HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/2016 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to
order by Council Chair Mel Rapozo at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street,
Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, September 7, 2016 at 8:32 a.m., after
which the following Members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Mason K. Chock
Honorable Gary L. Hooser (present at 8:36 a.m.)
Honorable Ross Kagawa
Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i (present at 8:34 a.m.)
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura (excused at 12:15 p.m. — 1:47 p.m.)
Honorable Mel Rapozo
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Councilmember Kagawa moved for approval of the agenda as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Chock, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Councilmembers Hooser and Kuali`i were excused).
Council Chair Rapozo: There is a public hearing at 1:30 p.m. today,
as well as a 2:00 p.m. Executive Session for County Auditor interviews. Those are
the only things that we have scheduled for today. There has been a request to
remove C 2016-188 off of the Consent Calendar, as we have a speaker that would
like to testify that is not able to stay. Can I get a motion to receive C 2016-186 and
C 2016-187, please?
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2016-186 Communication (08/08/2016) from the Director of Liquor
Control, transmitting for Council information, changes to the fee structure of the
Rules & Regulations of the Liquor Control Commission, and pursuant to Hawai`i
Revised Statutes (HRS) Section 281-17.5, requesting Council approval of Rule 2.8,
Rule 3.11, Rule 4.1, and Rule 4.7: Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive
C 2016-186 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock, and carried by a vote
of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Hooser and Kuali`i were excused).
COUNCIL MEETING 2 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
C 2016-187 Communication (08/15/2016) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Inventory Report for the Fiscal Year
Ending June 30, 2016: Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2016-187 for the
record, seconded by Councilmember Chock, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Councilmembers Hooser and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Rapozo: Can we have C 2016-188, please?
There being no objections, C 2016-188 was taken off of the Consent Calendar.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2016-188 Communication (08/23/2016) from Councilmember Yukimura,
transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution Amending
Resolution No. 2015-02, Draft 1, And Resolution No. 2015-62, Relating To The
Rules Of The Council Of The County of Kaua`i For The Organization Of Committees
And The Transaction Of Business, to allow members of the public a total of
eighteen (18) minutes at the beginning of the agenda of any Council or Committee
meeting to speak on any agenda item; and allows for public speaking per
Rule No. 11(c)(8) to come as the first order of business after the roll call and the
approval of the agenda and minutes: Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive
C 2016-188 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will suspend the rules.
Mr. Mickens, you may come up to testify.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
GLENN MICKENS: Good morning Councilmembers. For the
record, Glenn Mickens. Thank you for taking this off of the Consent Calendar for
me. You have copy of my testimony. I know you cannot answer my questions, but I
am hoping that at least in writing somehow or verbally after the meetings it is
something you will address anything I say, whether you like it or you do not like it.
Please address it. For simplistic reasons, I do like this Communication and
Resolution No. 2016-56. For the public, I believe it is easier to understand that they
can speak for a possible six (6) minutes on any agenda item early if they need to. I
had no problem with the way our Chair ran our recent testimonies and liked his
idea of keeping our meetings as short as possible, but I firmly believe that with
either methods of testimony, the public should be extended the courtesy of answers
to their questions or comments, verbally or in writing. I do want to make sure that
if any other item on the agenda comes up and the speaker did not speak to it early,
then they have the right to speak to it at that time and they should have the right
to speak for another three (3) to six (6) minutes on that subject or any other subject
COUNCIL MEETING 3 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
if it is their first time to testify. Yes, it is clear under Rule No. 13(e) and Hawaii
Revised Statutes (HRS) 92-3 that a testifier has the right to testify early on any
agenda item in the eighteen (18) minute time period, if it comes back again. Does
he have a total of three (3) and three (3) minutes, no matter how many items he
picks to talk about, the same as he does in the regular agenda time since his and
other early testifiers could take up the total eighteen (18) minutes as the rule states
that "the speaker will not be allowed to give testimony later in the day?" Is he not
being prevented from testifying on any and all issues that he wants to?
Rule No. 13(e) was designed to accommodate those who cannot be present
throughout the meeting to speak when the agenda items are heard. If the speaker
has an agenda item that will not be brought up until the afternoon and he cannot be
there at that time and use his early time to speak on it, but can remain until noon
and wants to testify on another item, why should he be denied that right under the
Sunshine Law? Obviously, no speaker should be allowed to speak twice on any one
subject; that is common sense, but should not be prevented from testifying on any
other subject on the agenda. It would be nice if the public had a fifteen (15) minute
time period before the meeting began to talk on any government-related subject
that they want. So many times an issue is deferred or just dropped altogether and
it is still an important enough issue with the public to bring it up again, which can
have a very positive effect. We talk all of the time about more open government and
this method could only make government more transparent, no matter how the vote
goes. I will finish that later. Thank you.
(Councilmember Kuali i was noted as present at 8:34 a.m.)
(Councilmember Hooser was noted as present at 8:36 a.m.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify on this
matter? Your testimony for this Communication will be carried over to the
Resolution as well, so if you want to speak on this, you can do so now. If not, I will
call the meeting back to order. Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a point of clarification. For this
upfront testimony, it is limited to three (3) minutes. The person does not have the
right to come back for another three (3). So it is three (3) minutes on a subject, or if
they want to try to cover many subjects they can do that, but because this is sort of
an exception to the rule, we are doing it like that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any other discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa.
COUNCIL MEETING 4 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Kagawa: Everybody can look at something two (2)
different ways. I hear what you are saying, Glenn, that why not have the
fifteen (15) minutes or eighteen (18) minutes prior to the meeting starting for
anybody who wants to testify on an item and cannot stay. I understand that; that
would be great. The reason why we changed the rule and took it out when we
reorganized this Council at the last election was that the Office of Information
Practices (OIP) had a concern whether there were more than eighteen (18) minutes
of speakers that wanted to speak. Say they were twenty (20) people, like when we
had Bill No. 2491, that wanted to speak before the meeting started—we would have
to cut them off at eighteen (18) minutes and the other people waiting...what would
that be...the other four (4) people or what have you, would have to wait until the
item got discussed and it may be eight (8) hours later and they would have to wait
in order to testify, and a lot of them would leave. Again, in all fairness, OIP
wanted...if we were talking about having more participation by the public, what
that eighteen (18) minute rule does is cut off participation beyond that for people
that want the same right to testify prior to a meeting. Again, this Council tried to
be fair to everyone when we reorganized. You can say that it is unfair, if you want
to speak early and if you one of the people who make it under eighteen (18) minutes,
but for people who come after eighteen (18) minutes, it can be looked at as unfair.
Again, there are always two (2) ways of look at a problem sometimes and when we
reorganized, we tried to be as fair as possible to all and we went in this direction.
So it was not to cut off public testimony; it was to open it up in fairness to everyone.
We have items like the "Imu" Bill and "Dog Barking" Bill where we have a lot of
people in here that do not want to wait for the Council Meeting to hit their item.
Again, a lot of times there are two (2) different ways to solve a problem. The
Council went in this direction and it does not please everybody, but on the other
hand on other issues, other people are not happy. Again, we tried our best. Thank
you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Also for a point of clarification, I have
attached the OIP opinion, which says that this proposed rule is legal and if we feel
that eighteen (18) minutes is not sufficient, if we find in the process of
implementing this rule that more people want to testify in the beginning, we can
expand it to twenty-one (21) minutes or twenty-four (24) minutes. This was a rule
that was in effect from 2011. When the Rules Sub-Committee, which I chaired, and
whose members were then Councilmember Derek Kawakami and then
Councilmember Nadine Nakamura, when we proposed the rules in 2011, we
adopted it and they worked, as I recall, pretty well. We have since gotten
confirmation from the Office of Information Practices, which rules on Sunshine Law
issues that there is no real violation. I think we have clearance to go ahead and
COUNCIL MEETING 5 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
restore this rule for the convenience of, especially working people, because those
who are retired and those who are paid lobbyists can stay the whole meeting, but
those who are working people cannot afford to take off a whole day, and this allows
them to speak at the beginning of the meeting. When we implemented the rule, we
did not have any real problems because with issues that had a lot of testifiers, the
Chair could often, in his discretion, put that item first or there were other ways to
handle it. This rule is meant for people who just on an issue that does not have a
lot of testimony, but they want to say something, they can come and say it and
leave. It makes it more convenient to the working person.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? I have a very short PowerPoint
when we get to the Resolution, but I do not know what is wrong with the way we do
it now. Mr. Mickens wanted to speak early, so we took it off the Consent Calendar.
You actually would have had an opportunity to speak for six (6) minutes. If we had
the eighteen (18) minutes, and you had to go and watch your baseball game or
whatever this afternoon, you would have had three (3). This Chair, I, have always
accommodated the public. Please point out a situation where that did not occur,
anyone on this table. Point out a situation where someone said, "I have to go take
my kid to school; I have to go back to work; I have to take my dog to the
veterinarian." I have heard it all. Give me one (1) example of a time where I said,
"No, wait until the item comes up." It has never happened. We have manipulated
this agenda for the public time and time again. We have taken items out of order,
as Councilmember Yukimura said the Chair has the prerogative to do. We have
suspended the rules and people that had to come up early because they had to
leave, whether they had to catch a flight. Mr. Mickens, you know this is the truth.
It is a better system when you can come up on an item and speak twice at three (3)
minutes than it is once and not be able to testify again. There is nothing wrong
with the system we have today. The problem is the rule was not written for people
like Glenn Mickens, Joe Rosa, and Ken Taylor, who is here every single week, and I
do not mean that in a derogatory way, I appreciate you folks being here. This rule
was made for the mom, the dad, and the student that had to leave because they had
to go back to work or take care of a child or a pet. They come in, testify, and they
leave; not come in, testify because they could, and then wait around for a second
opportunity later to speak. That is why former Chair Furfaro wrote that rule or
authored that rule to limit the testimony to just one shot because they did not want
people abusing the rule. That is the reality of it. Point out a situation where this
Council told someone, "No you cannot testify. Wait for the item show up." It never
happened and it never will happen, as long as I am the Chair. We will have the
discussion at the Resolution. I am not going to support it because there is nothing
wrong with this current system. We will have further discussion at that time.
Councilmember Yukimura, you spoke twice already, so you can reserve your
comments when we reach the Resolution.
COUNCIL MEETING 6 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: This is not the final discussion.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is the final discussion.
Councilmember Yukimura: This is on the Communication and not the
Resolution.
Council Chair Rapozo: It does not matter if it is the...
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, you know...
Council Chair Rapozo: No, I know. Do not make me do this,
Councilmember Yukimura. You always do this...
Councilmember Yukimura: I am not making you do anything. I am
asking for a...
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? You can bring it up at the
Resolution.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is not according to the rules.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am sorry?
JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Chair, we have one (1)
more registered speaker.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: That person said she is waiving it. I will call
the meeting back to order. Councilmember Hooser.
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Hooser: I will defer if she is going to speak.
Council Chair Rapozo: She is not going to speak already. She spoke
twice. We are not going to go down that road again. Do you have any comments?
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. I understand...
COUNCIL MEETING 7 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: I am not sure what you are doing,
Councilmember Yukimura. Let us take a five (5) minute recess.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 8:46 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 8:51 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Any further discussion? Councilmember
Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: In speaking in support of this, just real
briefly, Chair, and I wanted to point out that I agree that as far as I can remember,
you are very generous and you are accommodating people when they ask to speak.
But I believe there is an element of certainty that is missing from the rules as they
are today. If someone asks me if there is something on the agenda and they want to
show up and talk, what time it will be on the agenda, often times my answer is,
"Well, I do not really know. We have an agenda and things move around. You have
to come early and be prepared to stay all day. You can ask the Chair and if it is
possible, they might amend the agenda." But there is no certainty. If this rule
change passed, then people will know for certain that they can come in here at the
start of the agenda, schedule their childcare, job, or whatever, and then they can
speak and leave. I think that is the primary advantage to it, that it does allow a
greater benefit, if you would, in my opinion, to the public, and I think that should be
our number one concern—how do we serve the public as best we can? Again, how
many meetings do we sit here and watch people in the audience, and I feel badly...I
am sure all of us do...they are sitting there and sitting there all day long, and then
finally they get to talk at the end. If they would have had a clear opportunity
without having to ask permission, then they knew that they can come in at the start
of the meeting and talk for three (3) minutes and go, we might have more
participation. For that reason, I am inclined to support the rule change right now.
Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Chair, I just want to say that I agree
wholeheartedly with Vice Chair Kagawa's points. Let us remember that these rules
were changed during reorganization when this Council first came into existence.
This Council has two (2) months left. The timing of this is very odd. If a
Councilmember had such grave concerns of this because they think they are hearing
from constituents, I do not understand why we have not addressed this a long time
ago. With two (2) months before the election, it is suspect to be grandstanding of
COUNCIL MEETING 8 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
sorts. I think it is really a waste of our time right now and it is very troubling. We
do not have any problems with the system as it currently exists. We have never had
anyone come forward and tell us that they had a problem, whether they were able
to come here in person or send something to us in writing. Often when there is a
big issue and a lot of people are showing up for this issue and they cannot be here
all day, we move that issue to the top of the agenda, and then twenty (20) people
can testify and have their six (6) minutes: three (3) and then three (3) more. We are
creating a problem out of something that just does not exist and I think we should
move on.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: We went through this issue once before and
we have talked about it a lot. I think there was fighting on the issue when we first
started or at least when I first started on the Council as far as the rules go. As far
as I have seen during the last two (2) years, it has worked smoothly and I really
have not heard anybody from the public complain to me about not having the
eighteen (18) minutes in the beginning. Again, you do see the unfairness. If you
tell somebody, "Come early and you can have your eighteen (18) minutes," but if
six (6) other people come before them then you tell them, "Well, I guess you just
have to wait." Also, oral testimony is not the only testimony we receive. We also
receive written testimony and phone calls, so there are opportunities for people that
want to testify to provide their point. We are the decision-makers, so they E-mail
us, we get it, and we take it into consideration. It does not necessarily need to be
one television for us to get it. For most bills, you have at least three (3)
opportunities to testify, where you have a first reading, public hearing, which sets
the time, and then you have a committee meeting...actually, it is four (4)...you have
a committee meeting, and then you have a full council meeting. So for most bills,
you have four (4) opportunities to testify on one (1) item, orally if you want to. I
think we have been able to accommodate everybody and I am okay with the rules as
it stands.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I have not had any real
issues with this. Initially, I voted against the change for this and have been
monitoring the situation. This, of all the rule changes to me, was the least drastic
in my opinion. I certainly have some issues with asking questions and getting
feedback because I think it does help for better dialogue. So the bottom line for me
is when a person walks into a room and they have a limited amount of time and
they want to and is requesting to speak, that they be offered that opportunity. I
think that you for sure, Chair, have offered that. I think that it could probably be
better articulated or communicated with the community. One of the things that I
COUNCIL MEETING 9 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
thought about was if there was a sign when people walked in that said, "If you are
here and have limited time to speak on something, please let us know so that we
can try to accommodate you," then that way we could address it. I know that even
on our committee days, I think there may be some inconsistencies amongst chairs,
because someone might walk in after the beginning of the meeting, so we might
make the request early, "Is anyone here to speak on something? Can we address it
now?" Then it happens, but they might come in midmorning or something and they
only have a limited time. If they know, walking into the room, that that option for
them is there consistently, then perhaps that is something that we can approve
upon. I would like to hear from the public because just like Councilmember
Kaneshiro said, I have not heard any complaints on this. However, what I would
think would be better is to hear if there is more from the community or if we need a
public hearing to hear from others on it, then that is something I would support at
this time. If I have to vote on it today, I do not know if I could support it. Thank
you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: If this was school, I would send
Councilmember Yukimura to detention. I find it rude that she is standing while
everybody else is talking for their first time.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember looser: Chair, I think it behooves us to remember
that this Council still has the work to do for several more months and that it
behooves us to treat each other with respect. The community is watching and the
community expects us to treat each other with respect. To call out another
Councilmember, questioning his or her motives, accusing her of "grandstanding,"
doing something before the election, or saying that they should leave and that kind
of thing is inappropriate and immature, quite frankly. We should act like the
Councilmembers that we are elected to be. We have two (2) more months to be a
Council. We should not stop introducing legislation, rule changes, or bills between
now and then, and we should not question everyone's motives between now and
then. We have to get a grip on this. People are watching us and we should act
accordingly. I think this is a reasonable and good request, and I believe our rules
allow Councilmember Yukimura to speak for twenty (20) minutes as the introducer
of the measure. If we would like a recess to consult the rules or otherwise, I can tell
you that it is on page...Rule 13(0...
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser, I know the rules.
She will have twenty (20) minutes at the Resolution, not the Communication. She
COUNCIL MEETING 10 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
will have twenty (20) minutes when the Resolution is introduced. That is what the
rule says.
Councilmember Hooser: Do the rules call for only two (2) times to
speak all the way through the entire meeting?
Council Chair Rapozo: On each item.
Councilmember Hooser: On each item?
Council Chair Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: So the twenty (20) minutes is not allowed on
the Communication?
Council Chair Rapozo: On the Resolution, on the matter that is set
for...
Councilmember Hooser: So she will be allowed twenty (20) minutes
on the Resolution?
Council Chair Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, I am not going to
recognize you. I have already said it. If you want to challenge that rule, you can. I
would appreciate it if you would sit down because it is a distraction when you stand
like that, but that is your call. I am going to move on with the meeting. The motion
is to receive. Is there any further discussion for someone that has not spoken twice?
The motion to receive C 2016-188 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2016-189 Communication (08/04/2016) from the Director of Finance,
requesting Council approval to accept and expend the appropriations in the total
amount of $5,700,000.00 provided to the County of Kaua`i in the Supplemental
Appropriations Act of 2016 — Act 124, Session Laws of Hawai`i 2016 from the State
of Hawaii, for Appropriation Warrant No. 222 for the following projects:
• Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center - $5,000,000.00; and
COUNCIL MEETING 11 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
• Kaua`i Veteran's Cemetery Renovation - $700,000.00.
Councilmember Kualii moved to approve C 2016-189, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura moved to take C 2016-189 in seriatim, seconded
by Councilmember Hooser.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, do you want to
explain your motion?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Rather than vote both on the
Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center and the Kaua`i Veteran's Cemetery in one
vote, I would like to ask that we vote on them separately.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Let us act on that motion first
before we take public testimony. Is there any further discussion on the items being
taken separately? Can I ask for a roll call on the motion to take C 2016-189 in
seriatim?
The motion to take C 2016-189 in seriatim was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa TOTAL — 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The motion passes.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, we will take the item separately
on the vote. Is there anybody in the audience wishing to testify? Further
discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have some questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: Sure. Who did you need?
Councilmember Yukimura: Our Life's Choices Kauai Coordinator.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. With that, I will suspend the rules.
Anyone else? The Managing Director might as well come up also so if there are any
questions on the Administration's direction, then everybody will be here to answer
questions. Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning. Theresa, has the County
procured expert services to design the center?
THERESA KOKI, Life's Choices Kauai Coordinator: Good morning,
Theresa Koki, for the record. We do have, and have had for the past three (3) years,
Marc Ventura, the Architect, to design the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center
with off-site and on-site infrastructure.
Councilmember Hooser: I have a hard time hearing you, so I would
just ask if you could speak up a little bit.
Ms. Koki: We do have, and have had for the past
three (3) years, Marc Ventura, our Architect, who is responsible for the design of
off-site and on-site infrastructure planning and design.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is his expertise in designing an
adolescent drug treatment center?
Ms. Koki: I believe we have had several discussions on
the Council before, and I am not sure if this pertaining to the agenda item today,
but we have mentioned it in correspondence and council meetings that he is an
award-winning architect that has designed a lot of medical offices here on Kaua`i
like the Urgent Care Clinic, Wilcox Memorial Hospital, the expansion of the
Surgery Unit, and others that has experience in. We also did mention that Marc
has been doing various site inspections at other adolescent treatment centers in the
State of Hawai`i to gather information.
Councilmember Yukimura: So the E-mail that I sent you from
Dr. Zuniga explaining the way that this building requires specialized knowledge
about adolescent drug treatment, do you feel that Marc Ventura is satisfying that
background of what is required?
Ms. Koki: Yes. Like I said, he has been meeting with
other adolescent treatment centers and looking at their plans and facilities. He also
frequently meets with our Blue Ribbon Panel, who is experts in the drug treatment
field. Like I said, he has done a lot of other medical office buildings.
COUNCIL MEETING 13 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: So you mean that he has been discussing the
details of the design with your Blue Ribbon Panel?
Ms. Koki: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I would like to get the minutes of
those meetings, please.
Ms. Koki: I believe we already sent that to you earlier,
but I will send it to you again.
Councilmember Yukimura: No, I do not want meetings that were done
prior to the starting of the actual design process. So anything that actually deals
with the design of the building, if you could send that, which you have not yet sent.
Ms. Koki: I will check if there are other discussions
after we sent the minutes to you.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will send that in writing for that specific
request.
Ms. Koki: Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is your timetable now?
Ms. Koki: Right now, we are publishing the
Environmental Assessment (EA). I do believe that you all got copies from our
Consultant. It was a thirty-day comment period and we had a draft EA that had a
Findings of No Significant Impact (FONSI) on the property, so we are moving ahead
and Marc Ventura is doing his preliminary drawings right now.
Councilmember Yukimura: So the thirty-day comment is over and you
folks have a finished, accepted EA?
Ms. Koki: Yes, it is being published and it is another
thirty-day review that was required by the Planning Department.
Councilmember Yukimura: A thirty-day review for public comment?
Ms. Koki: Now that they have had the Findings of No
Significant Impact, yes. It is published and it is open for a thirty-day review and
comment.
COUNCIL MEETING 14 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: So the public is being asked to comment for a
thirty-day period?
Ms. Koki: They were asked to comment and now it is
available for everybody else to look at and send any more comments in the next
thirty (30) days.
Councilmember Yukimura: When is the deadline?
Ms. Koki: I believe the first week in October.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is the schedule for design, going out to
bid, and completion? Do you have a schedule for that?
Ms. Koki: I do have a timetable and I apologize for not
bringing it, because I did not realize it was pertaining to the agenda item. We can
also forward that to you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? I have a question on
the cemetery renovation. This request is basically for us to get the money from the
State. The State allocated four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000) in the prior
budget, correct? Maybe you do not know, Wally. I am sorry.
WALLACE G. REZENTES, JR., Managing Director: Wally Rezentes,
Jr., Managing Director. I am sorry. I am not sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, I saw Lenny. I should have asked Lenny
to come up.
Councilmember Yukimura: I thought we were taking this is seriatim.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, for the vote.
LEONARD A. RAPOZO, JR., Director of Parks & Recreation: Lenny Rapozo,
Director of Parks & Recreation.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thanks, Lenny. I apologize for the spur of
the moment question, but I remember that the State allocated four hundred
thousand dollars ($400,000) in a prior budget. Did we ever receive those funds?
COUNCIL MEETING 15 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Rapozo: They were holding it back because we were
short-funding to complete the whole construction project. So now that we have this
additional funding, this request will supplement the previous one that we had.
Council Chair Rapozo: So it is seven hundred thousand
dollars ($700,000), in addition to the four hundred thousand dollars ($400,000)?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Lenny, could you review for us what these
moneys will be used for?
Mr. Rapozo: This would be for the renovation and
upgrades to the communal hall at the Kaua`i Veteran's Cemetery. We procured a
consultant to do a review to upgrade the maintenance, renovate the halls, and to
bring it up to code. With this, we can move forward with the construction to bring it
up to code and to...
Councilmember Yukimura: The communal hall is the place where we all
gather on Veteran's Day, Memorial Day, and so forth, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Where there is that beautiful mosaic, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is very, very old, so there is some rot and
stuff.
Mr. Rapozo: There is some rot. Like I said, the electrical
is not up to code. We found that not all of the concrete masonry unit (CMU) cells
were filled with concrete like they should have been, so all of these would be
addressed.
Councilmember Yukimura: That sounds good. Do you have a timetable
for that?
COUNCIL MEETING 16 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Rapozo: As soon as we have the money, we can move
forward with the procurement.
Councilmember Yukimura: It does not have anything to do with creating
additional burial plots, right?
Mr. Rapozo: That is a separate project that we are
currently working on with the Department of Defense.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right. I am glad you are working on that
because we would not want to be without plots when our veterans or their families
need them.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions for the Administration?
If not, thank you very much. I will call the meeting back to order. Further
discussion? Councilmember Kuali`i.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to say that this is a
communication, and by our support, we are approving the acceptance and the
expenditure. This is a cause for recognition and mahalo to Theresa, the
Administration, the Mayor—a big mahalo. This is a good success on our way to
doing what we have been trying to do for years, before a lot of us were sitting on
this Council, to finally get an Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center, five million
dollars ($5,000,000). That is rare and hard to come by. Thank you to the
Administration. Let us keep moving and get this done for our people, especially our
young people. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Before we go on, Councilmember Chock has
asked for one more question of Theresa. If there are no objections, I will suspend
the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Chock: Sorry, Theresa. This just kind of came to my
mind. Congratulations, because it is a big amount of money that has come from the
COUNCIL MEETING 17 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
State for you on this. I wanted to ask more about the operations. I know that a big
part of our success with the future of the center will be how the State jumps
on-board and helps us to sustain it. I was just wondering if there has been any
latest update or response from the Department of Health on how it is that they
intend to support what this island, this County, is moving towards.
Ms. Koki: Well, all of the current contracts that they
have right now are expiring in 2018. Other than that, we cannot discuss
procurement issues prior to, but we have been getting support from the Department
of Health and the Alcohol and Drug Abuse Division as well. They do have our
preliminary sketches and made some comments, so we are going back and forth.
We really have started the trend of having a state-of-the-art facility in the State of
Hawai`i and working with our partners, not in competition with the existing
treatment facilities. I also believe that with this project, the Mayor is one step
ahead of the Juvenile Justice Reform where there will be places for kids. I am
really excited about that because this is going to be like a youth center where there
would be the assessment center and outpatient services, which could generate
money as well, and then the residential treatment, which is a gap in service here on
Kaua`i.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I have a question and it may be for the
Director of Finance, but I will ask you. If he needs to come up, he may. Have these
funds already been released by the Governor or the Budget Finance Department
and this is the last step or do we still have to get the Governor, the Budget Finance
Department, and other offices to actually release the funds?
Ms. Koki: This is the step to release the funds. We have
to come before you to have your blessing to release the funds that were already
appropriated and we will write a letter after you release, if you release it. Then it
will go to Budget Finance.
Councilmember Hooser: So the Budget Finance Department is the
entity that releases the funds, not us?
Ms. Koki: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Have they already agreed to release the
funds?
COUNCIL MEETING 18 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Koki: Not until we send the correspondence.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so this is part of the process for asking
them to release the funds?
Ms. Koki: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: And we are not one hundred percent (100%)
sure...normally, the way the process works, you do not really know until they
release them, and this is the next step. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: In the timetable, when do you plan to open
this facility?
Ms. Koki: I believe with all of the legalities and all of
the steps that we have to take, it will be a couple of years.
Councilmember Yukimura: So that would make it 2018?
Ms. Koki: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: How do you plan to get the operating
moneys?
Ms. Koki: We are going to have people that are
interested actually bid on the facility and submit a business plan of how they are
going to run it. Other than that, there are operating funds that would be available
through various sources from the State Department of Health and there are other
ways that we are looking into right now with our federal agents and our lobbyists in
Washington, D.C.
Councilmember Yukimura: As far as other sources from the Department
of Health, what other sources is there that do not compete with existing centers?
Ms. Koki: I do not think I can answer that question due
to the procurement because if there are centers that have different services, then it
is a different pot of money, and that is all I can say right now because it is all
contractual and we would have to respond to the Request for Proposal (RFP) when
it is open.
Councilmember Yukimura: Do you have an RFP that is out right now?
COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Koki: No. During the budget process, the Director
of Finance and our Procurement Officer said that we cannot procure something that
is not there.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right.
Ms. Koki: So we do not have an RFP out right now.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I thought you were saying for
procurement reasons you cannot talk about certain things, but in fact, there is no
procurement in place at this time.
Ms. Koki: That is you asking me about the State giving
us money. It is all a procurement process.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but when we commit to five million
dollars ($5,000,000) in building a building, you usually want to have an operating
plan that shows you where you are getting your operating moneys from and how
that is going to be operated. You do not proceed to build a building until you have a
really good business plan or a working plan. That is why I am asking, because it is
a great concern.
Ms. Koki: I believe that is why the Council issued a
resolution in support.
Council Chair Rapozo: Hang on. This seems like déjà vu. We have
been down this road. We have had the discussion. This Council supported the
request for the five million dollars ($5,000,000). This Council also supported or
passed a resolution that basically said that one million two hundred thousand
dollars ($1,200,000) of operating money would be...the Council had basically said
that we would participate in that and work with that. I do not want to get into the
details of whether or not the model is right or wrong. This is for five million dollars
($5,000,000) to build the building. Is that correct?
Ms. Koki: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: Then once we build the building, then the
RFP and all of the different parts of the process will move forward.
Councilmember Yukimura: The thing is that you build a building based
on model, and if you do not know what the model is, you are spending five million
dollars ($5,000,000). It is like doing a house without a house plan and knowing how
COUNCIL MEETING 20 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
people are going to function within it. That is the concern. You have to know what
you are building for. If you do not have a model and know what you are building
for, you could end up wasting a lot of money.
Council Chair Rapozo: Again, let me remind the Councilmembers
that the Council already approved this. Maybe not everybody agreed with it, but
this is what we approved. We went through the discussions. Today it is a matter
of, do we want the Governor to release the funds? If not, we can say, "No, Governor,
keep your five million dollars ($5,000,000)." That is what is on the agenda today. If
you want a separate update on the project, then we can agenda that in a committee.
But today is really, do we or are we supporting the release of the money from the
State to the County?
Councilmember Yukimura: This may appear to be déjà vu, but that is
because there have not been any reliable answers. So you are saying basically that
you expect the Council to pay for the operation of this facility at the tune of one
million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) basically, right? If all else fails
and there is nothing, then we are committing to one million two hundred thousand
dollars ($1,200,000) a year in operating moneys for this facility, even though we
might be building it without knowing what model we are going to use; therefore, our
building might not be suitable to the model that we are going to eventually figure
out.
Mr. Rezentes: If I can speak to that a little bit—I have been
back a few months and I have attended a few meetings with the partners that have
been involved in the process of developing or working with Theresa, our Consultant,
Mr. Ventura, and others. My takeaway was that I guess, for lack of a better word,
the plans will be detailed enough, yet generic enough to stand up a facility that
could work. We had players in the room that are professionals in the field that are
working at and operating these facilities elsewhere in the State. They are also
confident that what we are conceptually designing would work for the type of
facility that we are looking to stand up. To your point about "is the County
committing one million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000)"—we cannot say
for a fact obviously today. We hope to entertain a number of viable proposals, and
hopefully at the end of the day, we would engage in a company or have a contract
with an entity that will run it as efficiently as possible. But it is too early to
ultimately make that call if we are committing one million two hundred thousand
dollars ($1,200,000). We are hoping it is a lot less than that. We are working with
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Division (ADAD) and other partners in the State on finding
the right pathways of securing other sources of funds outside of the County.
COUNCIL MEETING 21 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: So you are saying that we hope we will have
a viable proposal. So you are going to build the building and go out for a proposal
for an operator, but what if you do not have a viable operator or viable proposal?
Mr. Rezentes: What alternatives do we have? Do we get a
viable proposal before we do the building? Can someone commit that today? I do
not think so.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. The feasibility study recommended
using an existing building...
Council Chair Rapozo: Hang on...
Councilmember Yukimura: No, I am sorry. I am asking the question.
Council Chair Rapozo: You are not asking. You are telling him
about a feasible...we are not going to get into that debate of the process. Today's
discussion is whether or not we want the State to release the funds. If you want to
have an update, Councilmember Yukimura, I say we can put that in a committee
and have the update. We are not going to go down that road again and listen to...
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, I am just asking a question that is
related to the question of whether we want to release the money.
Council Chair Rapozo: Then ask your question.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have been asking the questions, except that
I have been interrupted continuously.
Council Chair Rapozo: Ask your question.
Councilmember Yukimura: What will happen if we do not have a viable
proposal?
Ms. Koki: Actually, and you got copies as well, earlier
on, we did go out for a Request for Information (RFI) to see what is out there and we
have been talking to all four (4) vendors who responded to the request for
information or Request for Qualifications (RFQ). One of them has money and
wanted to move here tomorrow, but we have to speak to all of them on an even
level-playing field, because it is a procurement process. We were in the process of
writing a business plan as well, and then we were advised that we should have
whoever the operator is show us their business plan and model and go with them
from there.
COUNCIL MEETING 22 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: That is correct. Usually, when you build a
building, you work with the people who are going to be in the building. When you
do an RFI, at the end of an RFI, you usually know what kind of proposal you want.
Councilmember Kagawa: Call for the question, Mr. Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Hang on.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry. This is part of the dialogue in
understanding what is being done.
Councilmember Kagawa: Can we take a vote? I call for the question.
Council Chair Rapozo: We need to be back in order before we do
that. Again, you are trying to convince them that they are doing it wrong,
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: No, I am asking questions and seeking...
Council Chair Rapozo: Ask the question. I am going to go on to the
next person.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. What happens if we do not have a
viable proposal?
Council Chair Rapozo: She just answered that.
Councilmember Yukimura: But we have a five million
dollar ($5,000,000) building?
Council Chair Rapozo: I am having a difficult time here, but...
Ms. Koki: I truly believe that we are not going to not
have a proposal. That is why we went out for the RFI. I want to move forward on
this because this is the most work that anyone has ever done in the last ten (10)
years. We are almost there. I am a fiscally responsible person. I would never let a
building sit empty after we have spent five million dollars ($5,000,000) on. There
are various ways that we can do things.
Council Chair Rapozo: Again, we hear you...well, I think six (6) of
us hear you. I want to move on. I am not going to get into the debate of what model
will work versus the other. I think I heard Wally say very clearly that the design is
COUNCIL MEETING 23 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
going to be flexible enough where it could accommodate different models. I do not
know how else more you can put that. You said you have four (4) vendors who
responded to the RFI, and one was ready to move here tomorrow. How do you
answer her question? I do not know. We need to move on. Are there any other
questions as far as the release of the five million dollars ($5,000,000)? If not, thank
you. I will call the meeting back to order. Further discussion? Since we are going
to take it in seriatim, let us start with the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center.
Can I have a motion on that item first?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve the Adolescent Treatment &
Healing Center - $5,000,000, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. Ironically, at the fair I
just bumped into a grandfather that raised this boy, who is a junior now, and he
had to send him away to Hilo to the Youth Challenge, where he is at and he showed
me a picture, and the grandfather mentioned that he is doing great. I guess the
biggest problem is that the grandfather has raised his grandson all of these years
and he is allowed one (1) call, ten (10) minutes a week. If the child was here,
obviously grandpa would be able to see him more often and be a part of his life
growing up. So there is this worry that the grandfather is suffering and it is
because we do not have a facility. We worked through the State or what have you,
and have our problem youth that are going through problems in their lives, and
have to send them away to Hilo to take care of our problems. I do not think that is
pono. I think we need to try our best to take care of our children and make sure
that our families are there to support them, and that is why I am totally supporting
this project. I believe that the questions asked of Theresa are unanswerable. You
cannot get a RFP when you do not have the facility and you do not have the State
funds to even start building. It is ridiculous. It is not saying that it is an easy road.
The healthcare industry is a tough road. Mahelona Medical Center had problems.
Kaua`i Veterans Memorial Hospital (KVMH) went through problems. One of Maui's
hospitals thought about closing. The healthcare industry is not an easy nut to
crack. Dr. Norma here knows that it is not easy. It is very competitive and very
expensive, but I am telling you that it is something that we need to do for our
children, for our families. There are significant problems with the youth in our
communities and we constantly send them away to Maui and O`ahu, and now we
are sending them away to Hawai`i Island, because we do not want to address our
island's problems? I think that is wrong. It is an easy vote for me. I am supporting
you, Theresa.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion on the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I support effective adolescent drug treatment
that is based on best practices, is financially sustainable, is effective, and is
cost-effective. So far, based on what I have heard, the proposed Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center is none of the above. It is not based on best practices
if you ask the experts on this island, like LaVerne Bishop, Wayne Law, and
Madeleine Hiraga-Nuccio, among them. The real practice is to have it family-based
and work with the family, and it also needs the continuum of care so that when they
come out of this most intensive treatment that they have adequate support. The
County's feasibility study shows that there is not this continuum care so the relapse
rate will be great. It is not financially sustainable, the County's own feasibility
study, which was done by someone with impeccable credentials and expertise in the
area of children and youth said that unless the Department of Health commits
funding, the project is not sustainable. Some Councilmembers say, "Oh, we will pay
it. Well, we will see." But paying one million two hundred thousand
dollars ($1,200,000) a year when we were able to shake lose in the last budget only
three hundred forty-four thousand dollars ($344,000) to put towards ten million
dollars ($10,000,000) needed to repair our roads per year; it does not give one
assurance that there will be that money. There have been two (2) other adolescent
drug treatment centers on neighbor islands that have closed, that were not able to
sustain themselves. So we are going to pay five million dollars ($5,000,000) to build
a building, and then we do not have a clear plan on how we are going to sustain it.
Cost-effective—this will be for eight (8) to ten (10) beds, which are actually
available on O`ahu, and there are support for families to go and visit their children
there, so it is not like there are no other options. But using one million two hundred
thousand dollars ($1,200,000)—how many young people could we help to prevent
them from even needing to go to an adolescent drug treatment center? Are we being
strategic in how we use our money? Are we using it to help the most kids on this
island? That is the question. Councilmember Kagawa talks about Youth
Challenge—well, there is a lack of understanding about what kind of services our
kids need. They need Youth Challenge, some of them, but that kind of
programming is not going to be given by an adolescent drug treatment center.
Some kinds do not have a diagnosis of drug use. They need other kinds of
programming like Youth Challenge. They are not substitutable and we need to
know how we meet these very needs of our children, which takes some really good
strategic planning about how we do that. We have not done that on this island
because we have just been looking at this one facility. I do not believe we are ready
to move forward and there are questions that have not been sufficiently answered
that need to be answered if we were to be fiscally responsible, but most of all,
responsible to the needs of our kids.
COUNCIL MEETING 25 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to say that the way I view this
is that we, as a Council, is a policy-making body. The Administration is the body
that handles the day-to-day operations. We set the budget, but the Administration
is the one that incurs the day-to-day expenditures to make operations work to best
serve our community. This body wholeheartedly agrees, as a policy, that we need to
do something for our youth, that we need these adolescent drug treatment and
healing centers. We all have neighbors and family members that are impacted by
this, and yet, none of us, except maybe Councilmember Yukimura, are so engaged
in the minutia of what management practices have to happen that we can play that
role. That is not our role. Let the Administration do their role and have a little bit
of trust in them. If it is a policy and a priority then provide the funding if we must.
If we do not know where the money is coming from, then that is our job to find it.
We can set priorities. The bottom line is that we have to work with the
Administration. We cannot micromanage how they make things happen. We are
the Council; we are not the Administration. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is agreed that we need to do something for
our youth; the question is, what is the best way to serve the needs of our youth?
The Administration does have a role and their role is to do the operations. Our role
is oversight, to give money when we have been shown that the programs have been
well thought out and that there is a good plan to follow. That has not been provided
in this instance. Yes, we have neighbors and family members who have been
affected by drugs, tremendously so, but most of them will not need the most intense
need for adolescent drug treatment. They need all other kinds like counseling, in-
family therapy, and all kinds of things. Those are the continuum of care that the
feasibility study for the center says is needed.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just have to say that after teaching for
fifteen (15) years at Kapa'a High School I think I know that there are youth that
have substance abuse problems that have gone to Youth Challenge and Acadia for
help. Councilmember Yukimura acts like she knows, but I do not think she
knows...she can know any other area that she may think, but she does not know
more about youth and the challenges that they go through and programs that are
out there that have helped our youth. I am just saying that having this substance
abuse center can at least help some of our youth on Kaua`i that are struggling to get
COUNCIL MEETING 26 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
the help here on this island that they live on. That is all I am saying. Thank you,
Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I will be supporting this proposal, if you
would. I share some of the concerns that Councilmember Yukimura raises and I
appreciate her willingness to ask the questions and to dig down deep, because they
are valid questions. How are we going to pay for this in the end; whether it will be
a cash drain on the County; how many people will it serve; and whether it works or
not are huge questions and deserve close scrutiny and I think it deserves scrutiny
by this Council, as well as scrutiny by the Administration. I appreciate those
questions being asked. However, the reason I am willing to support this right now
is having the ability to utilize the structure for other purposes that might be related
to youth support, whether it is drug rehabilitation or treatment, or whether it is for
other purposes. The moneys are coming from the State. The land is coming from
the landowner. There will be costs to the County to construct it; there is no
question about that. But given the totality of the situation, I believe that this is a
project worthy of support, and there is no question that drug use and abuse is a
huge issue for our entire community and that we need to take some steps to deal
with this. I am glad where we are taking some steps, but I think there is much
more that we can do, besides build a building and we should explore that as we
move forward as well. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? If not, I will just say that this
goes back fourteen (14) years to former Mayor Bryan Baptiste when he put
together the drug team and had our first drug plan. I was fortunate enough to sit on
that and I remember that this was one of the key components. There are many
people between then and now that had a part in this and much mahalo to all of
them and Theresa Koki, who has been persistent—pushy at times—but this is
something that I believe is long overdue. The reality is when we...I was there and I
met with the State Representatives and the Senate, begging for the five million
dollars ($5,000,000). In fact, I was there with Theresa and Nadine and met with
Sylvia Luke. They wanted the County to put some commitment; that is where the
one million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) came from. They needed
something from the County saying, "Hey, if you folks want five million
dollars ($5,000,000) from us, show us that you are going to have a dog in this fight,"
and we did. This Council approved that Resolution. Yes, it is a resolution and it
does not commit the County to any future funding, but it does make that strong
policy statement saying that this Council, this sitting Council, whether or not we all
agree or disagree, are basically saying that we are committed to making sure that
the operating funds will be available. If we have to raise taxes, we have to raise
taxes. I guess the point is that the Council made a policy statement saying that we
COUNCIL MEETING 27 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
will do what it takes to get this facility built. As Councilmember Kuali`i said, the
model is...you folks have the experts. Yesterday, I had a meeting with Brian
Kohatsu, who is a recovering addict, and is now a drug abuse counselor. He turned
his life around and he is part of the Treatment and Intervention Committee. There
was a lot I learned yesterday about what is lacking here in services. This is one
part. There are many other parts that we have to look at, but this is one part that
is critical. Rather than sit here and say that there are all of these other ones that
failed, let us talk about the successes and opportunities. Councilmember Hooser
brought up the additional uses. I heard loud and clear that Theresa said that there
will be outpatient services. There will be other services, not just acute care and
residential treatment. Our kids that are in Councilmember Kagawa's classes that
he talks about, that he knows from the schools that are being shipped off to Youth
Challenge and this facility may be a benefit to them. Parents today cannot afford to
visit their kids that are in Honolulu, Hawai`i Island, Arizona, or Utah. We talk
about one million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000)...to help our
kids...why should Kaua`i not have a treatment center to help our kids? Maybe some
people believe that we do not have a problem. Really? They better wake up,
because we have a problem. That one million two hundred thousand
dollars ($1,200,000)—if that is going to help one (1) kid, two (2) kids, or three (3), or
four (4)—eight (8) beds may seem little, and it is, but when you talk about the
turnaround...these kids come in, get the treatment program, they go out, and then
somebody else comes in. You can help quite a few kids can come through the
program and hopefully benefit from this. Again, this was all approved in the past;
we are just asking for the State to release the funds and that is what today's action
does. I am hoping that we can get unanimous support to show the State that we are
serious and that we mean it and that we do want to get this facility built. With
that, roll call. The motion is to approve the release of the five million
dollars ($5,000,000) for the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center.
The motion to approve the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center -
$5,000,000 was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL– 6,
AGAINST MOTION: Yukimura TOTAL– 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL– 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL – 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, can I get a motion for the Kaua`i
Veteran's Cemetery Renovation?
Councilmember Chock moved to approve the Kauai Veteran's Cemetery
Renovation - $700,000, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
COUNCIL MEETING 28 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion on that? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I believe these funds are much needed and
there is a plan for the renovations. We owe it to our veterans to support them and
to keep the Veteran's Cemetery and the facilities there in good condition. These are
only preliminary moneys, so I look forward to the next phase where we are also
then ensuring that we have enough plots for our veterans. I appreciate the work
that the Department of Parks & Recreation has done on this.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? I want to thank the
Department of Parks & Recreation and the Department of Public Works for staying
on this. That building should be the best looking building for our veterans. I also
want to thank Lyle and Lenny and also the Department of Finance in working with
Tulsi Gabbard. We have been in active discussions with her to try and get the feds
to release those funds for the expansion, as Councilmember Yukimura has talked
about, because we are running out of space and that is in motion as we speak.
Hopefully they will release those funds soon. I can honestly say that the County
has done their job; the Department of Parks & Recreation and the Department of
Public Works have done their job as far as the planning and design of that. We are
just waiting for the funds. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: As we approve this, I want to thank Lenny
and the Department of Public Works as well. As we move forward and do the
repairs that are needed, I am going to ask to not skimp when it comes to putting the
reinforcements needed. I know that the Kaiakea Fire Station, because it is close to
the ocean, has been substantive damage done from the salt breeze to all of the metal
components, and from what I have heard, we have been replacing it yearly; things
that should last twenty (20) years, we are doing repairs on it yearly because I guess
we are using substandard type of metals that are not salt water resistant. So I
think the Veteran's Cemetery is going to be same thing. That is not an area to use
substandard materials that are not resistant to the salt breeze. I do not want to see
Kaiakea Fire Station recurring. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? If not, roll call.
The motion to approve the Kaua`i Veteran's Cemetery Renovation - $700,000
was then put, and carried by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEETING 29 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL– 7,
AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL– 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL– 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL– 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
C 2016-190 Communication (08/08/2016) from the Planning Director,
transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend Chapter 8,
Kauai County Code 1987, as amended, to allow multiple family dwelling units in all
residential zoning districts: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to receive C 2016-190 for
the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion or public testimony? The
rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
ANNE PUNOHU: Aloha. My name is Anne Punohu. To make
sure that I am up here testifying for the right thing, this is on the housing issue,
correct? Although I am not a paid lobbyist and although I am just a private citizen,
I am going continue to come up at this desk every time I see an agenda item
putting affordable rental or helping renters out and housing on the agenda, and I
will continue to say the same things every time. So I know you will get really sick
of me, but I am hoping that if I say it enough that somebody will listen. I want the
median income to be charged for any of these units under any ordinance or law or
anything that you folks propose to be less...far less than eighty percent (80%). I
want it to be lower and I want any of these items to be piggybacked on another
item, which will call for rent control or some sort of rental suppression, or some sort
of rental limit. I feel that as much as you folks propose these things, without that
piggyback on it to be an entire package, it will not work for the people or help the
people that you want to help. I pretty much do not have anything else to say, but
just expect this testimony every single time the item is on the agenda. Mahalo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Is anyone else
wishing to testify? Ms. Parker.
ALICE PARKER: Alice Parker, for the record. This is a
courtesy of the Kaua`i County Farm Bureau Fair—I tripped. I think this is terrific.
This is what the public wanted, all County-wide residential units to be able to build
affordable multiple family units, because we need housing desperately. The
COUNCIL MEETING 30 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
infrastructure is already there and could be easily structured to expand for more
people. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Ms. Sparks.
NORMA DOCTOR SPARKS: Good morning. Norma Doctor Sparks. I
support this as well. As I have said before, under my father's trust, we have six (6)
rental units, and every time one becomes vacant and we advertise it, we have over
thirty (30) people coming to see a unit. We have really worked on trying to keep our
rents affordable and we understand all of the possible County benefits that we
would receive in terms of taxation if we were to keep it affordable. So I think the
idea of allowing multiple family dwellings in all residential zoning districts is a good
idea, especially when the first communication actually talked about being only in
Lihu`e. I think that this is very responsive to the needs of Kaua`i's citizens. I just
want to also really focus on keeping those multiple family dwellings to be affordable
as much as possible and that they not become very expensive rentals as well. So I
do support this and I appreciate the movement to all residential zoning districts as
well. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, I will call the meeting
back to order. Further discussion? The motion is to receive. Councilmember
Kagawa.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kagawa: I know a lot of the problems that occur. I
appreciate what Anne has spoken about, but the housing market and the high rents
that are on Kaua`i are not only on Kaua`i; it is a statewide problem; it is a
nationwide problem. How to fix that, I do not think that the Council alone can fix
what has happened. I think it is going to take coordination with the state and
federal government to figure out if we are going to try and really address this
problem to help out everyone, because renting is a free enterprise. If you buy a
place for five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), it is very difficult for you to rent
it under one thousand dollars ($1,000). It is plain math. You are not going to buy a
place and take a loss. The question is why is it five hundred thousand
dollars ($500,000) and what can we do to bring it down? We have to somehow bring
our market values down, if that makes sense. Again, this is a global and
nationwide issue that we have to tackle. It is very difficult to incentivize. We had
Kako folks talk about it, like they jumped out of the affordable rental program
because the tax benefit of getting the Homestead rate versus the Residential rate
was not worth it anymore. Again, you can use all of the tax credits and all of the
different methods that you can here at the Council body, but unless we control the
COUNCIL MEETING 31 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
market values of our land prices, it is going to be very difficult to get a handle on
how we provide affordable rents all over the island. This is an issue that needs
significant coordination with state and federal agencies and legislators. We need to
really work together and try to find a better long-term solution, rather than small
tax credits here and there. As we saw with previous testifiers and previous bills, it
is very, very difficult. If the market values keep going up and we cannot control it,
then we will not really be solving the problem. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I think this is one of the many considerations
that we need to be looking at in addressing the need for housing on our island. I
know that we will be taking up more discussion, but I just wanted to voice that I do
have some questions, mostly regarding how we intend to mitigate any effects of
sprawl as well in the future if we move in this direction if it is a concern and some of
the Planning Commission process that we had before us. I will be posing those
questions later, if we can just let the Planning Department know.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I support the intention of this Bill and
appreciate the fact that Councilmember Kaneshiro has introduced it. I think we
need to look at increased densities within our town cores, and hopefully this will be
a way to make more housing available. I also hope that the Planning Department
will have a variety of ways, whether it is form-based codes or otherwise, to help
mitigate the impacts of the mix in multi-family housing and single-family housing. I
am thinking of a specific example, where the County is the developer of Rice Camp
and there are single-family homes immediately adjacent to Rice Camp that have
been there for years. They were given no notice that three (3) stories of building are
coming up just a few feet away from their single-family home, and they found that
lack of notice and lack of consideration is quite distressing. As we approve bills like
this, there will be situations that I think we have to anticipate. Whether it is
setbacks, or building envelopes, or things like that, there are ways to mitigate the
impact and make this a win-win for everyone, so I hope that the Planning
Department will be sensitive to those issues. There will be some questions that I
will also be asking during the period that we have to vet this Bill.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I am also supporting this going forward, but
I do have lots of questions. Will we have the Planning Department here later to do
that?
COUNCIL MEETING 32 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. I will hold my questions.
Council Chair Rapozo: Today is first reading, but as I have stated in
the past, I think it is important that we get our questions answered before the
public hearing. As far as the details, we could probably wait for that when it goes to
the committee meeting. If there are some significant questions, especially intent, I
think, is important; what is the Administration's intent moving forward? I think it
is important to ask that today before we get to the public hearing.
Councilmember Hooser: Thank you. I agree. For any major issues,
we should get it on the table as soon as possible so that we can further discuss
them. I will wait until that point later today.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: So the questions will come when the Bill
comes up, rather than the Communication?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. Again, just the questions that you
believe are important before it goes to public hearing so that the public has an idea
of what this is about. If you read the agenda, you do not know what this is about,
multi-family dwellings. I think the public should have an idea of what this Bill is
really going to do before the public hearing. We will have the Planning Department
here. Anyone else? Go ahead.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to add that hopefully the
Planning Department can just give us a brief update on what this Bill entails and
hopefully that can lead us to at least moving to first reading. I think if we are going
to get into a deep discussion that may lead to amendments or changes, then we
should wait for the committee meeting, where I believe we should hammer out the
nuts and bolts. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: As the introducer, I know we are only in the
Communication and I was going to hold my comments until the Bill, but basically
all this does is allow multi-family units in R-1 through R-6, and does not increase
density or do anything, but it just gives the developer or a homeowner the
opportunity to try and change the way a building looks by saving on costs, by
COUNCIL MEETING 33 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
having one (1) roof, shared walls rather than two (2) separate houses. That is all it
does. As we go forward, just think about that as we get to the actual bill.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I think it may also allow an Additional
Dwelling Unit (ADU) conversion. For example, where I live, we are allowed to have
an ADU; a ten thousand (10,000) plus square foot lot. This is one the questions that
I am going to ask, but since we are talking about it now, it may allow every home in
my neighborhood to be a duplex because they all have ADU rights, so that has a
potential to dramatically impact, at the minimum, the aesthetics, if not other
things. So I think there might be unintended consequences and it bears a thorough
discussion. That is all. I think that the intent is a good one and that it has a lot of
potential to help us, but I think we need to look at it very closely.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
The motion to receive C 2016-190 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, the next item is C 2016-191 with a
companion Executive Session, ES-868. Did you want to take that later?
Council Chair Rapozo: Can you read it into the record first? Who is
in charge of this sound system? Are they working on it now? They told me that
they just upgraded the system, so we should get our money back. I do want to call
the item because there may be someone in the audience wishing to testify on this
matter. If not, I would ask that we do this after the Executive Session.
C 2016-191 Communication (08/18/2016) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend funds up to $50,000.00 for Special Counsel
services to represent the County of Kaua`i Housing Agency before the State of
Hawai`i Land Use Commission in order to file a 201H-38 Petition for the Lima Ola
Workforce Housing Project (Resolution No. 2016-53), and related matters:
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-191, seconded by Councilmember
Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will suspend the rules. Do we
have anyone registered?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 34 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Sparks: Good morning. Norma Doctor Sparks. I
have a concern about the dollars that are being expended or being proposed to be
expended for Special Counsel. The reason for that is that I think within the Office
of the County Attorney, there should be a process to create a litigation team. When
I was a Deputy Attorney General, of course we had the whole State, so some of us
were doing mostly advice and consent and administrative law, while others really
became the litigation team. I would like to propose that the County Attorney
consider the idea of developing attorneys or hiring attorneys who have litigation
experience. It appears to me that some of these requests are really to represent the
County before an administrative body, such as commissions. I think that if
possible, the County should try to develop and reduce the dollars that are being
asked for Special Counsel services. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this
today.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next speaker.
MATTHEW BERNABE: Matthew Bernabe, for the record. I believe
that this is taking away seventy-five (75) acres of coffee fields. I do not know if that
is true, but we should not be encouraging reducing agricultural land, especially
productive agricultural land. However, with that said, I understand the need for
houses; not just affordable, but regular houses so that we can earn more money for
real property. The problem I have with this agenda item and the one that we just
spoke on, C 2016-190, is nowhere do I hear the discussion about getting the Ahukini
Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), down there by where Reynold's is, up and
running. Throughout this campaign, I have talked, gone, seen, and realized that we
have companies like Macy's dropping off hangers by the big Matson container,
sitting in our landfill, versus being cleaned up...
Council Chair Rapozo: Matt, I am trying to...
Mr. Bernabe: I understand, but I want this to be talked
about within this Council. If we are going to give them money for Special
Counsel...we are on the Lima Ola, right?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes.
Mr. Bernabe: That is why if we are going to give them
money to go to this special board, go to the State, and do all of this...it is germane,
but I want some component for us to get our dump situation organized before we
expand housing.
Council Chair Rapozo: I understand where you are going, but...
COUNCIL MEETING 35 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Bernabe: That is all I want to say. To me, it is
germane. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to
testify? If not, I will call the meeting back to order. Councilmember Kagawa.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Kagawa: Can I ask Mauna Kea a question? Mauna
Kea, you do not need to answer it if it belongs in Executive Session, because we
have an Executive Session item in case we need to go there.
Council Chair Rapozo: Let me suspend the rules. Go ahead.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Kagawa: My question is simply what Norma asked.
We have many attorneys in your office. Why are you asking for Special Counsel and
why can your office not do it with the manpower that you have?
MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: Aloha. For the record, Mauna
Kea Trask, County Attorney. Honorable Chair and Councilmembers. First off, to
address the statements made on the floor, the County Attorneys, as you know...this
was pursuant to a discussion that the Office of the County Attorney had with this
body, going back to 2014, as well as with Mayor Carvalho, taking in more litigation.
We have overwhelmingly done that. I invite everybody in the community to look at
the County Attorney's budget presentations to show that we have...we have been
running a litigation division for over two (2) years now. We have saved hundreds of
thousands of dollars in Special Counsel funds. We only go now under the Charter if
there is information that may indicate that there is a special need. The Housing
Agency is also present to speak about this. Really what it comes down to is the
Land Use Commission (LUC), and I do not know if your layperson knows this, but
the Land Use Commission is its own separate, special administrative body. When I
spoke with members of the Bar, including respected ex-County Attorneys, to try to
gauge their opinion about these things, which I really respect. I believe that as the
County Attorney, you look to what your forbearers did and how they analyzed and
really appreciate their advice and input, given their decades of actual practice.
They said that this can be a special area of expertise, that there are a couple of
marque firms that do this and they do it well and quicker, which translates to less
expensive proceedings. The Land Use Commission—a lot of procedural
process...sixty (60) days before you plan to file a Land Use Petition for
redistricting...you file a notice of intent. There is a bunch of notice procedures and
COUNCIL MEETING 36 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
affidavits required to be submitted. Intervenors can be let in. The Land Use
Commission can hold pre-mediation discussions and meetings with any or all
interested parties...forty-five (45) day review and hearing a possible contested case,
and if they are after nothing taken, on the forty-sixth day it is approved. I am
prepared to talk in more detail, but I just wanted to correct the possible
misperception that was created on the floor.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you for your response. It is clear to
me why you are asking for it. Cliffside was Agriculture, and `Ele`ele Nani I and II
were Agriculture, so did we have to go to the Land Use Commission for those as
well?
Mr. Trask: I believe so, but I cannot speak specifically.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay.
Mr. Trask: Makoa used to be Agriculture...
Councilmember Kagawa: I do not know why you are shaking your
head. Cliffside was Agriculture; I lived right next to Cliffside. Cliffside had
sugarcane right next to my house—I know because I was there.
Councilmember Yukimura: But it did not have to go the Land Use
Commission.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. I am just asking.
Mr. Trask: It is usually an acreage determination. I am
not sure.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. I just wanted to clarify what Matt
was asking on why we are doing housing on agricultural land. All of those were
Agriculture before, like Cliffside, `Ele`ele Nani I, and `Ele`ele Nani II. It was
Agriculture before; there was sugarcane all around there.
Mr. Trask: I think it is the determination of acreage of
the parcel is what I think it is.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do not know how large, but anyway, thank
you. Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 37 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: Mauna Kea, do you have an already qualified
list of people with that expertise?
Mr. Trask: We do.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. So in your normal procurement
process you have created such a list with attorneys of that expertise?
Mr. Trask: Correct. I think it was around May
sometime...before the fiscal, so about April/May every year we do our yearly
professional solicitation, our HRS 103(d).
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mauna Kea, when I saw the posting...I mean
I understand why we have an Executive Session, but I just do not see the need. I
think you made it clear that you believe your Office does not have that specialty
experience to do land use cases.
Mr. Trask: We just never did one before.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right, which is a good reason to find
somebody that has.
Mr. Trask: Yes. In times like this, we did identify in
deciding when to go that if we do need to go to Special Counsel and you deem it
advisable, that I would assign a litigation attorney to track to create as a learning
experience. There is nothing better than to learn on the job with some of the best
practitioners in the State, so we intend to do that.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think you do not feel comfortable with your
Office taking on this land use...
Mr. Trask: Well, let me qualify that—I think we can do
anything.
Council Chair Rapozo: Do not say that or I will vote no on the
money.
Mr. Trask: Okay, but with the qualification that we
have never done it before, we are very busy now with our current litigation load,
and I do understand that Mr. Mackler is here from the Housing Agency to speak on
the specifics as to why the Housing Agency wants it. We would appreciate the
COUNCIL MEETING 38 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
opportunity to go Special Counsel and to learn on this one. This body has indicated
its importance; the community has indicated that housing is important, so we want
to do it as quick as possible. Mr. Mackler is here as well.
Council Chair Rapozo: The request for legal counsel is you. I know
that importance to housing, as we heard that last week. The Council supported the
20111 process. The reality is that I do not see anything that we can talk about or
need to talk about for this item in there. I just do not. I think everything here
should be just out here. You are just requesting for some specialty Special Counsel.
Any other questions? If not, thank you.
Mr. Trask: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I will call the meeting back to order.
Councilmember Chock.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Chock: I just want to say that compared to when I
first started on the Council, I think that...the reason why I say this is because I
want to commend the County Attorney on exactly what he said, that we have really
scaled back our use of Special Counsel, and I want to acknowledge, and when
necessary, especially under the circumstances that he is mentioning, I think
warrants us to support him under the load that he is taking on. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? I would agree
wholeheartedly. I think to Mauna Kea's credit, they have, and I think we have said
it enough times on the floor, that they have terminated several Special Counsel
contracts. But I do expect and respect Mauna Kea for saying that this may be
something beyond our expertise and we need some help. I would also expect the
Office of the County Attorney to utilize this opportunity to train someone in their
office in this area of law. This is the first time this County has done a 20111
process. This is going to be the first time the County will go before the Land Use
Commission, so I do not have a problem with it. I think it is important to look at
the Office of the County Attorney in totality and the fact that, and Councilmember
Chock has summed it up very accurately, that the requests, if you notice for the
general public, is that the request for Special Counsel funds have decreased
tremendously and I appreciate that. With that, the motion is to approve. Roll call.
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes?
COUNCIL MEETING 39 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have Mr. Mackler come up since he
is here to talk about how the Housing Agency is going to use this Special Counsel?
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Mr. Mackler, may you come up? I will
suspend the rules. I am not sure Mr. Mackler will be using it; I think it is going to
be the Office of the County Attorney, but Mr. Mackler can come up and say that. I
think it is clear that it is the County Attorney's request and not the Housing
Agency. Mr. Mackler, are you going to be using this or is it going to be the County
Attorney?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, the County Attorney said that Gary
Mackler is here to talk about how the Housing Agency is going to use or work
with...
Council Chair Rapozo: No, what he said is that Mr. Mackler is here
to talk about the importance of this 201H process and we all heard that last week.
Go ahead, Mr. Mackler.
GARY MACKLER, Housing Development Coordinator: Which part of that
would you like me to speak to?
Council Chair Rapozo: Answer her question.
Mr. Mackler: What is her question?
Councilmember Yukimura: What is the Housing Agency's plan with
respect to the Land Use Commission?
Mr. Mackler: Well, as we shared with you about three (3)
weeks ago when we were here with our 201H application, with your approval, our
next step to complete the entitlement process for the Lima Ola project to reclassify
seventy-five (75) acres of Agricultural land to Urban, to change the boundary to
amend the boundary district for that would require us going to the Land Use
Commission with a petition to make that request. The Land Use Commission, as
we understand, is a quasi-judicial process, and that we would be well-served to have
legal representation helping us, advising us, preparing our petition, and navigating
us through that process, because we are actually moving us through an expedited
process, as we said the last time we were here, that we are actually seeking an
expedited review from the Land Use Commission. We want to make sure that the
petition is done well, that we cover all of our bases, and that we have all of our
COUNCIL MEETING 40 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
ducks in a row by the time we formally submit the petition. It is...pardon me...it is
rare that it rings—but we want to make sure it is done well and that it is done
correctly so that when we do go in, we get though that process on our first attempt.
Councilmember Yukimura: In the materials you submitted before us, the
Council, "Attachment C," which is the pro forma operating budget, is to be
determined by developer at a later date, so there is no operating budget. Are you
going to have that when you go before the Land Use Commission?
Mr. Mackler: Sorry. The reason we do not have the pro
forma budgets available for you at this time is because the vertical construction for
housing at the Lima Ola site is preliminary. It is premature to actually present you
with a project pro forma budget. Those budgets will be made available to us when
we RFP private developers to actually build the project. We do have pro forma
budgets from...
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Mackler, the question is...
Mr. Mackler: That is really off topic...
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. We are going back to the discussion
with Lima Ola. The question was would you have the pro forma prior to the
submission to the LUC?
Mr. Mackler: The answer to that is no, we would not.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions for Mr. Mackler or the
Housing Agency? If not, thank you very much. I will call the meeting back to order.
Further discussion? Unless one of you believe you need to have some questions in
Executive Session, I do not see the need. Everything is not protected by HRS, so if
not, we will just call a roll call. Councilmember Yukimura.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to say something before the vote.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
COUNCIL MEETING 41 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: I think the request is reasonable. If you
agree that eastern `Ele`ele is the right place for six hundred seventy-five (675)
affordable housing units, one hundred seventy-five (175), which are already
established for Habitat, and five hundred fifty (550) for Lima Ola, I can support the
one hundred forty-nine (149) homes in the first increment, even though that
number alone is huge, especially when you consider the northeast traffic, that it is
likely to generate on an already crowded Kaumuali`i Highway towards Koloa,
Po`ipn, and Lihu`e. The fact that there is no safe way for elementary school children
to cross the main highway that has been proposed, I do not believe that flashing
lights and crosswalks alone are safe. In my opinion, when cars are speeding down
the hill at thirty to forty miles per hour (30-40 MPH), sometimes against the
blinding sunlight. I also have a concern about the huge investment of water
infrastructure alone that will be required for the subsequent phases. The more and
more I learn, I cannot support the placement of five hundred fifty (550) units. I can
support the placement of one hundred fifty (150) or one hundred forty-nine (149),
the first increment. Just the other day, I received information from the Department
of Water that there is sufficient water for thirty (30) homes in Waimea. We do not
have to build any new water infrastructure and there is enough water for one
hundred (100) homes in Hanapepe Heights. That means that if the County were to
support some affordable housing in those locations, it would not have to spend the
four million dollars ($4,000,000) to build a water tank in `Ele`ele, which is what will
be needed for Phases 2, 3, and 4. There is a vacant lot right in Waimea Town that
we have looked at for affordable housing, where people could walk to the middle
school and to the high school, the grocery store, and the beach. You do not have to
put in a whole lot of new infrastructure. It is close to a bus stop. It just shows what
kind of alternative housing we could do in other parts of the west side and it belies
the Housing Agency's assessment in their environmental assessment, when they
assessed alternatives, they assessed the no-build alternative, as if that were the
only alternative, that it was either build in `Ele`ele or do not build at all on the west
side. So where in Hanapepe or Waimea could the County get the land from? As I
mentioned, there are several parcels in Waimea that could be bought with money
from the State Legislature. There is a total of fifty-one million dollars ($51,000,000)
that is going to be allocated to this project at Lima Ola, and much of it is going to be
County, State, or Federal moneys. If we use that for other places, we could have
quality projects that would enhance the west side, while providing well-located
affordable housing. We all know what happens when good planning is sacrificed.
For example, if you do not have a good plan when building a house, then there are
errors and waste. On the scale of Lima Ola, there is so much taxpayer money at
risk and there is no real business plan or pro forma. There is nothing for an
operating budget. So while I think it is okay to hire Special Counsel to represent
the County before the LUC, I can only, in good conscience, support the first
increment and therefore I cannot support Special Counsel, unless the County
downsizes its project and looks at other places for housing on the west side. I also
COUNCIL MEETING 42 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
want to say that it is quite ironic that people who want to give input on this project
have to go to O`ahu to testify because the Council refused to schedule a public
hearing on this, but we can give fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for a special
attorney to go to O`ahu to do this work.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is that it? Anyone else? Councilmember
Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to say that this is just another
step in the right direction to get something going that has been long overdue and
that the Housing Agency, the Administration, and the Mayor needs to be
commended for taking these steps and to getting us where we need to go. Five
hundred fifty (550) homes, whatever that number is, we need all of them, and we
have been arguing for housing on the west side. Maybe it is not as far west as
Councilmember Yukimura would like, but it is `Ele`ele and it is where the lands
were available, where the County worked out and negotiated with Alexander &
Baldwin, Inc. (A&B). You cannot just build housing anywhere. You need to have
land. I commend former Mayor Baptiste, who worked it out that we have this land.
I think `Ele`ele is a prime neighborhood for growth with all of that open land. Yes, it
is former coffee lands, but there is still plenty more coffee being raised and still
plenty more agricultural lands. So we need to keep it moving. This project is
long-overdue and long-needed, and as we talked about before when you came before
us at the committee meeting and all, it is very exciting, we need to get this done,
and get on to the next one because we need thousands of homes, and affordable
homes at that. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am not against five hundred fifty (550)
houses on the west side, but all in one place is not the right idea, especially when
there are other much better sites on the west side.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Anyone else? Did we
take public testimony on this? We did. Okay. Anyway, with that, I guess like
Councilmember Kualii said, commendation goes out to the Housing Agency and the
Administration for sticking with it. I agree that this something that we need. It is
a small price to pay to do it right. With that, roll call.
The motion to approve C 2016-191 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
COUNCIL MEETING 43 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
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.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Motion passes.
Council Chair Rapozo: We have five (5) minutes before the caption
break. Let us take C 2016-192, please.
C 2016-192 Communication (08/22/2016) from the Director of Economic
Development, transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to
Ordinance No. B-2016-812, as amended, relating to the Operating Budget of the
County of Kauai, for the Fiscal Year 2016-2017, by revising the amounts estimated
in the General Fund, to fund security services for certain community events on
Kauai. (Office of Economic Development, Grant In Aid (Special Events Security) —
$53,773.00): Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2016-192 for the record,
seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? There is the Bill coming up.
Any public testimony?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Sorry, I have to recuse myself. It is only the
Communication. Do I have to recuse myself from the Communication?
Council Chair Rapozo: You can have a seat. I see the note here
that you plan to recuse because you are the Chairperson for the Koloa Plantation
Days and I am not sure how you want to handle this. Are you going to recuse
yourself from the entire item?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: If you take it individually then I will just sit
off on the Koloa Plantation Days, but if you take it as a whole I will just recuse
myself from the whole thing. I understand that taking it individually is kind of a
pain. I will just recuse myself from this.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
(Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as recused from C 2016-192.)
Council Chair Rapozo: I believe he did second the motion, so I can
get another second on the motion?
COUNCIL MEETING 44 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Chock seconded the motion to receive C 2016-192 for the
record.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, I will suspend the
rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public
testimony.
THOMAS NIZO: For the record, Thomas Nizo. I am with the
Waimea Town Celebration. I have been the Chairperson for the Waimea Town
Celebration for the past three (3) years and different committee chairs for the last
twenty (20), so I am pretty invested in the Waimea Town Celebration. I am here to
support the funding for law enforcement services for the festivals. We, the festivals,
the Koloa Plantation Days, Tahiti Fete, and the Coconut Festival, we put on
memorable experiences for our visitors and we want to make sure that there are
safe environments for those visitors that come and participate with us. We also
want to be proactive and address any incidents that could be happening at one of
our festivals and we do not want to be a statistic within the world of festival
mishaps. All of the festivals, we put heads in beds for Kauai. People plan around
our events. We just want the County to be engaged in our events to provide some
kind of increased Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and police services. With
that, the State invests with the Hawai`i Tourism Authority (HTA) and provides us
funding with County Product Enrichment Program (CPEP) and signature events.
The community invests in our festivals with people, resources, and time, so we just
want the County to invest in our festivals and provide funding for police services to
keep our festivals safe and provide security. Mahalo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify?
PATTY ORNELLAS: Patty Ornellas, American Cancer Society.
Cancer affects everyone, directly and indirectly, and as a community manager for
Relay for Life, I am in the business of saving lives. Relay for Life events are the
largest nonprofit fundraising events that help sustain programs and services that
support our survivors and caregivers on a national and local level. Our Relay for
Life Kauai event, which is held at the Hanapepe soccer field, has become the top
fundraising event in the Hawaiian islands because of the support of our generous
community. Year-after-year, we have seen our community participation and
support on event night increase at our overnight walk and have witnessed our event
grow beyond our expectations. Thus, it is vital that I request a part of this
grant-in-aid because this funding is essential with having these off-duty officers
present to ensure the safety of all of our participants there. They come to our
annual event to celebrate our survivors, who are very near and dear to our hearts,
COUNCIL MEETING 45 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
and they come to remember and honor their loved ones who have passed on and
support those who are still fighting back against this deadly disease. We have also
utilized the funds to secure our onsite donations that are taken and collected on
event night. So to all of our Councilmembers, we please ask you to support and
approve this Bill. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
JONI ITO: My name is Joni Ito,and I am a volunteer
serving on the Event Leadership team for Relay for Life of Kauai. This event held
at the Hanapepe soccer field is very inspiring and heart-touching because cancer
affects us all. Many people of all ages, from all parts of Kaua`i, as well as visitors
attend this event. The Relay for Life not only raises money for programs and
services provided by the American Cancer Society, but it brings together survivors
and families of past survivors, caregivers, and the community. This event is truly a
celebration of life. It gives survivors a reason to fight and it gives hope. The event's
overall success in fundraising, attendance, and safety are related to the presence of
the police command center and the presence of the Kaua`i Police Officers onsite.
For myself, it is reassuring to know that they are there as first responders if any
emergency should happen at this event. Their presence promotes safety and
well-being to everyone in attendance at the Relay for Life. I ask for your support for
this grant-in-aid. Thank you.
Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, can you submit your written
testimony? Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify on this
Communication? Ms. Parker.
Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. As you can see,
the paramedics helped me survive my trip at the fair, and I want to say that yes, we
do need funding there. Several years ago, I was at the Lihu`e Hongwanji Bon Dance
and I was stung by a bee and I am highly allergic to bee stings, but the paramedics
were able to treat it for me, and my friend took me home. Also, up in Koke`e, I
looked at my friend and said something is wrong—she was having a stroke. The
paramedics up there were able to deal with her there, and then call an ambulance
up, and she was a couple of weeks in Waimea, and then at Wilcox Memorial
Hospital. We need these services there. It is freak accident kinds of things that can
happen. We need the services and we need the police in case somebody gets rowdy.
Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I will
call meeting back to order. Further discussion? Councilmember Hooser.
COUNCIL MEETING 46 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Hooser: I have a question for the Administration.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Hooser: I am definitely supporting this. I appreciate
the testimony that we had earlier. My question is if I was watching this on the
television and I was doing an event, how do I get my security...how do you
determine which events are supported by the County and which events are not
supported by the County? There is a wide-range of parades and festivals and
everybody needs security, it seems like. Do you have a targeted list of people who
get support? Is there an application process? I think it would be useful for people
to understand.
NALANI BRUN, Specialist IV— Tourism: Nalani Brun, Office of Economic
Development. There is an application process. Because I work with a lot of the
festivals and events and the many other roles that we do at the Office of Economic
Development, I am aware of most of the festivals that are out there. These specific
grants-in-aid are usually to something that needs police service. So many of them
have security, and that is part of their budget already, but sometimes their events
begin to touch on something that is going to be much larger. Usually, it has to do
with traffic, so with the parades you have to shut down roads and some of the roads
are difficult to get into, so you want to have police present. Some of them have a lot
of money moving, which can cause for other dangers to come around, so that may
warrant police. The good thing about it is a lot of these things are the larger events
that happen and puts them together with the Kaua`i Police Department to come up
with a plan. As we know, things have happened around the world and changed in
our events. It is not the same world we used to live in. So they sit down and
actually come up with some really great plans for how to handle the event and
maybe change the events a little to make it safer for the public and the visitors, and
also so that traffic flows really well so residents that are not going are not impacted
as badly. That is kind of what it is. We do have an application. I go out and check
with the organizations that are going to be coming in, because it is not an easy
application. They need to go to the police and fill out off-duty paperwork, which
includes a lot of insurance requirements and everything else. These organizations
have to be equipped to do that and have the capacity to handle that. They need to
make payments right after the event within two (2) weeks, which means that they
need to have money on-hand. What happens is basically these grants-in-aid are
COUNCIL MEETING 47 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
reimbursed once they are done. So they get everything done, they take care of it,
and then we come back in and verify with the police on how much money was spent,
and then that is the money that they are reimbursed. It is a nice little triangle
between the group that is doing the event, the Office of Economic Development, and
the Kaua`i Police Department. We are all working together. We originally came
together in a big room with all of the events that were interested and needed it, and
then we kind of came up with a plan together on how to make this work between
the off-duty staff at the Kaua`i Police Department, the regular staff there, the Office
of Economic Development, and the organizers. So we have come up with a pretty
good system. It took us two (2) years to kind of work out the kinks, while we still
have a few and we always will, but this system works. In the last budget, we did
get the funding taken away, but with the note that if we came forward with who
exactly was getting the funds, then we would have a chance of maybe getting the
funding back.
Councilmember Hooser: Great. To be clear, these are for the most
part, police officers that are off-duty?
Ms. Brun: Yes, that is the plan.
Councilmember Hooser: And they are not being paid overtime
necessarily, right?
Ms. Brun: That was a big part of it, to try to keep the
overtime costs for the Kauai Police Department down. So this was a way to get
them to use off-duty officers instead of overtime.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. So they are hiring off-duty police
officers, they are not paying overtime, and the County is reimbursing them after we
verify it?
Ms. Brun: Yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Great. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to confirm
that for the initial sixty-five thousand dollars ($65,000) that was removed, was that
a Council decision in this last budget?
Ms. Brun: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Chock: That is what I thought. I just could not
remember. You were told to come back with more specifics.
Ms. Brun: Yes.
Councilmember Chock: So we are actually saving eight thousand
dollars ($8,000).
Councilmember Yukimura: Twelve thousand dollars ($12,000).
Councilmember Chock: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: This might be for Ken, but every month we
have these transfers that come from the Administration and the transfers going on
are numerous. Sometimes I wonder why we even have a budget because we have so
many transfers going on that I think the budget is just "for show." The amount of
transactions by these transfers tells me that the budget is not something that they
really try to stick to. Otherwise, we would not have a lot of transfers going on. I am
wondering when you have events like this that say, "Hey, we need it," and you folks
are trying to solve the problem; why can you not do the transfers? On other issues
like traveling to the mainland, there is no problem transferring. When it comes to
helping event safety, then we do not know how to transfer...I do not understand
some of the rationale. Then they say, "Oh, the Council cut it, so we cannot do it,"
but when it comes to travel to the mainland, there is no problem. There is a
transfer and they go to the mainland for training. What is it?
Council Chair Rapozo: Is that a question for Ken?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, we cannot be asked for a transfer when
we determine something to be really important, just as other departments find
going to trainings in the mainland very important, and they see that they are short
on per diem and need more per diem in here, so they just transfer. I am just
wondering that when it comes to items on an individual basis that they say, "Hey,
we need it. We need it for the safety." Then we cannot do the transfer like other
things that we transfer?
GEORGE K. COSTA, Director of the Office of Economic Development: For
the record, George Costa, Director for the Office of Economic Development. I cannot
speak for the other departments, but we, the Office of Economic Development
(OED), take pride and we really work diligently on putting our budgets together to
COUNCIL MEETING 49 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
come pretty tight. If you look at lapses from year-to-year, we come pretty close to
our budgets. Yes, there may be some transfers, but during the course of the year we
pretty much stick close to our budgets. Even for me as the Director, I review the
travel budgets for each of the Specialists. They have to plan ahead what trips they
make. From time to time, there may be a few but not too many as far as I know.
With regards to your question, I am not sure if your question is that there may be
funds in our Department that we could transfer instead of doing a money bill.
Councilmember Kagawa: This is my question: it is September 7th and
we are three (3) months into the budget and you are already asking for a transfer
now. We have nine (9) more months to go, so there should be excess room. If you
determine something to be really important, do the transfer now, and as we reach
the end part of the year say, "Well, we funded these things because we felt they
were really important, much needed for the community, and since we transferred
from this account, this is what we need to replenish." Why are we panicking two (2)
months into the year and telling them that we do not have money for something we
deem important and we are not using the transfer process? But for other
departments to travel and go to trainings and whatever, we have no problem
transferring. What is it? I do not understand.
Mr. Costa: Maybe I understand your question better
now. When we did work very diligently on our budget, we did allot for sixty-five
thousand dollars ($65,000) for off-duty police, which we have experience in for
several years and we were denied and told to come back. So here we are coming
back because pretty much every other area in our Department is pretty tight.
There is no sixty-five thousand dollars ($65,000) or fifty-seven thousand dollars
($57,000) in our budget to...
Councilmember Kagawa: I understand, but does the transfer process
allow you to use another account that has excess money right now—we are only
two (2) to three (3) months into the budget—to use on a case-by-case basis. If
somebody says, "We need this police money now," even though you do not have it in
that account already and it ran out, but we are asking for it and you folks fund it
through the transfer process out of something else and later come back to the
Council and say, "This account is lower because we determined these things." What
I am saying is that we have a transfer process that is obviously being used. I can
show you the amounts of transfer every month. Like I said, I scratch my head and
think why we even have a budget if we transfer that much so early in the year. We
just started the budget and we have departments transferring for travel and other
things like that. I am saying if something is important, use the transfer process to
make sure that public safety is not impacted and do not point the finger at the
Council because you have a process to take care of public safety.
COUNCIL MEETING 50 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Brun: Typically, we...
Councilmember Kagawa: Then come back later and at that time I
think the Council will find it reasonable to fund whatever is short in the budget, but
we are only in September and you folks are here already when you have a means to
take care of things like this. They should not come here panicking about their event
when there is a transfer process to take care of it.
Ms. Brun: I never thought about using...we have kind
of tried really hard not to repurpose funds from one line item to the next, and
because now that we do not have this line item, we could not transfer into it because
we do not have it at all.
Councilmember Kagawa: I will say that I wish more departments were
like you. Anyway, I will support it if you folks are sticking to the budget and if you
are doing it another way. Hopefully the Director of Finance can have more of the
departments follow what you folks are doing. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I do not want to go too far, but I think
it is a good question that is actually for the Director of Finance of the policy of what
qualifies or should be qualified for a "transfer," as opposed to how it is you are
budgeting and other departments are budgeting. I think that sounds like a
question that we can send over separately. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. We will call the meeting back to
order. Any further discussion?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: I guess I wanted to clarify something that
the Communication basically says that...and it was referenced that the Council cut
it out, but I think what the Council did in the budget told the Administration that
we did not cut out the funding to cut out the services to these events. What the
Council, as my recollection is telling me, is we said to find it within your existing
budget; that in fact...what is the carryover from one year to the next? Thirteen
million dollars ($13,000,000)? Eight million dollars ($8,000,000)?
Councilmember Kagawa: Last year, it was fourteen million
dollars ($14,000,000).
COUNCIL MEETING 51 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: To find that sixty-five thousand
dollars ($65,000) in your existing "fat" is what we said, and that we were going to
try to cut where we could and ask and force the Administration to go ahead and
utilize existing funds for these projects; not to cut out the projects. I do not want
that message to be sent out that the Council cut out the funding. What we said was
to "be more responsible in your spending and find it within your surplus," and we
said "utilize your funding and as the year goes on, if you need to replenish, then you
come to the Council with a money bill." But not two (2) months. I think that is
what Councilmember Kagawa is trying to say. We did not say that we are going to
cut them to show or cut them so that the public is going to say that the Council cut
this budget, and then come back in two (2) months and put it right back like we did
not even cut it. I appreciate the Office of Economic Development's budget, but at
the end of the day, there are funds sitting...maybe in the committee meeting I will
put up the transfer spreadsheets so that it shows how much moneys are being spent
for purposes other than what the budget called for. I really do not want to do that,
but I will do that because what I am saying is that there are numerous moneys, a
number of dollars that the budget process comes in and says, "We are going to use
these one hundred dollars ($100) for `x."' Then further down the year, we say, "You
know what, we really do not need `x' anymore; we need `y' more. So we are going to
take from 'x' and move it to `y."' They have the ability to move it from any other
department into Economic Development to fund these projects. I am not going to
support the transfer because the County...it is not just Economic Development; it is
the County of Kaua`i; it is the County's budget that will have a surplus. So rather
than just take from the surplus—no—find it in your budget...find it in the
Administration's...are they fixing this thing or not? This is frustrating because I
can hear it echo and screeching. What I am saying is to find it within your budget,
fifty-three thousand dollars ($53,000). Find it within your budget, somewhere in
the County where you know you are not going to spend and transfer it to Economic
Development. Stop taking the surplus. We just took it out two (2) months ago. It
looked good though, during the budget process when the Council said...excuse
me...let us take a caption break and get whoever needs to fix this over here as soon
as we can.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 10:47 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 11:02 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: We apologize for the technical difficulty. I
promise to address that before the next meeting. As I was saying, we have a budget
process and the Administration comes to the Council and we go into the budget
discussions, and then the Council says, "Hey, certain things we removed or deleted
or asked the Administration to make changes," and the fact that the Council agreed
collectively, said, "Find it within your budget. We are going to have a surplus, so let
COUNCIL MEETING 52 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
us try to cut all of this excess spending and get it from your existing budget. Find it
within your existing budget." Then not to come back in two (2) months and say,
"Okay, we want to take again from the surplus." The whole purpose of the
reduction of these expenditures was to preserve the surplus, to preserve this reserve
at the end of the year; not to use it as a slush fund. I understand that Economic
Development's budget is tight. They do not have fat, so there is no way they can
transfer from one line to another because they have nothing to transfer from. But
you cannot tell me that within the entire County, all of the departments, that they
cannot find fifty-six thousand dollars ($56,000) to transfer into OED. After this
Council said that we are not going to put that money in because we believe you can
find it somewhere in your existing budget. It is defeating the purpose of the budget
process and it is just, "Okay, let us put on a good show for the public, and then in
two (2) months hopefully they forget and we will just come back." I am not going to
support that. Find it within your budget. As we get closer to the end of the year, as
you need more funds, then you come to the Council with a money bill from the
reserve; not just use that as, "Okay, we need more money so just go to the Council."
No. Find it within your budget. Transfer it. It still requires a money bill and the
Council needs to approve a transfer from one department to another, and that is
what I am suggesting this Administration do. We just cannot sit here and continue
to pay and pay, after the Council two (2) or three (3) months ago said, "No." So
either this Council is going to stand firm on their decision that they made three (3)
months ago or we are just going to cave in and say, "Okay." Then the whole budget
process is for nothing. We said we are going to provide better fiscal management.
We, this body, said collectively that we will provide better fiscal management. We
are going to expect the Administration to provide better fiscal management.
Approving this today basically says, "We were just kidding three (3) months ago.
We just said that because the people were watching and it is an election year. We
want to let the public know that we are going to cut, but come back in three (3)
months and we will put it back." No. That is not how we are supposed to do things.
Again, it is not OED, because they do not have the money. I support this, but what
I am saying is that they need to get it from their existing "fat" in the budget,
somewhere in the County in one of the departments and transfer that over to
Economic Development. When it gets to February, March, or April, as we get closer
to the end of the fiscal year and you need funds, then you come back to the Council
and justify the funds. This is a first reading bill. I am not supporting it because I
do not agree with the premise. I do not think this is a precedent that we should be
setting. Obviously, it is the will of this Council that is going to move this or not
move it. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I like the message that you are saying and
the way it was conceived for me when I read this was, "Wow, did we just do this for
show?" Yet, I understand the inequities between departments, their budgets, and
their inability to be able to transfer. So I guess I can support this on first reading if
COUNCIL MEETING 53 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
we can ensure that moving forward into the committee meeting that we start to
have a discussion that really goes back to the Administration in identifying where
that specific money will come from. I think that this is an important thing that we
need to support. If we can get some assurances from the Administration that they
can find where they are going to get it so that we can anticipate a money bill, and
then we can get rid of this whole thing sometime. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: As someone who voted against eliminating
the moneys from the budget during our budget hearings, I want to just read the
minutes of the discussion. I do not believe the message was to go find it in your
budget, because Chair Rapozo, this is what you said, and you were the one who
moved to remove the funding and it was seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. This
is the minutes of the Chair's words: "I guess my concern is we have nonprofits and
we have events that we do security at that these organizations have the ability to
pay. They actually have the ability to afford, based on what they get from the
events. I am not so sure that it is right for taxpayers to be funding these types of
security. Again, if we had the money, absolutely. Now as we are looking at these
tough financial times, we spoke all year about how we have to cut the budget and
cut the budget, and I am just trying to find ways that we can cut the budget and not
cause a problem for our taxpayers, citizens, and visitors." When we commit to
things like a one million two hundred thousand dollar ($1,200,000) operating for an
adolescent drug treatment center, we are going to have to cut one million two
hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) from someplace else, or as the Chair said,
raise taxes. These are the really tough things that we have to do. It is not that
easy. I do not think it is good budgeting to say to find it from somewhere else and
come back at the end if you do not have money for it. It is either a worthy thing
that we think is necessary to fund or it is not, and at budget time we need to say so,
one way or the other.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: In looking at the Office of Economic
Development's budget, there are areas that I think we could have taken some of
these, such as the Kaua`i Visitors Bureau (KVB) consumer promotion item, which
has two hundred twenty-five thousand dollars ($225,000). All I am saying is that if
you have something as the Economic Development Director, if you deem something
as a really successful event like the Waimea Town Celebration or the K5loa
Plantation Days, and you feel like a lot of tourists come for this event, it is
dangerous, and we need it to be done, then basically you transfer from KVB, and
later as they run out, you come back to the Council and say, "Hey, I have to use this
KVB money to fund some things that we had to do. It is my job as the
COUNCIL MEETING 54 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Administrator to do what is best for the economic development events on Kaua`i."
What I am saying is that there are avenues that I feel, and I am not the manager,
but I feel there are steps that can be taken. It is only two (2) months into the
budget and we are pressing the panic button already, when you have a lot of
available areas that you can use, because other departments use it. I am not telling
you to do something that no other department does. You can look at transfers here.
A lot of the departments do it on a regular basis, a monthly basis; beginning in the
first month after the budget they are transferring moneys, significant moneys. So
what I am saying is that in certain areas you have the power to make your Office
run even if funds are not there by using other items. Like I said, I think you have a
reasonable Council that would replenish those moneys, knowing that you as
manager had to make some decisions with the budget that you had, even if cuts
were made. I think that is the checks and balances in government. We, at some
point, have to do our fiscal part because we are not the ones running the
management, but that is just the way government works. I think we should not
press the panic button or say that we cannot do it when something needs to be done
and public safety is going to be in jeopardy. I think we need to do it—slam dunk.
So I believe there is a process. I do not think coming so soon was necessary, but I
will be supporting this, only because I have looked at their budget and it is pretty
tight. I think we hold Economic Development the same as other departments, such
as Fire and Police, but they are not. It is apples and oranges and the Department of
Public Works. They do not have as much fat to play with, but what I am saying
that as I look through this budget, I can see one million fifty thousand dollars
($1,050,000) in grant-in-aid accounts that I believe could be moved around if we
really had to. Anyway, that is all I have. Thank you, Chair.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Yes. I will be supporting this. I see it a little
differently, that this is something that should have stayed in the budget. I also
voted against removing it from the budget. If it had been in the budget, we would
not be here today talking about it because it would have been funded. It is a
relatively small amount of money in the scope of things. It goes to leverage
incredible amounts of money and energy put forth by the community in all parts,
whether the west side, north side, or east side, various parades and festivals. What
we are doing here is supporting the people in our community, so it makes it easier
for them to hold these events. I am a little puzzled of why it has taken it so long to
be approved on first reading for fifty-three thousand dollars ($53,000). Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? I would expect the members of
the Council that did not support the removal at budget, because they felt it was of
need. Again, the projects and the security services are vital to the events, and
maybe people are not hearing my message. It is in the not that I do not support the
COUNCIL MEETING 55 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
events; it is just that I do not support two (2) months into the budget, coming in to
go after the reserve. That is what I am saying. When your child wants something
and they know that they whine and if you give in, they are going to continue to
whine. We assured the community, this Council did, that we were going to be
better overseers and better fiscal managers, and that is what we do. You cannot tell
me that this County cannot find fifty-three thousand dollars ($53,000) within their
one hundred eighty million dollar ($180,000,000) budget to accommodate this need.
The reserve is there for a reason. It is a reserve to carry over to create this reserve
to, to build this reserve. The reserve is not a slush fund. It is not a fund that when
we need money we are just going to the Council and get money. That is not what
the reserve is. But when we allow this to happen, when we allow the
Administration to come across with a money bill, "Oh, because you folks did not
approve it in the budget, we are coming back now to take it out of the reserve"—
that defeats the purpose of the budget. That defeats the purpose of this Council
even voting on anything in the budget. Just "whatever, take it away today, but give
it back in two (2) months." You cannot tell me there is no fifty-three thousand
dollars ($53,000) somewhere in the budget. If the County does not have any money
in the various departments, then I can understand that. This is too early to tell.
This is way too early. We are only in September. The fiscal year started on July 1st.
It is just a little over two (2) months. As Councilmember Kagawa said, we are
pushing the panic button. Again, my "no" vote is not against the projects. My "no"
vote says, "Administration, you find the money to fund this important function in
your existing budget. Then you come to us to approve the transfer of funds." I can
count and I know it will go to the committee meeting, and when it is the committee
meeting I will have the transfers on a PowerPoint so that the public can see the
amounts of money that this County transfers in between, within departments for
like Councilmember Kagawa said, traveling, per diem, parking, and car rentals.
What is more important? That is all I am trying to say.
The motion to receive C 2016-192 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 6:0:0:1 (Councilmember Kaneshiro was recused).
C 2016-193 Communication (08/22/2016) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to Section 2,
Ordinance No. 891, relating to Authorizing the Issuance of General Obligation
Bonds of the County of Kaua`i for the Purpose of Financing Certain Bonds of the
County; Fixing or Authorizing the Fixing of the Form, Denominations, and Certain
Other Details of Such Bonds and Providing for the Sale of Such Bonds to the Public,
to account for the current Capital Improvement Projects that were not originally
cited in the initial bond issuance: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to receive
C 2016-193 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 56 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we just get Ken to tell us exactly what is
happening here?
Council Chair Rapozo: I would like to move this out and have that
discussion in the committee meeting because I have a ton of questions as well. I
honestly do not understand what this request is. If you have a general question, I
have no problem with that.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is just following your guideline of people
needing to understand so that they can testify at the public hearing, which the
committee meeting is after the public hearing. So just that people know what this
is about.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KEN M. SHIMONISHI, Director of Finance: Ken Shimonishi, Director of
Finance.
Councilmember Yukimura: Hi, Ken. Thank you for being here. I just
want to know basically what this ordinance is doing and the implications of it.
Mr. Shimonishi: It is just updating what we currently have to
accept the bond projects and appropriations or changes that we made in the most
recent adoption of the Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Budget. That is just a
requirement that we do every year, kind of like a housekeeping to reference that
Ordinance No. 891 is now updated to reflect the most recent changes that were
passed as part of the CIP Ordinance.
Councilmember Yukimura: So it is the ordinance that authorized the
general obligation bonds and...
Mr. Shimonishi: I guess it is Ordinance No. 891, the
initial...when we went out for the bonds, we had a list of projects, but every year as
we go through the CIP Budget process, there are amendments, changes, projects
added, projects defunded, and so on, so we are just saying that it is not updated to
reflect the most recent changes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so it is just correlating the Bond
Ordinance with the CIP Budget that we passed?
COUNCIL MEETING 57 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Shimonishi: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: In doing that CIP Budget, we were very
mindful of the guidelines for what projects are appropriate for bond moneys or not.
Mr. Shimonishi: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so it is basically housekeeping?
Mr. Shimonishi: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: I have one real quick question. I notice that
nothing really changes, except that there is an addition of
Ordinance No. B-2016-813. What is 813?
Mr. Shimonishi: That would be the most recent CIP Budget
Ordinance adopted.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, so it is an addition of...
Mr. Shimonishi: Right, we are just adding each year's...
Council Chair Rapozo: For the new fiscal year?
Mr. Shimonishi: Correct.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Any other questions? If
not, thank you very much. This is just the Communication. Any further discussion
or public testimony? Go ahead. I will suspend the rules.
Ms. Sparks: Norma Doctor Sparks. In order to really
understand what these bonds are for, one of the questions that I am wondering
about is in terms of the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center, five million
dollars ($5,000,000), whether or not that bond is for a general obligation bond and
whether the fact that the program is going to be run by a private agency and not by
the County itself, whether or not there will be some impact on the bonds that this
County could actually get. Now if, in fact, the bond for the Adolescent Treatment &
Healing Center, for example, is really coming through the State, then there may not
be any issues. But I think for the public, as an example, the adolescent unit and the
other kinds of bonds that we are talking about, it would be very helpful for us to
learn more about that as well. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 58 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? We will have the
larger discussion at the committee level. With that, I will call the meeting back to
order. Further discussion? Again, this is a motion to receive.
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to receive C 2016-193 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of
the County of Kauai, Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as silent (not
present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative vote for the motion).
(Councilmember Kaneshiro was noted as present.)
C 2016-194 Communication (08/22/2016) from the Director of Finance,
requesting Council approval to dispose of the following government records,
pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Section 46-43 and
Resolution No. 2008-39 (2008) as amended, which have been kept for over seven (7)
years and are no longer of use or value:
• Contract Folders (Fiscal Year (FY) 2004 to FY 2005)
• Purchase Orders (FY 2007 to FY 2009)
• Procurement Work Folders: Request for Proposal (RFP) (C4056)
(FY 1993), RFP P0088 (FY 2005), Exempt RFP X-20 (FY 2005),
IFB (#2872 42936) (FY 2005)
• Professional Services — Exempt: X7-PROF-05/06 thru X8-PROF-
07/08 (FY 2006 to FY 2008)
• Documentation for: Sole Source Procurement FY 2005/2006 — FY
2007/2008 (FY 2006 to FY 2009), Exempt Procurement FY
2004/2005 — FY 2007/2008 (FY 2005 to FY 2009), Emergency
Purchase FY 2005/2006 to FY 2007/2008 (FY 2005 to FY 2009)
• Logs: Certified Mail and Professional Services (FY 2008 &
Older)
• Written Informals (FY 2009)
• Auction: Auction Documents (FY 2007 to FY 2009)
• State Price Lists (Various)
• Accounts (FY 2009)
• Trust Fund (FY 2009)
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-194, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
COUNCIL MEETING 59 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have Ken or Ernie come forward?
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. The rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ERNEST W. BARREIRA, Assistant Chief Procurement Officer / Budget
Chief: Good morning. Ernie Barreira, Budget & Purchasing Chief.
Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning, Ernie. The items of concern
to me are the Professional Services Exempt and the Documentation for Sole Source
because those are outside of the normal rules. Are there records of this somewhere
else electronically, or once we get rid of it that is it and there are no other records?
Mr. Barreira: First of all, all of the procurements,
Professional Services Exempt and Sole Source, are actually all clearly delineated
within the procurement code and the associated Administrative Rules, so they are
all governed by certain procurement standards that have to be met.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
Mr. Barreira: The records are support records, so they
would be the type of records that we utilize to advance a specific procurement, so
they would separate and apart from contract records that exist. Once again, as I
reported last to you when I came for a records request before the Council, our
records are completely electronic as of July 1, 2011, so we have substantial
redundancy and therefore are able to dispose of the paper records. These are the
old records that are in play where we do not have corresponding electronic records,
but they have been deemed to be obsolete based on the requirements within the law,
in terms of record retention and based on whether there is any pragmatic need for
these documents.
Councilmember Yukimura: So the answer to my question is that there
are no real records left after we destroy these records?
Mr. Barreira: Other than contract records that may not
have yet met the time standard, that is correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but these are Fiscal Year 2006 to 2008,
up to 2009. So you said as of July 2011 we have electronic files, but we do not have
any electronic file backups for these?
COUNCIL MEETING 60 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Barreira: No. The requirements under the law is that
we retain records for seven (7) years after closure of the effective procurement.
Councilmember Yukimura: It would only be if there is some kind of
question, I guess statute of limitations would be passed, but it would be mainly for
archival or historic purposes if people wanted to review any of these documents?
Mr. Barreira: That is true, Councilmember. If that was
the standard, we would have to have massive warehouses to hold all of the
governmental documents that are governed by this requirement.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? Councilmember
Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Just a quick question—what is a "Written
Informal?"
Mr. Barreira: A Written Informal is a type of solicitation
that is actually rarely used any longer, but it would be for the types of procurement
where the purchase price is anticipated to be above fifteen thousand
dollars ($15,000), but under our formal threshold of twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000), where we execute a written informal to ensure adequate
competition. The reason we hardly use that now, Councilmember Hooser, is
because with our electronic resources we are able, under the law, to obtain three (3)
price quotes, and so long as we are able to obtain three (3) price quotes, we have
met all legal requirements and we no longer need to pursue the old practice of the
written informal bid.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? If not, thank you very
much. I will call the meeting back to order. Further discussion?
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to receive C 2016-194 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
COUNCIL MEETING 61 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this brings us to the bottom of page
number 3, C 2016-195. Again, we have a companion Executive Session.
C 2016-195 Communication (08/24/2016) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend funds up to $20,000.00 for Special Counsel's
continued services provided in County of Kaua`i vs. Hanalei River Holdings, Ltd.,
et al., Civil No. 11-1-0098 JRV (Condemnation), Fifth Circuit Court, and related
matters: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-195, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: We do have an Executive Session scheduled
and this one is currently in litigation, so we will have the opportunity to talk to our
attorney and inquire. We will take public testimony. I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
MICHAEL SHEEHAN: Chair and Members of the County Council.
Michael Sheehan is my name. I am also Hanalei River Holdings in that proposal
request. What you have here is the tip of an iceberg or you are at a fork in the road,
traveling through an interesting forest. This is going to be far from a twenty
thousand dollar ($20,000) exercise. With this appeal before the Hawai`i Supreme
Court now is all about the process that the County Administration and the Office of
the County Attorney has engaged in, in an attempt to acquire my boatyard and
revoke my operating permits that were interestingly originated in 1986, thirty (30)
years ago, right down below here in Mayor Tony Kunimura's office. What we are
seeing is a wrap up of thirty (30) years of very interesting time spent. If you fund
the County Attorney's request for a mere twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) and not
picking some point in time, which I would suggest, is about right now, it is about
time to end this nonsense. I think thirty (30) years is far, far too long. There are
many, many venues that are available to resolve this besides having to go to the
Hawai`i Supreme Court. The Hawai`i Supreme Court has an alternative dispute
resolution section, which again, I ask and propose the County request their services
to try to resolve this, as I have made pretty clear to anyone who cares, which lots of
people do care. Myself and my family supports the creation and the expansion of
Black Pot Beach Park and would like very much to have my former boatyard
included in that expansion. We are not the parties responsible for these millions of
dollars in Honolulu lawyers' cost that will continue if you fund this twenty thousand
dollar ($20,000) request. It is an indication of the processes that the County
Attorneys and the attorneys for the County have been recommending, and it is
really only to try and screw me over and all it really does is irritate me, and what it
really does is it costs the taxpayers hundreds and hundreds of thousands of
unnecessary dollars. It needs to stop sometime. This is crazy. How many millions
COUNCIL MEETING 62 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
have been spent over the years since former Mayor Yukimura's Administration
began this anti-tourism rant?
Council Chair Rapozo: Mike, I have to stop you right there. Anybody
else wishing to testify on this matter? If not, you can have your second three (3)
minutes.
Mr. Sheehan: Okay. It was a wonderful exercise. I think
we have all learned a lot and have all learned that this is probably not the way we
ought to be doing these kinds of thing in the future. I do not like designating myself
as a guinea pig, but it is what it is. I would really like to call on you folks to try and
find better ways to wrap this up. My family is still committed to enlarge and
expand the park over and beyond that initial three (3) acres or seven (7) more acres.
We tried to donate it, but the Administration did not want to accept it. Instead,
they rather chose to come down with a Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) team
and K9 dogs and get the court to ex parte order there immediate seizure of the
property. Well, the problem is that they made a few mistakes along the way, and
unless and until they join with us to petition the Land Court for the re-designation
and the re-subdividing of the existing properties, I will continue to be the legal
owner, though the County will be in possession and you will have paid these funds.
The County Attorneys and the attorneys for the County are full of all sorts of other
excuses, but the fact is that we are at a stalemate and you folks need to fully and
better inform yourselves as to what the real hold up is, and the real hold up is in the
Office of the County Attorney and the offices of the County Attorneys. We are
wasting a lot of time and money and the public is suffering unnecessarily. I would
like you to ask you to ask some really hard questions when you go into Executive
Session and let us find a way to wrap this thing up and move this program forward.
If there are any questions, I would be happy to try and answer them.
Council Chair Rapozo: We will be asking our questions of our
attorney in Executive Session.
Mr. Sheehan: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will call the meeting back to
order. Any further discussion?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: If not, we will hold up on the vote until after
the Executive Session. Can we have the next item, please?
COUNCIL MEETING 63 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
C 2016-196 Communication (08/30/2016) from the Acting County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to submit an application and indemnify the State of
Hawai`i Department of Education for use by the Department of Public Works of the
King Kaumuali`i Elementary School Cafeteria to conduct a public meeting:
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-196, seconded by Councilmember
Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion? Is there any public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2016-196 was then put, and unanimously carried.
LEGAL DOCUMENT:
C 2016-197 Communication (08/08/2016) from the Mayor, recommending
Council approval of a Dedication Deed from Makaleha Gardens LLC, conveying
roadway widening lots to the County of Kaua`i for roadway widening purposes,
Subdivision of Lot 71-A Being all of Grants 7517 and S-14707 Kapa'a Homesteads
First Series into Lots 1 to 6, Inclusive, Roadway Widening Lots A & B, Kapa`a,
Kawaihau, Kaua`i, Hawai`i, Tax Map Key (TMK) No. (4) 4-6-06:17, 19, and 20 (por.).
• Dedication Deed
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-197, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Public testimony? The rules are
suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Mr. Bernabe: Matt Bernabe, for the record. I know this
area. I am just curious why we have to widen the lots. The area does not have a
problem. They should work on other areas of that Kapahi area before they do this.
I know you folks cannot answer, but I just want to know why.
COUNCIL MEETING 64 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else wishing to testify? Is the
Planning Department here today? Can someone come up and answer that same
question because I have the same question?
LYLE TABATA, Acting County Engineer: Good morning, Members. Lyle
Tabata, Acting County Engineer. Actually, the conditions of the subdivision was
required by the Planning Commission, gets recommended by the Planning
Department to the Department of Public Works, and then we just confirm that the
work was completed. This was part of the conditions of the subdivision approval to
widen sections of our roadway right-of-way. Michael Moule has some drawings to
show. I will turn the details over to him.
MICHAEL MOULE, Chief of Engineering: For the record, Michael Moule,
Chief of Engineering for the Department of Public Works. This is a fairly
straightforward situation. We are going to show a map that shows it here.
Effectively along Kawaihau Road, this is a large parcel being subdivided...it has
been subdivided, I should say; it is final. There were two (2) roadway widening lots.
The gray here is the existing pavement of Kawaihau Road. This black line here,
here, and here is the existing property line. The subdivided parcel is this large area
here that goes much beyond this map. This is just a portion of the construction
drawings where they are doing some improvements on their site. This particular
property corner right here is actually within the pavement of Kawaihau Road, and
then right over here, the edge of pavement is roughly right at the existing property
line for the right-of-way. What the County owns is the road right-of-way, this area
from this line to that line, and it continues here. You can see the angle points. The
challenge with these old roads that have been around for decades is that the
rights-of-way were often laid out with angle points. Roads are not built with angle
points; they are built with curves, so the road did not always follow when these
roads were built years ago, often by sugarcane companies or others. They did not
always follow the right-of-way perfectly. In this case, the road got built on a portion
of private property. So as part of the subdivision, one of the conditions of approval
was to subdivide out two (2) roadway widening lots, which is this triangle here, in
this green area here, which actually goes down a really thin layer down here as
well. You can hardly see it. In order for us to have the pavement of the existing
Kawaihau Road, plus approximately five (5) feet of grass shoulder so that we can
maintain the road adequately in the future without being on private property. That
is the purpose of this dedication.
Council Chair Rapozo: Has the widening has been completed?
Mr. Moule: There is no road widening that needs to be
done. It is just widening of the right-of-way. It is called a road widening lot; that is
what we call it. But there is no actual widening being done here. They do propose
COUNCIL MEETING 65 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
to build a driveway right here that happens to be at one of these lots, but that is
there driveway into their site and that work will be on their site, connecting to our
roads. They will be working within the current and new roadway right-of-way
there, but there is no actual road being widened here. It is just the dedication of the
property so that we can maintain the pavement and have five (5) feet of grass space
outside the pavement for maintenance.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other questions? If not, thank you very
much. I will call the meeting back to order. Further discussion? Seeing none the
motion is to approve.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
The motion to approve C 2016-197 was then put, and unanimously carried.
CLAIM:
C 2016-198 Communication (08/09/2016) from the County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Stephen Lucas, for
damage to his property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai:
Councilmember Kualii moved to C 2016-198 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Councilmember
Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion? Is there any public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
The motion to refer C 2016-198 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 2016-11) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
COUNCIL MEETING 66 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
"PWPR 2016-10 Communication (07/25/2016) from Councilmember
Hooser, requesting the presence of the Acting County Engineer, to provide a
briefing on plans to address the traffic congestion on the east side of Kauai.
This briefing should include, but not be limited to:
• The plans and strategies to address the traffic congestion;
• Whether the State or County is responsible for the project, or
whether the project is a combined effort between both
governmental jurisdictions;
• The timeline for start and completion of the project(s);
• Whether alternative projects exist, and the order of priority
for these projects; and
• Any immediate plans to alleviate the traffic congestion,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we do have one (1) registered speaker,
Glenn Mickens.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Mickens: For the record, Glenn Mickens. Once again,
I want to thank Councilmember Hooser for bringing up the traffic problems in the
east side of Kaua`i and asking the hard questions that need answers to solve them.
For me, one of the most important questions that need answering is why bike lanes
are being built along all of our roads and highways, lanes that narrow and
exacerbate the problem that we are trying to fix—traffic? These lanes are seldom
used by bikers and are very dangerous and are accidents waiting to happen. Lee
Steinmetz told me that these paths are not mandate for government mandate for
getting matching federal funds. Who is pushing for them to happen? Any drop of
common sense says that these lanes are counterproductive to solving our traveling
problems. Where is this stupidity coming from and why? We must stop talking
about opening our cane haul roads and get them paved and opened, as was done
with the Kapa'a bypass road many years ago. It was cane haul road and we had it
paved and open in eight (8) months. As badly as we need all of the roads on Kaua`i
to alleviate traffic, what are we waiting for? As Councilmember Kagawa said, we
have spent millions of dollars on our contraflow over the years, whereas another
lane or otherwise would have saved a lot of tax money. Action must start and talk
has to stop. As Council Chair said, why are we not spending as much time, money,
and effort in solving our traffic problems as we are and getting a Transportation
COUNCIL MEETING 67 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant to beautify Hardy and
Rice Street? Basically, I would love to hear the Administration or anybody tell me
what it is...why are we mandating that these bike lanes are being put along all of
our roads every time we build a road someplace? You said it, Councilmember
Kagawa. They are hardly used. You never see anybody on them. They are
narrowing the roads and creating more traffic.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else?
JEROME FREITAS: We are talking about the State highways.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. This is the minutes from last week's
meeting regarding the congestion on Knhio Highway.
Mr. Freitas: I remember about forty (40) years ago...I do
not know if you remember Billy Fernandez, the senator...well, what happened and
what he was saying was that they wanted to make a bypass road from Olohena all
the way back and come out in Hanamd'ulu. They had an opportunity to do that, but
I guess the Kapa'a business people did not want that. They said that they were
going to lose business. I am going to bring back what happened, but forty (40) years
ago when I used to travel on the road with my mom and dad, you would only see
five (5) or ten (10) cars on the road coming back and forth. Now, we have a lot of
traffic because we have more tourists coming in and people have a lot of cars...in a
household, there could be two (2) to three (3) cars. Fixing up this traffic is going to
be hard. Anybody can talk about it. It is easy to talk, but nothing has been done for
many, many years. I think it is about time...actually, this is a State's kuleana in a
sense. The County has a lot of roads that they need to fix themselves, too. So take
care of your backyard first before you worry about the State or whatever it is. I
talked to Ray McCormick many, many times and right now the update is that...I
mentioned his name already, but they are going to get an extra lane, maybe about
five (5) years from now, coming from Wailua Bridge, going all the way in front of the
golf course, cover up the ditch or whatever it is, going all the way out to (inaudible).
Right now, easing the traffic is not going to happen. There is no way. So be
truthful with everybody. It is not going to be done overnight. Regarding the
contraflow, when I talked to Ray, he said that the hours might be...rather than
early in the morning, it may be a little later. So that is all I wanted to say. Council
Chair Rapozo, Vice Chair Kagawa, and Councilmembers and staff—thank you very
much for being here. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
JOE ROSA: Good morning. For the record, Joe Rosa. I
am going back sixty-five (65) years. You probably were not even born...you
COUNCIL MEETING 68 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
probably were just youngsters. Sixty-five (65) years ago, the State had a plan that
would have alleviated all of these problems that we are facing right now, and it is
only because of politics that it did not become a reality. I can go on back and tell
you all something that you can look into—the County of Kaua`i in the 1960s, when
they had a big problem and the way Stan Baptiste's home got flooded out because of
the old Kamalu Bridge...that was clogged up and it backed up in the valley and
flooded his home. They got a position that they made a new bridge. They came into
the State Department of Transportation's office to find out where the road of the
mauka arterial was going and it was going down Kamalu Road. So they asked, "Are
they going to make a new bridge for `Opaeka`a Stream?" The thing was, "Well, they
are going to make a new bridge because they have to build a higher bridge so that
the traffic could go more smoothly." It was built. So the County can coinside the
building of that bridge for that mauka arterial that the State had planned way back
in the 1950s. In 1950, when I first started to work with the territory and later the
State of Hawaii, that was part of the back mauka construction for the highway that
would have alleviated this problem. We would have an additional two (2) lanes,
running nearly parallel with Kuhi5 Highway. Why does the State not go back and
you folks work with the State and ask them what happened to that where money
was spent for surveys, studies, and everything. You are still going back to make
studies. Those are things that people are not aware of because too much politics
were involved. I know that money that was studied and used ended up in projects
in Honolulu, because on Kaua`i we had the charge code F056...that was assigned to
Kauai for any project number and the money was set aside to get things started to
make things a reality was used in Honolulu. Some of it was at the Kaneohe-Kailua
sewer project and the annual report for the (inaudible) for the State you see a F056
project. That money was spent in Honolulu. It is time that the Department of
Transportation people in Honolulu look into that because it is only...
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, Joe, that is your time.
Mr. Rosa: ....a mile and a half to connect Ma'alo Road
with Kamalu Road. So look into that instead of spending money with consultants
and making studies. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Again, these are just the
minutes from last week's meeting.
Mr. Bernabe: Matt Bernabe, for the record. Yes, last week
I talked about a bunch of the solution aspects of what the discussion talked about,
but today I want to say my primary observation. We have bad drivers. I will be in
crawl traffic at five miles per hour (5 MPH) and have vehicles at three (3) car
lengths, holding back traffic. The State said that their observation, as is mine, that
we do not get enough vehicles through intersections, and that is one of the
COUNCIL MEETING 69 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
rationales. The other one was from a red light...when the light turned green, we
did not get enough vehicles through that intersection because we have a delayed...it
is cultural...we are on "island time" here. This is what we always say, "island
time." I got into a discussion about tailgating, because you can view tailgating as
two (2) ways: one, you are doing the speed limit or slightly above it and somebody is
on you, and that I do not agree with; however, if the speed limit is twenty-five miles
per hour (25 MPH) and you are going seven miles per hour (7 MPH), then you
cannot grumble that I am tailgating. You are going too slow and you are impeding
traffic. I also talk about the people making left turns at the bypass and I just
recently...I keep doing this...I am the sixth person to make a left turn and the
people are letting everybody go and I can see the traffic all the way to Foodland. So
I stop and flash my lights and I flash the lady and wave so that she can come, and
she sits there and argues with me, "No, you come," and with no words...I am
sure...I can see her mouth moving, but then she realizes that she is holding up
traffic so she drives on. That is impeding the flow of traffic. This is bad drivers. In
this discussion online, a bus driver...I respect her and I have known her my whole
life...it is my friend's mom, but she pointed out that Kaua`i drivers, and she sees
everything, should be retrained and that they should have classes. She even went
out to say that we should pick up the bill, so maybe instead of always letting our
license continue, maybe every once in a while we need a refresher course, in her
words. I will say that obviously we need some new avenues on the east side, but it
has to have a component of reeducation. I am on the roads every day. I take my
kids to jiu-jitsu and I take my daughters to work. I am the one. My wife works all
day. I work, too, but I am the one who leaves work and goes and gets my kids. So I
am on the road. I see bad drivers, I see them racing, I see the people on island time,
and I see the people on corporate time that have to go to work, or get their kids
somewhere, and they are in a hurry. We need to get the flow moving.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else for the first time?
Second time? Mr. Mickens.
Mr. Mickens: For the record, Glenn Mickens. I do not
think there is any of you Councilmembers that do not agree that traffic is probably
the number one problem on this island right now. The people sitting here who are
watching this hearing is wondering what is being done. What constructively is
being done? We sit here and talk and talk. We get questions asked by
Councilmember Hooser, and the rest of you folks are asking the same questions.
What is going to happen when Coco Palms opens up? We will have another one
hundred (100) to two hundred (200) cars coming out of there. Where are they going
to go? We have the Hanamd'ulu project with about four hundred fifty (450) units
that are going to be there. Other places are going to build up. Are we just going to
continually do "ready, fire, aim?" So do we do nothing about it and wait until the
problem is there, and then we cannot fix it? Like Joe said, how many years ago
COUNCIL MEETING 70 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
when Billy Fernandez proposed that route over the powerline road from the south
side to the north side, and then the Kapa'a Business Association stopped it. They
did not want that. They said that it was going to make Kapa'a a ghost town, which
was ridiculous, because if you are going to go to the gas station or shopping, you
want to go from one side to the other without stopping. Again, we took the bull by
the horns when we built the bypass road. We built it in eight (8) or nine (9) months.
It was already an existing road, so did not need an EA or an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) to do it. What is the holdup here? What is the next step? Again,
we cannot just sit here and say, "Well, wait until there are one thousand (1,000) or
two thousand (2,000) more vehicles on the roads before we try and do something."
We have gridlock coming. Anyway, I hope that you hold the Administration or
somebody's feet to the fire and said, "Hey, let us do something besides talk." Thank
you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Freitas: My name is Jerome Freitas. Council Chair
Rapozo, Council Vice Chair Kagawa, the rest of the Councilmembers and staff. I
want to make a note...we are always talking about the old haul cane road, but I
went to talk to the Department of Transportation a couple of weeks ago and they
said that they did not fix the road, so you cannot use it as a permanent road. Grove
Farm and Hawaiian Homes owns the property and it will take a lot of liability to fix
that road, so forget about that road. They are only going to use that road only for
emergencies at this time. So forget about the road, so we have to look at other
options and it is going to be a tough one, but we have to all work together and get it
done. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
BRUCE HART: For the record, Bruce Hart. I want to take
some pressure off of the Council and the Administration of the County of Kauai. I
do not personally expect this Council to come up with hundreds of millions of dollars
to really address the road problem. Like Joe said, it has been a long time coming
and it costs a whole lot more. What I came up for, I wanted to remind the public
that the real problem is with the State's Kuhio Highway. That is not the County. It
is not fair that the County of Kaua`i thinks that the County Council and the
Administration is the one holding up this problem with traffic. If we could get the
State to commit, and then begin, not just talk about, but get going on some
solutions. It does not let us off the hook, the County, that we should do everything
we can, timing traffic lights and whatever, but that is not going to fix it. It is going
to have to be reconstruction and rebuilding of the State of Hawai`i's Kuhio Highway.
I just wanted to take the pressure off of you folks. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 71 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Rosa: For the record, Joe Rosa. Like I was saying, I
am talking about something that I know about because I worked on it in my
thirty-six (36) years with the Department of Transportation. We surveyed across
the Wailua Falls area up there, the connection of Kamalu Road, and all of that.
Money was spent in wages for the people that made the survey, but yet the
Department of Transportation did not complete it because of politics. Why do they
not dig up those records? They have the field books probably the office yet, in the
basement someplace. There are too many studies, studies, and studies, but no
action. Money is spent foolishly. Those young workers in the Department of
Transportation in O`ahu, they do not know what the problems are here on Kauai.
When they took the policy away from each island to do their own highway planning,
it caused all of this backlog, and it has been thirty (30) years since Kapule, a major
highway fixed. This little section here on Kaumuali`i by Kukui Grove has not solved
anything. We did not have a problem here in Lihu`e. Why they did they do that
fancy thing that made it look like a freeway in Los Angeles. People said it is not
even by the speedway in that area right now. That is true because cars just pass by
you now and that is taking Kaua`i away from being Kauai, with those big, freeway
looking things made out of concrete. So keep Kaua`i, Kauai. We need the two (2)
mauka lanes up there, plus Kapule Highway. We would have eased all of these
problems. The infrastructure was planned for the future, but yet too many studies
and politics were involved. I have not seen anything from our Kaua`i legislators
getting money appropriated for making a survey, like we used to go out and do the
work to see if it was feasible. I do not see these Oahu consultants come down here
and make studies. When are they going to get started? Everything they say is
substandard, that the roads are substandard. The routes up mauka in the Lihu`e
area were about what the plantation roads were made to haul cane. So there is
nothing. To make it up to standards, do what they had to do like in the Kapa'a
alternate route there that they have, the so-called bypass road. They brought it up
to standards quick as ever. A lot of the same things could be done with the Lihu`e
mauka area. One of the things they could hook up...
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, Joe. Your time is up.
Mr. Rosa: From Bette Midler's property...
Council Chair Rapozo: Joe...
Mr. Rosa: Yes, I am going to wrap it up.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, you need to end because you have the
red light. I apologize.
COUNCIL MEETING 72 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Rosa: Anyway, there are a lot of things that people
should look into. Stop wasting money on consultants.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next.
Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. New tact—I
have heard this whispered occasionally: staggered work hours for government
employees. It really worked in Los Angeles and it would cut down the massive jams
coming into Lihu`e and leaving Lihu`e in the evening and going west side or north
side. I am a night person, but I got up at 4:00 a.m. to catch a 5:10 a.m. bus into
downtown Los Angeles. If I went later instead of an hour and a half to get down
there, it would have taken me two and a half (2.5) hours each way. I think that
would really help. Also, I know we get pooh-poohed about the bus system, but I do
use it and three (3) of us who live in Lihu`e have cars. One lives in Puhi, one lives
in Sun Village, and I live in Lihu`e Gardens. We take the bus up to Kilauea Senior
Center at the gym and back because it only costs...well, for them...two dollars
($2)...I also catch a shuttle, so it is two dollars and fifty cents ($2.50), but you are
not going to save time because you are going to be on the road anyway. I try to do
the crossword puzzle and with the Kapa'a crawl I can do the whole thing. But
anyway, staggered work hours would really help. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, I will call the meeting
back to order. The motion is to approve. We are just on the first Committee Report.
Councilmember Hooser.
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Hooser: Just really briefly, Chair, because I know
these are just the minutes, but the testimony of the public, I think, is indicative of
the importance of this issue in our community. The traffic on the east side...it is
bad all over, but particularly the Wailua-Kapa'a corridor. What I would like to do is
ask staff to put this request out to the Administration, a letter requesting that they
come forward and updating us, perhaps in December. We can also invite the
legislators, the delegation: three (3) House of Representatives and the Senator. So
right before the legislative session, we could put this back on the table, front and
center. This is the only way, in my opinion, that we will see action. If you look at
history, the contraflow only happened after citizens had had enough and pushed
and pushed. The same was with the existing bypass. The Kapa'a Business
Association and others just had enough and all of a sudden we have some solutions.
I think it behooves us to keep this front and center, and the Administration is the
appropriate lead on this. So whether it is December or January, I believe that we
need to have this back on our agenda so that it does not slip another two (2) years in
COUNCIL MEETING 73 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
scheduling and implementation of the four (4) lanes in front of Coco Palms, at a
minimum. Not to mention the other possible solutions that the County could do
separate from State. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: As soon as that last committee meeting was
done, Aida drafted a letter to the Deputy Director of Transportation, Ed Sniffen,
who was physically here in March of 2015 and told us that priority number one,
which was expanding permanently four (4) lanes in front of the Wailua area that
construction was slated to begin in 2016, and that funding was in place. Now to
hear at the last committee meeting that the projected construction date is now 2018
and the funding is gone. To think that we were almost ready to go with a projected
start date, and that is why I asked what happened? That was my question to
Mr. Sniffen. Why was it that funds were in place and then it suddenly became
unimportant and you took the funds and you delayed it two (2) more years? I am
curious to see his response there, and I think once we get that response, we need to
take some kind of action, because obviously the response is not going to be good. I
do not think the project ever became less important. It only became more important
as time went. Anyway, I am very curious to see what kind of response Mr. Sniffen
is going to have for us.
Council Chair Rapozo: I really think the only way that the pressure
is going to be put on, as Councilmember Hooser suggested, is to get them all here so
that they cannot point fingers at anybody else and everybody has to basically say
why. I agree. It is frustrating. It is not getting any better. If we do not put the
pressure, it just will never get done, because there will always been another priority
issue on another island and that is the frustration.
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2016-12) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
"PWPR 2016-11 Communication (08/04/2016) from Council Chair
Rapozo, requesting the presence of the Acting County Engineer and County
Attorney, to provide a briefing on all outstanding roadway dedications in the
County, and the County's plan to resolve these dedication issues,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried.
COUNCIL MEETING 74 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
A report (No. CR-PWPR 2016-13) submitted by the Public Works / Parks &
Recreation Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
"PWPR 2016-12 Communication (08/08/2016) from Council Chair
Rapozo, requesting the presence of the Acting County Engineer and County
Attorney, to provide a briefing on the written request from Walton D. Y.
Hong, who on behalf of his clients are asking that the County of Kaua`i begin
the acceptance and dedication process for Lot 4, Hanapepe Valley, Tax Map
Key (TMK) 4:1-9-012 por. 042, which is proposed to have been used as a part
of Awawa Road for many years,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2016-55 — RESOLUTION RELATING TO INCREASES IN
THE LIQUOR LICENSE FEE STRUCTURE: Councilmember Kuali`i moved for
adoption of Resolution No. 2016-55, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I have questions for the Administration.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I will suspend the rules.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we also have a registered speaker.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay.
Councilmember Kagawa: Chair, can we just clarify that this is not
related to the Wailua Golf Course Bill, because I do not know if people signed up
thinking it was that.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, this is the increase in licensing fees for
the liquor establishments. Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Good afternoon.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GERALD RAPOZO, Director of Liquor Control: Good afternoon.
COUNCIL MEETING 75 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Hooser: This may have some legal questions in it also.
Part of it is the process. This proposal was approved by the Liquor Control
Commission, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: It is now here to be ratified, if you would, or
approved by the Council.
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, State law provides that any amendments
to the fee structure needs to be approved by the county's legislative body.
Councilmember Hooser: It is possible for the Council to increase them
or change other aspects of these fees as well?
Mr. Rapozo: My understanding is that it would have to go
through the Liquor Control Commission.
Councilmember Hooser: If we wanted to change something...is it like
the Planning Commission where we would introduce something and it goes to the
Liquor Control Commission, and then it comes back to us?
Mr. Rapozo: I would think that it is the same process.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. My memory is usually that we just
rubberstamp this and it goes on. We never or rarely...I cannot remember any time
we have ever attempted to amend any of these rules.
Mr. Rapozo: This is my first go-around in the whole
process.
Councilmember Hooser: So I guess the underlying point, and part of it
is for you as the administrator of the program, is to encourage all of us to think
about challenging the status quo, if you would. There might be ways that we can
raise additional funds for the County to use in other ways, within the law, but
maybe outside of the box. For example, it says one hundred fifty dollars ($150) for
the first violation, "The licensee shall pay a penalty of one hundred fifty
dollars ($150) to the department at the time." So could that fee or fine be paid to
Life's Choices, for example, or could it be paid in some other program for other
purposes?
Mr. Rapozo: I would say no. These fees are used for
specific purposes. So in this case, all of the fines go into separate accounts. The fee
COUNCIL MEETING 76 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
account or the moneys from the penalties, the fines, can only be used for specific
reasons. It can be used for education of the licensees, the Liquor Department
employees, and commissioners. Ten percent (10%) of the accumulated fines can be
used for public education purposes.
Councilmember Hooser: I do not mean to interject, but I wanted to
catch that thought. So ten percent (10%) of the fines can be used for public
education?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct. That is under the State law.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Does the County control that public
education?
Mr. Rapozo: It would be the Liquor Department, yes.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. So the Liquor Department could use
that ten percent (10%) to promote addiction services, hotlines, or "do not drink and
drive," and that kind of thing?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, we have to make sure it is within public
education, liquor-wise.
Councilmember Hooser: I think you were here when we talked about
the drug treatment facility.
Mr. Rapozo: I was watching.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Addiction is a terrible problem; we all
know that. Alcohol addiction and drug addiction are linked, I believe, and so I am
looking and I would encourage the Department and the Commission to look at ways
to leverage the money appropriately to enhance and expand education for addiction,
treatment services, resources, and that type of the thing. That is where I am going
with this conversation.
Mr. Rapozo: I know there are conversations going on
right now on the legislative side, to increase maybe the liquor taxes and appropriate
those funds for treatment, prevention, and education. That would be the better
place to do it on the State side.
Councilmember Hooser: I understand that, but I am kind of looking
at what we can do without the State. How much does the ten percent (10%) equate
to in a year about?
COUNCIL MEETING 77 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Rapozo: It depends.
Councilmember Hooser: Is it one thousand dollars ($1,000)? Ten
thousand dollars ($10,000)?
Mr. Rapozo: It depends on the type of violations. It could
be anywhere between five thousand dollars ($5,000) and ten thousand
dollars ($10,000).
Councilmember Hooser: A year?
Mr. Rapozo: Maybe even more.
Councilmember Hooser: So that is what the Kaua`i County Liquor
Control Commission has to spend on education?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes. When you look at the statute, it says
"fines accumulated." So say there is one hundred fifty thousand dollars ($150,000)
in the fine account; I guess we would be able to use ten percent (10%) of that.
Councilmember Hooser: I notice that we regulate...if I could just ask
a little more questions...the requirements for doing a liquor license or serving and
selling liquor covers a lot of things, like how clean the bathroom is and the serving
size and portions. It also covers things like advertisements, posters, and signs.
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember looser: Could we require these facilities that if you
want a license, you have to post signs informing people of services, warnings, and
that kind of thing, within this body of rules?
Mr. Rapozo: It could. Currently, the State law, they
require Driving Under the Influence (DUI) posters. I know that the Honolulu
Liquor Commission has requirements for added signage.
Councilmember Hooser: So the Honolulu Liquor Commission did
expand that?
Mr. Rapozo: Yes, it is possible.
COUNCIL MEETING 78 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. When this came on the agenda, it just
made me think the tie-in between this money, these services, these permits, and the
drug treatment facility and addiction.
Mr. Rapozo: We are open to suggestions, so we can sit
down and discuss it. These rule amendments were something that was ongoing for
years. Although this one is going through now, I am already working on other rule
amendments, too.
Councilmember Hooser: Good. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. Hi, Gerald.
Mr. Rapozo: Hi.
Councilmember Yukimura: You folks had a public hearing when it was
at the level of the Liquor Control Commission, right?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Was there a lot of testimony?
Mr. Rapozo: None.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. One option for us since we are
ratifying, or we are being called to ratify, the fee increases is to have a public
hearing. But if you already had one and there was not a whole lot of testimony,
then I can see that it is probably not necessary.
Mr. Rapozo: If I can clarify, too. The fee increases were
not really fee increases. We had to come up with new license fees for new licenses
classes that the legislature passed. The only real increase was the waiver amount,
the one hundred fifty dollars ($150) that you talked about. Certain violations, it is
pretty much minor violations or paper violations where they can waive their
hearing and they just pay what used to be a fifty dollar ($50) fine. The Commission
felt that the fifty dollar ($50) fine was not worth the time and effort from the
investigations and everything. So the fees that were added were to the new classes
of licenses, like for winery class. There is a new small producer pub license. So
there were no increases to the actual fees.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
COUNCIL MEETING 79 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any other questions? If not,
thank you very much.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I see some categories that look like are new,
such as condominium/hotel winery small produced pub. Is that new?
Mr. Rapozo: Over the years, the legislature came up with
these new classes of licenses, so we had to adjust those in our rule changes to get it
up to speed.
Councilmember Kagawa: So we are kind of consistent with the other
islands?
Mr. Rapozo: Correct.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any more questions? If not, thank you very
much. Any public testimony?
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we have one (1) registered speaker,
Matt Bernabe.
Council Chair Rapozo: Matt, you may come up. Matt said he signed
up for the wrong one. Next speaker.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as excused at 12:15 p.m.)
Mr. Rosa: For the record, Joe Rosa. I wanted to really
know what happened to the law on the books of the Liquor Control Commission...I
always hear that juveniles were provided alcohol by adults or somehow they got the
alcohol and they got into an accident where somebody bought liquor for juveniles. I
know there is a law that the person who is involved, who bought the liquor would
have to pay a fine and even a jail sentence. I do not hear anything about it. I see
accidents where juveniles say the liquor was provided by adults. I do not hear of
any adults going to court, being fined, and sentenced for what they did for
contributing to juvenile delinquency by buying the liquor for those juveniles. I
checked the Liquor Control Commission rules and I think it is in the books yet,
COUNCIL MEETING 80 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
because I know, (inaudible), bless his soul because he is gone, but he used to sit
outside here in the County parking lot watching the old Hale Pumehana liquor
store to see the adults and the kids coming in and out of there. If any establishment
is caught selling liquor to minors, they close down for thirty (30) days and that is a
lot of revenue that they lose. So they should look into it and publishing it in the
papers. Maybe it will slow down adults buying liquor for the juveniles. Those are
rules that are in the books yet, but probably are not being enforced because I do not
read about anybody getting fined for selling liquor or buying liquor for minors. I
think the Liquor Commission should look into that and publish all the ones that are
contributing to the problem of juvenile drinking. Maybe we would have fewer
alcoholics on the road. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? If not, we will call
the meeting back to order.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Mr. Rosa, they do conduct many operations
throughout the island and the fact that you do not read about it in the paper does
not mean that it is not happening. Typically what happens is the Police
Department is called and the subjects are arrested and prosecuted. I would assume
it is probably in the police blotter in The Garden Island. Any further discussion?
Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2016-55 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Yukimura TOTAL — 1,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura had to step out. I
did see the excuse memorandum, so she will be back after lunch. Having said that,
I would ask that we defer Resolution No. 2016-56 until after lunch. Can we go to
the Bills for First Reading, please?
There being no objections, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) was taken out of
order.
COUNCIL MEETING 81 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, TO ALLOW
MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS IN ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONING
DISTRICTS (Kauai, County Council, Applicant): Councilmember Kuali`i moved for
passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) on first reading, that it be ordered to
print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 5, 2016, and referred
to the Planning Committee, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Council Chair, I have a housekeeping
amendment. It was a suggestion that came out of the Planning Committee Meeting
and it is basically just an additional elimination to some redundant information. It
is a section that refers to another section that we are deleting for this amendment.
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) as
circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto
as Attachment 1, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and carried by a vote
of 6:0:1 (Councilmember Yukimura was excused).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. We are back to the main
motion. Any further discussion? We had a lot of discussion earlier today. Any
further discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted Ka`aina to give a quick
overview.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Kagawa: So it passed the Planning Commission with a
unanimous, 5:0 vote. Ka`aina, in a nutshell, what does this Bill do for the people of
Kaua`i? What are some of the pros and what are some of the cons?
KA`AINA HULL, Deputy Planning Director: Ka'aina Hull, Deputy
Planning Director for the Planning Department. Thank you, Councilmember
Kagawa. The Bill is very simple. There currently is in this zoning ordinance, a
prohibition on constructing multi-family dwelling units in the R-1 through R-6
Residential zoning districts. That is not to say that properties in the R-1 to R-6
zoning districts cannot build multiple units, but under the definition of the Kauai
COUNCIL MEETING 82 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
County Code, a multiple dwelling family unit is when you build two (2) or more
units connected to each other, i.e., they share the same wall or they share the same
roof. They could even be duplex type of construction where they share the same
wall or they could be the upstairs/downstairs situation where it is two (2) or more.
It just strictly prohibits the construction of these units connected together. You
have multiple properties in those zoning districts that can construct two (2),
three (3), or four (4); sometimes five (5) or six (6) dwellings, but the prohibition
requires that they be separate units. When they are required to be separate units,
there are some cost barriers. It could be a bit more costly just for construction costs.
So by allowing them to construct together, you can reduce construction costs, as well
as some infrastructure costs such as the Department of Water's Facilities Reserve
Charge (FRC), which currently for a single-family, standalone units costs about
fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000), just for that FRC. Just if they are connected,
that FRC is reduced to nine thousand eight hundred dollars ($9,800). If you are in
the R-1 to R-6 district and you build more than one (1) unit, by the prohibition
alone, the multi-family units in those districts, they cannot take advantage of those
various reductions in cost. The proposal is just to allow multi-family unit
construction in the R-1 through R-6 zoning district. There has been some
speculation publicly that it is going to increase density. In no way, shape, or form
does this Bill propose to increase density. If your property is afforded the right to
build two (2) units, all it says is that you can build them together. If your property
can only build three (3) units, it still maintains that three (3) units. It is just that
you now have the opportunity to build the structures under a single roof, so to
speak. It is relatively simply. The Planning Department and the Planning
Commission have come out in support of the bill. It is a way to reduce costs for
construction of these units and hopefully increase the inventory of housing on the
island.
Councilmember Kagawa: So going back to your initial definition, so
sharing a wall or roof; not sharing a wall and roof?
Mr. Hull: It could be and roof as well.
Councilmember Kagawa: So it can be sharing a wall and/or roof. That
is considered a multi-family dwelling.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Kagawa: What size of properties are we talking about?
For example, R-6? We have another bill that proposes to allow Affordable Rental
Units (ARUs) on properties from...it was ten thousand (10,000) before, but going
down to five thousand (5,000) square feet. What size of properties would be the
smallest ones in the R-6 that would allow a multi-family dwelling now?
COUNCIL MEETING 83 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Mr. Hull: You just have to look for any property in the
R-6 district that you can build more than one (1) unit on.
Councilmember Kagawa: So that would be ten thousand (10,000),
right?
Mr. Hull: About ten thousand (10,000) square feet,
roughly.
Councilmember Kagawa: Ten thousand (10,000) square feet. So this
does not really relate to the ARU Bill because the ARU Bill deals with square
footage.
Mr. Hull: Correct. This is just looking solely at...
Councilmember Kagawa: What type of building you could construct?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Kagawa: So instead of building a separate unit and
infringe upon maybe going over the fifty percent (50%) lot coverage, one would be
able to maybe attach it to the house and that way they would not go over the fifty
percent (50%) lot coverage?
Mr. Hull: There are some situations in which not only
lot coverage, but setbacks do operate as a barrier. Currently, the way that property
owners have to get around that is they have to shrink their house or redesign the
house around those setbacks or lot coverages. This would be one tool that would
help alleviate that burden, I will say.
Councilmember Kagawa: Ka aina, you folks work with the permitting
and work with the public on a daily basis on how they can work and try and get
more dwellings on their property, so do you expect a large number of people to be
coming forward if this Bill passes? By large, I mean more than ten (10)? In
Honolulu, they passed the ARU and I think Council Chair Rapozo did a checkup
and there was only one (1) that did it in a year and a half or whatever.
Mr. Hull: It is really hard, Councilmember, to
anticipate that. If we got more than ten (10) then that would be a success. The
thing with zoning is that zoning is an entitlement and opportunity for someone to
construct. It is not necessarily an incentive or a stick that cajoles a property owner
to constructing something. It is just an avenue that should the property owner
COUNCIL MEETING 84 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
decide to take advantage, then it is there. Right now, property owners do not have
the opportunity to take advantage of shared wall construction. Whether or not that
will lead some folks to build, I can only hope so. We just have no way of
anticipating how many people would do the cost-benefit analysis and say, "Right
now, I am not constructing because it is just a little bit too expensive." This should
save in the magnitude of five (5) digits when constructing. Whether or not that is
enough for a property owner to finally pull the trigger and say, "I am going to
construct"—we cannot anticipate that. I apologize.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just have one last question. Do any of the
other islands have this type of language in their...
Mr. Hull: I will have to double-check because on some
of the other islands, zoning is a bit different than ours. I will have to double-check
to see if there are specific prohibitions in certain zones.
Councilmember Kagawa: I guess I am talking mainly about Hawai`i
island and Maui.
Mr. Hull: I do not know that off the top of my head, but
I can double-check.
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, if you can check if they allow
multi-family dwellings on R-1 through R-6. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I know we have a member in the audience
that cannot come back after lunch, so we will get to you. If the rest can be back
after lunch, then we will take your testimony after that. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: To your knowledge, when we talk about
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs), is this a limiting factor in this as
far as you know for having duplexes? Is that going to be a barrier for homeowners?
Mr. Hull: That could potentially be a barrier if there is
a specific CC&R that does allow for multi-family dwelling units. But that is not to
say that this would override the CC&R. At the end of the day, the CC&R is a
private covenant between an individual property owner and his association or
surrounding property owners. If this got passed and say there was a neighborhood
or area that has a CC&R that prohibits it, that CC&R would hold. I will also state
that, that CC&R would also have to be enforced by the respective association that
the Planning Department would enforce or act upon that CC&R.
Councilmember Chock: Right. Okay. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 85 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: You just said the word. As far as the
multi-family units and as long as they already have the zoning entitlement, then in
essence, this would allow them to do duplex, triplex, and even four-plex?
Mr. Hull: If they had the appropriate density already
allocated.
Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: So if it is R-4 and they have an acre of land,
they could build a four-plex?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Even if that acre of land was in the
middle of a subdivision or adjacent to a subdivision that just has single-family
homes in it?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Correct me if I am wrong, but people
can do it now with the use permit.
Mr. Hull: They can only do it with a use permit for
those lots that were created prior to 1980. Any lot...
Councilmember Hooser: Prior to when?
Mr. Hull: Prior to 1980. Any lot created subsequent to
1980 in the R-1 to R-6 district, there is no provision, use permit, or otherwise that
allows them to have shared roof construction essentially.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Provisions for parking and all of that,
what happens?
Mr. Hull: It still stands in place. Every single dwelling
unit still requires the appropriate amount of parking, which are two (2) parking
stalls. They would still have to meet setbacks and the height.
COUNCIL MEETING 86 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Hooser: I mentioned this earlier, but just thinking
about where I live and the street, a lot of the homes, probably every lot on the street
is allowed an ADU, but many of them, the houses are situated so there are all of the
empty lands is in the back and there is no way to get there. So these folks could all
create, in theory, a duplex? If it is a single-family home, ten thousand (10,000)
square foot lot, they could go up or share a wall on the existing home and create a
duplex. Is that correct?
Mr. Hull: Under this Bill or under the current zoning
ordinance.
Councilmember Hooser: Either one.
Mr. Hull: They could do that today.
Councilmember Hooser: With a shared wall or a shared roof?
Mr. Hull: Correct. The only provision that allows for
shared wall construction in the R-1/R-6 district is if it is for an ADU, because the
ADU law statutorily was constructed and the way it was drafted overrode the
prohibition on multi-family construction R-1 through R-6. Today, if you have a
property that qualifies for only one (1) dwelling unit, it is real important to know
about ADUs. Everybody thinks that everybody can build an ADU. An ADU
technically only applies to those properties that can only construct one (1) dwelling.
If you have a R-1 zoning designation that is one (1) house per acre and you have
one (1) acre in size, you can construct that one (1) house, and the ADU provision
allows you to construct an additional dwelling unit. But it only applies, like I said,
to properties that can only construct one (1). If you have a R-1 zoning designation
and you have two (2) acres, you can therefore construct two (2) dwelling units. They
do not qualify for the ADU. The economy situation we are in is that if you are the
one (1) acre and you can build an ADU, you can have shared wall construction. If
you are two (2) acres, same zoning, but because you are two (2) acres and you
qualify for a second dwelling unit, that has to be separate detached dwelling units.
Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Ka'aina, we are going to ask you to come
back after lunch. I do want to get some public testimony in before we break for
lunch because we do have a public hearing at 1:30 p.m., so we are trying to move
this thing along. Do we have any registered speakers?
COUNCIL MEETING 87 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we have one (1) registered speaker for
this item, Chad Deal.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you for your patience, Mr. Deal.
CHAD DEAL: Chair and Councilmembers. Aloha. I am
Chad Deal and I am submitting testimony today on behalf of the Kaua`i Board of
Realtors (KBR) and member of the Government Affairs Committee for Kauai. We
are the voice of real estate on Kauai and represent five hundred fifty (550)
members. The Kauai Board of Realtors supports the intent of Proposed Draft
Bill (No. 2634), which allows for the construction of multiple family dwelling units
in all residential zoning districts. Whereas KBR realizes the shortage of housing in
general throughout Kaua`i, accordingly the Kauai Board of Realtors supports
additional multi-family units, as stated within Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) as a
reasonable means of encouraging house construction island-wide. Thank you very
much for the opportunity to testify.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. How many of you are
wishing to testify on this matter? Okay, we are going to have to break for lunch
right now. It is 12:35 p.m. Please be back by 1:35 p.m., one (1) hour, and then we
will go straight into the public hearing. For the public, we have a public hearing at
1:30 p.m., and then we have interviews in Executive Session at 2:00 p.m., and that
is probably going to run at least one (1) hour or so. I know we had an E-mail from a
constituent, asking us about what is going on with the auditor situation that just
came in a little while ago. So for that person who is watching, the interviews today
are of two (2) potential candidates for the auditor's position. That is being done
today. They are on the mainland. You can come back and hang around. I do not
anticipate us getting out of there until at least 3:00 p.m., possibly 3:30 p.m. We will
have the public hearing at 1:35 p.m.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 12:35 p.m.
The meeting was called back to order at 1:47 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: We are on Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634).
The motion was to approve and set for a public hearing. Is there any further
discussion? I know we had public testimony. Anne, did you still want to testify on
this matter? Okay, I will suspend the rules.
COUNCIL MEETING 88 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Punohu: Aloha. Anne Punohu. I had several
suggestions that I thought about during lunch. I think you all know my opinion.
My opinion is really strong on this issue. I feel that before you presented this to the
general public, I think that you should decide who exactly you are targeting and
what income level you are targeting for this type of housing offering. What I mean
is do you really want to let somebody...do you want to cap it at eighty
percent (80%)? Eighty percent (80%) will not help anybody. If you cap it at sixty
percent (60%), that takes care of your demographic and gives us an opportunity to
get some of these rents a little bit more reasonable. My other opinion is that the
general public should know who it is targeting first. Everyone is just going to rush
in and go crazy and think it is for them. The renters are going to go, "I still cannot
afford it." My other issue is that there should be more breaks for lower-income
families. Like you have a home, like a little Hanama`ulu aunty and uncle, they have
this house and they are trying to help out by renting the rooms for four hundred
dollars ($400) a month. Now, they need to do these improvements, especially on the
sewer and water, and it is very expensive to get that done and this has to be done in
order to comply. Could we look at income levels to give these people a break? Other
than that, it will not help these people to get their place in tip top shape so that
they can rent it out at the same rate. All it will do is help people who already have
money to get a better break still and they will still charge at the eighty
percent (80%) median income, which will keep it out of the hands of the very people
it is keeping the hands of right now. When you look on Craigslist, that is what the
market can afford. When you go to the Department and Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and look at their standards of how they do their median
income, it is a lot higher. When you get a HUD voucher now, I think it is up to one
thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800) or something, because that is what the
market is charging. When you go on Craigslist, what the market wants is five (5),
six (6), and seven (7). I know what you folks are trying to do. Let us do it right. Let
us not do something that you think is going to be great, and then in the end it is not
going to serve one (1) person that you wanted to in that demographic. Mahalo.
(Councilmember Yukimura is noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else wishing to testify?
If not, I will call the meeting back to order. The motion is to approve and schedule a
public hearing for October 5th. Any further discussion? Councilmember Kaneshiro.
There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 89 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Kaneshiro: One thing that came to light through this
process is that I know this Bill is island-wide, but the north shore has a special
planning area that prohibits multi-family units in their plan, so it would prevent
them from doing a multi-family on the north shore and I think they would need to
change their plan in order to allow it. Other than that, it is pretty straightforward
as far as not increasing density and just allowing flexibility for a homeowner to be
able to either build two (2) units together, rather than two (2) separate units.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. We will have much more discussion.
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Just for the committee meeting after the
public hearing, I would like the Planning Department to respond to the question I
had about whether Hawai`i island or Maui has similar legislation, and if so, what
kind of feedback has it gotten in the number of complaints or what have you from
residents there? Has the bill been received in good standing or has it actually
caused a lot of complaints with people as far as the changes that it has allowed. I
would like to get that response ready by the committee meeting. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: I just have a quick question and the
introducer might be able to answer it and I think I asked the question the last time,
but earlier the Planning Department said that if it was R-4 and if it was an acre
then that would allow them to build a four-plex. So if it was ten (10) acres, could
they build forty (40) multi-family units connected?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I think I would rather let the Planning
Department answer that.
Council Chair Rapozo: We can do that offline. What he said was if
you had a house with an entitlement to build one (1) unit, you would qualify. If you
had multiple units authorized, then you would not qualify. So if you had two (2)
acres...
Councilmember Hooser: If we could just have the Planning
Department up real quick, because I believe he also said...
Council Chair Rapozo: We have an interview at 2:00 p.m. I am not
meaning to rush anybody. We can come back after the interviews and finish this
up, but we are on a time schedule with someone from the mainland, so we want to
make sure that we can get in there and do that interview.
COUNCIL MEETING 90 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Hooser: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, the rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Hooser: I believe you said if it was R-4 and an acre
that this would allow a four-plex to be built. So if it was ten (10) acres, could a
forty (40) unit building be constructed?
Mr. Hull: Theoretically, but I would not anticipate that
happening, given the fact that there are not many acreages that size in nature. But
theoretically, yes.
Councilmember Hooser: We can talk more about it later. There are
hundreds of acres zoned R-4 or R-6 and could immediately put those into
multi-family zoning if they wanted to.
Mr. Hull: To a certain degree...no...yes...
Councilmember Hooser: We could explore this further. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: That does shed a different light, because
theoretically they can, so guess what? They can. The real question is do we have
ten (10) acre parcels of land on Kaua`i that are R-4 zoned in one area where you
could put a nice mini resort. With that, roll call.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634) on first reading,
that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 5, 2016, and referred to the Planning 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.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Yukimura was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as
an affirmative vote for the motion.)
COUNCIL MEETING 91 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: We have Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) and
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2638). Are you folks anticipating discussion? We have
discussed that to death earlier today. It is first reading bills. Can we get through
that in the next minute or so? Please read Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637).
(Councilmember Kaneshiro is noted as recused.)
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2016-812, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING
BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2016 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2017, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS
ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND (Office of Economic Development, Grant In
Aid (Special Events Security) — $53,773.00): Councilmember Kuali`i moved for
passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) on first reading, that it be ordered to
print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 5, 2016, and referred
to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: I believe there is an amendment.
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) as
circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto
as Attachment 2, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kuali`i: This is from staff and the Office of Economic
Development making a couple of corrections. One correction is the account number
on the left side of "Grant-In-Aid," and then the other correction is to remove
three (3) items, which should not be included or deleted: "Kaua`i Hospice, Kekaha
Fourth of July, and Pilgrimage of Compassion." So then the amount of fifty-three
thousand seven hundred seventy-three dollars ($53,773) is reduced to forty-three
thousand four hundred seventy-three dollars ($43,473).
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, I wanted to also clarify that the public
hearing date for Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) is October 5th. I think October 10th
was the stated date.
Council Chair Rapozo: So noted. The public hearing will be on
October 5th. Any further discussion?
The motion to amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637) as circulated, and as
shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2
was then put, and carried by a vote of 6*:0:0:1 (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of
the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember Yukimura
COUNCIL MEETING 92 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
was silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative vote for the
motion; Councilmember Kaneshiro was recused).
Council Chair Rapozo: We are back on the main motion. Is there
anyone in the audience wishing to testify? Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2637), as amended, on
first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be
scheduled for October 5, 2016, and referred to the Budget & Finance
Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i,
Yukimura TOTAL— 5*,
AGAINST PASSAGE: Rapozo TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Kaneshiro TOTAL— 1.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Yukimura was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as
an affirmative vote for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next item.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2638) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
SECTION 2, ORDINANCE NO. 891 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FOR THE
PURPOSE OF FINANCING CERTAIN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND
REFUNDING CERTAIN BONDS OF THE COUNTY; FIXING OR AUTHORIZING
THE FIXING OF THE FORM, DENOMINATIONS, AND CERTAIN OTHER
DETAILS OF SUCH BONDS AND PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF SUCH BONDS
TO THE PUBLIC: Councilmember Kuali`i moved for passage of Proposed Draft
Bill (No. 2638) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing
thereon be scheduled for October 5, 2016, and referred to the Budget & Finance
Committee, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any discussion? Public testimony? Seeing
none, roll call.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2638) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 5, 2016, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then
put, and carried by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEETING 93 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
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.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmembers Kaneshiro and Yukimura were noted as silent (not present), but
shall be recorded as an affirmative vote for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carries. Can you read the Executive
Session items, please?
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-867 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4
and 92-5(a)(4), and Kauai County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County
Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council, to provide Council with a
briefing and request authority for a possible settlement proposal in a claim filed by
Geico Insurance, as subrogee for Jenica Springer and related matters. This briefing
and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges,
immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this
agenda item.
(Councilmember Kaneshiro is noted as present.)
ES-868 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4,
92-5(a)(4), and Section 3.07(E) of the Kauai County Charter, the Office of the
County Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the
Council with a briefing on Special Counsel services to represent the County of
Kauai Housing Agency before the State Land Use Commission in order to file a
201H-38 Petition for the Lima Ola Workforce Housing Project
(Resolution No. 2016-53), 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.
Council Chair Rapozo: Since this Executive Session is no longer
needed, can we have a motion to receive ES-868?
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to receive ES-868 for the record, seconded
by Councilmember Kuali`i, and carried by a vote of 6*:0:0:1 (*Pursuant to
Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
COUNCIL MEETING 94 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura was silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative vote for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
ES-869 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4
and 92-5(a)(2), (4), and (8), the purpose of this Executive Session is to consider
matters that require confidentiality under state law, to wit, the hiring of a County
Auditor, including interviewing any candidates, and terms and conditions of
employment. The further purpose of this Executive Session is to meet with the
Councils legal counsel on questions and issues relating to the Council's powers,
duties, privileges and immunities and/or liabilities, claims and/or potential claims,
as such powers, duties, privileges and immunities, and/or liabilities, claims and or
potential claims relate to the foregoing item, and to take such action as the Council
deems appropriate.
ES-870 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4
and 92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kauai County Charter Section 3.07(E), the purpose of
this Executive Session is to provide the Council with a briefing on County of Kauai
vs. Hanalei River Holdings, Ltd., Civil No. 11-1-0098 JRV (Condemnation), Fifth
Circuit Court, and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves
consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the
Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
ES-871 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4
and 92-5(a)(4), and Kauai County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County
Attorney, requests an Executive Session with the Council, to provide the Council
with a briefing and request for authority to settle the case of Carl A. Ragasa vs.
County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. CV14-00309 DKW BMK (United States District
Court for the District of Hawaii) and related matters. This briefing and
consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities,
and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-867,
ES-869, ES-870, and ES-871, seconded by Councilmember Kualii, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7*,
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 95 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Yukimura was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as
an affirmative vote for the motion.)
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, we will recess this segment. We
are going to have to come out and vote. I am looking at our schedule and 2:00 p.m.
is our first interview and 3:30 p.m. is the second one. I am thinking that we will
reconvene at probably 4:30 p.m. or 5:00 p.m. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Is there any possibility that the item...well,
the item that we have left, if we could cover it in between 2:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m. I
do not anticipate being in the interview for one (1) hour, but if it does then we will
stick to your schedule. However, I do not want to waste time and put our staff on
overtime if we can avoid it.
Council Chair Rapozo: I agree. If we can get through the interview
in half an hour or forty-five (45) minutes, it gives us some time to come back into
open session and take up those items.
Councilmember Kagawa: Maybe we want to keep B.C. on call then?
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. Thank you. We are going to take a
recess.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 2:03 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 4:45 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Can you read us C 2016-195?
C 2016-195 Communication (08/24/2016) from the County Attorney,
requesting authorization to expend funds up to $20,000.00 for Special Counsel's
continued services provided in County of Kaua`i vs. Hanalei River Holdings. Ltd.,
et al., Civil No. 11-1-0098 JRV (Condemnation), Fifth Circuit Court, and related
matters: Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2016-195, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: I do want to make a note of Councilmember
Kagawa's request to have a letter sent over to the Department of Parks &
Recreation and whoever, and in fact maybe even...I will leave it up to the Public
COUNCIL MEETING 96 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Works / Parks & Recreation Committee Chair Kagawa if he wants it on the agenda
to have an update of what is going on down there.
Councilmember Kagawa: When I get the response, I will see.
Council Chair Rapozo: If there is no further discussion, roll call.
The motion to approve C 2016-195 was then put, and carried by the following
vote:
FOR APPROVAL: Chock, Hooser, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Kagawa TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: That brings us to page 5,
Resolution No. 2016-56.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2016-56 — RESOLUTION AMENDING
RESOLUTION NO. 2015-02, DRAFT 1, AND RESOLUTION NO. 2015-62,
RELATING TO THE RULES OF THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI
FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF COMMITTEES AND THE TRANSACTION OF
BUSINESS: Councilmember Yukimura moved that Resolution No. 2016-56 be
ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 5, 2016, and
referred to the October 19, 2016 Council Meeting, seconded by Councilmember
Hooser.
Council Chair Rapozo: Discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, I want to say that this is no reflection
on your conducting of business because it is just asking for a restoration of a rule
that was in place until there was a question about a Sunshine Law violation. We
cleared that up and there is no Sunshine Law violation, as indicated by the OIP
opinion. It makes things more convenient, especially for working people. It gives
notice. I know that Councilmember Chock suggested something up on the door, but
in fact, a rule is the best way to give notice that there is this way for people to
testify at the beginning of a meeting. In fact, people have told me that it is hard for
them to get people out on particular issues because they just do not know when the
issue is coming up. They have work and they cannot take off for the whole day.
Rules are to create order and they are to give notice. That is what this rule would
COUNCIL MEETING 97 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
do, I think, for a process that worked well. If we think that there is going to be
more than six (6) speakers, we can increase the time to twenty-one (21) minutes or
even a whole hour, if we want to. I think it is a very good way to function. It is not
about a bill with a lot of people who want to testify. I believe, whether it is
Bill No. 2491 or bills on ADUs or things like that, we can schedule them, which we
have a formal request process. But for individuals who want to come and testify, I
think this would be a good thing to have. It will improve process and make
government more accessible. If we say there is no need for it or we have not heard
anything, a public hearing would allow for that to see really what the interest and
concerns are out there.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Chair, I stated earlier that I have not had
any issues with the current rule. In fact, I think what I have seen is that whoever
is chairing the meeting to be accommodating, as much as possible to potential
speakers or testifiers, particularly if they have some time constraints. While I think
we can always improve, and I am an advocate of continuous improvement, from my
perspective, I just have not seen it fail. With that being said, I think the approach
that I am taking here is to be as objective as possible to the introducer's request. If
Councilmember Yukimura is hearing and has some feedback from the community
that there is an issue, then I am more inclined to listen to a public hearing, if that is
the direction of this existing motion. I was prepared to not support it. If it means
going to a public hearing for the sake of listening and getting more information, I
am supportive of that at this time.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I am not going to support this Resolution. I
think the timing...we are two (2) months away from finding out who will be on the
next Council, the top vote-getter looks like a shoe-in for Council. So the makeup for
the Council will be different, I think. The changes that were made with the last
election that we did led to more efficient meetings, led to more order, and led to
more following of a process to prevent unnecessary discussions taking place when
questions and answers should be taking place. I think those successes have reduced
overtime with our staff, and I think it is unnecessary overtime. I think the changes
that we made were successful and are successful. I have heard no complaints about
the current process. I have heard a lot of praise about the current process.
Therefore, I do not find any reason why we should change it at this time. I think in
two (2) months if there is a new Councilmember or an old Councilmember that feels
that after the election that this would be a good rule to put back in, then I think
that would be the appropriate time. Therefore, I will not be supporting this. Thank
you.
COUNCIL MEETING 98 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I, too, will not be supporting it. As I
mentioned earlier, I have not heard of anyone that had a problem with it. We did
get one (1) testimony from Glenn Mickens, but even he did not seem okay with it
because he still wanted his six (6) minutes when the rules says only three (3)
minutes, and if he had six (6) minutes then that is only three (3) people that could
talk, rather than six (6). I think the Council has been very accommodating. We
even had it today where people were speaking on the Consent Calendar if they
could not stick around. I am fine with the rules now. We even had times where we
have tried to accommodate people and we have set agenda items at a certain time,
and still nobody even showed up for it. Because they wanted it at that time, that is
when they could come, we set it, and nobody came and testified. Again, there are
many ways to testify. It is not only coming up here and testifying. You can write it
or you could call us. Again, there are four (4) chances to testify. There is the first
reading, a public hearing, a committee meeting, and there is a council meeting. I
think there is a lot of opportunity for it. I think that it is fine the way it is, so I will
not be voting for it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I agree with the comments of Vice Chair
Kagawa and Councilmember Kaneshiro and I also cannot support this. Actually, I
think we found out today that there are actually five (5) chances to testify, because
it was very odd to hear so much testimony on traffic congestion when we did not
even have a traffic congestion item on the agenda. What we did have was under
"Committee Reports" a Public Works / Parks & Recreation Committee,
PWPR 2016-11, and once one (1) person got to come up and talk about it, everybody
decided, too, and they even did for a second time. Really, all we were approving was
minutes. There is a balance to being effective at doing our work and giving people
the appropriate time and ability. The three (3) minutes has been always granted to
allow the second three (3) minutes. The rules say three (3) minutes and the Chair
may grant the second three (3) minutes, and that has always been done as well. I
have not heard from anyone. I think in the future when you are trying to make a
change and you say it is because you have been hearing, you should get those people
to send in their E-mail to all seven (7) Councilmembers so that we can hear initially
from at least a handful of people that there is even a problem so that we can maybe
go further to try and hear from more people. No one really showed up today,
specifically for this matter. They knew it was on the agenda. Yes, we heard from
Mr. Mickens. We will always hear from Mr. Mickens. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Go ahead.
COUNCIL MEETING 99 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Chock: Just for clarification, as the discussion about
this particular rule came up, I started to think about if someone walks in at
9:30 a.m. or so and says that they have to go to work by 10:00 a.m. and asks for
consideration that, that is something within our current rule that will tried to be
accommodated. I just wanted to get that clarity.
Council Chair Rapozo: That has actually happened in the past.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you for that. The second thing would
be that I do think that the suggestion I had about being able to disclose that in a
way for people walking in and showing up to the meetings so that they know that
option does exist for them, is something that we might want to or need to consider
in the future to improve on the system. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: The other thing I would add is that it might
be too obvious that people are missing it that everyone always has the option to
submit their testimony in writing. If somebody came at the beginning at the day
and they came in at 9:30 a.m. and had to leave at 10:00 a.m. and somehow based on
the agenda and what was going on and priority of other speakers already signed up
or whatever, that if they had the same issue that at a last resort they could submit
their testimony to the staff on their way running out the door, so we could always
have it in writing.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: There is such a difference between people
appearing to testify where others can hear and where the public can hear than just
submitting testimony. If it is a pure equivalent, then we should just do away with
oral testimony. There is a difference with oral testimony. Now it is not true that
people have three (3) times to testify. They only had once to testify on the Kauai
Veteran's Cemetery renovation, only had once to testify on the Hanalei Special
Counsel issue, and they only had one time to testify on this Resolution. If it is an
appropriation bill, there is a public hearing or if it is a Planning bill, but it is not
always the case that you have more times to testify. If we want to encourage public
input, we are trying to make it easy. No matter what we are saying here, not
everybody will know that they can come in and ask permission from the Chair to
speak early. In having it in a rule, and then to have people asked throughout the
meeting to come and testify because they have to leave is really kind of chaotic. So
what a rule would do is to give order so that everybody knows, and to give notice
because it is in the rules. People can read it and check it and know that it exists. It
COUNCIL MEETING 100 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
is really amazing to me that enabling and making public testimony easier is
something that this Council does not want to do.
Council Chair Rapozo: I just want to let you know that, that is your
second time, Councilmember Yukimura. If you want to use up the rest of your time,
I suggest you do it now while you still have the floor.
Councilmember Yukimura: One of the curses of this two-time rule is that
you cannot respond when people raise issues and you cannot have the
counterarguments. You cannot even talk for five (5) minutes, necessarily. You do
not want to make up time and make up words. You want to respond to the various
arguments that are given. So this arbitrary two-time rule is really repressive. It is
actually quite "Trump-like."
Council Chair Rapozo: That rule has been in the rules for a long
time. That is something that I created. That has been in the rules for a very long
time.
Councilmember Yukimura: I do not agree. I do not believe that has been
in the rules for a long time. It was created almost two (2) years ago when the rules
were proposed by yourself, Chair, at inauguration day.
Council Chair Rapozo: No, that rule was not changed. The two-time
rule was always there. I just enforce it and that makes me the bad guy. If your
argument is about that then that should have been on the resolution and not this
eighteen (18) minute rule. Is that going to be your final time to speak on this
Resolution?
Councilmember Yukimura: No, not if there are other arguments and
other information that needs to be given. For example, Chair, on the "Barking
Dogs" issue, you totally distorted what it meant to have an affirmative defense, and
that came after I had spoken twice and it would have left the discussion without a
correction of that. I had to speak a third time in order to correct it.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are talking about the eighteen (18)
minute rule today. That is what is on the agenda.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but you brought up the two-time rule,
Sir.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am giving you an opportunity to use up
your time, so I am trying to be generous. But if you want to be done then that is
COUNCIL MEETING 101 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
fine. I am telling you that I will not recognize you for the third time, so I am asking
you if you are done.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry, but the two-time rule does not
work. You are not being generous at all.
Council Chair Rapozo: Are you done?
Councilmember Yukimura: It depends.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anybody else wishing to testify? If not,
Scott, may you please put up the presentation? I have a very quick presentation. It
is very simple—why now? We have five (5) council and committee meetings left in
this term. Why now? There were no issues during this term. In caps, "ALL
REQUESTS FOR ACCOMMODATIONS WERE GRANTED," and we did that by
taking early testimony or moving agenda items to accommodate the public. The
meetings have run much more efficiently. We have shortened the meeting time,
which reduces staff time and saves money. That is what this has done. We have
not taken away a thing from the public, absolutely nothing. Right now, somebody
comes in, we do not have eighteen (18) minutes and we do not have to make it
twenty-one (21). There is no time limit. If we have six (6) or seven (7) people that
have to catch a plane, have to catch a bus, have a meeting, or have to go back to
work, they will be accommodated. Under the proposed Resolution, under the
proposed rule, eighteen (18) minutes. If we have more, then guess what? We are
going to suspend the rules, like what we do now. It is not necessary. Currently,
there is no limit on speakers. You could have four (4), five (5), or six (6). Again,
there could be a situation where a bunch of school teachers need to get to work,
need to get to school, or a bunch of students that need to get to school and they want
to testify, you are not going to get many of them in there for eighteen (18) minutes.
The proposed Resolution rule change is "first come, first served." Is that fair in a
public arena? "It is first come, first served, ladies and gentlemen. If you do not
make it, then tough." It is just ridiculous. Fair and equitable. The proposed
language creates opportunity for people to get left out. I know Councilmember
Yukimura said that it is not a reflection in how I have been running the meetings—
well, I do take it as a reflection. You are saying that it is not working, so we need to
change rules. You do not change rules when things are working. This is how I
close: "If it is not broken, do not fix it." In my opinion, it is not broken.
Councilmember Hooser.
Councilmember Hooser: Can you put the slides back up? I do support
the motion, and to be clear, the motion simply asks for a public hearing. That is all
it does, is ask for a public hearing. If people show up to testify and we hear them,
there is no debate. We are not allowed to debate at the public hearing. Remember?
COUNCIL MEETING 102 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Those are in the rules. It simply asks for a public hearing. If no one shows up, that
is the end, we schedule it, and we have this conversation again. In some senses, it
is just a courtesy, but it is really not any great consumer of energy for the Council,
for the staff, or anybody whatsoever. Can you put the slide up? Can I hold my
minutes while I wait for the slide? I want to put my minutes on hold while I wait
for the slide.
Council Chair Rapozo: Sure. Which slides do you want up?
Councilmember Hooser: The current and the proposed. I just want to
point out, Chair, that I understand the points you are making, but the proposed
does not affect the current at all. It only affects people who show up early. The
others also have no time limit and they all have no limitation on speakers and they
are all fair and equitable. The only limitations are on those first people. We still
have the rest of the speakers who could come and talk twice if they want. They can
have as many speakers as one could talk during the regular proposal. I said earlier
that I support this partly because of certainty, and if it was certain, and it has been
by practice, that people can speak early, then I suggest we put that in the rules so
people know. I think that would solve the issue. If we always accommodate people,
let us pass a rule that people are always accommodated. When people ask, "When
is it going to come up," then we can tell them. We could tell them to come early and
speak. It is a rule. That is it. I just think that this is a request for a public hearing
and I think it is a reasonable request. Thank you.
Councilmember Kagawa: I have a question for Councilmember Hooser.
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Kagawa: When you were in the State Senate, did you
folks have a time like this for the public to come up and speak on anything that they
wanted to before you folks? I am just wondering if the State had this and we are
trying to follow.
Councilmember Hooser: The Chair had discretion. I cannot recall
that rule.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. I am just checking.
Councilmember Hooser: I am responding to the question. I am not
using my three (3) minutes. I see you speaking for the third time.
Councilmember Kagawa: The second time was my question.
COUNCIL MEETING 103 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Council Chair Rapozo: If you have a question on the testimony,
then...
Councilmember Hooser: I think it is irrelevant what the Senate does.
We have seven (7) members here and we set our own rules and we want to make it
as best we can. I think that is the objective, to make it as best as we can for the
public. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think made it the best we could when we
changed the rule and removed that. That rule was just put in with the former
Chair. Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I am not going to repeat what I said, but
again, it is kind of funny that we are here talking about public testimony and
allowing people to do it, and we did not get any on this. If people want it changed,
but they were not even willing to testify on it...I do not know what to say. I think
everything is working fine now. I think that you have ran the meetings very well.
Again, people had time to testify. We have done a lot of stuff to accommodate
people and it has worked up well up until now and I am happy with the way things
have gone. It is what it is. I am ready to vote on it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: People did not even know that this Bill or
Resolution is on the agenda. They only had six (6) days and not everyone knows.
The reason why I did not go and call everybody is because I expected that it would
be passed without any concerns because it is so reasonable.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay...
Councilmember Yukimura: There are people who say that they cannot
come out because they do not know when the issue is going to come up.
Councilmember Kagawa: May I respond?
Council Chair Rapozo: You know...
Councilmember Kagawa: There was an article in the newspaper
yesterday, front page, saying that this item was going to be discussed.
Council Chair Rapozo: Exactly.
Councilmember Yukimura: Not everybody...
COUNCIL MEETING 104 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Kagawa: Nobody reads The Garden Island?
Councilmember Yukimura: No...
Council Chair Rapozo: Listen, typically...
Councilmember Kagawa: You do articles all of the time in The Garden
Island.
Council Chair Rapozo: Typically what happens is that a constituent
has a concern, they see a Councilmember, the Councilmember does their due
diligence, and then they come up with a bill or resolution. In this case, that never
happened. If it happened then the public would be here. The public did not come
today. For me, it is a matter of managing this Council. For me, it is a matter of
what is working. This is working absolutely fine in my opinion. Ask the staff—a
public hearing does take a toll on our staff. The bottom line is that if you believe
that this is needed, then you support the Resolution and you support the public
hearing. We have five (5) council and committee meetings left. Why in the world
would we do this now? I do not know if you folks have noticed, but with the rule
changes and with the enforcement of the rules, and maybe I am imagining this, but
I will leave this up to you individually to think about this, we have had more new
people testify at our meetings because of the structure. We have had more people
that have come and testified on issues because of the rules and I get a lot of
compliments. I do not take credit for it. It took the Council to enforce or pass the
rules. I am trying my best to run these meetings in the most efficient way. I do not
see a problem. I have not heard absolutely any complaints about the way this is
being run. I have not heard anyone come up and say, written an E-mail, or called to
say that they did not have an opportunity to testify because they came to the
meeting late. Not once. I do not see a reason to change with two (2) months
remaining in the term. With that, the motion is to hold a public hearing. Roll call.
The motion that Resolution No. 2016-56 be ordered to print, that a public
hearing thereon be scheduled for October 5, 2016, and referred to the
October 19, 2016 Council Meeting was then put, and failed by the following
vote:
FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL– 3*,
AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL– 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL– 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL– 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 105 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Chock was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative
vote for the motion.)
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The motion fails.
Council Chair Rapozo: I need a new motion.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive Resolution No. 2016-56 for the
record, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any further discussion? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I commend Councilmember Yukimura. She
followed your instructions basically and I think you said at one point that if you are
not happy with the rules then propose a rule change. It is just that at times we
start disagreeing with each other, but actually, I think it is just accepting that each
of us has an opinion on an issue and we cannot always agree. On this one,
apparently we do not agree that a change is needed that is even worth going to the
public hearing because there are no problems. So she actually followed the
instructions that you gave her and proposed the changes that she had wanted at the
appropriate time, so kudos to her for doing it and following what your instructions
were. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Any other discussion? That is true,
Councilmember Kagawa. Rather than debate and argue whether a rule is right or
wrong or good or bad, this was the process that is in place. You do a resolution for a
rule change, express your concern and your justification, and we take the vote.
That is how it should be done, rather than being argued on the floor. I do agree and
I appreciate Councilmember Yukimura following the process. Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: The reason I did this rule is because I have
two (2) major bills that I will be introducing in the next five (5) weeks, one on
housing and one possibly on feral cats, and people need to be able to testify and this
is the easier way for them to testify.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, if you want to
make an issue time specific, has this Chair ever refused any of your request to hold
an item at a specific time?
COUNCIL MEETING 106 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Yukimura: No, I am not talking about that. If you have
several bills that want to be held at a certain time and so you have that bill that is
going on, people still do not know when it is going to end and when they can testify.
It is much easier if they can just speak up front.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. That is fine.
Councilmember Yukimura: Also, it is in the discretion of the Chair to
allow people to speak more than twice, but the Chair's exercise of that discretion
has been extremely restrictive.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is purposeful. I learned a long time ago
that if you are consistent with everyone, then it is a lot easier.
Councilmember Yukimura: And it limits debate that is very important
and discussions and facts and opinions and positions that should be part of the
. debate. It is a very arbitrary rule.
Council Chair Rapozo: Then I would suggest, like I said earlier, to
come up with a rule change proposal on that issue.
Councilmember Yukimura: I will.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I just want to say that if this thing went
through, it is only the first six (6) people that will get to testify. If it is a big topic
that is going to have a lot of people, everybody else is going to have to wait until it is
on the agenda at some other time. I think the Chair has been very fair. The
two-time talking rule, we know the rules. If you want to say where you stand on it
in the beginning and wait and hold your comments until everybody talks, and then
say one at the end, then we are open to doing that. You do not need to use your two
right away and want to do a third.
Councilmember Yukimura: You do not have a free-flowing discussion if
you have to think about everything you want to say. It is a response and back and
forth that can be really creative problem-solving. So it is a very artificial, arbitrary
restriction to say two (2) times and say everything that you want to say in two (2)
times and it limits the minority opinion because there is many more who can speak,
and then you do not have the time to respond. Also, if there are a lot of people to
speak on the bill, then you use the rule about having that bill scheduled at the
beginning. That is a different rule and a different circumstance.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 107 SEPTEMBER 7, 2016
Councilmember Chock: Just because of what we have experienced in
this last term, I felt like I needed to speak more towards some of what I understand
in group dynamics. While I understand that we are not a "team" per se and we are
all individual Councilmembers, any high-functioning group, I think, there are
certain dynamics that need to be taken into consideration, which we have
experienced at this table. One of those is that when we, what I call "conflict" or
have discussion or debate, if that system is to work, continue to work, then we have
to move from there at some point or another. That would require us to actually
come to an agreement, that in this case, a vote, and that we move forward from it.
So if we cannot move from it, the conflict will continue to exist, as it has right now.
But if you are going to consider us moving forward as a highly-functioning group,
then we have to consider that when votes are taken, we have to accept and move
forward on them. That is a dynamic that, I think, has not been acknowledged at
this table. That is all I wanted to say.
Council Chair Rapozo: If there is no further discussion, the motion
is to receive. Roll call.
The motion to receive Resolution No 2016-56 for the record was then put,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR RECEIPT: Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kuali`i,
Rapozo TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST RECEIPT: Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 2,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The motion to receive passes.
Council Chair Rapozo: We are going to adjourn this part of the
meeting, but I do want to go back into Executive Session for ten (10) minutes to
discuss the auditor interviews. If you could just oblige me with ten (10) minutes, we
can go around the table and decide where we are going to go from here.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the Council Meeting adjourned at 6:11 p.m.
R.: . - . fully submitted,
as
JADE
al�� N AIN-TANIGAWA
County C erk
:cy
ATTAQT1QTT 1
(September 1, 2016)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634), A Bill For An Ordinance To Amend Chapter 8,
Kaua`i County Code 1987, As Amended, To Allow Multiple Family Dwelling Units
In All Residential Zoning Districts (Kaua`i County Council, Applicant)
Introduced By: ARRYL KANESHIRO
Amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2634), SECTION 2, to read as follows:
"SECTION 2. Chapter 8 of the Kauai County Code 1987, as
amended, is hereby amended by amending Table 8-2.4 Table of Uses, Sections
8-2.4(a)(1) through 8-2.40)(19), to read as follows:
"Table 8-2.4 Table of Uses
ZONING DISTRICT
Sec. USE Residential Commercial Industrial
R-1 to R-10 to
R-6 11-20 RR CN CG IL IG AG 0
8-2.4(a)(1) Single family detached dwellings P P
8-2.4(a)(2) Accessory structures and uses, P P
including one(1)guest house on
a lot or parcel 9,000 square feet
or larger
[8-2.4(a)(3)] [Two(2)multiple family [P] [P]
dwelling units or two(2)single
family attached dwelling units
upon a parcel of record as of
June 30, 1980]
[8-2.4(a)[(4)] [Notwithstanding subsection(3) [P] [P]
above,multiple family and
single family attached dwellings
developed pursuant to a Federal,
State or County housing
program]
8-2.4(b) Multiple family and single P P
family attached dwellings[are
permitted in districts R-I0 and
R-20 in addition to those types of
residential uses and structures
permitted under Subsection(a)
above]
8-2.4(c) Public and private parks and P P
home businesses are permitted in
all districts
8-2.4(d) Adult family boarding and P P
family care homes that comply
with all State Department of
Social Services and Housing and
State Department of Health
rules,regulations and
requirements provided,however,
that the Planning Director may
require a use permit for such
applications that may create
adverse impacts to the health,
safety,morals,convenience and
welfare of the neighborhood or
community that the proposed use
is located
8-2.4(e) Transient vacation rentals, P P
1
ATTACHMENT 1
ZONING DISTRICT
Sec. USE Residential Commercial Industrial
R-I to R-10 to
R-6 R-20 RR CN CG IL IC AG 0
provided they are located within
the designated Visitor
Destination Areas established
pursuant to Article 17 of this
Chapter.These uses are
prohibited in non-VDA areas
8-2.4(0(1) Botanical and zoological gardens U U
8-2.4(0(2) Cemeteries,mortuaries and U U
crematoriums
8-2.4(0(3) Churches,temples,and U U
monasteries
8-2.4(0(4) Clubs,lodges and community U U
centers
8-2.4(0(5) Diversified and specialized U U
agriculture and nurseries
8-2.4(0(6) Dormitories,guest and boarding U U
houses;but not hotels and motels
8-2.4(0(7) Golf courses U U
8-2.4(0(8) Medical and nursing facilities U U
8-2.4(0(9) Museums,libraries and public U U
services and facilities
8-2.4(0(10) Private and public utilities and U U
facilities,other than maintenance
and storage of equipment,
materials,and vehicles
8-2.4(0(11) Project developments in U U
accordance with Article 10 of
this Chapter
8-2.4(0(12) Retail shops and stores U U
8-2.4(0(13) School and day care centers U U
8-2.4(0(14) Transportation terminals and U U
docks
[8-2.4(0(15)] [Three(3)or more multiple [U] [P]
family dwelling units upon a
parcel of record as of June 30,
1980,in the R-1,R-2,R-4,or the
R-6 District]
[8-2.4(0(16)] [Three(3)or more single family [U] [P]
attached dwelling units upon a
parcel of record as of June 30,
1980,in the R-1,R-2,R-4 or the
R-6 District]
8- Residential care homes U U
2.4(0[(17)]15
8- Adult family group living home U U
2.4(0[(18)116
8- Any other use or structure which U U
2.4(0[(19)]17 the Planning Director finds to be
similar in nature to those listed in
this Section and appropriate to
the District"
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.)
(V:\AMENDMENTS\2016\9-7-16 Bill No. 2634 Multiple Family Dwellings-AK-YS_lc.doc)
2
ATTACHMENT 2
(September 7, 2016)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2637, A Bill For An Ordinance Amending Ordinance No. B-2016-812, As
Amended, Relating To The Operating Budget Of The County Of Kaua`i, State Of
Hawai`i, For The Fiscal Year July 1, 2016 Through June 30, 2017, By Revising The
Amounts Estimated In The General Fund
Introduced By: KIPUKAI KUALII
Amend Bill No. 2637 in its entirety to read as follows:
"BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI,
STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 19.07B and 19.10A of the
Charter of the County of Kaua`i, as amended, Ordinance No. B-2016-812, as
amended, relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kauai, State of
Hawai`i, for the Fiscal Year July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2017, be hereby
amended as follows:
The sum of [$53,773.00] $43,473.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the
General Fund from the following account:
001-0000-271.00-00 Equity / Fund Balance — Unassigned [$43,473.00]
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
[001-0901-512.30-00]
001-0901-512.36-00 Grant In Aid [$53,773.00] 43,473.00
Special Events Security —
Visitor Industry Charity Walk
Ha`ena to Hanalei Run
Kamehameha Day Parade
Kaua`i Farm Bureau Fair
[Kaua`i Hospice 4th of July]
Kauai Veterans Day Parade
[Kekaha 4th of July]
Koloa Plantation Days Parade
Lights on Rice Street
Old Koloa Sugar Mill Run
[Pilgrimage of Compassion]
Relay for Life Hanapepe
Waimea Town Celebration
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material is underscored.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2016\9-7-16 Bill No 2637 OED Money Bill YS_dmc.doc
•
1