.
Mr. Hunt: It could go down again or it could stay flat. I
do not have a crystal ball.
Council Chair Rapozo: But you said you have a feeling that it is
going to go up, well what are you looking at that gives you that impression that it
will go up? As far as I see around here, it is not getting better.
Mr. Hunt: The median rents? The median incomes?
Council Chair Rapozo: Well, the economy. By just looking at the
economy, I do not know what indicator you would use to even think that it might go
up.
Mr. Hunt: Even more so, the affordability issue is if
they are truly going down and if we believe HUD figures are going down and the
median incomes are going down, this really measures the affordability. All we are
doing is allowing landlords to price it higher, while tenants incomes have gone
down, which put that bar even further apart if that is the case. Again, discussions
with Housing when they were testifying, they thought it was an anomaly and that it
would probably go up. That is my source. I do not have empirical information to
back that up.
Council Chair Rapozo: I thought you were checking the markets and
all of that. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Steve, what was the affordable rental
program percentage of median income from 2006 through 2012?
Mr. Hunt: I think there were two (2) changes. I think
in 2006 to 2010, I believe it was one hundred twenty percent (120%) of median, and
then from 2012 on, maybe 2011 or 2012 that they dropped to one hundred (100).
COUNCIL MEETING 81 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: So why are we making such a big deal about
one hundred (100) now?
Mr. Hunt: I think what we saw was we saw
inversion...we saw the market rent...the time it was one hundred twenty percent
(120%), we saw the rents under the affordable rates were actually higher than
market rents in many cases and the programs changed. We did not give as much of
a break. We actually charged the residential rate and we provided a cap. There
was a six percent cap on taxes. What happened or why nobody participated in that
or very few participated was because at the time that was existing, values were
coming down. So it protected on the upside. If values were increasing, you had this
six percent (6%) cap of taxes, but because values were going down, people would
register for the program and say, "I saw no benefit because my market taxes and
my cap taxes are the same. There is no benny."
Councilmember Kagawa: The second question is I have been hearing
that the Council plans to do a real property tax reform, which includes looking at
long-term affordable rentals and should the Council, in its wisdom, do a complete
overhaul of the real property tax system, would you think that it is a wise idea to
enter into a long-term agreement on these leases, knowing that this Council intends
to look at overhauling the tax system? We are going to have agreements that will
supersede upcoming legislation.
Mr. Hunt: Again, from the tenant's perspective, is there
some surety of what my rents are going to be?
Councilmember Kagawa: From the Council's perspective, we want to
fix or look at an overhaul, so a year-to-year type of tax system would seem to be less
risky, right?
Mr. Hunt: Again, my feedback has been primarily from
the property managers like Kaua`i Realty and the people that actually deal in
managing some of these properties. They find it very cumbersome to do the
one-year and they have been requesting the multiyear term.
Councilmember Kagawa: I understand. Are you going to be
participating with us on the reform? I was just wondering if you folks are willing.
Mr. Hunt: Yes. It is depending on when you time it
because this week we are trying to get out our assessment rolls to the print vendors
to get them going for 2016, so it is a very busy time for us. With advance notice and
good timing, we would like to participate.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So even if we do a reform, we can just say
that these people can keep their leases until it expires for three (3) years, and then
they will be affected by the new law. That is not a problem.
Mr. Hunt: I cannot predict what kind of ordinance is
going to be passed.
COUNCIL MEETING 82 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: We could not break their lease. It is not a
choice. They would sue us.
Mr. Hunt: I guess if the perception was that Council
was going to increase those limits of affordable, then probably the landlords would
not want to enter into longer term agreements. If they were going to decrease them,
but we grandfather them, they probably would. From the tenant's perspective, they
just want surety of what my rents are going to be.
Councilmember Yukimura: And they do not want it to go up.
Mr. Hunt: And that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you. I feel like I have been given just
enough rope to hang myself here. The bottom line is that what is attractive to me is
that we open this up so that we can get more people participating and get people
into houses. However, what I am hearing from you is that this is not going to
happen with what we are trying to propose.
Mr. Hunt: With the exception of those that have
existing leases that do qualify that has had them in place since October 1st.
Councilmember Chock: And going forward, we are putting this into
perpetuity, so we are really committing ourselves to...
Mr. Hunt: From an implementation standpoint, that is
my concern because we are going to get data hopefully in February from HUD and
we are going to be setting new forms. They do not work with our timeframe in
terms of assessments, forms, and dates. Their leases are going to be coming up
between October and February and they do not know what to set their rents at
because they do not know what they are either. So you have these people saying,
"Can I charge one hundred (100)? What is the one hundred (100) going to be?" We
are guessing. So we are going to have those challenges to deal with, too.
Councilmember Chock: The question I heard from Council Vice
Chair earlier was are you folks willing to sit down and figure out how it is we can
come to some better solutions that will help to accomplish what it is we are trying to
accomplish and I heard yes. What can I say? That is where we are. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So would it not be easier to just leave it as it
is, maybe put in a multiyear thing, think through this whole thing and come up
with a solution, and then put it in place rather than add a piecemeal that is not
even going to achieve what you want to achieve? Or even get you good data to help
you figure out what a good solution is. That is a question.
Mr. Hunt: If you are asking my opinion, and I do not
want to take sides, but I think Councilmember Kaneshiro's proposal was more
palatable, just basically reset/grandfather to 2015 rates, although they may be ten
dollars ($10) or so less than what it would be at one hundred percent (100%) if we
did that for this one year. If you wanted to make sure it was more inclusionary, I
COUNCIL MEETING 83 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
guess you could strike the portion about having to have been in the program before
or having not increased your rents. I think it actually said change rents in one of
them, too, so increase or decrease. You do not want to preclude them from being
able to participate, but we are still talking about a finite populous because it is
going to be those that have rents and leases in place on or before October 1st for a
year.
Councilmember Yukimura: So if we keep Councilmember Kaneshiro's
amendment in place, and then you said we could look at something to tinker with or
modify.
Mr. Hunt: I think in Section...let me see if I have this
one right...I have to make sure I have the right version.
Council Chair Rapozo: The right version is the version that was just
approved. Councilmember Kaneshiro's thing is done.
Mr. Hunt: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: The right version is what has been approved.
Councilmember Yukimura: We can amend it back.
Council Chair Rapozo: When are we going to call for the question?
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, then we might just kill the whole thing
without putting something in place that is going to work temporarily.
Council Chair Rapozo: You have that opportunity to vote this down.
Councilmember Yukimura: If we vote everything down, then we are not
even helping the people who...
Council Chair Rapozo: I am not planning on voting anything down.
I am just saying that there is a motion on the floor right now and that is what we
should be discussing. If you have an amendment, then we will move on to whatever
else we have to do and come back to the amendment. Right now, what is on the
floor is the main motion, and that is what we need to be discussing.
Councilmember Yukimura: Actually, my amendment is on the floor.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, there is no amendment because it has
not been circulated.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anymore questions for Steve? I think we
heard the issues and concerns. We are moving and going to deal with it. I
appreciate your clarification and appreciate the question from Councilmember
Chock that it will not probably have much effect in 2016. I do not know how many
people are out there that are in that little window that have leases that have dated
pre-October that would make it. It may not be very impacting, but 2017 would be
the year that we would get the good data. Councilmember Kuali`i.
COUNCIL MEETING 84 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kuali`i: It is kind of a quick question and I am trying
to think it through, but you know when you talked about the changes from one
hundred twenty percent (120%) to one hundred percent (100%), then from one
hundred percent (100%) to eighty percent (80%), when you talked about anomalies.
Are those anomalies either impacted or have the potential to impact so many
renters and landlords, and that is why the change is made to sort of offset it?
Mr. Hunt: I am going from recollection, but I believe the
main reason that it was dropped from one hundred twenty percent (120%) to one
hundred percent (100%) to eighty percent (80%) was we were looking at the groups,
much like Housing did, that were most impacted and needed the most relief. We
essentially changed the program again from a capped program to a tax rate, cutting
the tax rate in half, and we thought that would actually attract and keep more
people in the program, because we had people exit...I do not know the numbers
offhand, but I do not think we were ever close to the numbers we were last year or
even the year before when we were doing it as a cap. So I think when we migrated
the programs and wanted to entice more with the preferred rate, we really wanted
to help those that...really it is a tenant Bill more than a landlord Bill to help the
people who needed help and provide an incentive to those landlords that were
keeping their tenants in these rates.
Councilmember Kuali`i: In a sense, because it was...what is it called?
Minimum allowable rents? Because that from HUD went down, is that not in a
sense also an anomaly that you are saying we should just ride it through for a year,
and then get the ultimate eighty percent (80%) multiyear going after that? But
what we have passed is to address that anomaly for one (1) year, and then perhaps
put the multiyear thing and pass immediately after that? Do you see it that way?
Mr. Hunt: Again, I believe the drop in median income to
be an anomaly. Hopefully by February, or the latest by March, we will know the
numbers.
Councilmember Kuali`i: But how would you propose to address the
problems that were brought to us?
Mr. Hunt: If we are looking specifically to address this
anomaly, I think we should have a one (1) year package and not something that
affects multiple years, at least without knowing where we are. If the income levels
go down again or stay constant, then yes, maybe we do look at one hundred percent
(100%) going forward.
Councilmember Kuali`i: And that is what we have for one (1) year
with the passage of this amendment.
Mr. Hunt: No, the way I read this is we are setting it at
one hundred percent (100%)...
Councilmember Kuali`i: For one (1) year.
Mr. Hunt: No, the intent may be for one (1) year, but
the language is for...
Councilmember Kuali`i: Everything is for one (1) year if every year
you come back and work on it. It may not even be for one (1) year if we came back
COUNCIL MEETING 85 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
sooner, right? We have to work with your cycle, but if our intention is to work on it
and put something in place for next year's cycle, then it is really only for this year's
cycle. In fact, it is for the cycle that the application's deadline is already past.
Mr. Hunt: Correct, and assuming this gets addressed as
part of the reform or something that gets worked on, then it could be done next
year, but if it gets deferred or does not happen and this sticks, this is the new
standard.
Councilmember Kuali`i: For one (1) year.
Mr. Hunt: If it does not get worked on, this is the new
standard forever.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is why we have amendments.
Everything is in perpetuity until the Council amends it.
Councilmember Kuali`i: When Councilmember Hooser comes, we
have another vote, too.
Council Chair Rapozo: Everything is the same way, unless you put
a sunset on it. It does not matter. When you have the numbers and the Council
looks at it and says if we have to change it, then we fix it. There is no deadline.
Very few bills have a target deadline. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I would like to move to reconsider the
amendment given information that we received from the Administration and the
timing. It seems to me that we do not have that much time before February to
actually act on this, so I would like to continue to have this conversation about what
that percentage should be, but I believe that if we move back to what
Councilmember Kaneshiro originally had on, then we will achieve everything that
we wanted to, and if we move in the direction that we are currently, we are still not
achieving what we wanted to. I do not know if it makes much more difference, but I
would like to put that motion on the table.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember moved to reconsider the motion to amend Bill No. 2600,
Draft 1, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: On the motion to reconsider, it has to be
made by the person on the prevailing side, but can it be seconded by anybody?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, it can be seconded by anybody.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, relax.
Councilmember Kagawa.
COUNCIL MEETING 86 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Kagawa: I do not want to win knowing that it is not a
true win. If you need my second, I will second his motion to reconsider.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is not about winning or losing.
Councilmember Kagawa: No, it is because Councilmember Chock
thought that we would be opening up the door to everybody and by Steve stated
that, it deflated my balloon as well in that it is not going to open up the door for
everybody to enter this program. If this only applies to people who already applied
then that is defeating the purpose of the amendment for Councilmember Chock's
purpose. For me, I am still comfortable, but we did not get that information out
clearly and now that it is out, let us vote on it fair and square as everybody
understands this amendment to be.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. So the motion is to reconsider.
The motion to reconsider the motion to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, was
then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:0:1 (Councilmember Hooser is noted as
recused).
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, we are back to Councilmember
Kagawa's amendment. Any further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I think it is clear that the majority want to
really entertain Vice Chair's amendment, but that given how the present
amendment is written and the fact that there are other sections of the law that are
affected and needed to make this thing work, I think it is best to send this whole
idea to the reform committee, so they can look at how to do it in a long-term way,
and in the meantime have this interim legislation that does allow those who were
affected by the aberration or the lowering of the median income figures, thus rents,
to be able to keep the tax rate benefits for another year.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I will just go back and say that the
October Pt deadline just caught me by surprise. It certainly takes away a lot of the
good that I thought was coming out of this Bill. For the amendment, I was all for it,
but to find out that it is not going to be opening up the door—I always said from the
start that if we passed Councilmember Kaneshiro's amendment, as passed in
Committee, I was happy that we at least took that step. Certainly, I did not want to
prolong this because knowing what we knew, I felt like there were certain
Councilmembers that would be asking Yvette and Scott to continue to make
amendments and it is already there in Councilmember Kaneshiro's amendment
where we agree that although we are totally not happy, at least we have something
that addresses to fix the problem and at least allows those who dropped out of last
year's to go back in. I will still be supporting my amendment because I believe in it
and I believe that a twenty dollar ($20) increase for a four-bedroom is still a
reasonable cost of inflation for a rental. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anybody else? If not, I will be supporting the
amendment as well. I look at it as a one (1) year deal because we will revisit it.
When we get the numbers from the Administration, we will see if in fact we lost
people because they decided to jump to the market price rent. Again, everything we
do we can amend, so I am going to be supporting the amendment going forward and
COUNCIL MEETING 87 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
we will see how it goes from there. With that, we are back to the amendment again.
Roll call.
The motion to amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, as circulated, and as shown in
the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2 was then
put, and failed by the following vote:
FOR AMENDMENT: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST AMENDMENT: Chock, Kaneshiro, Yukimura TOTAL — 3,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Hooser TOTAL — 1.
Council Chair Rapozo: The motion fails, so we are back to the main
motion. Any further discussion? Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Not to prolong this, but I do not think it is a
"who can do it better" or anything like that. I think we are just in a weird year
where market values are going up, but median income is going down and we are
stuck with where should rents be? Should it be lower to help the median income
people? Should it be higher to help landlords get into the program? I think
Councilmember Kagawa was the first one to bring this up and I think it is an issue
and with either amendment that we used, it is there to try and help soften that
blow in the decrease in rents. Ultimately what it came down to is how do we
implement it? Doing the amendments was difficult, too. How do we implement
what we are trying to do? It is not an "I versus him" or anything. It is just that we
are trying to do what we feel is best. Ultimately, we can put in all the words we
want, but it has to get implemented and if the implementation is difficult, too, then
that is a problem also. For me, the original one tried to just...basically we just
wanted to help soften the blow of the decrease in rents at a multiyear so that people
could lock themselves in. That is all we were trying to do. Next year, rents may go
down, but it is what it is. We are focusing on the eighty percent (80%) and that is
all it was. The amendment originally was, how can we implement it easily also and
I think the more we try to amend it, we realize that it is very difficult as we tweak
words. Implementation is important for it to be successful, too, so I will be
supporting it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to say thank you to Vice Chair
Kagawa and Councilmember Kaneshiro for working on this. I know it took a lot of
work because it was hard for Councilmember Chock and I, just to keep up and
follow with arguments on both sides. The vote, even for me, could have gone either
way honestly. I especially want to also thank the members of the public, Dorothea
Hayashi and Tina Sakamoto, for all of their work because I know they put many
hours into this and they are advocating for others, not just for themselves. Thank
you to everybody who worked on this.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion? Councilmember
Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I would like to echo that I really
appreciate...I was moving forward with the opportunity that we might have to open
up affordable rentals. It just again shows not only how complex this is, but the need
for us to get together with the people who are actually administering these things
COUNCIL MEETING 88 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
for us and come up with the solutions. We have got some real talent in the room.
The presentation that I had from Tina and Dorothea yesterday I thought was
moving us in the right direction and we need to get you folks together. There are
more things that we have to do...there is so much more that needs to be done and
what we can and try to achieve for our community in this area. I do not feel like we
lost, I think that we just a little clearer on what we can and cannot do, but we need
to keep the pressure on and I hope that this is just the beginning of the conversation
and I will be supporting this main motion. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to second Councilmember
Kuali`i's acknowledgement of our Vice Chair and Budget Chair and second
Councilmember Chock's acknowledgement of the two (2) public members that have
been contributing. All this work will be useful as we move forward; it is just as
Councilmember Chock indicated, very, very complex, so it takes a lot of work.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I do also want to thank Steve Hunt. He is
always here and always very knowledgeable and he helps by providing answers to
pretty much every question. I thank you for all of your hard work, too.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I just wanted to say that this Bill is not a
"solve all." Again, I think if there are other areas that we want to address, I know
we have a lot of people who are willing to volunteer and help and try to address
another target market and what is the best policy to address that market. I think
we cannot necessarily shove it into one bill, but we can continue to work on making
it better for the island. As far as the affordable housing, how do we get more
affordable rentals? How do we get more affordable houses?
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I think this is a wake-up call for the Housing
Agency, the Administration, Managing Director, and everyone that let us not only
focus on new projects like Rice Camp, Lima Ola, and what have you. Focus on the
affordable rentals that are out there. Those affordable rental programs services
thousands of families and if we are not watching what is going on with the
affordable rental program and waiting until the Council finds out from the public, I
think it is a big swing and miss. That is why you are the Housing Agency. You
should have people watching those things very closely so that we can try and catch
it early. We could have caught it before October 1st and their amendment would
have been fine and we would have opened it up exactly the way that myself,
Councilmember Chock, and the rest of you had seen it, but because we are past
October 1st, we find out that our balloon popped and here we are wasting so much
time—I apologize to the Staff and fellow Members, but had I known that the
October 1st deadline had really thrown all of my idea out of door, then I would not
have wasted the time. But it is never a waste of time when we are trying to make
lives better for our residents, so I will take this as a good educational class. I think
Tina has taught me a lot about the affordable housing program as it relates to
HUD. I had no clue what median income was about, but now I feel like I have a
clue and I kind of know what is going on. Going forward, I am going to watch this
COUNCIL MEETING 89 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
program for as long as I serve here. I will make sure that that number goes up
because we are getting more residents, so we cannot have those numbers going
down. We have to go up. If we are not going up, let us adjust the rates before
October 1st. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Thank you, Councilmember
Kagawa, Councilmember Kaneshiro, Tina, Dorothea, Ron, and everyone else who
participated. Thank you for all of the work. It has been a long, long process. We
rely on the Administration for the numbers, facts, and figures, like you said. We
heard from the community, we look at it, and we are thinking, "We missed the
boat." We missed the boat, but as contrary to popular belief, this Council is not
aware of everything that goes on. One of the kids that were here this morning
asked the question of how do we know, and I think the response was real simple: we
hear it from the community. This is what happened. The six percent (6%) cap on
affordable housing worked better, as I heard Steve say, and when we departed from
that the numbers dropped and we lost a lot of participants when we went from the
six percent (6%) cap or is it the opposite way? We have to figure out a way to make
this thing work. I do not know the answer. I still think optimistically that
Councilmember Kagawa's amendment was going to...maybe not this year, but
maybe next year. I would be curious to see how many people would have raised
their rents. I still think that number would be small. I think the majority of people
in this program are in this program because they have good tenants and they have
tenants that have been there for a while, so I do not think they would come out and
say, "Oh, I can raise your rent ten dollars ($10) a month because the fed's numbers
said our numbers have changed." Another thing is that we have to have a better
way to analyze the numbers. We should be dictating the rent, not the feds. We can
use them as a guideline; I think that is a good thing, but we have to use our own
internal expertise to figure out what is that right number for Kaua`i, however we
determine to do that. There is no coincidence that from 2010 to 2011 to 2012 that
we dropped from one hundred twenty percent (120%) to one hundred percent
(100%); it was that information that we received in a study that the bigger need was
in that eighty percent (80%) bracket. Then it went down to eighty percent (80%)
even further after that. We need to get a better handle on what the needs of this
island are because the 2011 data is old and I do not know what the ratio is today. I
believe that there is still need throughout the spectrum and I think there are still
one hundred percent (100%) median income people crowding and I think there is
still one hundred percent (100%) median income people on the verge of being
houseless or living with family members because they do not have a place to go. I
think the need is all over the place. If we really want to help the needy, then we
should be focusing our attention on the fifty percent (50%) and below. You are
talking about people who are in dire need and those are the ones. Yes, eighty
percent (80%), too. We have to try and help everybody and we have to figure out a
way to make that a reality, whether it is adjusting tax rates proportionate to the
income level that we want to help. I do not know. But that is what we have to
pretty much determine. So with that, we are on the main motion. Roll call.
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, was then put, and carried by
the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Hooser TOTAL— 1.
COUNCIL MEETING 90 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next item would be Executive Sessions
on page 8. Would you like them all read?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, we are waiting for Councilmember
Hooser to come up, but you can go ahead and start reading.
(Councilmember Kagawa was noted as not present.)
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-818 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4),
and Section 3.07(E) of the Kaua`i County Charter, the Office of the County Attorney
requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the Council with a
briefing on the retention of special counsel to represent Irvin Magayanes in State of
Hawai`i vs. Irvin Magayanes, Criminal Number CR15-1-0267 (Fifth Circuit Court),
and related matters. The 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-819 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4),
and Section 3.07(E) of the Kaua`i County Charter, the Office of the County Attorney
requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the Council with a
briefing on Kaua`i Police Commission, et al. vs. Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr., in his
official capacity as the Mayor of the County of Kauai, Civil No. 12-1-0229 (Fifth
Circuit Court), and related matters. The 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-820 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4),
and Section 3.07(E) of the Kaua`i County Charter, the Office of the County Attorney
requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the Council with a
briefing on Diana Gausepohl-White vs. County of Kaua`i, et al., Civil No. 13-1-0360
(Fifth Circuit Court), and related matters. The 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 Hooser is noted as present.)
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to convene in Executive Session for
ES-818, ES-819, and ES-820, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Did you already discuss the communication?
Council Chair Rapozo: No, we have to come out after Executive
Session to vote on that. Did you have discussion on that?
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. I just wanted to comment on that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, you can have the discussion here.
COUNCIL MEETING 91 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
Councilmember Hooser: I just had one question.
Council Chair Rapozo: For which one?
Councilmember Hooser: For C 2015-290. That is approval for
twenty-six thousand five hundred dollars ($26,500) for special counsel.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: It would be related to ES-819.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, let us do it under ES-819.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Did you have a question for the attorney?
Councilmember Hooser: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. The rules are suspended.
Councilmember Hooser: Good afternoon.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: For the record, Mauna Kea
Trask, County Attorney.
Councilmember Hooser: My question is how much money have we
spent to-date on this item? The request is for an additional twenty-six thousand
five hundred dollars ($26,500), so I was wondering how much we spent so far.
Mr. Trask: The total expenditure comes out to
thirty-seven thousand four hundred twenty-two and ninety-three cents
($37,422.93). For a further breakdown, ten thousand dollars ($10,000) was
authorized initially on July 18, 2012, followed up by a fifteen thousand dollar
($15,000) authorization on October 24, 2012. The most recent was a twenty
thousand dollar ($20,000) authorization on February 13, 2013. The total
appropriation so far has been forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000).
Councilmember Hooser: Did you say that that includes the money
today or no?
Mr. Trask: No.
Councilmember Hooser: So the twenty-six thousand five hundred
dollars ($26,500) would be additional.
Mr. Trask: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Any other questions
for Mauna Kea? If not, I will call the meeting back to order. Can we have a roll call
on going into Executive Session, please?
COUNCIL MEETING 92 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to convene in Executive Session for ES-818, ES-819, and ES-820
was then put, 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.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as
an affirmative for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: We are going to recess this part of the
meeting and go into Executive Session. We have to come back out to vote on the
two (2) items.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 3:33 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 4:22 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Kagawa is noted as present.)
(Councilmember Hooser and Councilmember Yukimura were noted as
excused.)
Council Chair Rapozo: The meeting is called back to order.
Clerk, can we have the next item, please. 4
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this is on page 4, C 2015-290.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2015-290 Communication (11/02/2015) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend additional funds up to $26,500 for Special
Counsel's continued services provided in Kaua`i Police Commission, et al. vs.
Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr., in his official capacity as the Mayor of the County of
Kaua`i, Civil No. 12-1-0229 (Fifth Circuit Court), and related matters:
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-290, seconded by Councilmember
Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to amend the amount to authorize expending
additional funds of up to $5,000, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro, and
carried by a vote of 5:0:2:0 (Councilmember Hooser and Councilmember
Yukimura were excused).
Council Chair Rapozo: We are back to the main motion. Any
discussion? If not, roll call.
COUNCIL MEETING 93 NOVEMBER 18, 2015
The motion to approve the amount, as amended, to authorize expending
additional funds of up to $5,000 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Rapozo TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
C 2015-291 Communication (11/05/2015) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend additional funds up to $40,000 for Special
Counsel's continued services provided in Diana Gausepohl-White vs. County of
Kaua`i, et al., Civil No. 13-1-0360 (Fifth Circuit Court), and related matters:
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2015-291, seconded by Councilmember
Kaneshiro, and carried by the following vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Rapozo TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL — 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, if there are no objections, the
meeting is adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:24 p.m.
Respe. fully submitted,
JADE OUNTAIN-TANIGAWA
County ' erk
:cy
ATTACHMENT 1
(November 18, 2015)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, A Bill For An Ordinance Amending Chapter 5A, Section 5A-
11A.1, Kaua`i County Code 1987, As Amended, Relating To The Beneficial Tax Rate
For Property Used For Long-Term Affordable Rental
Introduced by: ROSS KAGAWA
Amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, SECTION 2, to read as follows:
"SECTION 2. Section 5A, Article 11A, Section 5A-11A.1, Kaua`i County
Code 1987, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 5A-11A.1 Beneficial Tax Rate for Property Used for Long-Term
Affordable Rental.
(a) Definitions. As used in this Section:
"Dwelling" means a building or portion thereof designed or used
exclusively for residential occupancy and having all necessary facilities
for permanent residency such as living, sleeping, cooking, eating and
sanitation.
"Long-term affordable rental" means a dwelling subject to a
written lease agreement with a term of one (1) year or more and at a
monthly rent not to exceed the maximum housing cost based on [eighty
percent (80%)] one hundred percent (100%) of the Kaua`i median
household income as set forth in the Kaua`i County Housing Agency
Affordable Rental Housing Guideline for the year in which the owner
files his or her application.
(b) Any owner who owns real property that is rented or leased as a
long-term affordable rental shall receive the homestead tax rate as provided
in Sec. 5A-6.4 provided that all dwellings on the property are long-term
affordable rentals or owner-occupied.
[(c) The owner may apply for the beneficial tax rate on a single year
or multi-year basis. An owner with a multi-year written lease agreement
may apply to receive the beneficial tax rate for each year that the lease
agreement is in effect up to a maximum of three (3) years, provided that rent
in each year of the lease does not exceed the long term affordable rental
limits at the time of application. For each subsequent year of the multi-year
lease, the owner shall file by September 30th, an annual affidavit confirming
the unit(s) is still being rented at the specified rent level in accordance with
the multi-year lease agreement. At the expiration of the multi-year
beneficial tax period, the owner may file a new application to receive the
beneficial tax rate as long as the property adheres to the long term affordable
rental requirements at the time of the new application.]
(c) The owner shall file his or her application annually in a form
prescribed by the Director of Finance by September 30th prior to the fiscal
year beginning July 1st for the beneficial tax rate. The owner shall notify the
Director of Finance within thirty (30) calendar days if the property is no
longer being rented or leased as a long-term affordable rental due to the sale
of the property or conversion to short-term rental. Should there be a change
ATTACHMENT 1
in the use as a long-term affordable rental, the beneficial tax rate shall be
automatically revoked and all differences in the amount of taxes that should
be due for the remainder of the tax year without the beneficial tax rate shall
become due and payable.
(d) For the 2016 tax year, any owner who received the beneficial tax
rate for Long Term Affordable Rental in the 2015 tax year and has not changed
the monthly rent amount stated in their 2015 written lease agreement may
qualify for the beneficial tax rate and receive a one-time tax adjustment to the
Homestead tax rate. The owner shall file an application for the one-time tax
adjustment with the Department of Finance, Real Property Tax Assessment
Division by December 31, 2015.
[(d)] (e) The Director may adopt rules and prescribe forms."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2015\Bill No 2600 D1 Long Term Affordable Tax Credit(RKI)YS_dmc.doc
ATFAT: 2
(November 18, 2015)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, A Bill For An Ordinance Amending Chapter 5A, Section 5A-
11A.1, Kaua`i County Code 1987, As Amended, Relating To The Beneficial Tax Rate
For Property Used For Long-Term Affordable Rental
Introduced by: ROSS KAGAWA
Amend Bill No. 2600, Draft 1, SECTION 2, to read as follows:
"SECTION 2. Section 5A, Article 11A, Section 5A-11A.1, Kaua`i County
Code 1987, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Sec. 5A-11A.1 Beneficial Tax Rate for Property Used for Long-Term
Affordable Rental.
(a) Definitions. As used in this Section:
"Dwelling" means a building or portion thereof designed or used
exclusively for residential occupancy and having all necessary facilities
for permanent residency such as living, sleeping, cooking, eating and
sanitation.
"Long-term affordable rental" means a dwelling subject to a
written lease agreement with a term of one (1) year or more and at a
monthly rent not to exceed the maximum housing cost based on [eighty
percent (80%)] one hundred percent (100%) of the Kaua`i median
household income as set forth in the Kaua`i County Housing Agency
Affordable Rental Housing Guideline for the year in which the owner
files his or her application.
(b) Any owner who owns real property that is rented or leased as a
long-term affordable rental shall receive the homestead tax rate as provided
in Sec. 5A-6.4 provided that all dwellings on the property are long-term
affordable rentals or owner-occupied.
[(c) The owner may apply for the beneficial tax rate on a single year
or multi-year basis. An owner with a multi-year written lease agreement
may apply to receive the beneficial tax rate for each year that the lease
agreement is in effect up to a maximum of three (3) years, provided that rent
in each year of the lease does not exceed the long term affordable rental
limits at the time of application. For each subsequent year of the multi-year
lease, the owner shall file by September 30th, an annual affidavit confirming
the unit(s) is still being rented at the specified rent level in accordance with
the multi-year lease agreement. At the expiration of the multi-year
beneficial tax period, the owner may file a new application to receive the
beneficial tax rate as long as the property adheres to the long term affordable
rental requirements at the time of the new application.]
(c) The owner shall file his or her application annually in a form
prescribed by the Director of Finance by September 30th prior to the fiscal
year beginning July 1st for the beneficial tax rate. The owner shall notify the
Director of Finance within thirty (30) calendar days if the property is no
longer being rented or leased as a long-term affordable rental due to the sale
of the property or conversion to short-term rental. Should there be a change
ATTAQHIINT 2
in the use as a long-term affordable rental, the beneficial tax rate shall be
automatically revoked and all differences in the amount of taxes that should
be due for the remainder of the tax year without the beneficial tax rate shall
become due and payable.
(d) For the 2016 tax year, any owner who owns real property that is
rented or leased as a long-term affordable rental may apply for the beneficial
tax rate and receive a one-time tax adjustment to the Homestead tax rate. The
owner shall file an application for the beneficial tax rate and one-time tax
adjustment with the Department of Finance, Real Property Tax Assessment
Division by December 31, 2015.
[(d)] (e) The Director may adopt rules and prescribe forms."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2015\Bill No 2600 D1 Long Term Affordable Tax Credit (RK
version 3) YS_dmc.doc