The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutBudget Deliberation & Preliminary Decision-Making, FY 2016-17, 5/12/2016-5/13/2016 BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE DELIBERATION AND PRELIMINARY DECISION-MAKING FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 ANNUAL BUDGET MAY 12, 2016 A Deliberation and Preliminary Decision-Making Meeting on the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Annual Budget of the County of Kaua`i was called to order by Arryl Kaneshiro, Chair, Budget & Finance Committee, on Thursday, May 12, 2016, at 9:04 a.m. at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Room 201 Lihu'e, Kaua`i, Hawaii and the presence of the following was noted: Honorable Mason K. Chock Honorable Gary L. Hooser Honorable Ross Kagawa Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i Honorable Mel Rapozo Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro The meeting proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Good morning everyone. Today we will be addressing decision-making for Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Operating and Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Budgets and Real Property Tax Rates for the same fiscal year. We have had nearly three (3) weeks of budget reviews and substantial discussion with the Administration, as well as receiving lengthy responses from the Administration to the numerous follow-up questions that were transmitted. I want to thank the Administration because we had over three hundred (300) questions that we sent over and you folks answered all three hundred (300) questions, so I think that is a success in itself and thank you for the responsiveness. We do not have much time for the budget and I know it was a rush on your part, but I appreciate the effort. I will not be requesting that the Administration come up today to respond to questions from Councilmembers on proposals, as all of our preparation and clarification on proposals should have been done in advance. Of course, we also have supplemental items that came in, so I would really like us to not have to call him up and create a lengthy discussion. We know what we want to do. We have some adds, some cuts, and let us go forward on it. It is now our opportunity to offer proposals to the budget. I would like to remind the Committee that any proposals to reduce or remove an item requires four (4) votes and any adds will require five (5). Once we vote on an item today, we will not revisit that item, unless it is deemed absolutely necessary. Additionally, once a proposal is introduced, I respectfully ask that Members be concise and considerate with their time during the discussion period, as our time will be limited. As it has always been, it is my recommendation as the Budget & Finance Committee Chair to preserve the Unassigned Fund Balance and to contribute any unappropriated funds resulting from the Committee's decisions to the Unassigned Fund Balance. I know we have also heard of putting money into roads, but I just want to put it out there that we have the Unit 14 increases that have not been completed yet, but that is another $433,000 that would be coming in. Any cuts that we make and allocate, we are going to end up having to pull from the reserve fund if we do not have $433,000 saved up in it. Just keep that in mind. Any additions that you may be proposing should have a corresponding reduction or identification of funding or revenue source. On the screen above, we will see all of the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 2 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING proposals in realtime, projected by staff, with a running total of additions and cuts. I am hopeful that we do not have to tap into the Unassigned Fund Balance to balance the budget. As of right now, the budget is balanced where we are not taking money from the Unassigned Fund Balance. We are starting at zero (0). Lastly, I want to remind all of you that if the Committee does not come to an agreement within the allotted time for decision- making, then the Mayor's original budget submitted on March 14th will go into effect. I will be opening today's session as we have done throughout the entire session with public testimony. Following public testimony, I will allow time for the Mayor and his team to briefly address the Committee before we get into our session. Following his presentation, the outlines of some of the changes in supplemental communications, I will immediately go into Council decision-making and we should have had time with Council Services to prepare all of our proposals for adds and cuts, so you should all have it with you. As a side note, I want to respectfully ask Councilmembers to make their final commentary on the budget during second and final reading scheduled for June 1, 2016, if all goes according to plan. We are not going make our final comments today. With that, I would like to suspend the rules. Is there anyone registered to speak? JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Yes we do, Chair. The first registered speaker is Curt Colby. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Curt, have a seat. You can speak on any item on the budget. You have a total of six (6) minutes, three (3) minutes at a time. When you have thirty (30) seconds left from your three (3) minutes, it will turn yellow and when your three (3) minutes are up, it will turn red. Then I will need to take public testimony from other people in the audience. If you have another three (3) minutes, then we will take everybody for the first time, and then you can come back for a second time. Just make sure the light is blue and state your name for the record. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. CURT COLBY: Curt Colby. Aloha County Council and mahalo for giving me the chance to address you. I handed out a folder about a piece of equipment, a bulkhead for the YMCA, where Swim Kauai Aquatics practices. I am the head coach of Swim Kaua`i Aquatics and I have been involved in swimming as a competitor or coaching for fifty-seven (57) years. The reason I am passionate about this is that swimming afforded me a chance to have a great education, taught me many life lessons about discipline and hard work, and things of that nature and that is why I am in this business of coaching. This is a final piece that we need for the pool to make it competition ready for interisland meets. At this point, we have the best quality pool on the island, and in fact, on some of the other islands as well. We need this one piece of equipment, a bulkhead, which is costly. We are asking for around $230,000 to complete this. Yes, it is expensive, but what this will enable us to do is to have the State of Hawai`i high school championships here and age-group championships here. What happens with the kids on this island at this point is that they have to pay to go to other islands for all of the championships and we would like to be able to have these championships here. What it will mean to the island financially is that you will have two hundred (200) to three hundred (300) kids and families coming over here to stay here in hotels, buy food, rent cars, and things of that nature. It also will afford us the ability to have top quality competition here, another level of quality competition here. The YMCA is very thankful to the generosity of the County. The County has donated land for the pool to be built on and they have donated money for solar to help reduce our fiscal budget. In return, the YMCA creates a quality program. They do have summer fun DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 3 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING days that are free to the kids that come. We as a team are going to be sponsoring six (6) days of summer that will be free swimming for families, the local people. The YMCA is a private organization and has to fund itself, so we cannot offer everything for free, even though as much as we could, we would like to. Swim Kaua`i Aquatics is a nonprofit organization, so we also have a tight budget and we are not making tons of money. We also offer between five (5) to ten (10) scholarships a year. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Curt, I am sorry. That was your three (3) minutes. Anyone else in the audience wishing to testify on our budget today? Seeing none, you may have your other three (3) minutes. Mr. Colby: Thank you very much. We offer scholarships to kids to swim on the team. They also offer the pool use for the junior lifeguard practices. They also offer the Kaua`i high school championships to be free of charge for the high schools to be here. Another benefit to the island is presently we have five (5) swimmers in college who are swimming. Three (3) of the swimmers last year who graduated and went to college were valedictorians at Kapa'a High School, Waimea High School, and Kauai High School. We are encouraging kids to have excellence, discipline, and learn some lessons in life. So we feel this is all very much a benefit to the County of Kauai. Let me see if there is anything else. I talked about bringing financial benefit to the island and talked about bringing top-quality competition. It also helps the families who have kids on the team not to have to pay money to go to the other islands. I believe that is it. I thank you so much for the time and we are obviously open to any questions at any point during the process and I thank you for that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Anyone else in the audience wishing to speak on the budget. Seeing none, while the rules are still suspended, Mayor Carvalho, you can make your quick presentation. BERNARD P. CARVALHO, JR., Mayor: Aloha Council Chair Rapozo, Vice Chair Kagawa, and Members of the County Council. I am happy to be here again one more time as we continue our budget process, now with the supplemental budget. Today, we present a brief overview of our 2017 Supplemental Budget proposal for the second consecutive year. We have submitted a structurally sound budget. This was achieved without using any General Fund balance and without any additional Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenues from the State Legislature. I believe this is an indication of financial discipline to produce sustainable budgets going forward and I would like to elaborate on the changes that we have made to our March 14th submittal. The result is a slight increase of one-half percent (0.5%) to our proposed Operating Budget. Let me provide you a little more detail. The most significant development since our March submittal is the Council's passage of our Salary Resolution, which provides pay increases for certain officers of our County. The Resolution was submitted by the Salary Commission following extensive research and reflects the Commission's efforts to bring the officers' salaries in line with their counterparts around the State and to help address the issue of salary inversion. As you know, most of these officers have not received pay increases for the past seven and a half (7.5) years. Another adjustment to our proposal includes funding for turnout gear or personal protective equipment worn by our firefighters when they respond to fires. In the past, this protective equipment was covered by grants, but this funding source is no longer available. We are proposing to spread the cost of the turnout gear over a three (3) year period, rather DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 4 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING than funding it all at one time. Grant funding is also not available for self-contained breathing apparatuses (SCBAs) for our firefighters. We have not included funding in this supplemental budget for the SCBAs. We anticipate submitting a money bill once the analysis and cost estimates are completed. There are three (3) additional items that we are including in this proposal: a grant-in-aid to the YMCA, an organization that has supporting Kaua`i's ohana for nearly ninety (90) years; an Assistant Fire Chief to support the Kaua`i Fire Department's (ICED) operational needs; and additional funding for a homeless program, due to an unintentional omission in the March 14th submittal. The YMCA is requesting assistance with the purchase of this specialized equipment. Currently, Kauai is the only county in Hawai`i that is unable to host such events, due to lack of equipment; we are talking State championships, et cetera. This puts our competitive swimmers at a major disadvantage. In addition, Kaua`i's economy is losing out on thousands of dollars of visitor stays here on our island. This grant-in-aid for the YMCA pool aligns with our 2010 Comprehensive Development Strategy Report as well, encouraging and to bolster our economic growth here on Kauai. Kauai Fire Department is one of the few fire departments around the country without a manager of operations. Calls for assistance from KFD have been steadily rising for the last fourteen (14) years with no sign of abating. To support the increasing workload, an Assistant Fire Chief will oversee the department's daily operations, directly supervise three (3) Battalion Chiefs, and assist the Fire Chief with implementing the KFD's strategic plan with a capital improvement plan as well. One of the biggest concerns facing governments across the country is homelessness. Here on Kauai, the County has formed a partnership with Kauai Economic Opportunity (KEO) and the Kaua`i Community Alliance to address this issue. Due to an unintentional omission in our March submittal, our County is providing additional funding for the homeless program. In our capital budget proposal, we plan to move forward with the third phase of the Coco Palms Odor Control Project, which will focus on addressing odors on Papaloa Road, near its Kuhio Highway junction. I know we talked about this in the past and we want to move forward on that. Previous phases have focused on addressing odors at Coco Palms sewage pump station only, so this will take it to the next step. We also have included funding to extend the sidewalk along Moi Road in Hanapepe, approximately seven hundred (700) feet of sidewalk will be installed that connects the existing sidewalk to the larger Complete Streets project. We have identified three (3) park projects in addition to this project. We have identified three (3) park projects that will be funded through the Department of Parks and Recreation's Ho`olokahi grant program. The funding will cover the cost from materials and supplies, while the labor will be provided at no charge by the members of the Kauai Senior Softball Association in partnership. At Peter Rayno Park, a permanent homerun fence will be installed. At Puhi Park and Hanapepe softball field dugout and announcers booth will be built. We are truly thankful for the partnership with the Senior Softball Association that allows us to leverage our limited tax dollars with the talent and heart of volunteers to benefit the entire community. As for other CIP projects, I am pleased to note that the State Legislature has approved funding for the following projects: Lima Ola, Kaua`i's first largescale green affordable housing community project; our Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center; and our Kaua`i Veterans Cemetery improvements. Let us examine the County's projected tax revenue, which remains unchanged since our March 14th estimate. At Council's recommendation, however, we have included in our supplemental budget additional revenue for underestimated plumbing permit fees, as well as revenue from dog and cat DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 5 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING license fees that are collected by the Kaua`i Humane Society. Aside from revenues, our structurally balanced budget was achieved by reducing the RFP consultant line item and making other operating cuts, as well as utilizing the money that was initially as an increase in the General Fund balance. The state of the County's finances continues to improve with real property taxes projected to grow over fiscal year 2016, along with the Unassigned Fund Balance. Although this represents a significant improvement over the previous fiscal years, keep in mind that this also represents the County's reserve for which a sound policy is being developed, under the guidance of the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). It is disappointing that the State Legislature has once again chosen to cap the Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenue for all the counties this year with the possibility that it could be further reduced next year. The current projected increase in overall TAT revenues for this year is an estimated $29,000,000 and there is potentially an additional $15,000,000 in TAT that could come from the recent bed and breakfast (B&B) legislation, should the Governor sign House Bill No. 1850. It seems unfair that the State may get this additional $44,000,000 from the visitor industry while the revenue to the counties that provide the bulk of the services and resources to the visitors remain flat. In closing, I would like to express our aloha and appreciation for you, to all of you for your open dialogue and the healthy discussions we have had thus far. I would like to commend our fiscal team for the hard work that they have done to really, truly find every single way to address your concerns and your questions and try to come forward with a very updated, very open, reengineered type of thinking budget process. We have been communicating over and over, and over with different entities to assure that we have the resources available the questions that you have had. Your staff members here have done really great work with our staff members, from Jade, Scott, and the rest of you. They worked really hard together in trying to address the issues that are put on this table before us today. I just want to make it clear to you folks that we tried every single way and you may not like some of the answers, but some of the answers...it is what it is. I just wanted to make sure you understand that we are trying our very best and we are moving and reengineering our fiscal operations in so many different ways. I look forward to a continued dialogue and a very healthy outcome for the people that we all serve. Thank you very much. Mahalo and aloha. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Mayor. I will now call the meeting back to order so that we can begin our order of business for the day. First, I would like to ask for a motion or agreement from the Committee to accept the supplemental budget communication changes that were submitted on May 6th and to use that supplemental budget as our starting point for the decision-making. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Chock moved to use the May 8, 2016 Supplemental Communication as a starting point, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i, and unanimously carried. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: So we are using the supplemental as our starting point. Next, I would like to entertain any proposed reductions to the Operating Budget, department, or agency and I would like to take reductions in the following order: Operating DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 6 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Budget by department, CIP Budget by fund, and then proposals affecting numerous or all department or agencies. So we are going to take the individual ones first through the divisions, CIP, and then if there is anything affecting the whole broad spectrum. Councilmember Yukimura, do you have a question? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. So for reductions, you want the ones that are only reductions or can they be matched with others? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are going to do all of the reductions first. If you have a reduction and an add, we will do that at the very end of the Operating Budget. If you have a reduction and an add in the same proposal, we are going to take that last in the Operating Budget, and then we will move to CIP. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, Jade will be reading out departments or divisions, so please make a note to me that you have proposals relating to the announced department or division. On each item, we will take a roll call vote. Councilmember Yukimura, do you have a question? Councilmember Yukimura: No, I would like to make a proposal. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are going to start with the Mayor's Office. We are going to go through all of the departments. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: When we get to the department that you have a proposal for, you can let me know. Jade, are you going to read it off? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Sure. This will be for the Office of the Mayor, including the Youth Work Program, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Office, and the Office of Boards and Commissions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any proposals for those offices? If not, I actually have one and unfortunately, it is what we just heard about the YMCA's grant-in-aid to remove $230,000. Councilmember Kagawa moved to remove the funding for the YMCA under the Office of the Mayor Grant-In-Aid account in the amount of $230,000, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Basically, we got this as a last minute request. We had our entire budget meetings and a lot of time to vet all of our concerns with the items that are on the budget, and then we get an add of$230,000 with less than six (6) days to look at it and see why it is needed. For me, it comes down to "what is a want?" and"what is a need?" Kapaia Swinging Bridge is an amount that is in the budget, but the people have spent eight (8) years working on it with the Administration. For this one, it is just a little premature for us to have to take it right now. That is my reasoning. Council Chair Rapozo. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 7 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: I agree with you. Yesterday I made a passionate discussion about "getting the pool before fixing the roof' and that was before I saw the YMCA request, which is kind of ironic that today I come in and I see the pool equipment request. As much as I appreciate what the YMCA does for the people of Kauai...it goes back to what you just said, Committee Chair, about figuring out if it is a want or a need. This is definitely not a need at this time. As we talked over the last few months about the dire restraints of our financial situation and the Mayor just talked about the TAT and there is a chance that may go down next year. This is not the time for the luxuries. We have to really be strict. I hope we maintain this discipline throughout the budget process, so I will be supporting the removal. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion on it? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I would just add that obviously it is a very worthwhile project and I hope that it still happens and that the community will get behind this. I did not see it in the proposal, but I hope that they can piece together different funding sources with all of the stakeholders and all of the users. If the high school's pool themselves are not equipped to handle things that this pool was good for because it is the largest and best on the island will be doing, then I would rather have seen the County be a small part of the partnership and not fully be the primary investor of this equipment. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Just one more point because Councilmember Kuali`i brought up an important thing about the high schools. That is the State again. That is another State function. The high school championships, which was one of the larger draws that this would bring; the County did its small part by donating the land, which is actually not a small part. I think the State has to partnership and say, "Hey, you have an extra $40,000,000 in TAT, so help us out." That is what I am seeing more and more. The State is pushing away and giving the counties more, expecting our county taxpayers to fund the State projects. That is just another reason. Thank you for bringing it up, Councilmember Hooser. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I will be the dissenting voice on this. I think supporting youth programs should be right there at the top of our list. There is a lot of talk about drug treatment and problems with our youth and I think that this is a relatively small item that can go a real long way and it will pay for itself in the long-term with the increased economic development. It does not seem right that Kauai cannot host the championship swim meets. Our students and our families have to pay money out of their pockets to fly elsewhere, so it is a burden to them, as well as it is a missing out on opportunities for those other schools, clubs, and teams to come here. This is a partnership; this is a central location that serves all schools, not just one. When I served in the State Senate, we provided some funds for this. It is a classic community partnership that is run by a nonprofit and it is supported by all levels of government and by the community, so I will be opposing this cut. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 8 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: It is amazing how people can look at issues differently. For me, we have two (2) pools, Waimea pool and Kapa'a pool. Waimea pool is severely old and rundown. It is about, "What is a priority to fix somebody else's pool before we fix our own?" Therefore, I believe that we put off a lot of our own pool maintenance and I do not see this as a failure to support our children that swim here. It is an opportunity to actually bring in other children from other islands here, and while I value having hosting state tournaments, Kauai is difficult to attract state tournaments in many sports. You do not see football state tournaments or baseball state tournaments. I think trying to achieve that ability to host state tournaments is great, but I look at that as a "bell and whistle." If you can do it, you do it. If you cannot, it is not a priority. Thank you, Chair. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion on this before we take the vote? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I think the YMCA pool really provides a much needed opportunity for our kids and families. I think we should look at this $230,000, but I would like to look at it in terms giving more access to families to the pool. I know the fees are high for some of them, so I would prefer to have it structured in a way that can allow families to have access. I guess I would prefer to see it in that form of support. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I want to support the YMCA and the pool, but this amount is a little too much for me a couple days into the budget, especially if I do not see any other community partners stepping in. I just have to agree with a lot of the other comments that were made, so I will be supporting the removal of this. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: The last thing I would add is that $230,000 is not a small amount. I think you will see that today a lot of our cuts or attempted/proposed cuts will be of amounts much less than that. The only other thing I would say is that this does not mean that we do not support youth programs; of course we support youth programs. For me, I would also have liked to have seen a budget that showed all of the partners and stakeholders, even if you showed the whole program, something more than just equipment so that we could see what role we are playing as a county. Also, I would have liked to have seen how we are actually giving back to the average resident or constituent and how the pool might be open to families who otherwise could not afford it, like kids who come from low-income families and not necessarily on the swimming team, but want to use the pool. There may be programs that happen, but it is not in the proposal. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, I just want to follow-up. I do not think anyone here is opposed to the kids, the swim meets, and their programs there, but what it does come down to is "who does the burden rest on?" We have given the land to it and we have given photovoltaic to that area, which hopefully resulted in reduced prices for the kids. With the limited time we have and the limited amount we have, it is very difficult to make a decision on this with six (6) days. I think the ultimate question is "who does the burden rest on?" Does it rest on us? Does it rest on the YMCA? Does it rest on the State to do this type of thing? I think that is what it comes down to. With that, can I get a roll call vote? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 9 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING The motion to remove the funding for the YMCA under the Office of the Mayor Grant-In-Aid account in the amount of $230,000 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL—6*, AGAINST MOTION: Hooser TOTAL— 1, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of Council of Kaua`i, Councilmember Yukimura was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for the Mayor's Office? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to make a comment that one of my proposed cuts is multi-departmental, with regards to positions and salaries. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will take that one at the end. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: That would be perfect at the end. So we are on Office of the Mayor, including Youth Work Program, ADA Office, and Office of Boards and Commissions. If there are none, we will move on and not turn back. Next department. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next department is the Council, including Council Services, Elections, and Office of the County Auditor. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any cuts for Council Services, Elections, or Office of the County Auditor? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I can make the same comment, but not just regards to salaries, but with elimination of positions. There are five (5) or six (6) of them and one of them is in this department. It will be based on vacant positions and deleted positions, so multiple departments. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will take those as a whole at the end. If nothing for that, we will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next office would be the Office of the County Attorney. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Anything for the Office of the County Attorney? Council Chair Rapozo: Committee Chair, just for clarification, if we have a cut and an add then that goes at the end? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. If you are going to do it as a combined cut and add, then I will take it at the end. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 10 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to confirm if Council Chair had a cut to the Office of the County Auditor. Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. The cut funds will be an add. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay, so I will lay off that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let me just say that if we are going to do a cut and add together, it is going to need five (5) votes to pass because it would be considered an add. Council Chair Rapozo: Let me do the cut then. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura, do you have a question? Councilmember Yukimura: I have a procedural issue. It seems to me that it might work better if we have just all the cuts and then all the adds because then we know what the consensus is of the cuts without being concerned about what the attached add is. Then when we go to the adds, we also know what the consensus is without being worried about what the cuts are. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: That is exactly what we are doing. The cuts and adds will be at the end so that we know what all of our cuts are already, and then you have adds at the end also, so we know what our number is. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, so then you actually do not need cuts and adds if you just do cuts and adds. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: In the past, I know Councilmembers have done cuts and adds at the same time and we have voted on it and needed five (5) votes. I have no clue what anybody is proposing or doing, but I know that last year we had cuts and adds together and they wanted it together, and that would be at the very end of all of our cuts and five (5) votes are needed on that. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not know what you folks are proposing. Councilmember Yukimura: So those would be cuts and adds only if the cut has already been made, right? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Of course, if the cut has not been made. It would end up getting adjusted. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: If I can add clarification, I think if you have four (4) votes, you have your cut. If you have five (5) votes, you have your add. I think former Council Chair Furfaro tried to have that mentality of, "You folks come in with a cut DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 11 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING and an add,"just so that we did not have a Councilmember just come all with adds and look like the "nice guy" and make all of the other Councilmembers look like "bad guys" for shooting down the add, but he was just saying, "At least be responsible. If you are going to come in with an add, have a cut to offset it so that you are not only going to be the `nice guy'; you are going to be the `bad guy' as well," if that makes sense. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: It still is a little fuzzy to me. I understand we are doing cuts now and then we will do adds at the end, but this term "cuts and adds," is that a third category? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It is a third category...we had it last year. People want to gamble with it. If you have a cut, it is easier to get a cut with four (4) votes, but last year we had proposals that were a cut and an add together and needed five (5) votes because it would be just like an add. It will be taken with the adds. Councilmember Hooser: So will you be doing the third category? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Does that mean you will be going back to other categories that we passed? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Just for the cuts and adds. Councilmember Hooser: So if there is a cut and add on something that we have already passed, you are going to allow the cuts and adds to go back? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Because it is a combination of a cut and an add. Councilmember Hooser: Right. For the record, because it is against the law for us to talk to each other, except more than one (1) person, we do not know whether we have four (4) votes or five (5) votes. If you know you have four (4) votes and five (5) votes, then that is a problem. Council Chair Rapozo: Then we would have it done today. Councilmember Hooser: Yes. We can guess on that, but we should not know where those votes are, according to the Sunshine Law. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If you make your cut very clear and you make it easy for us to decide on, then that would be the best because I have no clue what anybody has and I do not know what kind of proposals are coming through. It is like, "What department," and I give a little time because I have no clue what is coming through. If it is clear, we are going to take all of the cuts and at the end of all the cuts, we will have a number of total cuts. Then we will take all of the adds and any cut and adds. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Mine almost can be considered a housekeeping cut because of the Office of the Auditor and the situation. I think everybody knows that we DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 12 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING aggressively solicited and spent a lot of money on trying to recruit an Auditor and have been unsuccessful thus far. I believe this Council cannot ignore the function or the responsibility of doing audits, so my cuts are really the dollar-funded position E-85 and E- 73 and obviously with the related benefits, and the $135,000 for the Forensic Auditors. The intent, as we get to the adds, is to use those savings and put it in a line item for "Performance Audits," so it is basically a wash. That is the intent. When we get to the adds, that is the intent. We have always tried to follow the procedure that if you have an add, you need to have money to fund the add. Basically, I am just transferring the funds from the Auditor's Office at this point over to the Council Services budget so that we can conduct performance audits. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Council Chair, that sounds like a great idea. Who is going to manage the performance audits? Is that going to be Stephanie or is it going to be our office? Council Chair Rapozo: It will be our office. Councilmember Kagawa: Our office will make sure that performance audits would come from the recommendations for what performance audits would come from whom? Council Chair Rapozo: It would come from an individual Councilmember that would introduce a resolution and the resolution that identifies the audit and the scope would have to pass the Council. That is how it is done. Councilmember Kagawa: What role would the County Auditor's staff play in this? Council Chair Rapozo: In fact, right now the County Clerk is looking at a transition to bring them back across here. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the total amount? Council Chair Rapozo: $366,969. Councilmember Kagawa: Is that a motion? Council Chair Rapozo moved to dollar fund Position Nos. E-85, County Auditor and E-73, Audit Manager, and reduce related benefits; and reduce funding for Forensic Auditors and Other Professionals by $135,000, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? No discussion by the Members? For me, I am in favor of it. I think last year you called me "the audit killer," but this year we do not have an Auditor and we have money available to spend on audits, so why not take the Auditor position money and spend it on audits that we can do now. The DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 13 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Charter provision is in there where we need an Auditor, but to some extent, I think it would almost be cheaper for us to pay for audits rather than run an entire office. Council Chair Rapozo: Just real quick for the viewing public. We have not stopped the recruiting. We are doing continuous recruiting for an Auditor. Should we be successful in securing an Auditor, then obviously the funds would be returned back to that office. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We got very close to getting an auditor and it did not work out, so we are back to square one again. We are going to have this money in there. It will obviously take us a while to get an Auditor. I think it would be in the best favor of the County to be actually spending money on audits and doing what that office's function was for. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I like the idea. I have some concerns about a political body, like the Council overseeing the audits. We have done very well in terms of our recruiting process for the Clerk and the Auditor in the past few years and I think if we set up the system correctly with a good audit committee, I would guess—I do not know if that is what you have in mind, Chair? Council Chair Rapozo: That is what I have in mind. Councilmember Yukimura: Then I think it can work and it is worth trying to set a system to see how it would work. Council Chair Rapozo: This is how it used to be done. The fact that we did not do any audits does not mean that we did not have the authority or the money; we always did, we just never did it. It is something that we need to do...we need have to those moneys available should this body decide. To clarify, it would not be this political body overseeing the audit, it would be our staff, not so much the County Council. We would get the recommendations and the report, but as far as the managing of the contract for the auditor or the accounting firm or whoever is doing the audit, that would be managed by our County Clerk's Office. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Thank you. I am supportive of the maneuver to readjust and I am also happy to hear that we will be reorganizing and saving some income on a monthly basis on space. I think it is really important that we continue to seek an Auditor. I think we have set the bar really high and that is why it is going to be difficult to fill that position. I think this is a good interim decision. However, I do see the value in having an independent auditor, who is dedicated, because we can count on them to follow through and assist where we see the deficiencies or gaps. That is my expectation of a full-time Auditor to be able to provide those kinds of services in the long run. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Just to piggyback on that, as we went through the process of the interviews of our candidates, I think we learned a lot about how the Auditor's Office is supposed to be run and how they are a service office and not an"I got you office." That is what we are trying to find and we are just trying to find that right DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 14 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING candidate. The County Clerk has been instructed to continue the search. I can tell you that this matter will be brought up for discussion shortly because I think we really need to look into some options. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I want to concur with Councilmember Chock and Council Chair, that I think ultimately having an independent auditor and a separate office is the best way to go, but that presumes that we can find the right person. As our Committee Chair said, we got so close and I think we are holding out for that kind of quality and possibility in this County. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? If not, can we take the roll call vote, please? The motion to dollar fund Position Nos. E-85, County Auditor and E-73, Audit Manager, and reduce related benefits; and reduce funding for Forensic Auditors and Other Professionals by $135,000 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Any further cuts for Council Services, Elections, and the Office of the County Auditor? If not, we will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next department is the Office of the County Attorney. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any cuts for the Office of the County Attorney? No. We will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If there are none, we will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The Department of Finance. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If there are none, we will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The Department of Human Resources (HR). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any cuts for HR? If not, next. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Planning Department. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let me know if we are moving too fast. Councilmember Kuali`i: I do not want to say it every time, so I am just... DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 15 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We heard it. I do not want you to say it twenty-two (22) times. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Office of Economic Development. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: My motion is to remove the $90,000 from Other Services for Energy-Sustainability & Climate Action Plan. Again, for the purposes stated earlier that we have to start looking at the necessities and fund that, so I do not believe at this point that this is a necessity. Council Chair Rapozo moved to remove funding in the amount of $90,000 from Other Services for Energy-Sustainability & Climate Action Plan, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I actually think this is a necessity, but in speaking with Economic Development, I do not think the project has been well-designed and I think it needs to go back to the drawing table to develop it. A climate action plan is very, very important for this County, but we need to be real clear about how the services will be procured and what the outcome and the expected results will be from it, and I think that has not been clear. I regretfully will vote for this, asking for the cut in the hopes that there will be a reconstruction of the proposal and we can consider it at another time. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I will just add that I do think it is important as far as outreach and education and that the intent is right. Like Councilmember Yukimura said, there needs to be a better plan and proposal. Also, I think one of the main things when I met to get more information on this is that I want to see the community partners and how we, as a county, leverage our part of the big plan. There are five (5) different potential industry partners in electricity, ground transportation, air travel, tourism, and consumption and solid waste and in food and agriculture. So I would like to see leaders from each of those industries participate in this fully, not only with showing up to a meeting every once in a while, but putting some money towards the effort, even if it is small amounts of money like $20,000 or $30,000. We have five (5) different industry partners and leaders bringing in $20,000 to $25,000 and bringing skin to the game gets there much quicker to the $90,000. This is planned as a two-year plan of $90,000 and $90,000, so $180,000. So this is a good first attempt, but needs to be better. Thanks. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I had the same concerns after the presentation that was made here. I was happy that I had the chance to meet with Ben and George to go over the plan in more detail. I have the same concerns and voiced them at the meeting about my interest in more specificity, partnerships, and so forth. It is such an important DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 16 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING thing for me though that I am not inclined to support this cut at this time. I feel like it is needed and we need to move forward on it. While I think there is much more work to be done and better work on it, I just feel like we cannot wait on it. I probably will not be supporting this cut. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I also had the opportunity to meet with Ben and George about this, and I will not be supporting the cut. I believe it is a relatively small amount of money to put towards a huge, huge problem. Many would argue that climate change is the most important issue facing our times right now globally. I think it is important for our community to do its small part. It will be a very small part, but at least we will be able to set an example. People talk about, "What can we really do? What can we do to impact this issue?" Well, it is like saying, "Why does my piece of trash that I threw out of window really matter?" If everybody did a little bit, we could get a handle on this. I am confident that just by approving this money in the budget does not mean that they are going to run out and spend it "willy-nilly." I believe strongly that they would listen to the concerns of the Council and look closely at their plan, and then move forward after those concerns have been addressed. Again, it is a relatively small amount of money for a very, very important issue and I think our County needs to voice its support and not cut these funds. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: We have gotten a lot of E-mails from Zero Waste Kauai about going with a Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and do not go with Waste-to-Energy and they talk about energy sustainability and they say it is bad for the environment, which is bad for the climate if you have a Waste-to-Energy because of the ash or smoke that comes out when you incinerate. Again, it is one thing to spread fear and lies, but what are the facts? With a MRF, you sort it, bundle it, ship it across the ocean, and then bring it to a facility in California where they are going to burn it and turn it into regular cardboard. So you care about the ash on Kauai, but you do not care about the ash in California. How is that globally being sustainable and concerned? There are tons of water and fossil fuel that is needed to turn your all of your recycled rubbish into a good product. Again, we have to look at the facts and not listen to fear. A lot of E-mails are just ridiculous. I wish you all could read it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Let us stay on this item, Energy-Sustainability & Climate Action Plan. Councilmember Yukimura: Do you think I would not? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am just saying. That was not only to you; that was to everybody. Let us stay on this. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I understand because it had to do with the energy sustainability part. I do not want to get into a back and forth argument on the MRF because I am sure that will come up later. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 17 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Well, what I wanted to say was that this issue is very, very important and like Councilmember Hooser said, you cannot say, "Kaua`i is just a small thing. What we do does not make a difference," because even though it is a drop in the bucket, all the drops make up the bucket and we have to do our part and it is a way of thinking that has to change. Like I said, this study is a necessity; however, as we heard, it is a two-year thing, so by committing to this we are committing to next year, presumably. I think it has to be put forth as one budget of $180,000, effectively. You cannot do it in two (2) parts. That is part of the reason why I think they have to go back to the drawing board and come to us with a full proposal. I want to say that there is lower-hanging fruit. This is a study that is going to set targets and develop some strategies to get to our targets for lowering our greenhouse gas production here on the island. We have an opportunity and the possibility today to fund expansion of the bus system, which if we implement, we do that to implement our Kaua`i Multimodal Land Transportation Plan (KMLTP). That plan shows that we will reduce carbon emissions in our transportation system by twenty-seven percent (27%). That is what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is saying the world should be doing, reducing at about twenty-five percent (25%). I can see that this is very interesting. That is what we have the opportunity to do now, so I would love to see some real action on the concrete actions that we can take. As for this study, I think it has to be restructured, but I hope it will be done soon and I hope we will get back a winning proposal that we can all vote for and support so that we can do our part in climate change. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I would just say that any kind of effort like this, which is about the long-term future...well, it could be short and long-term future and we are talking about transformation and how our citizens behave day-to-day with regards to the environment. I think it really can only be successful if you have buy-in from all of the stakeholders and that if you have investment from the different leading stakeholders. I would have preferred to see something like this as grant proposal to a leading community group or nonprofit or even a coalition of multiple community nonprofits that are working on this goal, and that the County only be a partial funder, that there be other sources of funding. For this amount, I cannot support that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: To be clear, I do not know how many had the opportunity to meet with the proponents of this, but there are other partners and funders that are part of the program. This is part of the funding, but it was clear to me that they are seeking grants and other partners, both in the private sector, as well as the public sector to do this; everyone from the electric utility to the hotel industry and others. It is a partnership; there is no question about it. To be clear on the MRF, the MRF is designed or intended to be supportive of recycling and new industries here on Kaua`i and to support recycling of our products and not burning our products. I have not seen anywhere in the plan or in the proposals that the intent is to sort things out and send them off to the mainland to be burned, so I think it is a mischaracterization of the MRF. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not want to go back and forth on the MRF either because that is not really on the topic. Let us... Councilmember Hooser: Can I add something? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 18 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Not about the MRF though. Councilmember Hooser: No. If the Chair is going to allow an argument to represent one side of it, then I think it is only fair to allow discussion on both sides of it. If you want to nip it in the bud initially, that is cool. But if you are going to allow one (1) member to go off on a tangent, then I think it is only fair to allow others. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I see how this can go. Some members may make comments on other items. I do not want to see us go in the direction of, "Oh, you made a comment on that, so let me make a comment on that." I want us to stick to the item. I want you folks to be free to say what you want to say and sometimes we go off on a tangent and I am hoping you folks come back on it, but I do not want to keep going back and forth on a discussion that is not even a budget item. I do not want to just cut you off because you may be trying to make a point and I may be thinking that you are going off on a tangent, but I do not want to have the back and forth dispute on it. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I want to say that I met with Ben Sullivan and George Costa and I have extensive notes here and this is what they said: that there is no financial commitment from any partners yet. They are hopeful that they can get $10,000 to $15,000 from Kaua`i Community College (KCC). There is no financial commitment from the Kaua`i Island Utility Cooperative (KIUC) at all and their hope is to apply for this "Partners for Places Grant." It is a two-year grant for $150,000. They just missed the deadline, so they are applying again and they are hoping to apply in December. The hope was that if they could get some level of funding, if they got something from this grant, that it would lessen the need for the $90,000 in the second year. Those are the facts when it comes to the financing behind it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any final discussion on this? If not, can I get a roll call vote? The motion to remove funding in the amount of $90,000 from Other Services for Energy-Sustainability & Climate Action Plan was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Hooser TOTAL— 2, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any other cuts for Economic Development? Council Chair Rapozo: I do. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I am going to preface my cut with what Governor Ariyoshi told me way back when I first was elected. I do not know how I ended up talking to him, but I did and he said, "As you get more experience in politics, you need to understand that your main function is the core, the core functions of the people," which is DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 19 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING public health, public safety, and such. As I go through this budget, I was so tempted to put in a lot more of these cuts and yet I understand that some of these programs are ongoing, but really it is core? Is it something that we have to do? I am just trying my best. Like the little drops in the bucket that Councilmember Yukimura just talked about, those little drops add up to be a big bucket. So I have this proposal to cut funding for the Visitor Industry Plan Monitoring of $25,000. We have access to a lot of resources that is already being done. We have the Economic Research Organization at the University of Hawaii (UHERO) and all of these other agencies like the Hawaii Tourism Authority (HTA) that does reports that monitor visitor activity and we need to rely on that and we need to stop spending money that we do not need to spend. Again, this little drop can be used for something else such as roads and we can rely on the existing information that is provided by the University of Hawaii at Manoa and by the Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism (DBEDT) and everyone else that is already doing this work. We do not need to be constantly increasing our expenditures when we can rely on information that is readily available. That is my proposal. Council Chair Rapozo moved to remove funding in the amount of$25,000 for Visitor Industry Plan Monitoring, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion? Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Thank you for the cut. I had a question. Do we get a specific report or something back from this that you are aware of? I am trying to figure out how the $25,000 is actually spent. Council Chair Rapozo: Let me answer you in this way. Have you ever sent money away to someplace and realized at one point, "I do not even know what I am getting for my money." You stop the payment, right? Whether it is a magazine subscription, it is the same thing. I do not know what we get out of this. As far as I am concerned, the visitor industry monitoring is done by other agencies. I think we, as a county, have to rely on those types of information and resources that do not cost us. We have to be disciplined and I do not believe this is a vital part of our budget. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock, do you have anything further? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask Economic Development to at least give us an answer. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. The rules are suspended. You may want to state the question. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. GEORGE K. COSTA, Director of Economic Development: Aloha. George Costa, Director of Economic Development. As far as the visitor industry... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let her ask the question then you just answer the question. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 20 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: I am sorry. Councilmember Yukimura: I think we are wondering exactly what the County gets for this $25,000 for Visitor Industry Plan Monitoring. Mr. Costa: The presentation on the tourism strategic plan that was recently done, the monitoring is basically the follow-up. We contract Kaua`i Planning and Action Alliance (KPAA) to work with the various visitor industry partners to ensure that over the three (3) years, a lot of the recommendations that were part of that tourism strategic plan are being followed up on. Currently, we have focus groups that participate on a monthly basis to ensure that a lot of the recommendations that were presented in the tourism strategic plan are actually followed-up on. We can provide you with results of those meetings and ongoing processes that take place as part of the follow- up. This would be the last year of the funding. We have done it for two (2) years already as a follow-up to the tourism strategic plan. NADINE K. NAKAMURA, Managing Director: Nadine Nakamura, Managing Director. I also wanted to add to what George said that because the visitor industry is the largest industry on Kauai, there is finally a strategic visitor industry plan that helps to guide the industry. The problem is that when you have the plan, now you have to implement the plan. The funds bring together all of the key stakeholders in the visitor industry who do not normally talk to each other. Kaua`i Visitors Bureau (KVB) is primarily a marketing agency. The visitor industry plan, however, talks about some of the other educational issues to make sure that our students can go into the visitor industry and make that transition that talks about the infrastructure needs that relate to the airport, our roads, and so forth. It is a much broader discussion that if you do not bring all of the different people to the table to have that discussion and say, "Okay, this is now how we are going to implement this plan"; it is not going to happen. This is the facilitation piece to bring the stakeholders together to then take that plan. As George pointed out, they have action teams of taking one topic area, and then really start getting into, "Okay, this is how we want to address this issue, so how do we go about doing that?" It does take some facilitation to make that collaboration happen and that is why these funds are set aside. Just one concrete example that is going on right now is the discussion about the infrastructure, the traffic concerns, and the need to really look at shuttles. How do we get our visitors out of there? How do we pay for it? I think the policy set by the Council is that we really need to bring in outside revenues to help make it work. It should not just be County revenues. That is something they are exploring and looking at what can be options, and how do we engage the industry to help pay for those options and so forth. It takes bringing people together around... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: So the money is for a facilitator? Ms. Nakamura: That is correct. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The results of this...how many years have you had this now? Two (2) years? Is this the last year? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 21 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Ms. Nakamura: It may be the second or third year, but it is something that I believe is an ongoing need. Councilmember Yukimura: I was impressed with the updated tourism strategic plan that was done partly through this process. Is it that updated plan that you are facilitating around? Besides just talking about it, can you describe some concrete actions that have come out of it to implement the plan? Mr. Costa: George Costa for the record. A good example is that one of the focus groups talks about transportation. When you look at the visitor industry, most people think of hotels, condominiums, timeshares, and now we vacation rentals, which is about twenty-five (25%) of the overall industry. Then you factor in airlines, rental cars, activities, and companies, so it comprises about forty percent (40%) of all of the jobs on this island. So what this facilitation does is bring those industry partners together to look at areas like transportation. How can we address the situation like the traffic that we have on the island by these industry partners? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I have a question from Councilmember Chock and Council Chair Rapozo. Councilmember Yukimura: I hear that you bring them together. I am just asking what is resulting from the coming together. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I guess the other question I have is how many groups of studies do we have looking at the same thing? I do not need a consultant to tell me that we have a traffic problem in Kapa`a and Kaumuali`i. I think we have multimodal studies, shuttle studies, and all of these different types of studies...I do not see the need...I think we know what we have to do. I think what Councilmember Yukimura just said, it is not about just talking about and facilitating meetings to tell us because we know. It is how do we fix it? That is what I do not see out of this. To me, $25,000 in a much more practical place makes sense. I just cannot continue to support...this is the second year, not the third. Ms. Nakamura: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: I remember this discussion last year and I did not hear that it was going to be an ongoing expenditure. I thought it was a one shot, one contract, come back with the report, and tell us. That is what I thought. When I saw it on here, I was kind of confused. Is it going to be every year, $25,000, to tell us that we have traffic problem? I am done. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am still not clear how these facilitated discussions either come up with solutions to problems or result in the implementation of the plan. Maybe you can help us understand that. Ms. Nakamura: Nalani Brun who participates on this is on her way. One of the things that I wanted to just point out is that it is not about telling us because everybody knows what the problem is. The plan states this is how we want to try DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 22 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING to solve the problem in order to get participation from the visitor industry to, for example, help us fund the shuttles. Now they are working on some of those strategies to make that happen and it will not happen unless there is some focused discussion that involves everyone who really has a stake in the solution, and that will not come about on its own. It requires the collaboration with the various industry partners, so it is not about identifying the problem, Council Chair Rapozo. It is about finding the solutions that everyone can work with and feel comfortable moving together with because it is a complex situation. The Council said to find ways so it is not just the County involved in the funding of these shuttles; find other ways. So they are doing some problem solving around that. Council Chair Rapozo: Who else contributes to this effort, as far as the visitor industry? Is anybody else kicking in any money? Ms. Nakamura: Not that I am aware of. Council Chair Rapozo: Exactly. Who is the beneficiary? Ms. Nakamura: I think we are all beneficiaries. Council Chair Rapozo: Exactly, so we all should pitch in. Again, our taxpayers should not be funding that. Are there any action items that came out of this last year that I might find in this budget that they have recommended? Ms. Nakamura: Nalani Brun is on her way and she will have some other details. Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I do not know how long we are going to stay on this item. Anyway, thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The strategies that you determined are...I know...was Nelson/Nygaard our...if you are discussing this issue, did our consultants meet with this group? This is just an example to me if there is actual... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, the money is $25,000 for a facilitator. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Shall I ask Nalani that question? The Managing Director just told us that one of the issues this facilitated group is dealing with is transportation and traffic congestion and how to fund some of the potential solutions for the Visitor Destination Areas (VDAs) like a shuttle. My question was did this group meet with Nelson/Nygaard, the County's shuttle study consultants? NALANI BRUN, Operations Manager/Economic Development Specialist IV — Tourism: Nalani Brun, Office of Economic Development. No, they have not met with the consultant; however, we are meeting with Lee Steinmetz regularly. He is one of the leaders in our group, along with Larry Dill and Michael Moule. They have gone over different things. They have looked at the options when it came to the shuttle discussion, which is a big one, because they are trying to figure out how to fund it. We bring Lee in on almost every meeting and he keeps us updated on what the rest of them are doing. We could definitely meet directly with the shuttle person, but we are pretty DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 23 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING much getting fed all of the information. Right now, their first topic was a north shore shuttle, and then they are looking at Po`ipu and all of the others. Really, our discussion has been centered around funding and how to get that done and whether that is through the rental car system or through the visitor association. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Question, Councilmember Yukimura, so we can get going on this. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. This question was a test question because I want to see how well-structured this discussion is and if Lee is not telling you about assessment districts and stuff, then I do not know what is going on and how you can get to effective solutions. My question is, is it impossible for you to facilitate the discussions? Ms. Brun: It is not impossible. Overall, the problem really is time. Most of our items in the budget are because we are just constrained with so many different projects, that to pull away...we do like four (4) or five (5) meetings a month. Each one comes up with meetings and we have this huge action plan and we are trying to make sure we stay on track with our action plans and which step we are in. We meet all over the place from the college, who is helping us with the workforce problems, to the cultural people that we have to try to get together to talk about how we are going incorporate culture properly into tourism. That is huge right now. Then of course there are the traffic ones, which we meet all the time. For the TAT, we were constantly meeting about that, trying to figure out how to get them to change their minds about what they are doing. We met with people, it is not like we are just talking within ourselves. We actually go out and we have teams that have to go out and testify different things or try to talk behind doors with people to say, "Hey, would you consider doing this?" It is just hugely time-consuming. We need her to continue this. I do not know how far we will go without some facilitator to keep us going. That is really what happened after the 2006 plan. We did not do anything. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: If you could think about what is the biggest action outcome that we can sit back after a year's work and say, "This is what has happened. We have accomplished this because of this," then this is what this body needs to know. Ms. Brun: Actually, June is lined up for our final report and we have a big stakeholders meeting because that is the end of the year. We bring everybody in and they see our priorities and action plans, where we are, and we get feedback from the community on, "Are we going in the right direction? Is there new information out there that we need to continually go in the right direction?" That is actually scheduled for June, which we do every year, and then we have a big final report that comes in. I think actually getting the visitor industry to talk about any kind of fees that would help to pay for something very specific has been a huge undertaking, and getting behind the TAT issue. They have been coming in force, trying to get someone to listen to them and say, "All of this money is coming in, but it is not coming to the island, yet you want us to raise the General Excise Tax (GET) or whatever it is." That is the big thing. It is just kind of bringing the force of the visitor industry finally under one roof and getting them to agree to move in one direction. That is probably the biggest thing we have accomplished. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 24 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Let us try to tighten it up. We have a question from Councilmember Kuali`i, too. Councilmember Yukimura: Nalani, would you say that as a result of this meeting, you have increased and made a presence of the visitor industry in the discussions at the Legislature about the TAT? Ms. Brun: They have. Actually, a lot of the TAT discussion was on the phone. We knew where people stood on the issue. We just had a lot of our people...they got poked at a lot for trying to stand up for us and they tried to hold their ground and worked really hard. I know that maybe people do not see it because we did not get anything, which is really frustrating, but they are back there and constantly making phone calls and we have little E-mail sessions where, "Can you work on some testimony for this?" They have been sending it; we just cannot seem to get anyone to listen. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Does this $25,000 pay for anything other than the facilitation of meetings? So the facilitator is KVB? Ms. Brun: Right now, it is the Kauai Planning and Action Alliance (KPAA). They have taken us since 2006. Councilmember Kuali`i: Who are the lead stakeholders? Ms. Brun: The stakeholders? Councilmember Kuali`i: The County? KVB? Ms. Brun: The County and KVB...we stand as the lead, so we are kind of the strategic planners. Councilmember Kuali`i: So the County, KVB, and the other stakeholders—it is not as important to any of those stakeholders that they would meet anyway without a $25,000 funding? Ms. Brun: I think that they would. It is trying to organize the meetings and trying to get the spots. Councilmember Kuali`i: So trying to organize the meeting at forty-eight (48) meetings a year, it is five hundred twenty dollars ($520) to organize a meeting? Ms. Brun: And writing all of the reports of all the meetings. It is a lot. Councilmember Kuali`i: Reports, minutes, et cetera? Ms. Brun: Yes. The constant phone calls, setting things up...we wanted to watch the TAT when Mike White came here to speak and we sat around and watched that to see what he had to say. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 25 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: The things you talked about as far as getting the visitor industry together and talking about fees and the TAT, the potential for finding revenue to support those efforts is there, but perhaps the stakeholders should step forward and do it without $25,000 from the taxpayers. It needs to be done. It is awkward to say that without this, it would not happen. I think it would happen. It is important to everybody. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Nalani, presence may have been on the phone and in E-mails, but I can honestly tell you that...this is one of the biggest frustrations because I have been to many of those hearings and there was no presence from anyone else but the counties and the mayors. There was no visitor industry and no unions; nobody was there begging for the TAT. I am sure a lot of people called our delegation on Kaua`i and wrote some E-mails, but the fact of the matter is when we are at the Capitol lobbying, there was very little activity from the visitor industry, really very little intervention. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I will be quick. There is a report in June from this fiscal year's funding and your request is for next fiscal year to have this kind of facilitation with a report at the end. I heard that this is the last year or is it an ongoing process, as you see it? Ms. Brun: This next funding would take us through June of 2017. The plan itself ends in 2018, so by that point, we are going to try to decide what to do. If we could accomplish those actions, that is really what the goal is. Our actions remain almost the same from 2006 and the problems have just exacerbated even worse. As of next year, we pretty much feel that action teams will be on their way with the work and we will not have to continue. This is only our first year. Next year would be the second year we are really implementing. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, any further questions? If not, I would like to bring the meeting back to order and have our final discussion on it. Thank you. Any discussion on this item before we vote? Councilmember Yukimura. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Yukimura: One of our constant complaints about plans is that we do a lot of work, like our General Plan Update, to create them and then we put them on a shelf until it is time to do another update. It is interesting that with the homestay issue that we had last year, there were General Plan recommendations about this in 2000 and almost nothing has been done. So I see value in a process that is tracking implementation. I wish I had taken some time to read the reports and actually see what is going on, but I do commend the effort to not just do a plan and put it on a shelf, but to try to make sure that something is happening about it. I do wonder in my mind whether the industry could contribute part of it and I do not know what the resources are there, but I think it is a worthwhile format, if you will, or procedure. We spend a lot of money putting a DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 26 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING plan together and you do that because you actually want to get from one place to the next. That is why you do a plan. So to track the implementation of that plan is important. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion from the Members? Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I was about to cut this. I need tangible success to continue from the group. I am not saying it is not happening; I just need to be able to grasp it and that means action accomplished. I have some fears about people meeting, and with good intentions, and we need to take that and we need to solidify some real tangible outcomes, and then I can really get behind this. I have been a part of other processes that...I guess just too many that I have seen just a lot of good intentions not moving forward. I am willing to support it, but I do agree that an amount contributed from our stakeholders in the continuation of it would be imperative for me as well. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to suggest a possibility, which I am just putting it out on the table, that we may be funded at two-thirds and see if the industry can come up with the other third. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Scott, how do we do this? Do we take the vote on the cut first, and then it would be considered an add if they wanted to do two-thirds, right? Council Chair Rapozo: We can take the vote on mine. If it does not pass, then she can do another one for a cut. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If it passes... Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, if it passes, we move on. If it does not, it does not. We are not here to get consensus; we are here to make the move. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will take a roll call vote to cut the $25,000. The motion to remove funding in the amount of $25,000 for Visitor Industry Plan Monitoring was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Yukimura TOTAL— 2, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for Economic Development? I have one on the $50,000 for the Kaua`i EBT Program. Councilmember Kagawa moved to remove the funding in the amount of $50,000 from Grant-In-Aid for the Agriculture-Kauai EBT Program, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 27 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: My justification for this is in the presentation that we had, we recognized that we were paying $50,000 to a nonprofit organization to implement this plan and we get $18,000 worth of EBT spending on it. For me, we have to look at these projects and say, "Does this really make sense? Does it make sense for us to pay $50,000 to get $20,000 in spending?" For me, it is kind of a no-brainer. I say that is not working. We are better off spending $20,000 giving it to the EBT users, free money of $20,000 and they go spend it free at the farmers market and we save $30,000 on this entire program. For me, I do not want this in the budget. My personal opinion is if you want to come back with something, come back with something that makes sense. That is my position on this. Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I appreciate the Chair's analysis of this because I think we have a lot of well-intentioned programs, but we have to understand the cost-benefits of it and I think we want to set high standards for performance so that we want any proposal that comes before us to really show that it is working in the best way possible. I am inclined to support it, in the hopes that what will come back to us will be a better-designed program to address that. If we could just right now say "EBT, $25,000, direct payments," then I think I would vote for that. There always has to be an implementation mechanism and I do not think that has been thought through. But I think the goal, I support totally to supply the money to get to families that need to buy food. I think it is really worthwhile for us to ask what the best way to do that is and this does not seem like the best way. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I have a quick question for Economic Development. I do not doubt what you said is true, but I would like for them to respond if they could. Is that the sum total of the benefit of spending $50,000 is $18,000? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Costa: For the record, George Costa, Director of Economic Development. It costs $50,000 to implement the program; that is correct. That includes the registration with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) to get the equipment to process that. You cannot just give the money to EBT people because there is no way to go to the market to transact purchasing of the produce. There is an administration cost, travel costs of the EBT person going to each market every week, so it does cost $50,000. Right now, the $18,000 or back in February or March was year-to-date, so the program will run to June. So we anticipate that is probably going to be about $25,000; still, it is $25,000 benefit and $50,000 cost. The whole program was, I guess, approved by this Council back in 2008-2009. Judy Lenthall from the Kaua`i Independent Food Bank presented it and I remember when I came onboard, I heard this Council say, "Hey, this is a one-time deal. Do not come and ask us again," and we have supported this program since 2008. It is a benefit to those beneficiaries, but again, it does cost money to implement. Councilmember Hooser: It sounds like some of the costs were startup costs, to register and for equipment, but that does not have to be purchased anymore. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 28 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Hooser: So can it be done for less money? Mr. Costa: Well, the ongoing costs—I have seen the budget to administer and basically the bulk of the cost is the pay the person to be at those markets at the time the markets open and the fuel costs are the biggest costs to this. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Mr. Costa: Then after that, it is basically the marketing, going out and doing public service announcements, ads in The Garden Island, and other periodicals to basically advertise the program and get the beneficiaries to participate in the program. Councilmember Hooser: Could we do the program for $25,000, instead of $50,000 without the frills? Mr. Costa: I am not too sure. Kaua`i Independent Food Bank was doing it for $80,000 and they could not afford it, so this Council body, we reduced it to $50,000 and see who out there is willing to take this on. We had five (5) organizations: the Department of Health, Catholic Charities, Kaua`i Food Bank, and I forget who the other ones were. They came and said they were interested. They ran the numbers and came back and said, "No, we do not want to do this." At the last minute, Malama Kauai said, "We will step up to the plate and try and see if we can implement this program," and they are doing it for $50,000, but it is a stretch. I do not know if it can be done for $25,000. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Are there any models elsewhere of how to do it better? Mr. Costa: They do EBT at the Hilo market and they do it at Wai`anae at the Wai`anae market. Councilmember Yukimura: Have we looked as to how they do it? Mr. Costa: I have spoken to those people. I can ask them for hopefully their financials to see what it costs for them to implement it. Obviously, there is a lot more people that take advantage of the program in those markets. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions? Councilmember Yukimura: Just to finish off, I do not know where we are getting that song"From Heaven on Earth," but... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It is to keep moving. Just kidding. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 29 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: It appears to me that it needs some work. We need to research and figure out how to do it more effectively so that more money can reach the people who are targeted. Mr. Costa: When the Council funded this program with a lot more money, I think it was at $80,000, we were in private markets along with the County markets like KCC, so it generated a lot more, but it was not...then you would have to have somebody to monitor it to ensure that those EBT beneficiaries are buying healthy food, the produce, and not the value added products, which under USDA rules, is not allowed. So we had three (3) more markets when Kaua`i Independent Food Bank and we had a lot more people taking advantage of the EBT Programs. Councilmember Yukimura: Why did it stop? Because it took too much monitoring? Mr. Costa: Because they were not paying for it. We have asked them that if they want it at their markets, they need to contribute to the costs. These County funds are only at the County sunshine markets right now. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, the sunshine markets need to be really revamped, but okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: No more questions? Councilmember Yukimura: No. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Question? Councilmember Hooser: Yes, quick follow-up. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I got my number directly out of their presentation. Councilmember Hooser: Right. It threw me off when you said we are not KCC because they were in the past, right? If they were allowed to be at KCC, the other markets, would they then generate more EBT sales? They would? So the $50,000 would then go a lot further if they were allowed to go in these other markets? Mr. Costa: Then those markets would benefit. Councilmember Hooser: But they were not paying in the past, right? Mr. Costa: No, they were not paying in the past when we did the introduction. Councilmember Hooser: And we were there? Mr. Costa: Right. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 30 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: If the end result is to get more of these sales into the people, they are using the EBT, as well as the farmers, why would we not let them in for the same $50,000? Mr. Costa: When you had the private markets like Kukui`ula or Kmart, KCC, and I forget who it was...the Food Bank's program, which also had some grant money, that is why they could include the private markets so the coupons would be for the County sunshine markets. When that went away, those private markets said, "(Inaudible) your markets, but you need to help contribute to pay for the EBT personnel to be there." Councilmember Hooser: Right. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Just really quick and hopefully this helps you, but ultimately though, more markets means more staff hours to staff those markets, so you would need more money? Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Kuali`i: Even though you might be reaching more people and reaching a value of more than $18,000, it would take more money. Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Kuali`i: So the only other thing is have you thought about instead of having a person at every market all the time, because there are long hours that all add up, having one (1) day a week or one (1) day every two (2) weeks where people who want to use tokens go somewhere and buy their tokens and farmers who want to turn in their tokens to get their cash go there. Then you can narrow the labor cost to something really much smaller than what you are looking at now and it might work. Have you thought about that? Mr. Costa: We looked at something like that, especially when it came to the farmers turning in their tokens to redeem. A lot of them are in a rush, so they do not want to wait until after the market closes to redeem theirs, so they wait for the next market. But then for the EBT person, now they have to be there longer because you have this rush of farmers... Councilmember Kuali`i: I think if you try something, you might find deficiency. Mr. Costa: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I just have to ask, there is a cost to the program; what is the ratio of that to what we can get into the hands of the customer? Everyone around the table is having a hard time with the fact that we are expending more for the resources to administrate, rather than the benefit. If we can get a better picture as to what DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 31 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING that true cost is—what I am hearing is that it is not clear and there are a lot of different variables, or we could change and increase it. There needs to be a ratio of what is the maximum we can do and I am just not clear on what that is. Does it truly cost $30,000 in order to get $20,000 out? Mr. Costa: Right now, the way it pencils out, again because of the cost of paying that person to be there at the markets and the fuel costs...the additional part is doing all of the reports, the financial transactions, working with the USDA, that is an administrative cost. Maybe that can be done for free. I do not know. We can check with Malama Kauai. Maybe they can do it as part of their donation to the community and just have the actual EBT person that is at the market collecting the tokens and processing the EBT benefits. That would reduce the cost if we would only have one (1) person doing that. Right now, you have that person doing it, and then the administration of Malama Kauai doing all of the financial work reports and everything else that goes with it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, right now, we are going to be paying $50,000 to receive $25,000 worth in EBT spending. Any further questions? If not, I will bring the meeting back to order. Any final discussion on this item? I guess my final discussion is that it sounds great, it is not that I do not like EBT spenders or anything, but the bottom line is does this make financial sense, and to me it does not, which is why it is on my cut list. If this is something that we want to do, we have to go back to the drawing board and come back with something that makes sense. Council Chair Rapozo. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Chair Rapozo: Maybe putting it out to bid...I know for a grant-in-aid, you do not need to go out to bid and you do not have to go through procurement, but maybe that would be a better option to put the program management out to bid. What we are paying is paying administrative costs. That is what we are paying for a nonprofit. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: For me, if I could envision what the goal is here and if this is what we are truly trying to accomplish, the $25,000, then I could probably stomach that, but I guess I am seeing the disconnect. Yes, we can change and add people here, but if we are trying to get a certain amount of funds out to the community so that a service is provided and this is what it costs to provide that service, then I can understand that. I am seeing us trying to manipulate it in a way that does not make sense to me and that is what I am having an issue with. I do not want to take this away from people because I think it is important, but I guess I just need to learn more about it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I guess I am the same way. I am feeling like there is somewhere a better-designed program that can work better and it might take some research to find out. Even monitoring against the value-added purchases, there is a way to educate all of the value-added vendors so that they just do not accept it. I think there is a lot of different ways. It just takes somebody to put their mind on it to do the research about DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 32 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING how other places are doing it and to come back with a better design. I hope that will happen. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: If my goal or our goal is to maintain some kind of EBT support for the farmers market, because it supports both the consumer as well as the farmers, but we are not happy with the service, can we retain these funds in the budget and then subject to the Administration figuring it out to make it more effective? So not endorsing the spending of the $50,000 to get the $25,000, but having it stay there and either not be spent or have them figure out a way to spend it better. Is that an option? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: For me, it is up to the Councilmembers. If the Councilmembers feel like they want to keep it in there and tell George folks how to spend it and if that will work, I have no clue. We can cut it and they can come back with something and ask for money later on in the year, if there is a better program going on. My position is to cut it and have them come back. That is just my own position, but of course it all depends on the votes. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: George, when you did your presentation, you mentioned that we had a contract hire that was assigned to the markets. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules again. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Costa: I am sorry...hire? Council Chair Rapozo: No, do we not have a person right now on contract that you said monitors the sunshine markets? Mr. Costa: Right. Council Chair Rapozo: Is that not something that this person could do? Mr. Costa: No, not really. This person's responsibility is to work with all of the farmers, the vendors. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Mr. Costa: Those that participate in EBT, not all of them participate...some of the farmers do not see the value, basically, to them. They rather not...whatever they are selling, they are making enough money as-is, so they do not want to participate in the EBT program. So I would say that fifty percent (50%) on the farmers, depending on what market it is, participates in the EBT program. Our market monitor's responsibility is to be there to ensure that all of the vendors are there, they report on time, ensure that all of the administrative rules of the sunshine markets are being followed, ensure that the market runs properly and closes properly; that is at the market. Then there are the reports. Each vendor turns in their financial reports. There is a lot more that takes place. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 33 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you have a question again or are we ready to vote on it? Councilmember Yukimura: I am almost ready to vote. I just want to make a suggestion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can we make the suggestion later? We are here to just vote on this. If you have a suggestion, you can talk to him later. I want to move on this. Councilmember Yukimura: I just have two (2) sentences. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, you are pushing it. I think you have the time to ask the questions. We have had discussions while we ask the questions and... Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question then. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: This amount of time could have been used for your two (2) sentences, but I do not want to continue to go down this road. Councilmember Yukimura: Then let me just ask the question. Would you explore the possibility of an application that could really do all of the calculations through the iPhones or something? I think that is the solution. Thank you. It would be automatic accounting that way. Mr. Costa: Can I ask a question? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, doing an application is going to cost money. We are already spending $50,000 to implement this project. Thank you, George. I will bring the meeting back to order. Let us take a roll call vote. This is to remove the $50,000. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: The motion to remove funding in the amount of $50,000 from Grant-In-Aid for the Agriculture-Kauai EBT Program was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7*, AGAINST MOTION: 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 County of Kauai, Councilmember Chock and Councilmember Hooser were noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for Economic Development? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 34 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Just one more. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Do you have a cut, Councilmember Yukimura? Okay. We are coming up on a break, so we will just take the... Council Chair Rapozo: Let me just introduce it because it is a last minute one for me as well, so I kind of want to have that discussion. Did you pass it out already? It is to remove the...we had some discussion during the budget hearings about the special events security, the $65,000 that we utilized to assist. 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 the 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 what ways we can cut the budget and not cause a problem for our taxpayers, citizens, and visitors. This is just one that I really want to have that discussion. I may not support the cut either, but I wanted to see how the rest of you felt. It is a problem with the Sunshine Law; we do not have a chance to discuss this stuff, so it is only here. I am just thinking that as have to tighten our belts, so do the organizations as well. Council Chair Rapozo moved to remove funding in the amount of$65,000 for Special Events Security, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, we will take a ten (10) minute caption break and come back on this item. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 10:57 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 11:08 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. There is a motion to remove funding in the amount of$65,000 for Special Events Security. I am actually going to have to recuse myself on this one because I am on the Koloa Plantation Days Board and I am in charge of the parade and security for that parade when they block off the roads is actually paid for by the County, I believe. Councilmember Kuali`i, I will turn it over to you. (Committee Chair Kaneshiro relinquished chairmanship to Councilmember Kualii.) (Committee Chair Kaneshiro was noted as recused and left the meeting at 11:08 a.m.) Councilmember Kuali`i: Is there any discussion or questions? Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the Office of Economic Development up, please? Councilmember Kuali`i: Can you come up? Councilmember Kagawa: I have a process question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro announced earlier that a lot of these items were already discussed during the budget. I realize that we all may have burning questions, but I think at some point, it DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 35 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING becomes a matter of are you for the cut or against the cut? I think Council Chair Rapozo stated his reason and it is pretty clear. It would be better for the organizations to get money so that they will have extra money at the end, but I think it is pretty clear. I do not know if we should be wasting time on every single item and asking questions that, to me, are irrelevant. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Let us keep our questions to questions of any additional information you need to make a decision at this point and let us keep our answers brief. We are talking about $65,000 and maybe that means further clarification of how that breaks down. It probably was covered in the budget. Councilmember Yukimura has a question. I will suspend the rules. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Council Chair is saying that the associations or the organizations putting on these events can handle the cost. My question to you is, is that your understanding as well? How much of a cost are we talking about per event? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Costa: For the record, George Costa, Director for the Office of Economic Development. These funds basically started from a budget discussion with overtime in the Kaua`i Police Department, so it was determined that... Councilmember Kuali`i: Actually, we do not need the long history. We just need the answer to how much does it cost on average per event and maybe how many events per year. So what makes up $65,000? Mr. Costa: Okay, let me defer that to Nalani. Ms. Brun: Nalani Brun, Office of Economic Development. We do about fifteen (15) grants per year and that is a guess, but that is about what it is. The average is anywhere from $1,600 to $11,000. Our plan this year pretty much is the ones that can take some of the hit we are working on getting their numbers down so they do not get as much of the pot. There are smaller ones like Koloa Plantation Days and the little community events, that is really who uses them. They are actually at the $3,000 to $4,000 level. They struggle to make their budgets work, so it is a huge help for them. Some of the other ones have a fee and they can actually incorporate additional fees to help cover that and that is where we are trying to go with the program. Councilmember Yukimura: You said fifteen (15) organizations and what is the range again? Ms. Brun: Anywhere from $1,600 to about $11,000. Councilmember Yukimura: You say that KOloa Plantation Days is a small one? Ms. Brun: Yes. The larger ones are Waimea Town Celebration, the County Fair, and the Kauai Marathon. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 36 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: Can you repeat the middle one you said? You said Waimea Town Celebration and... Ms. Brun: The County Fair and the Kauai Marathon. Councilmember Kuali`i: The County Fair, okay. Council Chair Rapozo: How much is the Kaua`i Marathon? Now that bothers me. Ms. Brun: About $11,000. Council Chair Rapozo: They are not a nonprofit; they are for-profit. We had this discussion before years ago that we were not going to be funding The Kauai Marathon. Ms. Brun: They have a nonprofit arm. Council Chair Rapozo: The Kauai Marathon? Ms. Brun: They use a nonprofit arm. Council Chair Rapozo: Maybe they are using somebody else's nonprofit arm, but The Kauai Marathon is for-profit. Ms. Brun: Right. Council Chair Rapozo: We have been down this road numerous times and I am actually upset that we are giving them $11,000 worth of security because they make money. That just solidifies my vote. Councilmember Kuali`i: Does anybody need any additional information for clarification? If not, thank you. Let us take the vote. The motion is to remove funding of$65,000 for Special Events Security. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I just have some brief discussion. Councilmember Kuali`i: Sorry, I forgot. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: These community events, when you name them like the Waimea Town Celebration, Koloa Plantation Days, and we can go on and on; those are very important events for our community and for the tourist market even. We have some recurring tourists that come specially for some of those events and we do not have the University of Hawaii football games, large concerts, and what have you, as other islands do. This is a difficult one for me because how does it affect the community...where does the additional money come from? I have some concerns about what would be the total effect on these events. However, I think this is the year that we really need to try and tighten up the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 37 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING budget and perhaps, as was mentioned before, there would be future opportunities for you to come back during the year and proving on a case-by-case basis where there request for the amount is a solution to handling some events that are valid that are needed in order to continue to succeed. That would be my advice. I would be supporting the cut therefore, but we need four (4) votes and we are missing one (1). Thank you. Councilmember Kuali`i: Further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am not going to vote for the full cut. I do not mind doing some kind of a transition so that, as Nalani has indicated, trying to wean people or originations that can pay for it. I would like to do it that way. If the cut does not get four (4) votes, then I will look at proposing half or maybe three-quarters to leave there. Councilmember Kuali`i: Any other Councilmembers? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: We cut climate change, took away the money destined for the swimming pool for the high school swim meets, and farmers markets. It seems like we are literally cutting the low-hanging fruit or the weakest and the most vulnerable community-based funding. I have not seen any and I am hoping that we will see some that actually go after some of the more hard costs that the County has embedded into it. I am having a hard time cutting community support, quite frankly. These people that do these events are mostly volunteers. They work really, really hard. They put in their own money, I am sure, and their own hours and they bring tremendous benefits to our community, Koloa Plantation Days is one of them. I am not going to be supporting this. I think the County needs to step up and continue supporting these programs and we should shift our pen, pencil, or scissors to other areas of the budget and not focus on the community-based programs. Thank you. Councilmember Kuali`i: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I do not have a problem supporting the events that, like I think Councilmember Kagawa talked about, but this does not give the Council any ability to choose. I would not support the $11,000 for the Kauai Marathon because they make money. Some of these other community events I do not have a problem with and I would suggest that we do it the way Councilmember Kagawa recommended that we can keep the line item or one dollar ($1) in there or whatever it is, or set a proviso that all of these moneys would require Council approval on case-by-case basis. What else? It is up to you folks. It seems like just me making the cuts and everybody has the ability to cut the hard cuts, as Councilmember Hooser talked about. I am trying my best and I do not hear anybody else. What are we going to cut? Are we going to cut positions? That is what Councilmember Hooser is asking. I am going after the things that I do not believe are necessities right now, that the taxpayers should not pay. Do I agree that Koloa Plantation Days and all of these community celebrations should get the County's help—absolutely. Fifteen (15) grants? I guess I should ask (inaudible)...I do not know as I am going through the budget and trying to figure how we are going to pay our bills and pave our roads without raising taxes, and this is the only way I know how. I apologize if it seems like I am cutting out the weak and the...it is not the case. Where are we going to cut? Where are we going to reduce the spending? Anybody else has to same opportunities to cut and I have not heard many. Let us go. I do not know how else to make the ends meet. If anybody has a better solution...to me...I do not know...proviso...we will probably be told that we cannot do DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 38 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING that because that is crossing the separation and we cannot tell them what to do. Fine, cut it and when you need the money, you come to us and ask for the money and we will approve it, based on the Council's decision of whether or not they want to fund that particular event. Councilmember Kuali`i: Anybody else? Vice Chair. Councilmember Kagawa: I did not think about what you mentioned about putting something in for the current year. I was thinking that they could just come up with a money bill and we process money bills in two (2) months. If you really think it is valid and we rely on you, George, as the head to determine that of which ones are ultimately necessary. I know it is a little humbug, but we are (inaudible) for money and I think we are trying to do our best. Thank you, Chair. Councilmember Kuali'i: If there is interest and support for this to be one dollar ($1), would we want to amend the funding reduction to $64,999 or will be an add later. No? Okay. We will just vote on this as-is. Roll call to remove funding. The motion to remove funding in the amount of$65,000 for Special Events Security was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Kagawa, Kuali'i, Rapozo, TOTAL— 4, AGAINST MOTION: Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 2, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Kaneshiro TOTAL— 1. Councilmember Kuali'i: Thank you. Can we get Committee Chair Kaneshiro back? Where are we at? Any more for Economic Development? No more cut proposals for Economic Development. Committee Chair, back to you. (Committee Chair Kaneshiro was noted as back in the meeting at 11:21 a.m.) (Councilmember Kuali'i relinquished chairmanship back to Committee Chair Kaneshiro.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Jade, can we move on? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next one would be the Kaua`i Police Department. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I have a cut as circulated. My original proposal...I mentioned $500,000 from Police and Fire, but I decided that a twenty percent (20%) cutting of overtime would be perhaps too difficult to get four (4) votes, so I am proposing a ten percent (10%) reduction in all overtime and premium pay accounts. I feel like what really brought a lot of concerns from the public and opened up a lot of eyes was when we had the Administration request increases for department heads. In that time, Janine had provided to me, at my request, the top-25 paid Police and Fire personnel and that really stirred up a lot of complaints and criticism from the public that perhaps we are not keeping our eyes enough on the pay of our officers and firefighters. One of the glaring ones was where the top police officer was paid $177,000, $30,000 of which was overtime. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 39 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING One could say, "Well, what does ten percent (10%) mean to that person?" So instead of $177,000, ten percent (10%) of overtime would be a mere... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Sorry, Councilmember Kagawa, but I need a motion and a second first. Councilmember Kagawa moved for a ten percent (10%) reduction in Regular Overtime, Training Overtime, and Premium Pay, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa: So out of $30,000 overtime for that top cop, he would make $27,000 in overtime instead, which would still make his pay $174,000 a year. It is just one example and if you prorate it to every single officer, we are just talking about a ten percent (10%) reduction in overtime. I just wanted to mention that this is not a Kaua`i problem; I received many concerns during the Hawai`i State Association of Counties (HSAC) meetings from our City and County counterparts, Maui County counterparts, and Hawai`i island counterparts about what are we going to do with the police and fire budgets that have really made it difficult for us as we go forward and we were talking about not having moneys to pave roads and raising the GET. I just thought that this was a reasonable amount that I would propose to the Council that shows that we hear what the public is saying and we are trying to take a small step to try and get management to try and control some of the overtime that possibly could be avoided or may seem unnecessary, such as giving overtime for cell duty, events, or what have you, and instead putting lower-paid officers on those type of jobs. It is not to say that I do not appreciate the work of KPD and the Fire Department. They have both already made cuts, but you are the biggest budgets and if we are going to make a concerted effort to try and streamline government and spend the most efficiently, that is the only way to back up your talk, to look into the biggest budgets and try and make a concerted effort to try and control the highest line item. We cannot touch salaries. Again, it is just all in relation. We saw various examples. I think we saw one officer above the $90,000 range making about $60,000 in overtime. Again, that is a total of $150,000 and if you take ten percent (10%) of $60,000, you are talking only about $6,000 less, so he will still make a lot of money. Again, we will see if we have four (4) votes. I think this is a slam-dunk and an aggressive cut, but not as aggressive as the twenty percent (20%) that I first proposed. With that, we will see how the votes fall. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Discussion? Council Chair Rapozo: I had a question for Councilmember Kagawa. Is the premium pay not controlled, governed, or required by the contract? I think premium is the benefits under the collective bargaining contract? That is what I am thinking. I am not sure. Councilmember Kagawa: Well, I think if things are... Council Chair Rapozo: Like the nightshift? Councilmember Kagawa: My response to that is if we have items that were listed not in salaries or any type of item that looks like overtime, it should be joined DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 40 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING together in the future from the Finance Department because I do not think we should be separating something that is guaranteed versus something that is at the discretion of management to approve. Council Chair Rapozo: I believe the premium pay...like the holiday, the night differential, the hazardous, all of those different entitlements that come with the contract. Councilmember Kagawa: I understand. Council Chair Rapozo: I am not sure if we could do that, but I do not know. It is just what I recall. I could be entirely wrong. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we just verify? Councilmember Kagawa: We can verify. I just have one last comment. I think we all know that everybody in government is doing a little more with less, and I will just give you an example—for example, the Department of Education (DOE)—our class sizes have grown. We used to have twenty-five (25) students and now we have thirty-two (32) students and we do not get paid any more. If we do not like that we are getting the same amount of pay with five (5) students more in our class, then we have an option to resign. "Next man up," like Bill Belichick says. It is the same thing with a person making one hundred seventy-seven thousand dollars ($177,000); if you are going to make one hundred seventy-four thousand dollars ($174,000) and you are not happy, then "next man up." I think we have to try to control what we can. At some point, one could say that salaries have become excessive and what are we going to do about it? Are we just going to sit here and watch or are we going to try and control it a little bit? I think ten percent (10%) is a little bit. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will suspend the rules. Any questions for the Chief? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning, Chief. I just wanted to confirm the assertion from our Chair that premium pay is nondiscretionary. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. DARRYL D. PERRY, Chief of Police: Darryl Perry, Chief of Police. Yes. In a nutshell, there is a list of the payments to our officers for differential pay. It is contractual by collective bargaining agreement, and those are set and we have no discretion over it, whether or not to provide them with those payments, such as night differential, hazardous pay, and the like. Councilmember Yukimura: Do you know whether there was in this, or in past budgets, lapses in this line item, such that you did not spend the full amount during the year? Chief Perry: I am not aware of that. Councilmember Yukimura: Do we know? Does the introducer of the motion know? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 41 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: What I do know is that excess moneys in different accounts can be transferred to cover, should...like I am giving a hypothetical example: say his premium pay is short as they go throughout the year, and they have excess money in something else, like they decided to cut some travel. Then I believe those moneys could be transferred to fill that gap. Then that is why I went with a mere ten percent (10%). If I went with twenty percent (20%), I think it would be difficult to get four (4) votes because I can count. I know who supports police a lot. With ten percent (10%), I thought that maybe we had a chance to try and take this bold step. Councilmember Yukimura: My question though was whether there was leftover money in this account, not whether there was... Councilmember Kagawa: There was a lapse last year in the Police budget and I believe it was about $600,000, but my memory is not an elephant. Councilmember Yukimura: Of the total categories? Councilmember Kagawa: No, I am talking about a lapse in the whole Police budget. It was about $600,000, I believe. So if you minus $600,000, minus the total of these, we are still a little bit above. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I am most interested in the tangible impacts that these proposed cuts would have on public safety, basically. Will there be tangible impacts? Chief Perry: Yes. We have cut our overtime over the last few years and I do not have the number off the top of my head. I would believe it is in excess of $1,000,000. The needs for our police services have been escalating and we have not...we have gone over this before with the Council about not expanding our beats and not expanding the sworn personnel. As the expectations and the needs rise, we are a 24/7 organization. There is one of two things that will happen. One is that we will not be providing the services that are necessary via overtime. We are working as best as we can to be as efficient as we can. The other is that we will go ahead and provide those necessary services and come back to the Council for a money bill, unless there are other options available to us. What we are doing right now, and I want you folks to know, is that we are doing an independent workload study to see how we can improve on providing services, but my gut feeling is that they will come back and say that we are deficient in staffing and we will not be able to provide the necessary services that this County needs and deserves. I am not sure if I answered your question, but there will be an impact. Councilmember Hooser: Yes, you did in the beginning. You said that services will suffer. Chief Perry: Yes. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 42 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Just a quick question, Chief. So you said you have cut your overtime budget by over $1,000,000, but that is over what period of time? Chief Perry: I believe over the past two (2) or three (3) years. Councilmember Kuali`i: Two (2) or three (3) years? Chief Perry: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i: As far as the overtime line item from last year to this new year, the newly proposed, is there any additional cuts? What is the differential there? Is it a small increase or a small cut? Same? Chief Perry: No, we decreased again, but I do not have the numbers. My apologies. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay, I will check that. When you said that you would not be able to provide the necessary services with this overtime, we are talking about a ten percent (10%) reduction, so there would be a ten percent (10%) reduction to the necessary services and what do you include under "necessary services?" Chief Perry: Just the basic services like responding to cases, taking reports, working on events that we are not budgeted for, special investigations that need to be conducted, and emergencies such as the tsunami warnings and the rest. Councilmember Kuali`i: The last thing you said was about an independent workload study. Chief Perry: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i: When did that start? Is it ongoing? When will it be finished? Chief Perry: It has not started yet. We are in the process of procuring the vendor, but we expect it to begin by either early this year or the beginning of next year. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? Seeing none, thank you, Chief. Chief Perry: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will bring the meeting back to order. Any discussion? Councilmember Kagawa. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 43 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to report, and thanks to our staff, that the Period 12 Reports showed that the premium pay lapsed $79,601, almost $80,000 lapsed in the premium pay. Again, it is at management discretion. There could be an excess in there if they just ran as normal. Under normal operations, they ran and had a lapse of almost $80,000 last year and now that I have proposed this ten percent (10%), we are just trying to see if they can squeeze a little bit more out of the men using better management decisions, as far as dictating how we are going to cover overtime in the most cost-efficient manner. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: We are in discussion now, right? My basic comment is thank you, Vice Chair. I appreciate this proposal. I do think that it is about everybody doing a little bit more and doing what we can in small ways and that there is some management discretion over scheduling and making assignments. Some of the examples you gave, I think, we can do better. It is a small difference and I think we can do it. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question of the introducer. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: In the lapse, it was $79,000, and Vice Chair, you are proposing to take $170,000 effectively, so that is quite a big cut. What about the other areas like the Regular Overtime and the Training Overtime? What were the lapses in those cases? Do you know? Councilmember Kagawa: Not right now. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. My thinking is that I am a little uncomfortable because we are taking more than what lapsed. Councilmember Kagawa: So we have the lapse. For the regular overtime, we lapsed $94,594 and for the training we lapsed $21,763. You just mentioned that you feel kind of uncomfortable—do you think that I do not feel uncomfortable? It is hard for any of us to touch our most important function, but there comes a point in time when we try and put a lid before we come up like San Jose and we have to issue pink slips, like they did. They issued fifty-one (51) pink slips to firefighters in San Jose and I just wanted to see if we can squeeze a little bit out of everybody and see if we can just continue without any pink slips or even any thought of pink slips. Thank you. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to add one more point of information because you did say there was a $600,000 lapse in the entire department, but it is actually a $1,800,000 in the entire department, so there is plenty of room to cover this $390,000 overtime adjustment amount, so a $1,800,000 lapse in the entire Police Department budget. Councilmember Kagawa: I think I got it wrong. Maybe the firemen lapsed at $600,000, so thank you, Councilmember Kuali`i. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 44 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Further comments or discussion? Councilmember Kuali`i: As far as further discussion, I was happy to see that in his exact line items that there was such significant amounts because that actually makes the amounts needed to come from other places within the department less than half probably of what you are asking the proposed cut to be. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Further discussion from the Members? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: My concern is with the collective bargaining increases going forward, that is going to really alter the amount of overtime because the overtime is based on the new wages. I am concerned that this does not cover the lapse, and I understand there is over $1,000,000 in lapse last year, but what is it going to be this year because of the increase in salaries? The reality is what the Chief said, that all he has to do is come back and get a money bill if he needs it, but it is just concerning. The bigger concern I have is the premium pay cut because it is nondiscretionary that we need to pay. I am not sure if the consensus is at the $1,600,000 or $1,800,000 will cover everything. I do not know that because I have not done the numbers. I do not know what the estimation is, but I am really concerned when we start cutting out the public safety. Councilmember Kagawa, you are right though; somebody has to be the bad guy. I do not know how else to do this. I would much rather have seen a countywide cut; everybody cut overtime, travel, and the discretionary funding. That still can happen at some point before the end of this discussion. Councilmember Kagawa: I think no other department has that size of overtime. There are some really high-paid Public Works EM-07s and such that make a lot of money, but the only department that has the large overtime is Police and Fire. I feel like management-wise, that is one area that there are reasonable adjustments that can be made without impacting the public and I feel like ten percent (10%) is not that great and I still feel that officers will get paid well. That is my justification. Up or down, I think we will move on. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: The last point as part of this discussion is that any increases in the contractual salaries are anticipated and budgeted, so that is not part of our consideration here. It is budgeted for. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I appreciate all of the discussion. I prefer Vice Chair's method than an across-the-board cut that was tried last budget or the budget before because it really hurts the small departments, which do not have that much of a buffer. I prefer where there is a bigger buffer. I was thinking I would prefer a slightly smaller cut, but Councilmember Kuali`i' are persuasive that there is a pretty big buffer of$1,800,000, so I will find out how I am going to vote when I vote. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion from the Members? Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 45 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: I appreciate the attempt at creating savings and I know it is hard to be the bad guy and I have some bad guy ones on my list, too, later on in the budget. I appreciate the fact that there were excess funds in the last budget. I am troubled because the Chief clearly said services would suffer and I think moving forward, public safety is the number one priority for this County and we are only going to have more people and more demands on our Police Department, so I am having a real difficult time supporting cutting public safety. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Further discussion? Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I am trying to support as many cuts that make sense to me as possible, especially in light of our recent conversations on how it is we intend to address the $100,000,000 road backlog. I have looked at everything more from that perspective and will continue to do so in this case. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? I guess I am the last one. I guess you could say that I am torn on this because we are looking at two (2) different methods of how we should do budgeting. We allow them to budget what they have and we go through the year and let it lapse or do we force the cuts, take the lapse, and hopefully we do not spend this money? We can do this cut, and again, the Chief can always come back in with a money bill and ask for the money. I think throughout the year we have seen a lot of transfers and we have seen the Police Department come in for a lot of money on unspent budgeted items. I think we had the cars come in at $800,000, if we remember, not too long ago. So there is probably some flexibility in budget. Last year, I think we went with the methodology of"leave the budget and let it lapse." We saw some aggressive cuts last year that we did not support. This year, the cuts are a little less aggressive. I think it might be a little more manageable. Again, they always have the option of coming back in with a money bill and you take into consideration how much has lapsed each year, how many transfers go on within the year, and how many asks come in on things that they want to buy with money that they have not spent? I will be supporting this cut. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I did not keep track of the votes, but I guess I would be open to...I will not be supporting the $390,000, but I would be open to a five percent (5%) cut off of the Regular and Training Overtime and leaving the Premium Pay as an option. I think that is something that the department can absorb. It equates to, if my calculator is correct, a cut of $182,305. If for some reason the votes are not there for the $390,000, then I would be proposing the $182,305 amount. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: If you are looking for a unanimous vote, I would support the direction the Chair is going. Councilmember Kagawa moved to withdraw his motion for a ten percent (10%) reduction in Regular Overtime, Training Overtime, and Premium Pay, Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 46 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: I want to make a new motion to reduce Regular Overtime and Training Overtime by five percent (5%). Sorry, staff. I should have had that prepared. Council Chair Rapozo: Can we take a recess? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us take a quick recess. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 11:47 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 11:49 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. That one was off of the table. We have a new motion. Councilmember Kagawa moved to reduce Regular Overtime and Training Overtime by five percent (5%), seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion? If not, let us take a roll call vote. The motion to reduce Regular Overtime and Training Overtime by five percent (5%) was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for Police? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: There is no real money involved here, but I want to propose to cut the three (3) School Crossing Guards that are not filled. My rationale is that they are not likely to be filled and they are more likely to be reallocated into some positions and I prefer if the Police would come back to get those positions to explain to us their rationale. Councilmember Yukimura moved to eliminate Position Nos. 1304, 1306, and 1308 (School Crossing Guards), seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: That is basically it. I am concerned at all of the reallocations that are being done without Council approval and I know there have been some very creative ones that I do support, but I feel it is a better budgetary process for the Police to come back. This does not affect any existing warm bodies and it is positions that have been empty for a long time. As we all know, positions are long-time expenditures when we do create them, so I feel like the process should be that the departments come to DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 47 MAY 12, 2016 • DECISION-MAKING us to ask for them in whatever format they really want to have them and with the costs that are clear. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do we have questions for the Chief? I just want to say that the Police have a very comprehensive plan on what they are going to do with these positions to help reduce overtime and they were very transparent with their plan also, as far as what they wanted to do. We were all here for that presentation. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: It is not my understanding that these are the positions they are going to reallocate. I thought they were already in the budget reallocated. If I am mistaken, I will withdraw my motion, but I think the traffic safety monitors are already in there. That is on page 74. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Let me suspend the rules and ask the Chief the question. Chief, I guess from my understanding, we are going move the School Crossing Guards to another position and keep the existing three (3) School Crossing Guards? Can you just tell us how this would affect that plan? You came in with a whole plan on how you were going to transition people in and hopefully reduce overtime at the cellblock and you had a whole plan, so will affect it or not? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Perry: Chief of Police, Darryl Perry. Yes, we presented the entire plan before the Council. We did have, I believe, some positions left over. Because we have not increased our staffing within the Kauai Police Department for twenty (20) plus years, in spite of that, we have been moving forward with accreditation and the rest. Councilmember Yukimura, you are absolutely right; we will be using those positions in the future to help our department with the accreditation process with our Office of Professional Standards and other areas where we are deficient at this point. We have not come before the Council to request the reallocation of those positions, but those are the plans because of us not being able to increase our staffing. So we have those positions in reserve and those are the plans. If you remove those positions, then we will be back to square one and we will have to come forward again for new positions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think I was getting confused between the two (2) things you were trying to do. So these positions are the positions where you were going to hire a full-time trainer so that we would not... Chief Perry: Yes, those positions are the ones that we were going to use. I believe there were three (3) other positions that were available that we did not reallocate, that we were not planning on using, but those were positions that we were going to be using in future when we become accredited. I do not have it with me and I should have brought it with me, but those are the ones for the trainers. Right now, we are expending a tremendous amount of overtime for our trainers because we do not have a training cadre within the department. Councilmember Yukimura: But you have two (2) Training Officers, Positions Nos. 1309 and 1310, and I commend that idea that you would have permanent Training Officers, rather than pulling men off the line and incurring all the overtime and all the dislocation to the regular course of the action. That is well-done, but they are already • DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 48 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING provided for in these positions. So basically, if you are having a major shift in your personnel in terms of positions through accreditation, I think the best process is for them to come forward with the request. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? Council Chair Rapozo: I have a question, but it is unrelated, but I can ask him later. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? Let me get clarity again that eliminating these three (3) dollar-funded positions will do what again? How will it affect you folks? Chief Perry: We have future plans for that in regards to accreditation and our Office of Professional Standards and we are falling behind the eight- ball right now in getting the accreditation process going. Without the position in that area, we will be in trouble. In fact, we looked at August for our accreditation, but right at this point with the backlog of our policies and procedures, I am not sure if we will be able to meet those requirements. If we do not have an accreditation manager in place, it may further set us back. That is how we were planning on using those positions. Council Chair Rapozo: Now I have a related question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: It was unrelated until you mentioned the accreditation officer. What is the status with that attorney that you were supposed to get that we funded? Chief Perry: We are working with the County Attorney's Office... Council Chair Rapozo: How far away are we to getting somebody in place? Chief Perry: I would have to defer it to the County Attorney's Office. They have taken the lead on that, but we are working with them. Council Chair Rapozo: I will ask him offline. That is another position that we can cut some of the funding because they are not going to be a full year, it does not seem like we will have anybody in place. I will check with Mauna Kea on the break. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Accreditation help with policies and stuff was one of the roles of that attorney position, too, I believe. Was it not? Chief Perry: Yes, but accreditation is more than just getting policies and procedures. It is a whole gamut of issues concerning reaccreditation and all of the rest and keeping up with what is going on nationally. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 49 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Right. I think we need a full vetting of any new position that is being proposed and I think that is the best process and procedure. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: You talked about moving as quickly as August and that there being an urgent need, if you will. If that was the case, why is it not in the budget? Why is it a position for one dollar ($1) that in just a couple of months into the year, you will have to transfer money and create a position? Is it in the works already with Human Resources? Chief Perry: No, it is not. We did not want to put too much in this budget because we understand the fiscal situation of the County, so we were trying to be as fiscally responsible as possible and not overburden this Council with our plans. We could have done that, but we did not. We were looking at the future. Councilmember Kuali`i: Would you not agree that perhaps being fiscally responsible is being truthful about what the need is, when you need it, and when it is going to happen so that we can consider that, so that we are part of the decision? Because otherwise, as Councilmember Yukimura was saying, it becomes something that happens, and maybe it is a little bit faster, but I want the Council to be involved in the decision-making to support you when you justify what you need and what you are working on. Chief Perry: There is no deception on our part. Our plans within the department are to grow this department and to have a strategic plan in the future. If we came to the Council with every plan that we have, we will be bogging you folks down because we have plans in the next ten (10) to fifteen (15) years. It is not about being truthful. It is about being reasonable about presenting the issues to you. Frankly, I am not sure if the Council really understands the entire network that goes within the Police Department. Councilmember Kuali`i: I would disagree that we do not want every plan; we do want the plans that require budgeting within the budget here. Chief Perry: All of our plans, with respect to what you are saying, relates to the budget. Everything that we do relates to the budget. Councilmember Kuali`i: We are only looking at one dollar ($1). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? If not, thank you, Chief. Chief Perry: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will call the meeting back to order. Any further discussion on this item? Councilmember Kuali`i. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 50 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kuali`i: I appreciate Councilmember Yukimura's proposal. I do think it is important to help the Administration along and push a little harder and a little further in the direction of dealing with dollar-funded positions and vacant positions. Later with justification, they can come back to us and we can decide to create and support in that manner. I appreciate the direction that we are moving in. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I just want to make a comment. When the Chief became the Chief, I met with the Chief and I did not know him at the time that well and asked him one of the things that he could consider would be a beat expansion plan over the year. I do not know if you remember that, Chief. We had that discussion. After a period, he called me into this office and explained his elaborate plan on how he was going to expand the beats on Kauai to bring us up to a standard where most departments are at. He has not been given the support as far as the County, for whatever reason, excuses of no money. As I look at some of the budgeted items in all of these departments and the number of positions in some departments, and it is really awkward that you would have...if you think about it in this way, you have more people working in an office or in one division than police officers running the beat on the island...ten (10) beat cops. That has not grown for a long, long time and yet we hear all the complaints of, "Why did it take so long for the officer to respond?" It just makes no sense. Now the Chief is asking to at least be left with some dollar-funded positions so that if the need arises, he does not have to go through the rigmarole and get drilled and have to explain. If it is a permanent position, I can see that. But things happen. We see these dollar-funded positions. I am no fan of that and I do not like when dollar-funded positions are being used unnecessarily or for reasons that are not important, but for the department, I want to see that department expand. I want to see the day we have fifteen (15) or twenty (20) beats on the island so that everybody can get a response time that they can be happy with. I do not see that happening not with this budget, not the way we budget. Until we start generating a lot more revenue, it is just not going to happen. It is very expensive. But the Chief has done an excellent job with what he has. It is just ten (10) or eleven (11) people running the beat and a few sergeants on the road. It is frustrating because I want to see that department expand. I am not going to support a cut of dollar-funded positions that you may have to use. Chief, I would appreciate it and I do not have a doubt that you would let us know when your plans change and you are going to be utilizing the positions, but to take away that opportunity from a department who is already getting a hard time to expand, which they should—I would ask that we seriously consider allowing those positions to remain. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: There are still three (3) positions that are dollar-funded, background investigator positions. Really, this is about the budget process. When there are major changes in personnel, whether it is expanding a beat or not, that should be vetted not only before the Council, but before the public, and that does not happen when reallocations occur; and when they occur, they are huge budgetary allocations or obligations. If we allow that kind of budgeting to happen on a regular basis, that is when we get these budgets that are out of control and are far more expensive than we are DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 51 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING consciously and deliberately deciding on. It is just a matter of proper budget process, I believe. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further comments from the Members? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I am kind of torn on this a little bit because I really feel like School Crossing Guards and making sure that the children reach school safely is a DOE function, I believe, and it has historically been picked up by the counties. Here you see the State Legislature come out with their article saying that they funded $141,000,000 CIP projects for Kaua`i, and functions like having guidance for the children to get to school safely is supposed to be covered by the counties? Again, if we do not do it, nobody will. It is kind of tough. I will support keeping it in and try to work on the next legislature and hopefully have some new faces that we can work with. Thank you, Chair. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I wholeheartedly agree with Councilmember Yukimura, this is about the budget process. For me, I have to be consistent in saying that when it does happen, they should come back to us. It will be a different position for a different purpose, obviously with a different salary. I actually have the next proposal, which kind of lumps some of these positions together. So I will continue to support this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to say that the School Crossing Guards have been empty for years, to the extent that the Police Department is using them for other purposes. If there was a warm body there, I would not remove it, but it is not doing any good at this point, where it is. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? I am kind of under the same impression as far as these dollar-funded positions. If the need is there then come to us and ask for it. This whole accreditation process—what does it get us? What benefits do we have from it? I think we will have a whole presentation on that when these positions come back up if they really need it. I will probably be supporting this. Any further questions? Any further comments or discussion? Can I get a roll call vote, please? The motion to eliminate Position Nos. 1304, 1306, and 1308 (School Crossing Guards) was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL– 6, AGAINST MOTION: Rapozo TOTAL– 1, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL–0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL–0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for Police? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: My proposal was a broad-stroke that in the end, it came up with just positions in the Police Department, including one of these School DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 52 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Crossing Guard positions that we have taken out. Basically, the motion is to eliminate General Fund vacant positions and related benefits, which have remained vacant for greater than six hundred fifty (650) days excluding Traffic Safety Monitor positions. Those positions include 1301, 1305, 1307, which are all Background Investigators; 1309, Training Officer; 1310, Training Officer. As far as the length of vacancy, 1301, Background Investigator, was vacant for nine hundred forty-nine (949) days and the others were all vacant for nearly three thousand (3,000) days. Council Chair Rapozo: How many days? Councilmember Kuali`i: Three thousand (3,000)—two thousand nine hundred fifty-two (2,952) and two thousand six hundred six (2,606), so we are talking a long time, four (4) to five (5)years. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I need a motion and a second. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to eliminate General Fund vacant positions and related benefits, which have remained vacant for greater than six hundred fifty (650) days excluding Traffic Safety Monitor positions, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i, you may continue. Councilmember Kuali`i: I pretty much said everything. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any questions for the Administration? Councilmember Yukimura. I will suspend the rules. Councilmember Yukimura: I think we should give the Police a chance to explain. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I have a question, too, and where these positions are at, if they are in the hiring process. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Perry: Chief of Police, Darryl Perry. I will need the assistance of HR, too, to go over those positions. Council Chair Rapozo: Can I ask the Chief a real quick question? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: Do you not have Background Investigators right now working? Chief Perry: Yes, and they are helping us to fill out positions because if you do not fill out positions, then we will lose our Community-Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 53 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: How many Background Investigators do you have? Chief Perry: Right now, I believe we have three (3) or four (4). Council Chair Rapozo: How many Background Investigator positions do you have? Chief Perry: I will have to check. Council Chair Rapozo: I was under the impression that these positions were already filled, but this sheet is telling me that it has been vacant for over two thousand (2,000) days. Chief Perry: It does not appear to be accurate. Council Chair Rapozo: Maybe HR can help. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you want the position numbers? What would be the easiest? Council Chair Rapozo: Can you give her a sheet? JILL NIITANI, Human Resources Manager II: Jill Niitani, HR Manager. My understanding...I am not one hundred percent (100%) sure, but for the Background Investigators, we have been filling that with eighty-nine (89) day contract hires, so I think there was some difficulty in filling those positions on a permanent basis. That is our understanding with that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Let us start with Position No. 1301, which is a Background Investigator, which is dollar-funded. So those three (3) Background Investigators were re-described from the School Crossing Guard, correct? Ms. Niitani: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: So those positions are not vacant? Chief Perry: They are not vacant. Council Chair Rapozo: Right, but the Vacancy Report is showing, and this is as of April 30, 2016, it is showing that these positions have been vacant for a long, long time. Chief Perry: One of the reasons why we have used the eighty-nine (89) day contract hire is because it does not include the benefits if you hire somebody permanently. If the Background Investigator did not provide the services that were required that we requested, then we could let them go and go after another investigator. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 54 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Chief, my question is right now going forward, the budget line item is only one dollar ($1), so that is why Councilmember Kuali`i is considering removing it, but how are those Background Investigators being paid? Should that not be in the budget? Chief Perry: We are using the vacant School Crossing Guard positions for the eighty-nine (89) day contract hires. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, so... Chief Perry: Can we get back to you on this? There appears to be a glitch here. Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I know for a fact that those positions have not been vacant for two thousand nine hundred (2,900) days. Chief Perry: That is why I do not see why it is reflected here, so there is a problem. Council Chair Rapozo: So you need those Background Investigator positions, right? Chief Perry: Without them, we will not be able to fill our positions. Council Chair Rapozo: Right, but yet the budget is reflecting a one dollar ($1) salary or pay. Even if it is an eighty-nine (89) day contract, we must show a figure in that line. I do not know if somebody from Finance or something can explain. We are coming up on a lunch break, so maybe you folks can investigate it during lunch, because that is not right because I do not think they are working for one dollar ($1) a year. Chief Perry: No, not at all. My apologies for not having the information right now, but we will get it for you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: While you are up here, the Training Officer positions, do you have warm bodies for that? Where are you in the process for those? Position Nos. 1309 and 1310. Councilmember Kuali`i: That is where they are funding it probably. Chief Perry: What was your question again? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are the Training Officer positions that are vacant still vacant or are we in the process of hiring? Chief Perry: No, we are in the process of hiring and putting people in those positions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Both of those positions? Chief Perry: Yes. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 55 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Are those not the two (2) permanent Training Officers that we were going to replace all of the rotating instructors from your rank and file? I remember it being described as a very well-thought out decision. If they are those positions that were presented in the budget hearings, then they are very well-needed, I think. Maybe during lunch you could find out if they are that new training initiative that they told us about. Chief Perry: Yes, we will find out. This does not coincide with my understanding of what we have right now, and again, my apologies. We will get this squared away after the break. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any final comments? We will take an early lunch today. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I am just saying that these are the facts provided from Human Resources by proviso in our Vacancy Reports, so there is no other way to read it other than how it was provided to us. If it is different, we need some other kind of explanation or report, but the budget shows one dollar ($1) for those three (3) positions and it shows $75,570 dollars for each of the other two (2) positions, which is called "Training Officer." Those two (2) positions are showing vacant for eight (8) years. If they were budgeted at $75,000 for eight (8) years, that is $1,200,000 and maybe that is the money that was moved around and spent on other places, but we need to know. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Ernie, do you have an answer for these questions? ERNEST W. BARREIRA, Assistant Chief Procurement Officer/Budget Chief: Ernie Barreira, Budget and Purchasing Chief. We will validate as the Committee Chair has requested, but the positions that are being identified, an asterisk in your budget worksheet, is basically being proposed and is not yet approved is proposed in the upcoming budget. We cannot do anything unless that approved. The proposal is to take those positions that, Councilmember Kuali`i is correct, perhaps have been vacant for that long, and to re-describe them in the current budget for a purpose that was stated within the budget presentations to create those two (2) full-time training officers, which will have a corresponding impact and a significant savings on overtime for the Police Department. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: If you could provide for us, over the next hour and ten (10) minutes, a little chart that shows which position came from which? Now, I am really starting to see the concern about these dollar-funded positions because I cannot understand this. These positions were already re-described, correct? Mr. Barreira: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: That is done? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 56 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Barreira: They are proposed as part of this budget, an initiative that is being submitted to you. Council Chair Rapozo: Have those positions been changed already? It is telling me right here that if there are two (2) asterisks, it is showing re-described from School Crossing Guard. So have those Traffic Safety Monitors being redone? Are they now called"Traffic Safety Monitors" as of today? Mr. Barreira: Anything that is currently in this proposed budget is not yet approved, so we cannot take definitive action until the Council approves that. Council Chair Rapozo: But the re-description of a position can happen without our permission or knowledge. That is why I am asking if these positions were re-described. Mr. Barreira: We will confer appropriately and get back to you within the next hour, as you have suggested. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, we will take our lunch break and be back in one (1) hour. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 12:20 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 1:30 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back from lunch. Hopefully everybody is up and ready to work. We are on Councilmember Kuali`i's motion and I think we had some questions for the Chief of Police. Chief Perry: Chief of Police, Darryl Perry. With regards to the last inquiry with the positions on these School Crossing Guards, I passed out the presentation we made to the Council at the beginning of the year, and there were questions about the date of the vacancies and what that reflected was not the vacancies of the Background Investigators because those were positions that are yet to be obtained, and the Training Officers as well. What they were, were the dates that the School Crossing Guard positions were actually vacant. Those days reflect School Crossing Guard positions that were not filled. Maybe HR can expand on that. Ms. Niitani: The Chief is correct. There are a few that were listed on the vacancy, listing those five (5) positions, so those in particular have been vacant as School Crossing Guards, so that is correct. The Vacancy Report is correct, in that it is reporting what the position is as of now versus what they want to change it to in upcoming year. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any questions? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: My question is why did we do it that way? You are basically using the same position number for something really different and it is a DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 57 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING different position by name; a different name and different pay, probably...well, very likely here. In fact, if the Background Investigator is anywhere near the Training Officer, it is nothing like the School Crossing Guard. I cannot help but see what the report says. If the report says it is a Background Investigator and it says it was vacant since this date and it says that it is dollar-funded, but then I can ask about when the position would be filled, if not this budget year, next year; what would the range be? I have had the information on the range as well. It is kind of like hidden then, as far as the budget process goes, and misleading. So why do we do that process? Could you not just create a new position? It is a new purpose and new salary. Why do you not just create a new position, and whether it is during the budget or even throughout the year, if the need is urgent then there are money bills if you have the money in your budget and you can transfer it. Why is it that way? JANINE M. Z. RAPOZO, Director of Human Resources: Janine Rapozo, Director of Human Resources. Jill has been informing me of the question regarding the change from the School Crossing Guard being used as a Background Investigator and now changed to the Traffic Monitor in the new budget. Part of what I think KPD's plan was to...because they have had so much difficulty in filling the School Crossing Guards, they were going to convert those positions to Traffic Monitors and therefore not need School Crossing Guards in the future. The reason for using that particular position number is that historically, it has been that you want to try to minimize the number of new positions you come in with, so the best way to accomplish that would be to look at what your current budget has as far as positions and see how you can re-describe them to what your current needs are. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes, it made sense with the School Crossing Guard to a Traffic Safety Monitor because it is related, if you will. The other situation, as far as to minimize coming in with new positions, that sounds like to bury it and we do not get to see it because it is just a reallocation and not a budget request with the full explanation of what the position is, what the salary is, and to seek approval either within the annual budget process or if it comes out at a different point through the year. Ms. Rapozo: That is exactly why in FY 2017, those positions were now listed as Background Investigators. Councilmember Kuali`i: Right. The position number is what was vacant, with the prior title. So this new position is vacant as of what day? July 1st, which is yet to come? Ms. Rapozo: The background investigators? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Ms. Rapozo: I think maybe the Chief can answer that better because I believe they use those Background Investigators as needed when recruitment is needed for the background investigators, so they use them as eighty-nine (89) day contract when they need them and may not even work forty (40) hours per week. It can get vacant or filled again, so they just figured that they needed that many positions in the next budget to be used as needed. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 58 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: So it is not even a regular position, but more of an "as needed/temporary?" Ms. Rapozo: Right. That is why I think it is budgeted in the "Wage and Hourly" section, just eighty-nine (89) days, hourly pay. Councilmember Kuali`i: So there is a line item called "Wage and Hours" and there is a pool of money that you use for these eighty-nine (89) day hires? Ms. Rapozo: I think the regular position salaries are under "Salaries." The regular salaries are like a "01" and the next section would be "Wage and Hourly," which is "02." That is where those would be listed, the Background Investigators. I believe that is where they would be budgeted. Councilmember Kuali`i: I will just talk about the Background Investigators. Were the two (2) Training Officers also reallocations or use of prior position numbers that were School Crossing Guards as well? Ms. Rapozo: Yes, 1309 and 1310. Councilmember Kuali`i: And that is only budgeted now for July 1st? It was not budgeted last year? Ms. Rapozo: Correct. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. I wish there was a better way to be more upfront, but I understand now and I actually withdraw this motion. Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to eliminate General Fund vacant positions and related benefits, which have remained vacant for greater that six hundred fifty (650) days excluding Traffic Safety Monitor positions, Councilmember Yukimura withdrew the second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. I will call the meeting back to order. We are moving on. Any further cuts for Police? Next. I think they had enough. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Committee Chair, the next department would be the Fire Department. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do we have any cuts for the Fire Department? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am proposing to cut a portion of the Ocean Safety Officers. As it has been said before, if we had more revenues and this were a better budget situation, we would not propose these kinds of cuts, but these are positions that will be expenditures forever. I am glad for the Ocean Safety proposal, but I am thinking that because the calls are mainly on the north shore, that I would like to start with a pilot project, so it would be cutting four (4) of the six (6) and allowing the two (2) on the north DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 59 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING shore to be a pilot so that we can really see how that works and what the real costs are. Then to add on as we can, especially if we can get TAT moneys, which is a TAT expense, primarily. Then we can add on as we are able. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We need a motion and second on this. Councilmember Yukimura moved to eliminate four (4) of the proposed NEW Ocean Safety Officer I positions (19 hrs/week), seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any questions for the introducer? Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. This would cut out $67,000. It is a $100,000 budget. This would cut out four (4) of the six (6), but it would be in terms of a pilot project to continue, especially if we can get visitor industry moneys because this is largely related to the visitor industry, then we would add on as we can. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you have a question for the introducer? Council Chair Rapozo: No, I have a comment, but I will wait for the commenting portion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any questions? We will take discussion on it. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: This program is part of a pretty complex plan that was worked on between the Fire Department, Ocean Safety, and Kauai Lifeguard Association (KLA). I think when the presentation was made here, it was quite impressive and I think everyone agreed that it was one hell of a way to handle the need that currently exists. Last week, at the hotel I work at, the person that drowned out in Anini...the lady came to stay at our hotel and it was said, and I cannot help to think, "Was it the County? Could we have saved that person if there was one (1) extra lifeguard or two (2) extra? If we had adequate lifeguards or Ocean Safety Officers, could a life have been saved?" When this proposal was made to me once in my office and once on the floor here, I was very impressed with how the Fire Department, along with KLA put this together, and with the assistance and cooperation. I think this will serve a need. I cannot support the removal of these nineteen (19) hour a week positions. As we are fighting for the TAT, we justify the fight by paying these expenses, the impacts that the visitor industry puts on this County. Although the message would be a good message to the State saying, "Hey, because of your cuts or your greedy behavior with the TAT, we are not able to fund these types of things." But for me, I think the services or the product that we will get out of this new program is well- worth the investment, so I am not going to be supporting the cut. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: As I recall the numbers, and maybe we can call the Chief up, the bulk of the calls were on the north shore, so I think that is the appropriate place to start. I would even go to the eastside as well, but the call rate is something we have to look at. Can we ask the Chief to come up? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. The rules are suspended. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 60 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING There being no objections, the rules were suspended. ROBERT F. WESTERMAN, Fire Chief: For the record, Chief Robert Westerman, Kaua`i Fire Department. Councilmember Yukimura: Chief, do you recall what the calls are that were forming the basis of your proposal? I do commend the innovativeness of this and I think it is a good system. I just did not think we could go island-wide right away. Chief Westerman: Well, the calls are all over the island. Most of our current drownings are actually on the south shore. Shipwrecks and Waiohai currently hold the record for the most amount of calls. For a long time—you are correct—on the north shore, especially out at Hanakapiai and those beaches where there was no protection whatsoever, and the time to get there was very extensive was kind of the leader. The Anini example is a good one. We actually have tried a pilot program and it was on the north shore and it worked well and saved lives, at `Mini in particular. That is why we thought we are not going to full towers and trying to decide where the tower is going to go. You are absolutely right—the south shore is the hottest place for drownings this year and next year it could switch to Kealia. I would hate to say that one (1) beach is any more hazardous than another because then we get into, "Where are we going to put the tower? Which community should get the tower?" So this roving patrol kind of resolves all of those issues. It puts us in motion and puts us on a lot of beaches. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura: Can I ask you, how will you do the south shore coverage? Chief Westerman: They are all the same. Each district would be covered by a roving patrol, and in their district, they would rove during the day and they would establish early in the morning, where what might appear to be the most hazardous beaches by wave heights and those kinds of things and where the people count is. Then they rove and in some cases they might move and stay there for a good part of the day if they think that is where the hazard is, and that will be the example in all three (3) districts; it would work the same in all three (3) districts. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions from any of the other members? We will bring it back. Thank you, Chief. Any further discussion from the members on this? Councilmember Yukimura. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Yukimura withdrew the motion to eliminate four (4) of the proposed NEW Ocean Safety Officer I positions (19 hrs/week), Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Does anyone else have any cuts? Councilmember Kagawa. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 61 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: I have a proposal to reduce the overtime in the Fire Department by five percent (5%). I adjusted to try and accommodate a unanimous vote and the total cut would be $71,584. We are not touching anything else but Regular Overtime. My reasoning is that I think we have the ability in management to try and accommodate these cuts. It is very difficult on the legislative side to know for sure what days and what situations we are going to cut; that is not our job. But certainly, when we had the presentation on salary inversion, there was much public outcry, at least to me, personally, from the public. We had one showing the Captain making $100,000 in base salary and $50,000 in overtime for a whopping $150,000. If you cut the overtime by five percent (5%), that is only a $2,500 cut. Instead of$150,000, he would making $147,250. So I think even that opens some eyes, but I think we are taking some measures to try and control a cost that is, I believe at this time, running away from the revenue stream that we have. Hopefully at five percent (5%) you can support it, knowing that no one is going to be in jeopardy of not being attended to in an emergency. I think we have dedicated firemen, certainly, and a lot of them are close friends and families of mine; including the Chief, who was my golfing partner. It is very difficult to propose cuts for anybody, but I think if we are going to lead by example here at the Council, we cannot ignore that we have two (2) departments that take up a lot of our budget and I believe that some cooperation from the departments and taking small measures to allow this County to succeed without any drastic measures, such as shutting down firehouses or mass layoffs. I think we would rather take the proactive step and take on these small measures to show the public that we are willing to all work together and find a solution. Councilmember Kagawa moved to reduce Fire Department - Regular Overtime in all Divisions by five percent (5%), seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: My question is do you know what the lapsed rate was on these line items? Councilmember Kagawa: We can look at the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). Do we have the lapsed rates? I think the CAFR showed in the neighborhood of $600,000, if I remember correctly. $794,000 was last year's lapse in the Fire budget. Again, this is a $71,000 cut in overtime. I think the Police was around $100,000. I am trying to be fair to both entities that have similar salary increases and overtime. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any questions from the Members? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I have a question for the Chief. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. The rules are suspended. Council Chair Rapozo: I wish I would have asked the Police Chief earlier, but over the last several years, as far as overtime budgets, what has been the trend? Has it been going up? Has it been going down? Obviously, with higher wages your overtime costs escalates in proportion to salaries, but what has the trend been as far as the budget? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 62 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Westerman: Over the years, you are right. Simply because of pay raises, all of the salary line items have been going up. Through the years, the Administration has pulled a pretty hard line on us. Some years, it has been as much as to cut it by twenty-five percent (25%) already. So what is proposed on my budget this year and some line items have already been cut by fifteen percent (15%) and some line items cut by ten percent (10%). Again, I do not know which particular line items you are talking about. As Chief Perry explained, we do not have control over some of the line items. If it is a Premium Pay, it is a Premium Pay. It might be less as we go through the year because they did not have as many 9-alarm premiums or 9-alarm calls. But needless to say, some of them are just not controllable. I think we had this discussion when we were talking about the general budget about how could we differentiate which are the overtime items that we really have, we as administrators, have control over? I know we discussed with Councilmember Yukimura some of the ones that are like providing programs to the community that requires putting some people on overtime to do that. Those of course, we are able to try and control those costs. You are right; I did return back $700,000 last year and I had some positions that did not get filled and $250,000 that did not get encumbered and ended up getting encumbered the next year. That is just kind of how the budget cycle goes. If I just take the administrative overtime, I had to put an additional $39,000 into overtime in order to make it through the year and had $123 left at the end of the year in that line item budget. So you are right that I can move money around to make it happen, but I can almost guarantee you that I will probably be like the rest and come back for a money bill as we go through the year. Council Chair Rapozo: Were you directed to reduce your overtime this year? Chief Westerman: Yes, every year we are asked to look at our costs and reduce them, so we "bicker" back and forth, for a lack of a better word, on where that amount should be. This year, some of the line items were ten percent (10%) and some were fifteen percent (15%). If you noticed in my supplemental budget, I have asked them to put back some of the money they took out of the training line items because that training overtime is overtime I need in order to provide all of their certifications and requirements that they are required to have through the year. So that is really not an option for me or they become decertified in certain things. Again, we tried to move as much training as we can to on-shift and not overtime, but there is just some that we have to do on overtime. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I would just like to add that this is only cutting the Regular Overtime amounts in five (5) different departments of the Fire Department. Again, my initial proposal was for twenty percent (20%), which would have been about $625,000. Then my proposal that I came in this morning with, thinking to get four (4) votes realistically, I could cut it in half to ten percent (10%), which would bring $312,000, and now we are at a mere $71,584. I think the fact that it is so difficult to get four (4) votes here at the Council just cut my initial request into ten percent (10%) of what it was. The pressure works without even saying words. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 63 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? If not, I will bring the meeting back to order. Any final discussion on this? Councilmember Kuali`i. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kuali`i: In the five (5) accounts that we were talking about, there was a total of $19,000 lapsed from last year. So with the $19,000 lapse, that will cover a portion of the $71,000, and then with the $600,000 to $700,000 lapse in the total department, that could cover the remaining $50,000. So we are talking about a modest amount. I see it as, again, about maximizing scheduling and where needed, you do not do it because safety is important and you transfer (inaudible). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? If not, roll call. The motion to reduce Fire Department - Regular Overtime in all Divisions by five percent (5%) was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL—0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further proposals for Fire? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa moved to eliminate Position No. 84, Deputy Fire Chief, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Kagawa: Again, I feel like if we are going to take drastic steps in trying to control the size of our government, I think we need to rely on existing management. The Chief has three (3) Battalion Chiefs, which I know all of them and I know they are all fully capable and full of experience and pride. I feel like we are just at a point where we are top-heavy, and just a personal observation, I feel like we can do without the Deputy Fire Chief and that the existing sub-management can cover these duties. Thank you, Chair. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Questions? Council Chair Rapozo: I have a question for the Chief. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. I will suspend the rules. Council Chair Rapozo: In the original budget submittal, you were asking to remove the Deputy Fire Chief, if I remember correctly, and you have two (2) Assistant Fire Chiefs, right? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 64 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Chief Westerman: It was not to remove them; it was to reallocate them to an Assistant Chief. Council Chair Rapozo: And have one more Assistant Chief? So you would have a Chief, yourself, and two (2)Assistant Chiefs, versus one (1) Deputy? Chief Westerman: Yes. The other Assistant Chief was also a reallocation from the Fire Fighter Position; it was not an add. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. So in this scenario now, you are saying that your Fire Chief is vacant right now. Chief Westerman: Deputy Chief. Council Chair Rapozo: I mean Deputy Fire Chief, yes. Chief Westerman: Yes, but that is because it has been dollar-funded. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. So now it is budgeted, so your intent is to hire the Deputy? Chief Westerman: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Your intent is to hire a Deputy Fire Chief? Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And to have an Assistant Fire Chief as well? Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And you have three (3) Battalion Fire Chiefs? Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: So maybe you can explain to us. It does feel top-heavy. Chief Westerman: I guess it is a matter of perspective when you are sitting in my seat. I think it is extremely light. The Battalion Chiefs are not managers in the department; they manage a shift, an operational crew day-to-day. Their ability to be able to take off and spend the day like they are doing right now today, the crews are suffering because they do not have their leader out there working with them and helping them during the day, plus they do additional duties, like Councilmember Kagawa brought up. They already do things like help us with purchasing and issues, but they suffer from the same anomaly that our firefighters do, is that they work a shift, so they are on today, off DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 65 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING tomorrow, on the next day, and then they are off for four (4) days. If they are working a project that is critical, they could be off at a time that some decisions might need to be made. So the intent for them is to work the shift that they are on and make sure that all of the operations are done properly and safely and the firemen have everything they need, and in some cases, takeover the operation from them; not to sit back and manage the department. The Assistant Chiefs responsibility will be to help manage them and make sure that everything they need to do and assign them additional tasks, and then that is his responsibility to help make that happen. The Deputy Fire Chief, as it was in the past and always has been, was to help me manage the department. It is two hundred seven (207) people. I am sorry, but logistically, it is like I said in the budget hearing that I have run out of time in the day. There are not twenty-nine (29) hours in the day and things are not getting done. I am sorry to say that, but I do not want something to happen when I am not here in order to make it happen and I really need these tiers of management in the department. Councilmember Yukimura: So you are saying that you need two (2) Assistants to do your work? Chief Westerman: No. Councilmember Yukimura: I mean it is an Assistant Fire Chief and a Deputy Fire Chief. Chief Westerman: Assistant Fire Chief and Deputy Fire Chief. They do two (2) different things. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the difference? Chief Westerman: The Deputy Fire Chief is basically like me, like the Fire Chief, and supports everything that we do all day long like decision-making, getting out and seeing what is happening in the programs, making the decisions, talking across the shifts, management of the department, and those kinds of things. The Assistant Chiefs responsibility is to manage the three (3) different shifts and the three (3) bureaus that are out there, operating on a daily basis. Councilmember Yukimura: The three (3) bureaus are your Fire Prevention, Ocean Safety, and... Chief Westerman: And Fire Training and the Administration. Councilmember Yukimura: You also have the Captains at each station. Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: This Assistant Fire Chief will get overtime? Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Even though he or she is in an administrative managerial position? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 66 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Chief Westerman: Yes. There is need for it. Yes, he is eligible for overtime. Councilmember Yukimura: He does not get automatic overtime like your Fire Prevention person does? Chief Westerman: I would have to ask Rose to come up and help me with that, of what is included in his pay. But he is different than the Battalion Chiefs, because he is not working a shift like the Fire Fighters. Councilmember Yukimura: I know. ROSE BETTENCOURT, Administrative Officer: Good afternoon. Rose Bettencourt, Administrative Officer at the Kaua`i Fire Department. The Assistant Chief is an excluded managerial position, so he would be in the same category as our Battalion Chiefs, whereas a Deputy Fire Chief, as an exempt position, he gets a salary and that is it. The Assistant Chief would be entitled to overtime, as the Chief says, if there is a need for it, because he would be covered under the same Executive Order as our Battalion Chiefs. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Is that the same for your Fire Prevention? Is that a Captain there? Ms. Bettencourt: The Captain is included; he is not excluded managerial. Councilmember Yukimura: So he gets the rank for rank? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Rose. Now that we have this supplemental and it looks different from the original—so if the Assistant Fire Chief just got added, where is that person sitting right now? Or did he already get added? Ms. Bettencourt: No. Just the proposal you mean for the Assistant Fire Chief? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, $133,347, EM-7. Who is in that position right now? Ms. Bettencourt: A Fire Fighter. Councilmember Kagawa: Is he in already? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Kagawa: So that is a warm body? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 67 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Kagawa: The Deputy is open? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions? Council Chair Rapozo: I have to ask an obvious question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Because the salaries of the excluded are so much higher, $20,000 higher, would it not be fiscally wise to create another Deputy position, as opposed to an Assistant Fire Chief? In other words, for the administrative duties, you could have multiple deputies versus...that is $20,000 more... Ms. Bettencourt: Frankly, that was something that we had not entertained or discussed. Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I am entertaining it because I did not realize the difference in pay was so much. As we are trying to control the runaway—to me...it is a title...the title "Deputy Fire Chief' would be an exempt, correct? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: So they would be limited by the Salary Commission. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: Versus an Assistant Fire Chief, who the longer they stay in, the more they get. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: It does not end, right? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes, it depends on how it goes. Council Chair Rapozo: I guess I would put that out to you folks, if that is a possibility, to create another Deputy Fire Chief. I am assuming that the duties are similar. It is just because of the way it is titled, the salary would be different. What I am hearing is that the Deputy Fire Chief is basically the Chiefs Deputy, the top administrator, who should be qualified to do the duties of an Assistant Fire Chief. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 68 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: I am a former cop, so I am thinking that the Deputy Police Chief versus an Assistant Chief, which used to be called "majors" and "inspectors," but to me, the Deputy should be able to do all what they do. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: They are at the same level of experience. To me, the feasible thing would be to create another Deputy because I think you are going to have a hard time getting the support for a position that is $133,000 and climbing versus $114,000 steady. That is just a thought. Ms. Bettencourt: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: How are you going to fill it? Ms. Bettencourt: The Assistant Chief? Councilmember Yukimura: No, the Deputy Fire Chief. Who would want a position like that? Ms. Bettencourt: That is an interesting question. Councilmember Yukimura: So even if we create it...you do not have somebody in that position now, right? Ms. Bettencourt: No. Councilmember Yukimura: Partly for the reason... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: That position was dollar-funded last year. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, that is what I mean. Why would someone take $114,000 when they can make much more as a Captain, Battalion Chief, or Assistant Fire Chief? With a base pay of $133,000 as an Assistant Fire Chief with overtime, this person would be making about $150,000. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes, that is conceivable. Councilmember Yukimura: And retiring with that kind of base as well? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? If not, I will bring the meeting back to order. Any discussion on this? Councilmember Yukimura. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 69 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to reiterate what I said during the hearing. We have a Fire Department and seven percent (7%) of the calls are fire calls. The rest are mainly emergency medical calls and the State is paying for an emergency medical system—I do not know what the cost is. When there is a call, an emergency medical, the firetruck goes and the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) goes. The overlap and duplication is incredible and the people of Kauai and Hawaii are supporting that. There has to be a better way and I hope that somebody is looking at that because I bet we could find an incredibly robust system for less cost if we somehow coordinated things. We have two (2) medical directors: the Fire Department has a medical director and the EMS system has a medical director. You can just see the duplication, so especially at salary levels like this, there has to be a better way and I hope somebody is looking at that. This is an administrative matter. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: The question for this Council is it seems like we have the votes to eliminate the Deputy, but do we want to instead leave the Deputy and eliminate the Assistant Chief? That is the call. If we have the votes there, I would be willing to withdraw my motion. I am just trying to find consensus among the Members. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion from the Members? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I appreciate the thought. The thing is that position, if we do have a Deputy position, could stay empty, too. Is that a possibility? To have both of those positions does not make sense to me at all. Councilmember Kagawa: If I could just make a last point just as an outside observer that not all the time will salary amount in the present time dictate whether a candidate...I am not talking about a Battalion Chief taking a pay, but I am talking about a Captain that deserves a Deputy's pay and responsibilities. It is not all the time that they will just wait for a Battalion Chief or what have you to open. It may be experience that they are looking for to jump into the Deputy, get that experience, and when the Battalion Chief or Fire Chief opens up, they are in line and they have that experience. I do not want to say that at $114,000 that, that pay does not make it available to a candidate that is looking for advancement. Of course, $133,000 over $114,000 looks better, but... Councilmember Yukimura: And no overtime. Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Anyway, we have a decision that is out there. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Thank you. Chief, I am trying to think about the Deputy position again and some of the duties in comparison to yours because what I am hearing is that you want them to act as you, basically. Is there a way to look at that position or rename that position so that there are duties that they encompass that may assist you, but not have the same role or same title? For instance, I am not real clear, but I know that some cities and counties have a "chiefs driver" that does a lot of the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 70 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING "groundwork," so to speak, so they are not in that criteria, but they get a lot of the legwork done. Would that be another alternative to look at from your perspective? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Westerman: I appreciate the conversation. The question actually goes to what Councilmember Yukimura was saying. I agree with your perspective wholeheartedly, but who is going to do that? All of this movement that you want to do with EMS and providing better service to the County is in the strategic plan. Councilmember Yukimura: To merge... Chief Westerman: The dilemma remains, who is going to do that? I am already working twenty-nine (29) hours a day, trying to just manage my department. So to move it forward, we are at a standstill because there are not physically the bodies to do it. There just are not the bodies to manage at that level to perform those functions just like you were saying. What does a driver do for me? Really, not much, because the driver cannot sit in my office and work on a disciplinary issue with one of our Ocean Safety Officers or Fire Fighters and they cannot sit in my office and decide how the budget is going to be done and where the money is going be spent. Where are we spending the money? How are we spending the money? Are we doing it right? Are we doing it in the wishes of the Council? Are we doing it in the wishes of the Administration? All of that rests upon my shoulders. I have nobody else. I do not want to get offensive here, but I am the only department that will now be without a Deputy and being the third largest in the County, you want me to be effective and efficient, but you do not want to provide me the resources. I am sorry, I do not want to be offensive, but this is exactly what you are telling me. You want me to be successful, but you do not want to provide me the tools that I need to make this department work, be safe, be efficient, and be progressive. That is why we need both of these positions. I cannot really say anything else. I am sorry that I am getting a little aggravated, I guess, with the questioning, but I am trying to defend the department. It really is critical that these two (2) positions be provided to the department so we can move it forward. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I was going to ask you a question that you just answered. My question was about the impacts and you answered them clearly and I believe the department needs both positions and will be voting accordingly. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: No, I just have my comments. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Further questions for the Chief? If not, I am going to bring the meeting back to order. Councilmember Kagawa. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 71 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: If there is a question that he cannot at least get one...say we fill the Deputy and let go of the Assistant Chief and he says it is highly likely that somebody will take the Deputy, then he has nobody. But at least if we leave the Assistant Chief, there is a guarantee that somebody is going to take that $133,000 pay. I think I would say at least give him one Assistant that he will guarantee have to assist him. In the upcoming year, if it shows that there is some kind of lapse in performance, we can look at it as a midyear request, but I would say at this point, we are trying to tighten up the budget. I am not the manager there, but there are three (3) Battalion Chiefs right under, highly paid, and there are Captains and a lot of management that can all come together, pitch in, and make it run. I think we have a tough decision and it is not pleasant, but what is the alternative? GET? Anyway, I am ready. Thank you, Chair. Council Chair Rapozo: I have one more question for the Chief. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. I will suspend the rules. Council Chair Rapozo: Chief, how long would it take for you to fill the Deputy spot or do you even think you can? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Westerman: Well, my intent was, once July hit, to go out for both positions. Council Chair Rapozo: What is the likelihood of somebody qualified in your department for the Deputy position to actually take that position because of the pay? Chief Westerman: Well, I think there is probably several that will apply. Council Chair Rapozo: Oh, so you think you will not have a problem filling it? Chief Westerman: It might be a tough decision of who I select, yes. Council Chair Rapozo: But you do not think you will have a problem filling it? Chief Westerman: I guess really it is my problem if I do have the problem. Like I said... Council Chair Rapozo: Well, I am not supporting removing the position, but I do not like funding a position for twelve (12) months when the position will not be there for twelve (12) months. Do you know what I am saying? Chief Westerman: Oh. Council Chair Rapozo: So if it is going to take you six (6) months to get somebody in the seat, then I am obviously going to support reducing the salary by six (6) months. If it is three (3) months that it is going to take you to fill, which is what we do, but that is the only reason why I asked the question. Do you believe you can fill that position? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 72 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Chief Westerman: I believe I can fill it. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Chief Westerman: Can I make one point? Maybe personnel might want to respond to it, but the position for an Assistant Chief, if you choose not to do that, it does not go away. That is actually a position in the department because it is a reallocation, so we would have to be careful on how we make that decision. Council Chair Rapozo: That is a warm body. Chief Westerman: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I have a question, too, I guess, and it might be for the Administration. I think in the past we have dollar-funded this position, but right now we have it as completely eliminating the position. Have we eliminated Deputy positions before? Police is gone. Ms. Bettencourt: When there are no warm bodies, yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Is the intent to eliminate the position? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: When we say "eliminate the position," we have an opportunity midyear to come up with a money bill and put it back. It is not like we are chopping a head off and that it cannot be reattached. It is just that at this point, making a financial decision that we believe at this time, given the facts we have and what is best for the County. We are the budget-makers and decide "yes" or "no" at the time and it is not chopping the head off, but just putting a bag over the head for a little while. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion from the Members? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I do want to say something. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is this a question to the Chief? Councilmember Yukimura: No, this is discussion. I just want to say that with respect to my point about finding a way to remove the overlap, it is not about doing things within the Fire Department. It is about working cross-agency and policy-wise to find out how to create a new organization, and I believe that can be done by whoever is doing your strategic plan. It has to be done in very deep conversation and in analyses with Department of Health and the EMS service. I think that is a direction that we have to look at because we cannot keep going this way. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 73 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Anyone else? Sorry, I have a question for the Chief. I am going to suspend the rules. It seems like we are in a predicament of trying to decide. I do not think everyone is comfortable with having both of the positions, but they are trying to decide which position would help your office out the most. I guess I will put the question this way—if you had to choose, what would be the position that you would want to keep if one was on the chopping block? I think that is what is going around the table right now based on can you hire easier in one and who is going to help you out the most and be the most valuable. Council Chair Rapozo: Chair, I guess I just have a clarifying question because I think he just said that Position No. 630 is filled and that there is a person in that position. I am looking at our sheet, the comparison sheet that we got, and it is showing Position No. 630 as a new position. Is someone in that position, the Assistant Chief? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chief Westerman: The position is a reallocation to the Assistant Chief. Councilmember Yukimura: Of a vacant position? Chief Westerman: I do not know how they classified that, but maybe Rose can help. Councilmember Yukimura: Is it vacant? Chief Westerman: No, it is not vacant. Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, I heard it was, but it is showing up on our sheet as a new position. Ms. Bettencourt: It was a position that we got two (2) years ago and it is currently filled. Council Chair Rapozo: Currently filled as what? Ms. Bettencourt: As a Fire Fighter Trainee. Council Chair Rapozo: Fire Fighter Trainee? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: The Fire Fighter Trainee is not getting paid $133,000, right? Ms. Bettencourt: No. Council Chair Rapozo: You took that position and that position was reallocated to an Assistant Fire Chief? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 74 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Ms. Bettencourt: We are requesting that it be reallocated, so in the budget, the adjustment from his salary was... Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. If the budget item gets approved, then you can fill that...so that person in that position right now is still a Fire Fighter Trainee. Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: On this same follow-up? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am a little confused about how you can reallocate an existing position into a position that does not have that body. Is that what you are proposing to do? Ms. Bettencourt: It would require us to work with the Department of Human Resources if it is a promotion and movement simultaneously, so nobody will be out of a job; it is just like a circular movement. Councilmember Yukimura: Who is in there right now? A Fire Fighter Trainee? Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And you are not...please explain because I am confused. Ms. Bettencourt: Okay. There is currently a Fire Fighter Trainee in the position and if the budget were approved for the Assistant Fire Chief for that position to be allocated, we would work with Human Resources in order to go out for promotional recruitment, and then do movements at the same time. It is going to be someone else within the Fire Department who is going to go into the Assistant Chief position, so that position becomes vacant and it is like a domino effect, then we fill up, up, and up, and eventually we have a Fire Fighter position on the bottom open where that person would go into. It would be all on the same day. Ms. Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura... Councilmember Yukimura: Theoretically, you can just use any filled position and reallocate it to get an extra position? Ms. Bettencourt: It is not an extra position; you still end up with the same number of positions, the same amount of positions. It is just that... Council Chair Rapozo: That one (1) salary is three (3) times more than the others. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 75 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Ms. Bettencourt: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: So you triple the cost with the same position. I think that is what Councilmember Kuali`i was talking about earlier. For us, it is kind of like, "Wow." Then next year in the budget, we are going to ask why did it get so high? It may not only be because of collective bargaining, it is because of these manipulated positions throughout the budget year. I think that is what he is saying. Chief Westerman: Council Chair... Council Chair Rapozo: Chief, do not take offense. Chief Westerman: I am not. Council Chair Rapozo: I am just saying that it is difficult for us because when we approve the budget, the public sees the budget and it is a $189,000,000 budget, and then between this year and next year, there will be all of those reallocations without anybody knowing, there is no public process, no public hearing, and all of a sudden, somebody's salary jumped three (3) times and next year we are another $30,000, $40,000, or $50,000 in salary for one position, and no one knows about it until something like this comes up and we are asking. So I think that is the frustration. Chief Westerman: That is why we are here today to tell you that is what we want to do, and it is not a budget three (3) times the salary; it is only the difference between a Fire Fighter's salary and the Assistant Chiefs salary. Council Chair Rapozo: What is the Fire Fighter Trainee salary? Chief Westerman: $56,000 base pay. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. This is $133,000? Chief Westerman: $133,000. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, maybe not quite three (3), but more than two (2). Chief Westerman: Right. Councilmember Yukimura, if the Assistant Chief gets filled, that means maybe a Battalion Chief got promoted, so that position is open. So then the Captain gets promoted into the Battalion Chief and the Fire Fighter III gets promoted into that, so that Fire Fighter position becomes open. Councilmember Yukimura: As you pointed out, it is not like it is happening without our notice; you folks are here before us asking for that to happen, so it is a transparent, open process that you are doing it by. Chief Westerman: Right. Chair, I do not know if I have an answer for your question. As I stated before, I need both positions. If you want me to move the department forward, provide good service, and provide my firefighters safety, I still feel I need both positions. I guess the bottom line, if I had to choose, I could reposition the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 76 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Assistant Chief into any position that I want him to be and I could assign him whatever duties I wished. You are right that it would be easier to fill, so I guess would I go with the Assistant Chief. The other side of that, too, is with a Deputy there is always the opportunity for a Deputy to stepdown. So if I keep the Deputy instead of the Assistant Chief and bring somebody up, they have the opportunity to learn, and then they have the opportunity to step back down to maybe be the Chief some day and someone else step up and get some education and experience. The dilemma is both sides for me. Again, restating my case, I think I am in need of both positions, but whatever the Council chooses to do is, I guess, what I will live with. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Got it. Any further questions for the Chief? If not, we will bring the meeting back to order. Discussion? Right now, we have cutting the Deputy Fire Chief position. I think it is the same conundrum. Do we want both of them? Do we want one? Which one is it? Discussion? Councilmember Kuali`i. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kuali`i: I will just say that I am willing to support removing either. I would prefer to support removing Position No. 630, Assistant Fire Chief. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any other discussion from the Members? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I want to agree with you, ninety-nine percent (99%), Councilmember Kuali`i. I realized that sometimes you have to take the good and the bad and I certainly do not want to hurt the Fire Department in their performance and duties. I think cutting the Deputy would be a more feasible cut for us. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just think that there is a big difference between a position that has a fixed salary, which is the deputy, versus this EM-7, which is basically eligible for overtime. It is budgeted for $133,000, and that in its sense, is a budget approval. That is not something that exists now, so we would be approving a new $133,000 position from a $56,000 position that was reallocated. I think this practice is pretty much the opposite of transparent and something that I hope will stop as we all learn more to point it out, see it, and question it. Very easily, either chief could come before this Council and justify a position and the need for that position and just what it takes. But to do this stuff behind the scenes, and then for it to just slip by us in the budget is wrong. I think that is wrong. I would much rather support keeping the Deputy position and removing the Assistant Chief. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion from the Members? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I just have a difficult time cutting positions, because as part of the Chiefs strategic plan, I am concerned about that. I do not like the practice any more than Councilmember Kuali`i and I do not know what we can do. Our last County Attorney advised us improperly that we do not have right to do certain things, but I think when you are taking a position like that, you are taking a $50,000 position and DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 77 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING reallocating it to a $133,000 position, I believe that we should have the right to approve that. I think that we should have the right to put that in as a proviso, but maybe I am wrong. Having said that, I think the Chief has made an argument that satisfies me that the positions are needed. I do not think it will pass, so it is not going to matter what I say, but I would ask the Chief and Rose to consider my suggestion of another Deputy versus another EM, for no other reason but to really help this County in some trying times because the salaries are out of this world. Like I said, I do not think my comments will matter because I do not think it is going to pass, but I would just take that...is the Chief here? Is he around? Where did he go? Oh, he is sitting right there. But if you can at least consider that, Chief. I am not going to be supporting the removal of the position. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I am not going to be supporting the cut as well. I think the Chief does need this position in order to achieve the goals he is setting forth. I think that what I am asking for is for a lot more flexibility from a broader position as the Chief, to really look and dig deeper as we are trying here, trying to cut things that should not be cut, really, because that is what needs to happen. You folks are doing it creatively, as it is with the Assistant Chief positions and moving them around, but I think if we can work together on that a little bit more closer, we would not be in this position right now and I think that we are going to have to take some bold moves. I know the transition that you are looking for and I am supportive of that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I guess I am ignorant, but I still do not get how the Chief could not do it with one (1) Deputy or Assistant because there are three (3) Battalion Chiefs as well. This is high-level managerial. Nobody else in this County has two (2) deputies. The department heads have huge reach, whether it is number of people, complexity of issues, or difficulty of problem-solving. So it seems to me that there should be a way, with three (3) high-level Battalion Chiefs and an Assistant Chief, to be able to handle this. I could be really ignorant. I have never stood in the Chiefs shoes, but as someone that is looking overall in the County, and I think we have to recognize that there are other departments and other really heavy responsibilities, and in this time of difficult budgets, it seems that we need to be aware of that. I also think that there are not too many departments that have this high-level of salary for their managers either. The Battalion Chiefs are all at $120,000 and with overtime, which we saw during the hearing, was $170,000 for each Battalion Chief. We have a responsibility here, I believe. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: As I indicated earlier, I am not supporting cutting the Deputy Fire Chief position or the other Assistant Fire Chief position. There is no doubt in my mind that the Chief needs the support, the managerial support, specifically. Unlike every other department, except for perhaps the Police Department, this is a seven (7) day a week, twenty-four (24) hour a day job and we owe it to the Chief, the department, and the people to make sure we give him the proper support that he needs and I am convinced he needs it, so I will not support the cut. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I guess for me, it is taking the lesser of the two (2) evils. I applaud the Fire Chief. He has handled this long without an Assistant Fire DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 78 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Chief or a Deputy Fire Chief and you can see the stress on his face for what he has to deal with. For me, I am okay with leaving in the Deputy Fire Chief and if there is a proposal for the Assistant Fire Chief, then I will probably vote against that, but I definitely do think that the Fire Chief needs somebody there and needs some support. He has been doing it this whole time, so this will only help him...any other position there will only help him. Any further comments? If not, roll call vote. The motion to eliminate Position No. 84, Deputy Fire Chief, was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura TOTAL— 3, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL—4, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The motion fails. Are there any other cuts? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I do not know if it is prepared yet, but I am proposing that we reduce the Assistant Fire Chief to a trainee pay. Do we need some time? We may need some time. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Actually, I had one that would not need time. Is it okay if I propose mine first? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. I have a minor one. It was something that I questioned earlier. I am going to need somebody to propose it and have a second. Earlier, I questioned the Chief on the equipment purchases like the treadmills and stationary bikes and I saw that they did actually take out the treadmills. They still have a small amount for stationary bikes, and it is a small amount, but to me it is kind of just that whole question of"want" versus "need." Do we want this or do we need this? It is a small amount, but it just bothers me on the want and need. I am open either way. If people think that it is a need for the fire stations or not...I am more under the impression that it is a want. Councilmember Kagawa moved to remove funding in the amount of$4,800 from the Fire Department, Fire Operations for Stationary Bikes, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any questions or discussions on this? This is for $4,800 for two (2) stationary bikes. Any discussion? If not, we will take a roll call vote on it. The motion to remove funding in the amount of $4,800 from the Fire Department, Fire Operations for Stationary Bikes was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL—6, AGAINST MOTION: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 79 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further Fire cuts? Councilmember Kuali`i: Mine is only being prepared if yours fails. Councilmember Kagawa: I am just going to explain my proposal. I am alarmed at...when I was told that a warm body was in there, I thought a warm body was in for the entire Assistant Fire Chief and already promoted to that pay; however, I think in these tough times, we are adding high-level, managerial position pay and certainly everybody would like to take care of their employees and have more assistants at the top, but certainly now is not the time. We have seen it with all of the recent tax proposals and what have you. The public is saying, "Is a policeman/fireman worth $170,000? Is that reasonable?" I do not think it is reasonable. Therefore, I propose that we leave the trainee position as-is and wherever that person came from can remain at his position until we have a full vetting of the reasons why a promotion that large should be approved. Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa moved to reduce Salary and title change for Position No. 630 from Assistant Fire Chief to Fire Fighter I and move position from Fire - Administration to Fire - Operations reduce Position No. 630 to Firefighter I, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Vice Chair, you are proposing that this position be down-allocated to a Fire Fighter Trainee? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. The person that is in the warm body will get paid that amount that the person is right now and that cut will amount to a savings of $90,517, so I make the motion to reallocate the position from an Assistant Fire Chief to a Fire Fighter Trainee also. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. We have a question for the Chief. Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: It has been a long day and it is only 2:45 p.m. Can you give us your thoughts on the impacts of this to your operations and plans? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Chief, do you have an understanding of the motion? Can you hand the Chief a sheet. It is reducing the Assistant Fire Chief's position back to what it was. Councilmember Hooser: So it is my understanding that this reduces the pay to the equivalent or the funding, I should say, to what the individual was getting paid at this point and re-describes the position to the position the person has, as opposed to the Assistant Chief position. Is that correct? Councilmember Kagawa: Correct. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 80 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser, can you ask your question again? Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so the proposal is to change the position designation to reflect the actual person that is in there now, their job title and description, as well as their pay. So that would remove the Assistant Chief designation that is there now and remove the excess funds that are there now. My question is what impact will this have on the plans and operations of the Fire Department? Ms. Bettencourt: As far as not having an Assistant Chief? Is that the question? Councilmember Hooser: Yes. Ms. Bettencourt: That is something that I think the Chief would be better able to answer. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. It also has some fiscal implications because there is money being cut also. Chief Westerman: Right. If the position is not there, the funding is not needed to be there to support the position. My concern was how this reflects backwards, and again, I might need Human Resources' help to make sure it is right because the proposal in the budget was just to reallocate a position. We were not moving the position, so I do not understand how that works. If we do not have the position, again, I restate the effects it has on the department. The fact then that it is just the Deputy and I still trying to move everything forward. With the Deputy before, the Deputy was in the Operations Division doing what the Assistant Chief would have been doing and I was left doing both the Deputy and the Chiefs operations, so that is why we proposed it this way to get the Deputy back to where he needed to be in supporting me and the department, and then letting the Assistant Chief manage the Operations Division. Again, if I have one (1) of two (2), I move forward. Councilmember Hooser: It seems like you have your Deputy position. Chief Westerman: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Now, the Assistant position you have does not have an assistant in that position. It has a Firefighter Trainee. Chief Westerman: Right. Well, I guess I could do whatever I wanted to do with the position, if that is what you are getting at. This was kind of a complicated move. We had three (3) positions in the rescue company and we reallocated all three (3) of the positions to support the strategic plan and our movement forward. One went to training as a Firefighter III and that was to support the EMS function, as it was being built up in the training division; one went to Fire Prevention to help support the education program in the Fire Prevention Bureau; and the third position was going to go to the Assistant Chief. So now what happens is that engine company or that rescue company in Lihu`e, one (1) of the three (3) has an extra body. For me, that is complicated. I will take that position and move it somewhere in the administration and figure out something to do DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 81 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING with it. Councilmember Chock said to make him a driver—that is essentially what I am going to do, and then work with HR on how I can move that position over to the administration bureau. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Chief'? If not, thank you, Chief. I will bring the meeting back to order. Any discussion on the motion? I have a question. So if we did not have the Assistant Fire Chief position on it, this is what the position would have been? Is that what we are trying to do? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: Exactly. The person in that position right now, the warm body, is not going to be cut. We are just adjusting the salary to what he is actually doing. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I actually think of it not as a "cut," but that this proposal is to approve the coming reallocation because it has not been reallocated yet. As part of that reallocation they are doing it in the budget cycle is to increase the salary by two and half(2.5) times. That is another way to say the same thing. Councilmember Kagawa: In response, if everybody...top-of-the-line... efficient following the topnotch strategic plan—what is next? Next year, are we going to ask for two (2) Assistant Fire Chiefs, then three (3), and then four (4)? At some point, we have to draw the line and say, "Well, we have everybody struggling, so you have to struggle as well and do what you can." This is a good year to see that because we are broke. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion on this? Councilmember Kuali`i: I would just add that this is our opportunity; this is where we act as the Council during the budget. The only other chance on expenditures like this is approve or deny requests that come to us. As far as the whole budget, seeing actual positions, (inaudible) out and exposing for our ability to see it, reallocations, dollar-funded vacancies, and things that happen, and maybe we have not been seeing so clearly before, this is our only chance. It is not the end because if justification is there in September or October of next year for something to be created of this caliber, they can come before us. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair. (Councilmember Chock was noted as leaving the room at 2:53 p.m.) Council Chair Rapozo: We have gone through several departments and we often talk about the number of positions in departments. We went through the Mayor's Office budget. The Mayor has Chief of Staff, Managing Director, two (2) Administrative Aides, an Executive Secretary, two (2) Public Information Officers (PIOs), and a Protocol Officer. Every department has all kinds of staff. HR has eighteen (18) people. Anyway, we DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 82 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING have not visited any of those, granted maybe the warm bodies or what, but we are putting this scrutiny on the Fire Department, which I think is an essential department. We should be applying the same scrutiny on all the departments if we are going to budget. This is an opportunity and I appreciate this scenario where we have an opportunity to review this reallocation, but most of the time it does not happen. In fact, it rarely happens this way. It is usually done between budget years and it comes as a surprise. I hope that as we go through the budget, we start really looking at the manpower of all the departments because I think that is where the bulk of our expenditures are, obviously. I just wanted to make that point. I can count. The Chief will still be able to take that position number and reallocate it, get the funding from somewhere else, and make it happen. At that point, we will see if he can make it work. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Roll call vote, please. The motion to reallocate the position from an Assistant Fire Chief to a Fire Fighter Trainee and removing the position back to Operations was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL—6*, AGAINST MOTION: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of County of Kauai, Councilmember Chock was noted as silent (not present) and Councilmember Hooser was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay, we will move on. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Committee Chair, this brings us to the Civil Defense Agency. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any cuts for Civil Defense? If not, next. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Department of Public Works. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa moved to dollar-fund Position No. E-20, County Engineer, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion? (Councilmember Chock was noted as present at 2:54 p.m.) Councilmember Kagawa: I think as was stated, we have Lyle Tabata as Acting County Engineer and the Administration is fully confident that in the next two and a half(2.5) years, Lyle is the man to get the job done and I think they have stated that they have a lot of support around him. They have people in civil service positions now like EMs, that are capable of supporting him. They have Keith Suga helping him with special DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 83 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING projects CIPs. I have heard, at least from the Administration, that they are having difficulty finding a candidate for the County Engineer position. Again, dollar-funding it means that should they find somebody, which I doubt, they could come to the Council should they need to. At this point, I have full confidence that Mr. Tabata can perform the duties as he has been doing in the past few months since Mr. Dill left and we will go from there. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: We have received a memorandum from the Administration saying that they are going to post and do interviews in June, so that will not be possible if we...well, I mean if there is no salary there, it would be hard to recruit, I think, and that is my concern. Councilmember Kagawa: To respond, the dollar-funding holds the position open and existing funds within the Department of Public Works, County Engineer budget can be used in the interim period to pay the salary, and I assume that if the County Engineer is qualified for the position and gets hired, then I do not see any problem with this Council, through a money bill, putting in all of the replacement necessary funds that are necessary. I think at this point, it is prudent that we take whatever measures we can to anticipate any savings that we can, while we can. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the Administration up? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser has a question. Councilmember Hooser: I have questions for the Administration and Mr. Tabata. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will suspend the rules. Councilmember Hooser: I would like to know what impacts the Administration believes this will have on your recruiting and hiring and what the plans are for that. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Ms. Rapozo: We just put out the position this past weekend for the County Engineer position. It does show the salary increasing up to the new level as of July, so it is something new. We are not sure if that is going to attract anybody or if it will not. I do not believe we have had any response as of yet, but that will be out for ten (10) days right now. Councilmember Hooser: Thank you. The specific question is removing the funding and dollar-funding, what impact will that have on your recruitment? Ms. Rapozo: As Councilmember Kagawa said, by dollar-funding it, you are still holding the position, so if we are successful in finding a candidate, he is correct that the Administration could still come back with a money bill to add funding for that position. It would be that this Council would have to approve that DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 84 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING money bill. It does not stop us as far as recruiting because if you eliminate the position, then we would have to stop, which I do not believe you can because of the Charter. Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so it has no negative impact, I do not see any reason why we should not cut the funding. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Do you anticipate that it will be a challenge even at the new funding level? Ms. Rapozo: It is hard to say at this point if there is anybody looking for something like that, like if someone who is retired, who may want to come back and serve out two (2) years. Right now, the only guarantee we can give them is two (2) years with this Administration, so we have that challenge as well. So we are not sure. Sometimes you get someone, "a diamond in the rough" coming out. When State Highways hired Ray McCormick, he was actually retired and came back. So you never know, it is also timing sometimes. Councilmember Yukimura: Did you send the solicitation to Ray? When they ask when you are interviewing and a potential candidate is thinking of applying and they ask what the salary is, you can still give them the salary, but based on the Salary Resolution, I would guess? Ms. Rapozo: Yes, that is actually how the ad went out. It said, "As of July 1st, this is the salary. Right now it is at `this."' Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Do you have a deadline for response? Ms. Rapozo: Yes, it already went out and I believe it is May 8th for ten (10) days, so until May 18th. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: So you would have to come back for a money bill. Is that correct? Ms. Rapozo: That would be correct. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. I thought there was a time period where money bills could only be introduced after the unappropriated surplus was certified or something like that. Is that not the case? No? Maybe not. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: If that scenario happened, you could transfer internally, the money to cover the salary so you could expedite the hiring. Correct? Ms. Rapozo: We could. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 85 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Then come to the Council for a money bill to replenish the account that it came from, should you need? Ms. Rapozo: Correct. Council Chair Rapozo: It could be done relatively quickly, so it would not hold up the hiring. Ms. Rapozo: That is correct. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will call the meeting back to order. Any discussion on this? Councilmember Hooser. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Hooser: It appears that this would have no impact on their ability to hire. At the same time, it feels a little bit like "funny" accounting because if they intend to hire, they will have to have a money bill, so I do not know if it would be more appropriate to take fifty percent (50%). I am okay either way actually. If they intend to hire, the money legitimately should be budgeted, I think. I will just throw that out there. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I guess it comes down to my comment earlier when we were doing the bigger cuts for Police—do we cut it and then let them come back for a money bill or do we leave it in, maybe have it lapse a portion if it takes them a while to do it or a money bill? It is all up to the Councilmembers and what they are comfortable with. For me, I am fine with dollar-funding it and I will be voting to put it to dollar-funding and have them come back. We have to be cognizant that during the year, these positions that we cut and wherever this money ends up, in the Unassigned Fund Balance or whatever, it may come back to us and we need to be aware that we cut it with the intention of if they do hire, this money is going to come back. So when we look at our final balance, we need to know that maybe not all of that is money to go to a certain project. Janine, do you have something to add? I will suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Ms. Rapozo: I am sorry, can I add one more thing? When I answered Chair Rapozo regarding there would be no impact, the assumption is you are going to approve the money bill in the future. Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, that would be the assumption. Ms. Rapozo: If not, it would be a risk on us. Council Chair Rapozo: Right. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 86 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: But we could not approve the money bill and you could take it out of internal funds. Is that correct? Ms. Rapozo: The assumption is that all of the funds are budgeted for specific purposes, so we would not have any place to go to. Councilmember Hooser: Right. Did you have a surplus this last budget? Council Chair Rapozo: Everybody has a surplus. Councilmember Hooser: Yes, so the assumption also is that you have a surplus and that you might be able to fund it internally if the Council decided not to fund the money bill. (Council Chair Rapozo was noted as leaving the meeting at 2:57 p.m.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: They have one (1) more month to recognize their surplus or deficit. Ms. Rapozo: It would be dependent on when in the year that is. If it is early on, we really would not know. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. I will bring the meeting back to order. Discussion? Councilmember Chock. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Chock: Ultimately, it is not a good budget practice if we are moving down this road. I think that is what I am hearing you say, Chair. I would agree. I think the flipside of that is that we are trying to get what the surplus will be and we have seen it before, so that needs to be diminished as much as possible so that it is this much more accurate at the budget. This is something we know that we are going to spend our money on, so that is kind of what is concerning me if we continue to move down that road, then at the end of the year we see that we need to come back to these bills. It is just something that I want us to be thinking about, in terms of how we operate. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes, that is where we have to think what our policy is and we have to be consistent. We cannot say that we are going to cut all of these things and come back with a money bill, and then when they come back with a money bill, we cut it, and then they would have put up a much greater argument for the position and probably would have said that it would affect us and we would rather have the money in it and let it lapse. I think for the last budget, we went with the strategy of letting the money lapse and we have seen lapses come through. I think this year we are trying to feel out what is the budget strategy and you see us doing these smaller five percent (5%) cuts and seeing if that will work. When we do something like this, we need to recognize that they may end up coming back with a money bill and if it is early on in the year and their budget is fresh, they are not going to know if they are going to lapse in and they are going to come back and have to take it from the Unassigned Fund Balance. So just keep that in mind as we go on. Councilmember Yukimura. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 87 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: I had a proposal to cut four (4) months out of it, thinking that you would need about that time to actually recruit. On the other hand, I do remember when I was the mayor and I believe the County Engineer position was open for almost one (1) year and at that time, the Mayor's salary was $60,000, so you can imagine what the County Engineer's position was and we had trouble filling both the County Engineer and the Water Engineer positions. It can stay open for a long time, but I for one am committed to pass an appropriation bill as quickly as possible if you get a candidate that you select. (Council Chair Rapozo was noted as present at 3:00 p.m.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: My apologies because I had to step out. I am assuming that the decision was made that you are going to hire and I am not going to pose the other questions because I do not want to open up the suspension of the rules, but I am assuming that is what happened. At the last discussion we had here, we were told by the Mayor that he was not going to fill it and allow Lyle to serve out the term. So there is a decision that they are going to go out and hire and if that is the case, then I think it looks good to cut all of these numbers, but whether it is four (4) months or six (6) months...I am not sure how long it will take to fill this position, but I know it will take some time...but I would be more inclined to support a reduction of the salary for a period of time that you believe it would take to hire this position, rather than just dollar-fund it because then it is like putting the money in a piggyback, knowing next month that you are going to take it out. I am not sure how much time it will take to get an engineer. I do not know if there is anybody out there willing to come here for two and half (2.5) years under a Mayor that is going to term out to be the engineer. Nine (9) months? It is going to take nine (9) months to fill? Three (3) months to fill? Okay. We will go ahead with the vote and if it passes, it passes. If not, I will propose a nine (9) month funding. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I am not sure if the Chair was in the meeting when I earlier expressed similar concerns in terms of the budget policy, that if we are going to be spending money anyway, perhaps we should fund the nine (9) months, so that would be the direction I think would be more prudent. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I have an eight (8) month funding proposal ready to go. I am just saying that it is already ready to go. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? We did this last year, that rather than cutting the position, we funded something nine (9) months or eight (8) months. We have to realize that if we cut the whole thing, it might come back and we have to be willing to bite the bullet at that time. If we want to leave it in, we understand they have flexibility to do stuff with the budget, but it is all what we are comfortable with. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the motion to dollar-fund Position No. E-20, County Engineer, Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the second. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 88 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura moved to reduce funding for the County Engineer and related benefits to eight (8) months funding (reduce by four (4) months), seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. I do not know how much discussion we need on this, but... Council Chair Rapozo: Call for the question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Obviously, you can see that because of the Sunshine Law, we have no clue what anybody is doing and that is why it ends up like this. I do not know if they are going to partially fund, we cut it, and somebody wants to add it; we have no clue. Council Chair Rapozo: Either that or we rehearsed this quite well. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: We do not have the time. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Roll call vote. The motion to reduce funding for the County Engineer and related benefits to eight (8) months funding (Reduce by four (4) months) was then put, carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL—0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are still on the Department of Public Works. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Brace yourselves. This amendment is not so much an impact on dollars. My motion is to...oh, it is a combination...sorry. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will get back to it. I was thinking about the methodology that we are going through and I think it will be that we take all of our cuts, we take the combinations, because in actuality, those should balance out, and then we take the adds. There is no sense in taking the adds before the combinations. The combinations are going to balance itself out, so it should have no difference on the impact on the budget. That is the way we are going to go when we get there. We still have a long ways to get there though. Any further cuts for the Department of Public Works? If not, we will move on to the Department of Parks and Recreation. Council Chair Rapozo: Nobody has cuts for Solid Waste? Are we going to do it differently? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 89 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes, Solid Waste is separate. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Department of Parks and Recreation. I did not see who left. I just wanted to be sure that if we have combinations that somebody is here to answer. Councilmember Yukimura, do you have a cut? Councilmember Yukimura: It is just a removal of positions, not a cut. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It is a cut or an add. Do you have something for Parks and Recreation? We will get back to it if you want to find what you have. Anyone else with a cut for Parks and Recreation? We still have fifteen (15) more minutes before our break. Anything for the Agency on Elderly Affairs? Housing Agency? Transportation Agency? Public Works, Roads Division, including the baseyards? Stop me if I am moving too fast. Auto Maintenance? Councilmember Yukimura, are you ready? Councilmember Yukimura: Mine is a combination. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Auto Maintenance? Department of Liquor Control? Solid Waste? Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock moved to remove funding in the amount of $200,000 from Consultant Services for the Waste Diversion RFP Legal Consultant, seconded by Councilmember Hooser. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: You can explain your proposal. Councilmember Chock: This was just in discussion about the RFP and we know that it is phased out and I know this was already actually increased, but it sounds like we still have much more work to do in the RFP, so that is why I am considering the whole amount. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: Just real briefly, that was also on my list, but he beat me to the motion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: From the meeting, it is probably on everybody's list, if I can imagine. That one was on my list also. Any discussion on it? This is just the $200,000 that was moved from the County Attorney's Office to Solid Waste. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a more inclusive one that includes others. It is all Consultant Services to the tune of$550,000. Council Chair Rapozo: I just want to get clarity on this one that you are proposing. The $200,000, you are proposing that it be cut, and then you are going to be putting it in later in a different place. Is that what I heard? It is just removal? Okay. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 90 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Chock: I do not know what the pleasure of the body is, but I can withdraw if there is one that is more inclusive. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, are you saying that you want to cut the entire line item? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. If we all have it, then it is all inclusive. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you want to withdraw? Councilmember Chock withdrew the motion remove funding in the amount of $200,000 from Consultant Services for the Waste Diversion RFP Legal Consultant, Councilmember Hooser withdrew the second. Councilmember Yukimura moved to remove funding for all Waste Diversion RFP efforts, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I have a question for the Administration. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will suspend the rules. Councilmember Kagawa: We just did a RFP and we are at the stage of what? Is this RFP closing soon or did it close? What date did it close on? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. KEITH SUGA, CIP Manager: It closed this past Wednesday. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. How does this cut affect our further analysis or proceedings regarding looking into other opportunities that may be presented to keep trash out of the landfill? Mr. Suga: Currently, we have sufficient funding within the Solid Waste budget to move the RFP process through the Stage I phase of it. The funding that is being discussed currently is for the Stage II process. Councilmember Kagawa: So would it be reasonable to say that if this cut is made that the Department of Public Works can submit a money bill if needed to perform the Stage II when the time comes? LYLE TABATA, Acting County Engineer: We can. However, it would slow the process by the amount of time it would take us to prepare and submit and go through the money bill process. Councilmember Kagawa: The money bill process is about two (2) months. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 91 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Tabata: It will hold the project up for that long, at the minimum, maybe more depending on the timing of submittals and the ability to go through the entire process. Councilmember Kagawa: If this County is going to seriously look at if there are any waste diversion opportunities, other than the MRF, which is being talked about by some members, should we leave a certain amount in or leave it all in, or take out some? Mr. Tabata: Definitely, we should leave in the amount that is designated for consultant assistance to help develop the initial phases of the Stage II RFP. We feel like we are under a timeclock because of the Council's Resolution for us to seek alternative technologies, so we are following through on that directive, so any removal of funds is going to slow us down. Once you gain momentum and get to a certain point, you need to just follow through and keep the ball rolling. If not, it is going to delay the whole process. Councilmember Kagawa: I hope it was not just the Council's Resolution that is pushing you folks to look at alternatives. Mr. Tabata: No... Councilmember Kagawa: We have a landfill that is filling up and I think we all are concerned and want different options. Mr. Tabata: You are right. It is considering all of the "different stresses" that we are under is a better way to put it. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay, so what moneys of the $550,000 could be taken out and they are by line item, so it is $300,000 for the consultant, $50,000 for the financial consultant, and $200,000 for the legal consultant. Which ones could the Council reasonably take out, and then you still will have the two (2) months to come if needed? Who knows whether we will need the whole thing? I think it is very prudent of Councilmembers to look at taking out something that perhaps is a question mark at this point. Is there any amount of that $550,000 that is being proposed in Councilmember Yukimura's cut that could be reasonably removed? Kind of like a give and take? Is there anything that you folks can give us out of that? Mr. Tabata: I believe the original $200,000 that was originally proposed would be able to be cut. For the $350,000, I believe we should keep to help us go through evaluation and preparation of the document. Mr. Barreira: Ernie Barreira, Budget and Purchasing Chief. Just one thing to clarify—in addition to the financial discussion that is going on here, the RFP is a complete package. It is broken up into two (2) stages. Stage I has concluded with the submission of the offers, but when we go into Stage II, the elements of the RFP are still alive and well, which means that there can be no substantial public disclosure, in terms of discussion about the project until we facilitate, if we get to that point, a receipt of all proposals and an award at the end of the process. I know there was a great deal of frustration the last time we were here because of the limitations and the dialogue that can occur. Those limitations from a procurement perspective could still occur. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 92 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Questions? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I was a little confused with Lyle's answer because he started off saying that $200,000 was enough, and then he added the $350,000. What do we need to get to Phase II? Mr. Suga: I think what Lyle is trying to say is that the $350,000 will allow us to start the documentation for the Stage II RFP, work on the criteria, as to which it is going to be evaluated by. The $200,000 was more for the legal assistance to help review the documentation. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, so in other words, you need the $550,000? Ms. Nakamura: Nadine Nakamura, Managing Director. I just want to clarify that part of the Stage II document typically includes a contract and agreement that bidders respond to. This is actually how your agreement with the County would be. I think I just want to clarify that it would be very helpful to have that document, the assistance of the attorney to assist us from the very beginning. If we go down this path, and it would be a lot, I think; we would not lose time and momentum by coming back and not being able to, as Procurement Officer Ernie Barreira mentioned, at that point we will not be able to have conversations because we are going to be working on this document. It is important that we have the funding, so we do not have the downtime so we can move on to it. We will need the Attorneys' assistance with those bid documents. Mr. Tabata: Just to clarify, and I was corrected, that when we go and procure the services for financial consultant and legal, we need all the money there. We need to encumber the contract with all the money there. We cannot do it with only part of the money. I stand corrected and Mr. Barreira reaffirmed that we need all the money there to encumber the consultant services of all three (3) of the different levels that we are looking for. Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Mr. Tabata: I apologize for misstating earlier, but we need all of it. Ms. Nakamura: As the Mayor noted earlier this morning, the consultant line item was reduced by $250,000 in the supplemental budget, based on concerns raised by the Council at our last meeting. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Did I hear that you went out to bid without criteria for judging what is coming in? Mr. Suga: For the Stage I document, we do have criteria for the Stage I RFP document. Councilmember Yukimura: For Stage I? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 93 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Suga: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Which is the stage you are going through now. Mr. Suga: Correct, which was received this past Wednesday. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, I am glad because it would be kind of outrageous if you did not. So you are talking about criteria for what? Mr. Suga: The Stage II document. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. What is it that you expect to get out of this whole process? What can we expect at the end? Council Chair Rapozo: Committee Chair, I just wanted to say that we went through this when they were here the last time. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, we are considering whether we are going to... Council Chair Rapozo: Well, we know because we went through the whole shebang. I think right now, it is a matter of do we want them to proceed or not. I do not want to have to listen to this all over again. In fact, Councilmember Yukimura asked a ton of questions the last time. I would rather just move to the vote if you want to support the mandate...not a mandate, but the Resolution that we encouraged. So do we fund it or we do not? To go through the whole thing about the different types of technologies, I do not think that is for today. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think the last time we had problems discussing it because it is in procurement, so we can only get limited answers and we got a lot of answers the last time. Councilmember, do you have a specific question for them, regarding this number? Councilmember Yukimura: (Inaudible). Mr. Tabata: I can answer that. We are looking for a solid waste system. Councilmember Yukimura: So you are intending to abandon the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan? Mr. Tabata: No. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, that put forth a system and we have been working on that system. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, I think we went through this in a circular... Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 94 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser has a question. Councilmember Hooser: Actually, it is more for the body. My preference would be to approve this item and they would come back with a money bill later, and then there could be more questions at that point. If that is not the will of this body, then I think there are more questions that can be asked now. But I would prefer that we approve the motion, let them come back when they are ready, and no telling how long it is going to be. These things can take sixty (60) days or thereabouts. Then we can move forward with the discussion at that point. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I have to make one comment. I think Councilmember Yukimura's proposal has it as eliminating that entire line item and if that is the intention, then we can vote on it or if you want to withdraw it, I know Councilmember Chock had one that was dollar-funding the line item, so it would give them the ability to not get rid of that entire line item. I am not sure what the intention is. Is it to dollar-fund it or get rid of it? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I thought dollar-funding was really for positions. It is also for programs? Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. If you take all of the money out, the line disappears, so there is no line to transfer the money into, should we come up with a money bill. So you have to leave a dollar or else it disappears. If you folks are going to cut it, choose Councilmember Chock's one because his has a one dollar ($1) left. Councilmember Yukimura: I do not mind putting in one dollar ($1). So it is $449,000. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Maybe you should withdraw and have the other one come up with the dollar-funding in it, then we can do it that way to have to cleaner. Councilmember Yukimura: I would still like to have the full amount discussed. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: $550,000? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Council Chair Rapozo: $549,999. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Right, that is how it is on this right here. Councilmember Yukimura, you can withdraw your motion. Councilmember Hooser: I have a question before we do that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 95 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: If it is dollar-funded, the Administration could shift the funds internally without coming back to the Council with a money bill? Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so if we take Councilmember Yukimura's option and they come back with a money bill, they can come back for a line item at the same time. Council Chair Rapozo: Correct. Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so I support Councilmember Yukimura's proposal. I think it is an important decision that the Council should stay engaged in and not just turn it over and forego our responsibilities. I support the motion that is on the table. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If you do not want to withdraw then we can vote on what you have. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I think it would like to have it discussed as I proposed it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Are we ready to vote on it? Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to have some discussion on it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay, the meeting is called back to order. Councilmember Yukimura. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Yukimura: So as we are finding out now... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Actually, before we get into our discussion, I will take our ten (10) minute caption break so that we do not need to stop. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 3:31 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 3:41 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. We will keep moving. We are on discussion. Currently, the proposal is to remove $550,000 from the Waste Diversion RFP efforts. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: As we are finding out, this solicitation RFP process is a very long and expensive process. It probably will take over one (1) year and cost over $1,000,000 and there is no guarantee that there is anything of value that will emerge at the end. Numerous municipalities, some just across the channel, have fallen into the same search for a silver bullet, and years down the road they have nothing to show for it. Maui County proposed a Waste-to-Energy (WTE) project in 2012 and the thought was to DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 96 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING wait and see how it turned out. Well, it has been two (2) years with no results and recently the County Auditor of Maui determined that the original cost estimates were far off and rather than save the county money, if implemented, the project would cost Maui County an additional $800,000 a year. Several years ago, I think it was the district of Puna on Hawai`i island, but it was an area that was very similar in population to Kaua`i, went through the entire RFP process and when the final cost was presented to them, they turned it down because it no way that they could afford it and they spent $2,000,000 to go through the solicitation process. The issue of feasible alternative technologies were examined both in the Solid Waste Management Plan update, which was a 2009 R.W. Beck study, this is for the County of Kaua`i and the Resource Recovery Park feasibility study in 2013 by AECOM and both consultants concluded that Waste-to-Energy, including newer variations, such as gasification, pyrolysis, and plasma, was not commercially viable or economically feasible. I believe one of the vendors, Pelatron, appears to have gone bankrupt. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, we have had this discussion before about what we can and cannot say regarding the RFP and I just want to be clear that we are not putting ourselves in jeopardy. Councilmember Yukimura: Chair, I do not know who the respondents are to the solicitation. I am just saying that one of the Waste-to-Energy vendors has a website that is not working at this point. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not know who is there either, so I do not even know why we are mentioning it. In fact, we should not be mentioning it. Councilmember Yukimura: Because they were one of the ones that... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, I do not want to get... Councilmember Yukimura: I am not mentioning it anymore. This is... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Mauna Kea, let me know if we are starting to cross the line. Tell us to stop. Councilmember Yukimura: So what it is showing here is that we are spending a huge amount of money toward an end that we have been told twice already by our own consultants, who we have paid a lot of money to that it is not feasible. We are wasting money, $800,000, and we cannot afford to waste that money. We could use it to repave roads or fund a MRF that will get us to greater diversion. If we do not fund the MRF... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Mauna Kea, do you have something to say? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney. I apologize, Councilmember Yukimura. I just wanted to make my record real quick. Chair, I have been informed by the Budget and Purchasing Chief that we really should try to stay away from discussing further pending/open or even implication of the current RFP, only to comply with the state law regarding ethical procurement. I understand that you all want to make your points regarding the budget, but given the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 97 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING current status of it, if we could just address the budget line item versus the content related thereto, it would really benefit the County avoiding further expensive and prolonger bid protests, court challenges, and allegations of unfairness by other bidders or anybody. I just wanted to put that on the record. I understand that we are here to save money, so let us not put ourselves in a position to spend more. That is all. Councilmember Yukimura: I am addressing the $550,000, which is required for this RFP process. I am talking in general terms about an RFP process that has been tried on Maui and Hawaii island and I am also talking about feasibility studies that have examined these Waste-to-Energy processes that have shown that they are not feasible for a community of our size. If that is the result... Council Chair Rapozo: Chair, if I may, I brought this up at the last discussion because the difference between the outer islands and here is that this one does not specify a technology, so it is unfair and not right to continue to talk about Waste-to-Energy when the RFP is a broad RFP for alternatives. It is apples and oranges. This $550,000 is to pursue the RFP process, which includes all different technologies and all different systems. I made that clear the last time, but it continuously comes up that it is "Waste-to-Energy." I just want to make sure the public understands that is not the case. This is a RFP for alternative technologies, period. I am afraid that these companies are going to sue us because we are touching what we should not be. We do not even know what is in that RFP. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, I think we are very clear on your position. The County Attorney has warned us many times, so just state your position quickly and we can continue to move on. I do not want to end up getting into a fight on what we can and cannot say because we did that the last time. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. We have deviated from our basic plan, our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan,,and one of the ways that you do not get to where you want to be is by deviating from your plan. This is a major deviation and will cost a lot of money and it will not get us the results we want. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: On May 6, 2015, this Council adopted the Resolution urging the Administration to consider new technologies to manage the County's solid waste challenges. This was our directive or our instruction to the Administration. "Whereas, we strongly urge the Administration to consider deploying new innovative technologies and proven diversion activities in their effort...the County Council urges the Administration to consider technologies and partners who offer maximum diversion activities as part of the solution to our solid waste challenges." "Maximum diversion" means "divert." We also urged the Administration "to consider technologies that provide for the maximum net output or savings of energy and minimize the destruction of non-renewable materials that can continue to provide value..." The bottom line is that they are responding to a Resolution that four (4) of these Members passed and adopted, and you folks are moving forward. Now, you did your part and now we have to do our part and our part is to fund...we always talk about the unfunded mandates that the State puts on us and this is an opportunity to fund the mandate, if you can call it that, for them to continue to work. They are done with Phase I and to cut it short would be a waste of money. I will not support the removal. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 98 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I am supporting the motion for a number of reasons. Number one is that no money is needed at this point in time. The Administration does not need the money and it is not clear when they will need the money and when they do need the money, they are welcome to come back and get a money bill from us or otherwise get those funds. We talked about that option with a number of other budget items today from different departments, so there is no reason to commit $500,000 today for something that we have no clue as to what we are buying with it. I would prefer letting the money that has already been invested in the process that is already in play, play itself out and the Administration can come back and explain to us, even if it is in Executive Session, in greater detail exactly what the money is being used for and what we are going to get out of it at the end of the day. I just have a very difficult time spending $500,000 for a "black box" if no one knows what is inside of it and no one knows whether we are going to be able to use it or want to use it at the end of the day. I think it is just very bad policy to be doing this, especially when they do not need it now and we are talking about how we have to cut here and cut there. We cut security guards for parades, climate change plans, EBT funding, and we do not need this $500,000 to spend it today. Whether it is being spent wisely or not, when the time comes we can have that conversation, but we do not need to spend it today. We have a lot of other needs that have been repeated here over and over again with things like highway and road maintenance and bridge repairs to say the least. I will just encourage everyone to think about it. We do not need to spend it today, so let us spend it when we need to spend it and have that discussion at that point. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any other members? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: We do not also need to keep burying tons and tons per day into the landfill while we just sit here and talk about maybe doing a MRF. (Inaudible) goods in food that we need and pay the highest prices in the nation because of the shipping costs to ship it across the ocean. Imagine shipping rubbish and trying to think that we are going to make a profit. That is ridiculous. Look at those green bins that the Garden Isle Disposal has. It goes in sorted, and knowing Scott Kouchi as a personal friend for years, he tells me how tough it is to even make money. He said they lose money sometimes on that contract because the prices fluctuate for the goods that is already (inaudible). Imagine us (inaudible), I think it was New York City where they showed (inaudible) recycle containers (inaudible), "This is the problem with recycling," and they showed the container (inaudible) and all kind of other stuff(inaudible) and we are going to go down that road. Everything has its problems. There is no simple solution. To keep your eyes open and to try and eliminate the problem of(inaudible) everyday where (inaudible), I have issues with that. I have issues of thinking of opening up Ma'alo and the cost that is going to take. We are keeping our eyes open. I am open to the MRF. Maybe it might be the answer. I do not sit here and say that this or that does not work and just be satisfied with burying rubbish. I am not an expert in everything, nor is Zero Waste Kauai. If it was so easy to MRF and be profitable, where is Zero Waste Maui, Zero Waste Hawai`i, and Zero Waste Oahu, with over one million (1,000,000) people? Where is that MRF? But Zero Waste Kaua`i knows that "MRF is the only way" and "it will save us money." Okay, whatever you say. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 99 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: I have a question for the Administration or the County Attorney. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. Councilmember Hooser: Is the MRF a technology that is being considered by the RFP? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, I think we cannot answer that. Councilmember Hooser: No, but you allowed the discussion to continue here and that is why I am asking. Mr. Trask: Just real briefly, the Chair is right. It is open to all technologies and systems. Councilmember Hooser: That is my point. One (1) Councilmember was being criticized by talking about a technology and another Councilmember does it and nothing is said. That is the point I am trying to make. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am trying to look at these folks and say how we can go. For me, I have no clue what technology it is and I have no clue what RFP, so I do not know what word anybody uses is jeopardizing it, so it is hard for me to control it. Let us vote on it and move. Councilmember Kuali`i. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kuali`i: The solid waste problem is millions and millions and millions of dollars already spent in the past and to be spent in the future. These Request For Proposals is to help us move forward and figure out what our options are as far as solutions. We are at that point now and I think I heard clearly from procurement people and finance people that (inaudible) procurement is dependent upon this funding. So in order for us to continue moving forward, this funding has to be in place. That is why they have it in the budget to begin with. It is not about adding it to the budget; it is there. In the summary presentation, they talked but they reduced the Solid Waste RFP consultant contract by $250,000, and maybe had he not removed that $250,000 based on what we talked about in budget process, then that would have been my proposal to remove the $250,000, but he has already done that. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I am going to be supporting the cut. I just think it is prudent to be more cautious and I would like to be included in the process, as much as possible. I know that there are limitations to it, but we have to be able to make some good decisions as well. As you can see as we are going around the table, there are a lot of different interests in it. It is not so much that I do not trust that the process is moving along as it should, but it is just that as much as possible I want to be kept in the loop, whatever way that can be done, which I am not clear what that is and I need to be told what that is. Until that happens, I would err on the side of reserving this to take that next DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 100 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING step. I am not being told any other way that it is impossible, so until I am told that, I am going to support it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The County spent $300,000 to pay for the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, precisely because we did not want to just keep pouring trash into the landfill. The whole goal was to divert. Larry Dill was on the citizens advisory committee and they came up with the process of reduce, reuse, recycle and the MRF is a big part of that because you cannot do curbside recycling and you cannot do business diversion without a MRF. A MRF is not a place where you send off garbage. It is a place where garbage becomes commodity. You sort things and so you have the paper, the cans, the steel, and whatever. It becomes commodity that you can actually sell and send off. Yes, it does take shipping and the biggest MRF in the country in Colorado ships to the west coast, and then to China. We buried and burned $2,000,000,000 worth of paper back in 2007 that China would have bought for $2,000,000,000 because they need all the paper they can get. The reason why there are not MRFs on the other islands yet, at least not municipal MRFs, is because everybody has been going after this silver bullet, trying to think that there is another way to do this. Council Chair Rapozo: I have to interrupt. What is the proposal? Is it a MRF? Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, may I finish? Council Chair Rapozo: I guess I am calling a point of order because she is not on the subject that we are talking about. We are talking about... Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, Councilmember Kagawa... Council Chair Rapozo: I have raised a point. I am asking the Chair to rule if the agenda of what we are on is a RFP for... Councilmember Yukimura: You cannot allow Councilmember Kagawa to talk about MRFs and not allow me to. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: You talked about all kinds of... Councilmember Yukimura: So? What is wrong with talking about a MRF? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Mauna Kea... Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, but I am entitled to finish my discourse. Mr. Trask: I thought that this might be helpful. If you find it not helpful, by all means, disregard it. Councilmember Yukimura: Your interruption is not helpful. Mr. Trask: I apologize. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 101 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura... Councilmember Yukimura: If it is a legal point that you feel I am violating then please interrupt. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Mauna Kea, you have the floor. Mr. Trask: All I wanted to say is that the Chair is correct that you can really have it all on this. So assume that Waste-to-Energy will be submitted; assume that the MRF will be submitted—I hope so—because then we will be looking at all of these systems of technology. Councilmember Yukimura: So what is wrong with me talking about it? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, let him finish, please. Mr. Trask: Like the Chair said, this is becoming a discussion about who likes which technology better. This RFP, just to be clear, includes all of it. If you think that you are spending this money or appropriating this money to look at the viability of that to get a very sophisticated legal consultant that would provide the County Attorney's Office and our contractor with the necessary input to correctly evaluate any technology that you find acceptable, then you can emotionally feel well about this. Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, this is not a legal opinion. Mr. Trask: Under Hawaii Rules of Professional Conduct Rule 2.1, I am not truncated only to providing legal, but also policy and any facts that I think may be helpful to the client. I am just trying to simply help you. That is all. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, I will let you finish, but please...we are going back and forth on an argument of is a MRF good or bad, and I have no clue what is in this RFP. It is basically do we want to support the money going forward or not? That is the point. Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: You are trying to convince everybody whether we should vote for it or not, but come on, let us move forward. Councilmember Yukimura: In a discourse, we are able to respond to each other's comments, so it is totally inappropriate to interrupt me. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think my point is that you folks fighting about a MRF all day long is not going to get us any further on whether we want this $550,000 in or out and that is what the vote is on. Councilmember Yukimura: Then why did you not say that to Councilmember Kagawa when he brought up the MRF? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 102 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, you spoke three (3) times about a MRF. The last time we were here when Solid Waste was here, you went on and on about it. I am just saying let us get to it. Councilmember Yukimura: It does not matter how much I mention it, as long I am within the timeframe. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am giving you the time to continue, but please do not... Councilmember Yukimura: But you are interrupting me. Council Chair Rapozo moved to call for the question, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I have a roll call vote on the question? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Aye. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the question? Is it the point of order? Council Chair Rapozo: I called for the question. Councilmember Yukimura: You cannot do that in the middle of a person speaking... Council Chair Rapozo: You can call for the question at any time... Councilmember Hooser: Chair, can you call a recess? Council Chair Rapozo: I called for the question and it requires five (5) votes. If it gets five (5) votes, you call for the vote and we are done. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The call for the question is on... Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask for a point of order. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Recess. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 4:05 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 4:10 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: A call for the question was made and we are going to take a vote on it. If we have five (5) votes, we are going to go directly into the vote on this motion. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 103 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: A call for the question was made. We are going to take a vote on the call for the question. If there are five (5) votes for it, then we are going to move on to take the vote on this item right now. Councilmember Hooser: So the vote is whether or not to support the call for the question, not the question itself? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Correct. We are not voting on it. This is to cut discussion and go directly to the vote. That is what these five (5) votes will be for. Councilmember Yukimura: So the question is whether we close debate? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Correct. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Chair, just procedurally, I do not know what the motion would be, but I would like us to follow parliamentary procedures and I would like us to be respectful of the process. The motion was made. We were taking the vote. After Councilmember Chock voted, we got eruptions over here and we stopped in the middle of a vote. That is wrong. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. The point is made. It is late. We are tired. We have twenty (20) more minutes. Councilmember Kuali`i: Let us learn from it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I want to just get through this and move forward. Roll call vote. The motion to call for the question was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5, AGAINST MOTION: Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL—2, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: So now discussion is cut and we are going to take the vote on the item at-hand, which is to remove funding for all Waste Diversion RFP efforts, $550,000. Roll call vote, please. The motion to remove funding for all Waste Diversion RFP Efforts was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL—3, AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL—4, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further cuts for Solid Waste? Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 104 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser moved to remove funding in the amount of $200,000 from Consultant Services for the Waste Diversion RFP Legal Consultant, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any discussion on it? Councilmember Hooser: I just have brief discussion since we talked about this a lot. I think any compromise is always good and this is some middle ground that I would like to propose. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: The $200,000 that Councilmember Hooser is proposing to be removed is the line item specifically for the legal component of this. I guess my question is, do we have the in-house resources that can tie us over should the time come, that we need to go out and contract...I see Mauna Kea coming up, but do we have the resources in-house? I am assuming the procurement for a legal assistant or special counsel would be a lot quicker than a procurement for a normal service, correct? Would this go through Special Counsel or as Consultant Services with Solid Waste? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. Mauna Kea. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Trask: Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney. Under the Charter, the County Attorney is the chief legal advisor of all departments. So when we go to special counsel, as you know, you are essentially getting an attorney and they do the work and we are out of it. For example, for the Svngenta case, we have McCorriston. We have various clients and when we have special counsel to represent them, we do not touch that; that is their case. In this, my understanding is that the legal consultant will be working with the other consultants and advising our office on what the issues are, what the path should be. We could then bring our expertise, which includes land use and lay of the land type of stuff that we know, and we would not be supplanting our authority as chief legal advisor; we would be fed information and they would be working with the other consultants and it would be a group effort. I am hopeful and very optimistic that we have the in-house capacity to do that alone. I cannot say that we have the legal capacity to do what this contemplates because, like was said on the floor, this is such a technical area. I do not know anybody in my office that can do this or I do not even know even if there is somebody in the State or who these guys would be, even on our current special counsel list either. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions for the Administration? If not, I will call the meeting back to order for discussion. Any discussion? Councilmember Chock. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Chock: I will just mention that my interest is in being involved in this as much as possible. The last discussion that we had, and I am not going to bring it up in detail, was that there was going to be more information that was going to be DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 105 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING shared. In fact, there were papers that were given to us, and then taken away from us. This is where I am feeling uncomfortable and this is why I am where I am. I need somebody to sit down with me and go through this as much as possible because this is why I am voting the way I am. So moving forward, that is what I need. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Lyle, I am going to suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Tabata: Councilmembers, I just wanted to draw your attention to our response sent to you, dated May 3rd. It was our response to Councilmember Kagawa's communication to us regarding this subject. So that was made available to you and I believe was passed by the County Attorney's Office and the Administration as to how we could respond to the questions that were asked, and that is the extent to which we could answer at this time. If that was not good enough, then I am sorry, because of where we are in the procurement stages, that is all we can say. I do want to say also that come July 1st, we are going to need this money. As soon as this is approved, come July 1st, we are pressing the button. That is why any reduction in the funds is really not acceptable. I appeal to you that we need to keep this whole. Time is of the essence. When we make the call, we are going to go. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Was that May 3rd memorandum confidential or is that public record? Mr. Tabata: I believe it is public record. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Mr. Tabata: We did not put on a confidential cover. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I recall that it hardly said anything. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further questions? I will bring the discussion back. Any further discussion on this? Councilmember Kagawa. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: I hate that we have to kind of argue about it because I think none of us here at the table are experts and know what is best, because if there was a simple answer, as was mentioned, I think we would see other counties in Hawai`i doing it already. It is great that we strive not to make the same mistakes. I hope we have the sense and the knowledge of our workers not to make the same mistakes and I trust in them that we are all looking for the best solution, all of us from this table to that table, to across the street. That is where I am. It could be that the opposing sides that are talking about may be the correct one. Like we said, we hope that all possibilities come in, and I do not know what results are, but I thank the Administration for opening the door; DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 106 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING they have already learned from the past mistakes, I believe, by just doing that. Certainly, there is a long road ahead and I am certain that for a decision such as this, we will not be jumping into some unknown areas without properly vetting it. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: As I was mentioning, the other counties have not built a MRF because they have been busy chasing what they thought would be other solutions and they have come up empty. That is why we were the first county to go with "Pay As You Throw." We have an Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan that actually lays out the solution, but we have not been following it. It would have a seventy-five percent (75%) diversion rate. I have talked often about if we could accelerate it, we could extend the life of our landfill and we could build a much smaller new landfill because you will always need a landfill, whether you have Waste-to-Energy or a MRF. You could downsize it tremendously and that would be huge savings. So to not follow this plan, which we have been following since 2009 and always getting sidetracked by these possibilities that never pan out, we are just delaying the solutions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? For me, I probably would have wanted to say this on the last one, but I will say it on this one that I think in whole, I am willing to move forward with it and let you folks go through the process. We have state law procurement issues. I get afraid that the more we talk about it here that we are going to jeopardize the integrity of the system of our process. For me, I think I am in support of it. At the end, we may not end up with something, but we can say we tried and we went out and looked at everything. Whatever anybody had available and were willing to respond, that is what we looked at. All we can do is try. For me, they did reduce the amount (inaudible) and I am comfortable with the amount that is here for them to move forward. I am really afraid that the more we bring it up, the more we are actually going to jeopardize what is going on. The notes that were given to us and taken back were actually talking points that they had and scribble notes that possibly Mauna Kea had on. For me, that would be the same as somebody asking me for my notes here and wanting it, but it is like I really did not prepare it for you folks to see, so I would really want it to be a "can I have it back" kind of thing. If we want specific notes...I think Lyle had talking points...but we can ask them for it again and they can vet it out and be sure that it is something that they can give us, but I know that it was uncomfortable because it was personal notes that somebody was writing what they were going to say on and I would be uncomfortable, too, because I take a lot of notes and sometimes it makes sense and sometimes it does not. Sometimes it might make sense to me and whoever might read it might not make sense to them, so I can understand that. I am willing to keep it in. Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Yes, I totally agree. I do not expect personal notes here, especially notes from Mauna Kea. I think there was a comment that there was going to be something sent back to us, but the issue that I have is that it has not been clear. Some things were said and some things were not. I want to know what the criteria are. It was clear as mud and I need more guidance on that. Once I am clear, then I can be clearer to support $500,000. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: You say that we are trying everything—one thing that is not included in the RFP is an in-house activity; that is the County...we are DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 107 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING asking private vendors for proposals, which means we want them to do it cheaper when they have to make profits. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I really do not know what we are asking. Councilmember Yukimura: What I am trying to say is the one option... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am not trying to pick on you, Councilmember Yukimura, but I am looking at cues from the people who are doing the procurement and they are giving me looks like this and "no" and that is where I am getting my cues from. Councilmember Yukimura: I do not know why they are doing that because I am not saying anything about the specific proposals. I am saying that those proposals are asking for private proposals that... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, I do not know what that proposal is asking. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, maybe you can just listen to what I am trying to say. The other thing is that there is an in-house way of doing things, and that is our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan. It is about the County doing it. We are not giving that option a try because we are delaying that process and holding it back. We are not following our plan because we have to spend money on another possibility. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any final discussion? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I think the nature of this discussion is the basis for not spending the money. We are talking about this mysterious process that will have a mysterious outcome that none of us knows what it is going to be and none of us really knows the process either. We are not allowed to talk about what we do know, and yet the County is going to spend $500,000 or more and we are approving that. I just think it is ludicrous for us to sit here to commit money on what we are being asked to (inaudible). The $200,000 is a small step towards a rational decision. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think we are going to get the same answers that we get now and if we have the $200,000 come up midyear, we are not going to get specific answers, again, because of the state procurement issue. So we will probably end up fighting about this thing again, which we have probably gone through like two (2) or three (3) times already. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to say that it is pretty painful to keep going through the same thing. It is like you keep banging your head on the wall. You hit it and it hurts, but you keep doing it again and again. Why? I do not know. I do not think that this is not clear because it is clear to me. This is the RFP process. The State has a procurement law and we are following that law. What more do you need? That the request is for multiple submissions from "A" to "Z?" Everybody's favorite type will be included if you have somebody coming forward and putting a proposal. This cannot move forward without the funding. We have millions and millions of dollars previously invested and will be invested in the future because it is a reality. It is one of the basic purposes of county DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 108 MAY 12, 2016 DECISION-MAKING government; public safety, pick up the trash and do something with it. We need to move forward. We are talking about $200,000 now for this particular vote. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion? Roll call vote. The motion to remove funding in the amount of $200,000 from Consultant Services for the Waste Diversion RFP Legal Consultant was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3, AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL—4, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The motion fails. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, we will recess our budget meeting and be back here tomorrow morning and try to finish Solid Waste if there is anything else and we will continue to move on. There being no objections, the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Budget Deliberation and Preliminary Decision-Making was recessed at 4:28 p.m. The Deliberation and Preliminary Decision-Making reconvened on Friday, May 13, 2016 at 9:00 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Honorable Mason K. Chock Honorable Gary L. Hooser Honorable Ross Kagawa (present at 9:11 a.m.) Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i (excused 11:46 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) Honorable Mel Rapozo (excused at 3:37p.m.) Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Good morning. I would like to call back to order the Budget & Finance Committee and the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Budget Decision-Making session. Let the record reflect that we do have a quorum. Councilmember Kagawa is on his way. He should be here very soon. Just to check, is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on the budget? 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: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are nearing the end of our individual cuts and again, I thought about how our process was going to go today. I think to keep it simple, we will go through all cuts, our operating budget cuts and we will go through our CIP budget cuts. The votes will stay consistent; four (4) votes to cut. Once that is done, then we will come back and go through cuts that affect all departments. We will go back through with cuts and additions, then any additions, and that would be to any of them. We will try to keep it consistent. With that, we were on Solid Waste. Are there any further proposals for Solid Waste? If not, we will move on. Wastewater? Wailua Golf Course? We are going to go through Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) also. Are there any cuts for the Bikeway Fund in CIP? Are there any cuts to the Bond Fund in CIP? Are there any cuts for Development Fund in CIP? Are there any cuts for the General Fund CIP? Are there any cuts for the Highway Fund CIP? Are there any cuts for the Sewer Trust Fund CIP? Are there any cuts for the Special Trust Fund for Parks & Playgrounds? Okay, we got through our CIP. Now, we will take any cuts affecting all departments in the operating budget. Do we have any cuts that affect multiple departments? Councilmember Kuali`i: Just cuts? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Just cuts, no additions. Do you have one (1), Councilmember Kuali`i? Councilmember Kuali`i: The first one that will be coming around is to cut dollar-funded positions that were dollar-funded last fiscal year and that is being proposed to be dollar-funded for this fiscal year, and that has been vacant for longer than nine hundred (900) days, which is over two (2) years. There are five (5) positions, and you see those on the back. In the Office of the County Auditor, Auditor II; in the Council Services Division, Council Services Administrator; in the Planning Department, Geographical Information System (GIS) Analyst; Department of Public Works (DPW) Buildings Division, DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 2 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Elec-Electronic Equipment Repairer; and DPW Engineering Division, Engineering Drafting Technician I. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar funded in Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and have been vacant for greater than 900 days as of May 1, 2016, seconded by Council Chair Rapozo. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or discussion on this? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: In terms of number of positions, how many are there? Is it just these that are listed? Councilmember Kuali`i: Five (5) positions. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: They are all dollar-funded. If you want to have a sense of future expense, there is the column on current annual salary range. If last year it was dollar-funded, it is being proposed for this year to be dollar-funded, and if it was filled with money being transferred or what have you, the cost would be in that range. If it was needed the year after this year, they would come back to the Council and ask for a position with justifying the amount, the need, and what have you. Councilmember Yukimura: I have another question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: For the Administration? Councilmember Yukimura: No, for the introducer. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Have you checked with the departments about these positions? Councilmember Kuali`i: Not beyond what we heard with them during budget. As an example, during budget in the Planning Department's presentation, they talked about the need for positions and looking at reclassifying and reallocating. They talked about the Planner VII, Planner III, Planner V, another planner VII, and an Inspector III. But they have said they do not need this position for next year and that is why they are dollar-funding it. Now, if the year after that they do need to do it and we end up eliminating it, this would mean they would have to come back and ask for a new position, but we do our budgets only one (1) year at a time. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Are you talking about the GIS Analyst in the Planning Department? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes, that is the position that came up when I took the position vacancy report and I applied this rule, dollar-funded last year, proposed to DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 3 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING be dollar-funded this year, and vacant for more than nine hundred (900) days. You can ask Planning Department, if you want to. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I would like to get the Planning Department here if possible. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not see them. Councilmember Yukimura: But Mr. Tabata is here. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you have a question for Lyle or for the Department of Human Resources (HR) in general? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I want to know from the departments just what their situation is. LYLE TABATA, Acting County Engineer: Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer representing DPW. For the Electronic Equipment Repairer position in the Building Division, we are in continuous recruitment. We had talked about having difficulties with plumbers and having open recruitment. I do not know if people were watching this or people were notified, but we recently filled the vacant Plumber position. We are hoping the same thing would happen with the Electronic Equipment Repairer, plus with the eventual or proposed move to the Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR) of this section of Building Division, I do not want to handicap them by eliminating this position. We always have hope that somebody will or might apply. I am still working with Doug and am in the transition when we move this position to the whole department to DPR. I have started working with HR on a Countywide trades progression program that I worked with when I was the manager of Lihu`e Plantation, that helped us develop our skilled workforce for journeymen, mechanics, electronic technicians, electricians, and the like. I am asking to keep this position at a dollar-funded position, and if we do have viable applicants, we would come back, but do not handicap the future with eliminating it entirely. As far as the Engineering Drafting Technician I for the Engineering Division, we are holding that as a flex position that when we get to that stage of having the need for the capacity, that is available for us to then quickly come over to get a money bill to fund the position. At this point in time, we do not feel that it is a need position, but we would like to have that available for us when we do need it as we keep developing our projects and the need arises. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you, Lyle. First of all for the Electronic Equipment Repairer, is that position one that you need? Mr. Tabata: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: That is why you are in continuous recruitment? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 4 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Tabata: In continuous recruitment, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And you have not been able to fill it, but you are hoping like your Plumber position, which was just filled. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And that was open for how long? Mr. Tabata: It is continuous. Councilmember Yukimura: No, but... Mr. Tabata: Oh, yes. We reposted again after the last selection. I believe it was about six (6) to eight (8) months before we had enough candidates and then we could go through the applications. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Then the Engineering Drafting Technician I, is that a position that could also be funded by special fund that sometimes... Mr. Tabata: This is not a building permit function, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Mr. Tabata: If it was on the building permit side, yes. If we had an inspector, that would be, but this is project-specific. Councilmember Yukimura: You might want to include it in that particular category. My last question is, and I commend Councilmember Kuali`i for being concerned about these dollar-funded positions because we have seen these morph into totally different positions that were never vetted, but I am hearing that you do not have any intentions for that. Mr. Tabata: No. Councilmember Yukimura: That these are positions that you want to keep. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: And you will use the position for... Mr. Tabata: To flex for project driven needs, yes. (Councilmember Kagawa was noted as present.) Councilmember Yukimura: Right. So there is no intention or plan, and you can hopefully commit to not changing it into other positions unless it is related to the job in some way? Mr. Tabata: That is why it has been dollar-funded for a number of years. As we are building our capacity with projects as is evidenced with all of DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 5 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING these projects all going to construction and in design, the Engineering Division, we had to rebuild the division and our programs. Two and a half (21/4) more years, but whoever follows us will have a good solid foundation to keep the projects moving and improve upon what we started. Councilmember Yukimura: I like that thinking. Thank you very much. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Actually, my question is a general question probably more for the Administration because I think this discussion, the reason why Councilmember Kuali`i spent so much time over the last few years with the vacancy report is because of the morphing of positions that happens actually more often than I would like. Is the Administration open to a proviso because I know the attorneys will argue that we do not have the right and we do not have that authority? Would the Administration be open to a proviso and agree to a proviso that if you folks are going to morph a position between budgets, that it comes before the Council so the Council is aware? Mr. Tabata: For the DPW... Council Chair Rapozo: That was more for the Administration because I think yesterday we went through the whole exercise with the Fire Department, which is the proper way, that you come up, show the position you are taking, the position you are morphing it to, the pay, and the Council votes. But when it is done mid-year, you can take any position and create a whole new position and totally deviate from the budget that was approved. I still think that is not right, but I am not the lawyer. That would be my question. That would ease a lot of tension, I think, the stress. That would allow us to be more relaxed with the dollar-funded positions as opposed to being worried what is going to happen with this position. It has been vacant over a year. What is it for? It is just there so we can create positions during the budget year? That would be the question. NADINE K. NAKAMURA, Managing Director: Nadine Nakamura, Managing Director. Thank you for your question. I think in this budget, we have shown where certain positions morphed. We were very explicit about how those positions were changed, taking from positions that were dollar-funded, but then as we reengineer within every department, the Vacancy Review Committee does their work. In this budget, we were able to describe where some of those changes were made and how we could accommodate some of the existing needs and not just do everything just because it is the status quo. The budget is really a good time for that discussion to happen, but things happen during the year. As vacancies arise, the Vacancy Review Committee...to me, vacancy review is kind of a misnomer because it is not just about filling the vacancy. What they are doing is they are really having the discussions with the department heads/division heads about how we can do things differently within that. It is really a re-engineering committee because they are looking at...we do not have to do it this way. That is why the abandoned vehicle position went from one department to the other, and sometimes that involves a money bill, and that is why we come to Council in situations like that. In that situation, we had to come to the Council. But certain times, we want that flexibility to...vacancies happen throughout the year, so we would like to have the flexibility to work the situation out, and to give the Vacancy Review Committee the ability to work with the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 6 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING department heads and division heads to redo the way we operate our County to make it more efficient. We would like that flexibility. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, that is fair. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Back to Lyle. You had said that Position No. 1856, Electronic Equipment Repairer, is on continues recruitment. Has it been on continuous recruitment for the one thousand twenty (1,020) days that it has been vacant or nearly three (3) years? Mr. Tabata: Pretty much. We have had positions get filled that had become vacant, but this one has been one that has never been filled. We could have used this number and the days open could have been less, but an electrician left, we hired another one, and so this one just ended up being the one number that... Councilmember Kuali`i: That stayed vacant? Mr. Tabata: Yes. We have hired in the past six (6) years, I believe, two (2) new electricians, but we have never been able to fully man. Recruitment is out there and it is just that this number ends up being the one that does not get filled. Councilmember Kuali`i: The other question is, you are adamant that you need this position, so in the past three (3) years, how have you been meeting the need? Mr. Tabata: The backlog grows or we use overtime to cover for the shortage. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. The only other thing is that this position you see as definitely needed and in current recruitment trying to fill. If you could fill it tomorrow, you would. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i: But the other position you said, we are holding as a flex. When we get to the stage of having a need, we want to be able to quickly hire/transfer. Mr. Tabata: We would need to come to you because it is dollar-funded, to fund the position. At the minimum, it will take two (2) months. It just allows us to be more flexible. (Councilmember Kagawa was noted as not present.) Councilmember Kuali`i: If you would need to come to us to fund the position, could you not just come to us to create and fund the position? Mr. Tabata: I am not sure what the process is to create new positions. I know that it is a lot harder to create positions once you lose it. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 7 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: It is a lot harder because you may not have four (4) votes to create it because really, the answer to this is not that you would need to come to us to fund it because you could just fund it. You could transfer money. Mr. Tabata: Not necessarily. Councilmember Kuali`i: Once the dollar is there... Mr. Tabata: No. Councilmember Kuali`i: Are you saying you would not have the money? Mr. Tabata: Yes. In my experience, every time I had a dollar-funded position other than the Building Revolving Fund positions, we have had to come to Council to get approval. Councilmember Kuali`i: Your final position in this is you are holding it as a flex and you would like to keep it as dollar-funded because should you have the need, which you do not have now, you want to be able to come to the Council and ask for funding to fill an already existing position? Mr. Tabata: Exactly. Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Lyle, can you even recruit or post without an authorized position? Councilmember Kuali`i: They do not have a need. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Mr. Tabata: I need help with that, excuse me. Councilmember Yukimura: Maybe Jill? Councilmember Kuali`i: The answer yesterday was yes. You can recruit if you have a dollar. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I am forgetting. Councilmember Kuali`i: From Janine. Councilmember Yukimura: No, but if you do not have a dollar. Mr. Tabata: If I do not have a position, I cannot recruit. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 8 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i: But you would not recruit if you did not have a need. Are you recruiting this position we are talking about? Mr. Tabata: Not now. Councilmember Kuali`i: No. Councilmember Yukimura: However, Lyle, if you determine that you have a need and then you have to go to get authorization two (2) months from the Council, then you post it, and then nobody responds to it, would not it be better to post it and see if you have a response and then come for funding? You have a one dollar ($1) position. Mr. Tabata: It depends. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Alright. Mr. Tabata: It depends on the...if I was to do that right now, I know I would have applicants. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, are you not in continuous posting? Mr. Tabata: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: But you could go to that right away? Mr. Tabata: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: The reason you could not find money elsewhere in the budget to put into this position is you folks have a very narrow margin? Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: You do not have those big overtime budgets that the Police Department has where you can easily transfer money, right? Mr. Tabata: Yes. I am going to be honest, over the years we have been tasked by the Administration to do a better job with budgeting and make it more to actual. They have done all of these charts for us that gives us trends, so we have had to drill down to more true to actual budgets than ever before. Councilmember Yukimura: So you have a very tightly presented budget? Mr. Tabata: Yes, very tight. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 9 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Tabata: Let me add that before I come to Council, I need to go through the Administration and pass their vacancy review process also. So it is not a slam-dunk. Councilmember Yukimura: And it is right timing. Mr. Tabata: As an example of what we had done, was in our automotive shop, we needed to replace a lubrication worker and a tire worker, and we morphed it into one (1) position to be more flexible. We went through the whole process and we had to identify a new position description, identify the new class, and create that morphed position that the Managing Director mentioned. Councilmember Yukimura: Did you do that through the Vacancy Review Committee? Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: I do see the need to have that flexibility for the Administration. The Administration is taking on the responsibility of really reviewing and not just mindlessly filling what might be an obsolete or outdated position. Alright. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions for the Administration? Do we have a question for the Planning Department? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Mike is here. MICHAEL A. DAHILIG, Planning Director: Good morning. Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning. Do you want to state your name? Mr. Dahilig: Mike Dahilig, for the record. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I hardly heard that. Mike, the proposal is to remove the GIS Analyst position because it is been open for so long. It is important for us to know how you see the need or not need for this position. Mr. Dahilig: The history behind the position being vacant is that this was a position about four (4) budgets ago that was authorized by the Council, a fully funded position, for a Records Management Analyst. What was meant at the time was to support and try to build a Geographic Information System (GIS) program that was specifically focused on trying to digitize and provide analysis given the amount of digital information that we have in the County. However, there was a prolonged discussion once the budget was passed whether or not that position regularly belonged in my department or with the Department of Finance. It took literally almost a year to try to get to a point where the position was reclassified to GIS Analyst and then posted for recruitment. When it was posted for recruitment, we were already in the midst of the next budget season, and that was the budget that pretty much anything that was not filled because of the deficits DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 10 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING that were pending before the Council, everything had to be dollar-funded. So even though it was protracted, we ended up having to dollar-fund the position because we were not able to fill the recruitment in time. We have always pressed upon the Administration from a departmental standpoint, the importance of having a focused GIS program. It is a program that we are increasingly seeing across the Counties, that other Counties are making significant investments in. For instance, when you look at Maui County, they have five (5) individuals that are dedicated specifically for GIS. Currently, we have half a Planner that helps out and half a GIS Analyst that also helps with the other Information Technology (IT) duties around the County. With the wealth of information and the amount of information that is coming in, it begs the question concerning, and we always felt it appropriate to maintain the position to continue to have that dialogue and say, where should the investments in trying to build data-mining efficiencies come from? We would obviously like to have that position filled also because we think having a focused person on GIS at work in the County actually provides the return on both in the amount of time that it takes to actually review and mine information, but at the same time, provide accurate and discreet information across all departments. We are still also in the midst of land use management information system that we are looking at investing in. The system needs people that know how to analyze it and they also need information that is data-ready to actually be uploaded and put in. I do not want to shy away from the fact that our department still emphasizes this is a need for the County; however, in light of the budget situations, we felt at the time, it was important to fund moneys for the enforcement program versus the GIS program. Councilmember Yukimura: The concern here is that you will take this position and morph it into another position that is totally unrelated to what was approved. I want your assurance, if it is true, that you are not planning to do that. Mr. Dahilig: I think the reality with our department's budget considering the bottom-line item is that when you add the discretionary items in our budget, it is barely enough to even fund a warm body for that position. The ability for us to choose between filling the position and aggregating funds for a transfer into that particular account to pay for this position, would be a choice between warm bodies or paper. I would probably say practically even though that position could be morphed or changed, in reality, the funds for the department really are not there to actually aggregate and create something like a GIS Analyst position. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. It is not technically possible for do you that. What is your intention? Mr. Dahilig: The intention is that say there an opening where we can split...let us say I have somebody that leaves the department at a high salary, and then we can look at entry level that maybe gives the opportunity to split the position so that we can hire low, both a GIS Analyst and on the new recruitment for that person that leaves the County. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, but it is still the intention to have a GIS Analyst? Mr. Dahilig: It is still the intention of the department. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 11 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, that is all I wanted to know. The need will get more salient as you develop the land information system, right? Mr. Dahilig: I believe the need is already there. We have had already to normalize communication between Garrett and Lea because we get conflicting work orders because we have GIS handled by two (2) different departments. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. The need is already there. As you rationalize the whole system and the interdepartmental connections in developing your land information system, I think the role of this GIS Analyst may move it into reality because of the system that you are developing. Mr. Dahilig: Right, it is something that is long needed. In the desire to try to provide accurate products for the other agencies regarding anything from zoning to where fire hydrants are to where water lines are, we do not have a centralized way of doing that. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, and we are finding out with the Additional Rental Unit (ARU) Bill and the need for land information, whether it is proximity to sewers, or subdivisions with conveyances, how important data is to planning. Mr. Dahilig: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: When you said it has been a long time, I want to share that when I was Mayor and after the hurricane, we used Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) moneys to create the first GIS Analyst position, and that did not last very long because we did not have money and we were far behind. But that is how long ago that idea was conceived. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: Mike, with everything we talked about with this position, are you planning on coming up with a way to utilize the position this year? Within this budget period, are you planning on trying to act on it is my question. Mr. Dahilig: Like I mentioned earlier, the only way that we would be able to act on a position like this is if I had a high-level senior person leave the department, recruit salary savings, and split between two (2) positions. That is the only way I can do it right now. Councilmember Chock: You do not foresee that happening this year? Mr. Dahilig: If that does happen this year, again, it is hard to anticipate when people are intending on leaving, but that has been the move that we have been trying to go with in case that does happen. Councilmember Chock: So just in case? Mr. Dahilig: Just in case, yes. Councilmember Chock: Got it. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 12 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Dahilig: We have no intentions of creating anything but that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: It is conceivable as you develop the land information system that the priority for this position, I know you said enforcement has been the compelling priority, but the priority for this position might grow so in the next year or the next budget, you might come for full funding. Mr. Dahilig: I would have liked to come for full funding this budget. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions for the Administration? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I have to honestly say I am a little bit confused by some of our answers about need versus what is possible. I just wanted to understand because let me clarify too, that this is not just about dollar-funded positions that potentially could be morphed into different positions. What this is about is seriously looking at scaling back the size of this County by number of positions. So eliminating positions that we do not absolutely need, critical need, versus other positions, right? Also taking an honest look at positions that do not have warm bodies in it or there is not a potential to have a warm body in next year because it is kind of a wish instead of a need. Honestly, this has not been on continuous recruitment. It is not like a critical need like the electrician position we heard about earlier from the Building Division, correct? Mr. Dahilig: I guess the word"need" is relative. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Then, based on need as far as something that absolutely has to get done, if the position is not hired and that needs to get done, how is it being done now or if it is not and it falling by the wayside, is it something that we can afford to fall by the wayside because it is not critical, or looking forward, is it something that we can fill some other way, with other positions? You talked about something that it is not going to be possible unless there is another higher senior position and the funding could be shared, and it would be a half-half position. This is all your hope and wish for something in the future, correct? Mr. Dahilig: Let me answer the question concerning need and why I look at this as a need versus a wish, just to address that first. We have always seen GIS work as a way to actually be cost efficient in the County. The ability for us to do quick and efficient analysis has always been our goal so we do not have to actually hire more people down the line even though it may require one (1) position that is specialized with the software. Let us say, if we are asked how many homestays do you have within R-6 within the Lihu`e District? That has to be done by hand right now. We cannot do that digitally. We take manpower to actually do that digitally. If we get a query from the Police Department, how many homes have permits for, let us say, multi-family versus DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 13 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING single-family situations or let us say they queried that question. We have to again do that manually. A lot of the things that we are able to do right now is fully digital. I would characterize the need to be efficient as something that we not wish, but want because we want to provide accurate, timely, and efficient work products for the County. The second thing concerning how we were actually going to treat the position, again just to clarify, I have a lot of senior people in my department that have high salaries based off of their SR rating and step. The only way that we would eventually be able to even fund the position should we choose to recruit is by retitling both of those positions to lower entry-level positions. So that is conceivably feasible if that does happen. Again, I love my staff. I hope none of them leave, but that is what we are trying to prepare for. If there was a situation where that arose, that would be where we would move to so that we can actually push the resources in that direction because I do not have the flexibility for my discretionary budget because we have barely any operating funds and I do not have any equipment that would be able to scoop to send that way. This is not a situation that we are saying one thing and doing another. I understand the need to cut the position and I understand that this has been an outlier considering the amount of time it has not been recruited, but it is hard for us to actually go through the recruitment when we do not have the money available, and that is why we have not gone through active recruitment. (Councilmember Kagawa was noted as present.) Mr. Dahilig: I cannot aggregate more funds in my department to commit to long-term funding for that position. Councilmember Kuali`i: My last question is, and I am assuming that the answer to the question is yes, if this Council required you to cut one (1) position, being that this position has been on the books and vacant for four (4) years, would this be the position you would cut? Mr. Dahilig: It is what it is. Councilmember Kuali`i: So the answer is yes? Mr. Dahilig: It is what it is. Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions for the Administration? Councilmember Kuali`i: I would say since we heard from DPW and the Planning Department defending these positions, maybe it would be good to hear from the Office of the County Auditor and the Council Services Division to defend those positions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We have the Council Services Division ready to answer. Jade, I will give you an opportunity to defend yourself on getting rid of this dollar-funded position. Councilmember Kuali`i: Maybe that is not the right word, "defend," and it is not necessary. Sorry. But Councilmember Yukimura chose to ask those questions in an DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 14 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING • attempt to defend those positions, but I do not see her defending the other two (2), and I should not use the word "defend." Sorry. Councilmember Yukimura: I was just trying to check with our County Clerk. I think it is good to ask her. It was not that I did not want...that is what my next step was. I think we need to hear from all of the departments where we are proposing to eliminate dollar-funded positions just to understand what they have to look at, and in hearing the Administration departments that have appeared right now, there have been considerations that were unknown to us that I think we need to know. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Jade, do you want to come up? Council Chair Rapozo: She can do it from her desk. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. What is the question for Council Services? Councilmember Yukimura: Shall I? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Whoever. She will answer from there. Councilmember Yukimura: Is it okay television (TV) wise? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. They watch them read. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, good. I think it is the same question, Jade, that we have been asking the other departments. What are the considerations in terms of possibilities and needs of the department that might make you want to keep these positions dollar-funded because there is no real dollar implication? As a Council, we would not see them morphing in ours. Go ahead. JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Thank you for the opportunity. I did speak with Councilmember Kuali`i a little bit about it yesterday. This position, although we have not filled it... Councilmember Yukimura: Which one are you talking about? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: This is the Council Services Administrator. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Although we have not filled it and it has been vacant for quite a while because both the Deputy County Clerk and the County Clerk have been kind of serving dual purposes, this position would really allow for career progression for our Analysts. I could not tell you when that position would be filled, but like other departments, it does provide us flexibility and opportunity. Councilmember Yukimura: May I follow-up? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Speak into your microphone. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 15 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. It could also play a role in succession planning? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: What about Auditor II? Can you say something about the Office of the County Auditor? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The Office of the County Auditor, I have been working on a transition plan for the office itself, which will be presented to the Members. But ultimately, I believe it was the Council's desire to allow the new Auditor, should and when that person is hired, to structure the office as that person would see fit. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Is there a possibility of using...Council Chair Rapozo has already signaled a desire to do performance audits even without an Auditor in place. Could an Auditor II position help the Office of the County Clerk do that? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: From my understanding, the Auditor II position would need to remain within the Office of the County Auditor... Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: ...which we do not necessarily have direct oversight over. Councilmember Yukimura: I see. Okay. Alright. Anything else? Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i, do you have a question? Councilmember Kuali`i: My question is, because I think what you had mentioned was the opportunity for advancement and that this position is the next in line. I do not know if that is the only case, but being that the Clerk and the Deputy are covering what might be some responsibilities that this position would have, when the need came, when it was time for somebody who had served so much or whatever had to be promoted or would want the opportunity to be promoted and this was the only position, would it have to be this position at a salary range of$77,000 to $135,000, or could it be some other position that could be created in the future when it is needed? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Yes. There has been another position in addition to the Council Services Administrator. There has been a position right below that that we have also utilized. Councilmember Kuali`i: Does that position still exist as a dollar-funded position? I think maybe. I do not have it in front of me. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: I do not believe so. Councilmember Kuali`i: We have one (1) or two (2) other dollar-funded positions that were not vacant for more than nine hundred (900) days. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 16 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Those are the Analysts. Councilmember Kuali`i: Oh, okay. So that position was deleted in the past? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Yes, we do. Councilmember Kuali`i: Oh, we do? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Yes. It is the Council Services Review Officer, middle of the page of the salary page. Position No. E-66 is currently dollar-funded. That would be the next step above the Analyst. Councilmember Kuali`i: At this point being that this position has been vacant for over four (4) years considering the salary range, if this Council asks your department to eliminate one (1) position, would this be the position or might it be another? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Of all dollar-funded positions? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: I would probably have another one that I would consider also, but I understand the need for that. If you choose to eliminate the Council Services Administrator, I would ask that you keep the Council Services Review Officer position as a dollar-funded position open. Councilmember Kuali`i: This is the only one being proposed because it is the only one that showed up as vacant for more than nine hundred (900) days. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion on this? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am not able to vote for all of the ones that are proposed. I would like to keep the Planning Department, DPW Building Division, DPW Engineering, and the Office of the County Auditor, at least. Wow, that is a first for me. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: There is a buzzing noise in the microphones that comes through on there and it comes out on the TV. It is just something that they are working on, so we do have to just speak louder. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. I cannot vote to eliminate all the positions that have been proposed. Based on the testimony that we have heard today, Planning Department, DPW Building Division, DPW Engineering Division, and Office of the County Auditor, Auditor II position, I think we should allow to stand as dollar-funded. I think we heard our Clerk say if forced to choose, she would choose eliminating the Council DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 17 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Services Administrator. I do not know how the others feel about that, but that was the only one where that I might be comfortable doing. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Anyone else? No further discussion. I think we see these dollar-funded positions because everyone is trying to do more with less. We are telling everybody to cut their budgets and do not hire. They end up having to dollar-fund positions that they would love to have. Then you have heard that if they had the opportunity, they would love to fund it, but because of our tight budget, they are not. It also gives them the opportunity for succession planning. You get a high level paid person that leaves, then without having to increase their budget, they are able to take that money and then hire two (2) more lower-level positions. I do see the value of that in succession planning. It ultimately comes down to trust. Do we trust that these departments are going to reallocate the position to something else or not? I think we are running a tight budget. I am comfortable leaving it in, and that is just me. Is there any other discussion? Council Chair Rapozo and then Councilmember Kuali`i. Council Chair Rapozo: I just have problems with the morphing. I have seen it over too long a period. It happens. This is the mechanism or the tool, the vehicle that is used. For a position to be vacant that long with no attempt to recruit, tells me that it is not a needed position. It is not. If, in fact, we are not actively recruiting, how can you say you need the position? I looked it up. I do not know how many dollar-funded positions we have, but I looked. We have twenty-two (22) job postings. I just checked on the internet. County jobs. So that means we are not recruiting for quite a few of those positions. Again, this is a different year. We said it was going to be a different budget, and this is one of the ways that you tighten it up. You hold the Administration accountable to the positions. I do not have a problem. If they need a position, they can come up here and get it. If they need a position that is not something that is in the budget, they should have to come here anyway and not be able to take a SR-13 and convert to a SR-26 or Excluded Managerial (EM), and that is where I have trouble. We talk about Vacancy Review Committees and all of these. We are supposed to be reducing the size of government through attrition. So as people leave and as vacancies occur, we should be eliminating the position. If we have gone nine hundred (900) days without filling it, that tells me we do not need it. I am going to support the motion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: After everything I heard, I would probably remove the Electronic Equipment Repairer position, but that is the only change I would make unless I thought from the Council Services Division...I heard "consider also," but I was not sure if that meant consider that other position instead. I might make that change as well. As far as the other three (3), the only one I fully would withdraw my motion for and resubmit a motion without is the Electronic Equipment Repairer position. I do intend to redo this. I would like to hear a sense as far as what people support, a clearer sense. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Committee Chair Kaneshiro. I have a counterproposal to the original Mayor's submittal and the supplemental submittal that shifts the repair & maintenance from Building Divisions to DPR. Like Councilmember Kuali`i talked about, DPW Buildings Division position 1856 that is dollar-funded is going to DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 18 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING be essential to the change that I am proposing because we will have electricians on both sides. It is going to be in the Building Division, but I am going to propose a split in the Building Division so that there is clear separation of DPR repair & maintenance and DPW Building Division repair & maintenance. Again, if I vote for this and we kill it, then I am not giving the Buildings Division and DPR the ability to successfully carry out the plan in the electrical side. I will support your amendment, Councilmember Kuali`i. Great job. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion on this? Councilmember Kuali`i, are you going to withdraw this motion and come back with a new one? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes, but I want to come back with a new one that works. If I could hear from the other two (2) Councilmembers or not. It is optional. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I was not going to support the DPW proposal. I also was not clear on the Council Services Division. It sounded like we wanted to maybe switch, and I am okay with that. Not going to support a vote on most of them just from what I heard on some of them saying they need it, and they want to act on it. I feel like they are already operating at capacity and if they can make things work this year, they will want to act on it. That is where I am. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: If there is no other comments, I am going to withdraw my motion and work on a replacement. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I really concur with the concerns about positions morphing into something that is totally different from the position title. The reason why I proposed removing those three (3) School Crossing Guards in the Police Department's budget is because they have been morphing those fifteen (15) positions into all kinds of things and into very high-level positions that are not anywhere of the same nature as School Crossing Guards, and they used their big margins to do that. I think those are really policy decisions that the Council needs to make deliberately, not by default. So that, I believe, is a legitimate concern. In the case of these positions, I do not see that kind of intention. Maybe it is, as our Budget & Finance Committee Chair has said, it is a matter of trust and looking at past performance. But I see these as legitimate positions. I see the departments as needing and wanting them, and they do not have major consequences in and of itself right now, dollar-funded. It is true, if they morph, they will have major consequences. But if there is not that danger, then I think we should allow them. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Last comment before I go. This is not about the positions being legitimate or not. This is not just about the morphability of positions. This is about potentially this Council making tough cuts that maybe should not be seen as so tough because there are no warm bodies, the positions have been vacant over nine DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 19 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING hundred (900) days, and except for the Electrician position, there is no critical need that has been demonstrated. So that is why I will withdraw this and resubmit without the Electrician position. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: To add to that, one (1) of the twenty-two (22) positions that I talked about is the DPW Electrician position. That is posted right now. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. While staff is working on that, are there any other cuts across the board? Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar funded in Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and have been vacant for greater than 900 days as of May 1, 2016. Council Chair Rapozo withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: As staff is working on that change, do we have any other cuts across the board? Councilmember Kagawa: I have. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I think the sound is terrible. So you folks really have to try to talk loud into the microphone. I watched last night's telecast and all my discussion about the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) and zero solid waste was unheard. I am very disappointed with that. I stayed up to 11:30 p.m. to hear that and I could not hear it. Even the captioner could not hear it. It was pretty bad. We have to make an extra effort to talk loudly into the microphone. It is bad. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Point of personal privilege because it is about the sound system. It is really not workable if the sound system does not work. Councilmember Kagawa: Just talk loud. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: They are working on the fix. We are not going to hold up the budget meetings. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We have timelines for our budget. Councilmember Yukimura: I am not asking for an interruption. I am just inquiring about the fix. I am not criticizing anybody. It is just an inquiry because if we are doing budget decision-making and it cannot be heard, it is really not good. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 20 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: I do not know because I do not watch this when I go home. Are you saying that you could not hear the sound? Councilmember Kagawa: It was really bad. The captioner maybe would hear three (3) words, not hear the next three (3) words, and then she tried to pick up three (3) words after that. I talk really loud out of all of us. So I am just saying, put the microphone close to you and talk loud. I think the captioner will be able to hear us and it will function. Council Chair Rapozo: My concern, and maybe the County Attorney has to take a look at that, because of that (inaudible) agreement, that if we are not captioning properly, then we should not be hearing the thing. I would ask the County Attorney to take a look at that because that was the issue that we had before. If we could not caption, we cannot video. We are not stopping the budget meeting. It is just not going to be here. I would ask for a five (5) minute recess so we can double-check. I do not want to get sued because of that. I was not aware that the captions were not working. I heard that the sound was bad, but I was not sure. I did not hear about the captioning and that is a big concern. Councilmember Kagawa: If I could respond. She could hear some of it, but as I said, I would say a sentence and she would miss the next sentence. I would say another sentence. The viewer really did not know what I was talking about because there were missing sentences. Council Chair Rapozo: That is the whole purpose of that setup. If a hearing impaired person cannot understand the same meeting that a person who can hear can, then we are in violation. I would see if we can check, Mauna Kea. Councilmember Yukimura: But nobody can hear. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I, like Council Chair Rapozo, do not watch this. I watch very little TV. I want to suggest another option, maybe we talk less. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I like that option. If they can write that down. Do we need to take a recess on this? Council Chair Rapozo: That is just my suggestion. If the attorney is okay with it, let us move. I do not want to get sued. It is either a yes or no. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am getting the nod we can keep going. Councilmember Kuali`i, do you have your amendment or do you have your revised proposal? Councilmember Kuali`i moved to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar funded in Fiscal Year 2016-17 and have been vacant for greater than nine hundred (900) days as of May 1, 2016, with the exception of Position No. 1856, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 21 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? I know we have talked about this for almost an hour. If there is no further discussion... Council Chair Rapozo: There is. I know I said I would support it. The Auditor II position, because we are in continuous recruitment for the Auditor and it is going to be a vital position for the Office of the County Auditor, I would suggest that we take that out. I do not know if you can do it ad seriatim and we can do it individually, but I cannot support the Auditor II position. We could pick up an Auditor in this coming fiscal year and that Auditor would need to have the opportunity to hire an auditor to assist in that office. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let me take a really quick recess just to see if we can do them one at a time. Are we ready for the ten (10) minute caption break? Ten (10) minute caption break. Councilmember Kuali`i: We can easily withdraw and... Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar funded in Fiscal Year 2016-17 and have been vacant for greater than nine hundred (900) days as of May 1, 2016, with the exception of Position No. 1856. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will do a ten (10) minute caption break and you folks can fix the proposal. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 10:02 a.m. The Committee reconvened at 10:13 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. We have a motion from Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i, staff has prepared the updated one. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and have been vacant for greater than nine hundred (900) days as of May 1, 2016, with the exception of Position No. 1856 and Position No. E-74, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion on this? If not, we will take a roll call vote. The motion to eliminate General Fund positions that were dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2015-2016 and remain dollar-funded in Fiscal Year 2016-2017 and have been vacant for greater than nine hundred (900) days as of May 1, 2016, with the exception of Position No. 1856 and Position No. E-74 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Rapozo TOTAL— 4, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 3, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 22 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Are there any further cuts that affect departments with no additions? Councilmember Kuali`i: I have more, but I will give somebody else a chance. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not think there is anyone else. These are not additions, just cuts across departments. Do you have another one, Councilmember Kuali`i? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: Is it being passed around? Yes, Salary Resolution Commission reduction. This proposal is to reduce the budgeted amounts for the raises that would potentially fill the cap up to the filled cap level that was set for some of the positions, the modified version of the Salary Resolution that came through the second time. You will see all of the positions listed. Thirty-six (36) positions for a salary differential, which would budget to the level of a cap of$571,528. Thirty-six (36) positions $571,528. Councilmember Kualii moved to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? Councilmember Kagawa: I think you should state the total. Councilmember Kuali`i: I am sorry. Let me make a correction. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The total looks like it is $566,535. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his second. Councilmember Kuali`i: I withdraw that because based on other actions we have recently taken, it has been altered slightly. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion or questions? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 23 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the County Attorney? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: Aloha. For the record, Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney. Councilmember Yukimura: Mauna Kea, this seems to be a counter run to the Salary Charter provision that requires that the Salary Commission recommendation stand if their Resolution is not rejected by the Council, and that requires a five (5) vote rejection. This is putting a situation where it is forcing departments to pay from money that is not appropriated Mr. Trask: I apologize. Are you asking if this is a legal... Councilmember Yukimura: If this is allowed or if this is a violation of the charter amendment proposed by the Salary Commission. Mr. Trask: (Inaudible). I actually do not have the paper in front of me. I am not sure. I am sorry. I am not sure specifically what we are talking about. Councilmember Yukimura: Can you speak louder so everybody can hear? Mr. Trask: Sure. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i may be able to rephrase the question. Mr. Trask: In effect, what this does is it cuts the...are you saying that it undoes the Salary Commission Resolution? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Mr. Trask: Okay. So can we give someone (inaudible)? I see Councilmember Kuali`i is shaking his head. Councilmember Hooser: I cannot hear you. Can you speak up? Mr. Trask: Sure. Councilmember Hooser: It is really hard to hear. Councilmember Yukimura: You do not have to bend down. You can just project loud like you are talking in court. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think he gets the point. He will talk louder. What is happening is you are not specifically saying that, say, the Mayor's position, his DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 24 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING amount is going to be reduced a certain amount. The regular salary line item is being reduced by...Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I can say it really simply. The Salary Resolution establishes the caps. We have always been told that, when the argument was for supporting the caps, that this is not about what the actual pay will be, it will be what the maximum that it could be. Ultimately, that has been done. The caps have been set. Now, the Mayor has submitted to us a budget that budgets in every case that everything would be paid at that cap, but that is not necessarily decided. The budget is asking for dollar amounts fully funded to fully cover those caps. This does not change the caps in any way. We do not have (inaudible) change the cap unless we have five (5) votes to reject or approve, whatever happened. The reason we are unable to deny with four (4) votes was because we needed five (5); however, this Council has the authority to set the budget. My proposal is to set the budget without the fully funding the caps. That is what it is, and that is allowed as far as I am concerned. Mr. Trask: That is correct. The Council does have plenary authority to set the budget and control the purse strings. If it does not reject the Salary Commission Resolution and if you just choose to not fund them, then that is within your authority. Councilmember Kuali`i: Then it is finally still in the Mayor's authority to find another way to fund it? This Council is deciding to accept his proposal or not. Mr. Trask: I do not know. The process is the process right now. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Mr. Trask: I am not going to try to navigate every in and out right now. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: You just repeated what you said during the Salary Resolution. Mr. Trask: Yes. Councilmember Kagawa: That is why I appreciate you. We have had County Attorneys before where they give us one answer before something happens and then the second time it comes up, and the answer seems a little different, but your answer is crystal clear. You said if you adopt the Salary Resolution, or if you cannot reject the Salary Resolution, when it comes budget time, you can choose to put less. I appreciate that answer. This is our chance to put the amount requested or put in less, and this was stated by Mauna Kea before. We are asking the question that I clearly asked at least a couple of times during that discussion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 25 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: Just to repeat, the Council can approve the Salary Commission's recommendations and not fund those same recommendations? Mr. Trask: No. The Council failed to reject the Salary Commission's recommendations. The Salary Commission is supposed to operate as an independent apolitical body that looks at rational basis with which it sets salaries. Now, it becomes law sixty (60) days after passage of the Resolution absent any action by Mayor or Council unless Council rejects by vote of five (5). That is what happened. So that does not take away your authority, as Councilmember Kagawa said and as I stated on the record previously, to set the budget. It becomes awkward, but nonetheless, you are the purse strings. I would like to add that as far as the Office of the County Attorney goes, I would have appreciated being consulted about this action prior to it being proposed. I do see it does affect our office. A lot has been said over the course of this topic that no one has told the body that anyone is leaving because of issues related to salary. I was informed this morning that I am going to lose a Deputy. Bright light, big city, there are more opportunities on Oahu, and they are going to get paid more. We talk a lot about apples and oranges and comparing things appropriately thereto. You cannot get an attorney anywhere for $45 an hour. This is your authority and you are going to get what you pay for whether services are not. (Councilmember Kagawa was noted as not present.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Ken, do you have a follow-up or clarification? (Councilmember Kagawa was noted as present.) KEN M. SHIMONISHI, Director of Finance: Ken Shimonishi, Director of Finance. I just wanted to clarify from the March submittal to the May supplemental, obviously the department head increases were included; however, departments that did in fact already make cuts to the budgets from the March submittal to cover those amounts that were related to the department head and deputy increases. So that, in fact, has already been put into the individual department level budgets. That was approximately $142,000 that was mentioned in the message. I just wanted to be sure that the Council is aware that those steps were taken to offset cost increases where we could as we indicated when the Resolution came forward. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Just so that I understand, the raises have already been implemented after the Salary Resolution? Mr. Trask: No. The raises would be in effect July la° Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Mr. Shimonishi: The budget has reflected that and the cuts were put in accordingly into those departments. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 26 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Every department that benefits from a raise submitted cuts between the March 15th submittal and the May submittal to reflect that? Mr. Shimonishi: Not every department. For example, there are departments, as you heard earlier from the Planning Department, that simply do not have that flexibility outside of salary and benefits. That was one (1) department that could not make the cut. The Office of the County Attorney was another department and the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney was another department simply because their... Council Chair Rapozo: Out of the five hundred (500) (inaudible), what was the number of cuts? Mr. Shimonishi: $142,000 in cuts were made. We also presented during the Salary Resolution, the fact that we went to long-term financing on the gas capture system through a Self-Revolving Fund (SRF) loan, which reduced our expected cost on that by about $300,000. So that was the additional savings that we had identified. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I think I feel like we are saying is that this cut is going to make the sky fall, and it is $566,000. We had a lapse last year of$14,000,000, the year before that was $13,500,000, and the year before that was $14,200,000. You do the math. There is money somewhere. That is the mystery. Yes, you say lapse is not a bad thing. Of course it is not a bad thing. What is a reasonable lapse then? $12,000,000? $14,000,000 minus $12,000,000, you get $2,000,000, and this is a cut of $566,000. Nobody is dying. The sky is not falling. There is money somewhere, right? Mr. Shimonishi: What I am hearing the Council say is that we are still authorized to pay the amounts up to the salary cap in the budget going forward, even though cuts would be made to the specific positions not to reflect that. Councilmember Kagawa: I think what I am saying that we did not have five (5) votes to reject it, and now after this cut gets approved, you have the option as Mauna Kea has stated numerous times, to find the moneys elsewhere to fund salary increases that you believe are deserving, or if you do not fund those salary increases, people will leave. You have the option. That is how I look at it. You have the option to find the missing $13,500,000 in your budget. It is somewhere in there. There is $13,500,000 somewhere in here. It is somewhere and you have got to find $566,000. I think it is somewhere, so I am ready to vote. Council Chair Rapozo: I have one (1) more question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I just want to clarify that we are not reducing the line item for the particular position. We are reducing the line item for regular salaries. Mr. Shimonishi: Excuse me, I would ask for a legal read on that. Councilmember Yukimura: Me too. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 27 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Shimonishi: Because the line item itself is comprised of the actual positions. If you are in fact reducing, for example, the Mayor's salary line item that you are actually reducing the Mayor's salary in that line item as well as the Managing Director or whoever was affected by the increases so that the Council actually puts those line item decreases in the salary lines. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura and then Council Chair Rapozo. Councilmember Yukimura: It seems to me that if we do this, it is not money that is unattached to something else. What you are doing is you are cutting something else from the budget that we are authorizing, and so you are not having a balanced budget. That is the mandate of The Charter of the County of Kaua`i, that we have a balanced budget. Mr. Shimonishi: My understanding is that the Council has to specifically identify the line item that is being cut. Again, if you are saying that this position is not fully funded at this level, then you would actually adjust that position's salary. Councilmember Yukimura: Committee Chair Kaneshiro, I would like to ask the County Attorney for a legal opinion also, not now, but I think this is a very fundamental issue and it is about the charter amendment that governs the Salary Commission and its operations. I think that kind of understanding of how the budget works, that our Director of Finance has said, shows some of the impacts that need to be considered in developing an opinion about whether the Charter provision is being violated. Mr. Trask: I would appreciate that. If we can take either a recess on this issue or during the lunch break so I can go look into it. Councilmember Yukimura: I am not sure that even a lunch break or...this may be more complicated than just a short one, but if you can develop an opinion in that short time, I am fine with that. I think we need some clarity about the legal ramifications of this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We can maybe push this until after lunch and get that legal opinion. My question goes back to Councilmember Kuali`i, as far as making the adjustment, would this be a negative salary line item? How do we do it? Because now I am understanding what Ken is saying. If we are going to reduce regular salaries and it either has to (inaudible) combination of the salaries in the account or are we creating a new line item, which would be like a negative salary line item? We have done negative line items for things like electricity in the past where the Council has done an across the board cut in electricity. I just need clarity on that. Councilmember Kuali`i: I do not have the answer right now either. I will get back to you. Council Chair Rapozo: I have a question as it relates to that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 28 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: All of the line items and all of the positions have been changed to show the cap, correct, in the budget? This question would be for the Department of Finance. Mr. Shimonishi: That is correct. Council Chair Rapozo: I know the question during the Salary Commission hearing was asked of the Mayor whether or not the intent was to give everybody the maximum or the cap, and the answer as I remember it, was everybody was going to be looked at differently. Am Ito assume all of these positions will receive the cap? Mr. Shimonishi: That would be a question for the Mayor and the Managing Director to address. Council Chair Rapozo: Maybe just a yes or no. Ms. Nakamura: Nadine Nakamura, Managing Director. Council Chair Rapozo, I wanted to just clarify that the Deputy Prosecuting Attorneys' salaries will be determined by the Prosecuting Attorney, so that includes more than ten (10) of those positions. The County Attorney will determine the salaries for all of the Deputy County Attorneys. The various Commissions will be doing evaluations of the directors of the Fire Department and the Police Department... Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Let me do it this way then... Ms. Nakamura: ...and so forth. There is very few that actually the Mayor will determine. Council Chair Rapozo: The few that will be determined. Ms. Nakamura: It is probably a handful. Council Chair Rapozo: Will it get to the cap? Ms. Nakamura: Some of the evaluations have taken place, some will be taking place, but we have until July tat and it does not preclude us if the evaluations are not done by July 1st, to do retroactive increases. Council Chair Rapozo: What is the intent? Was there any direction given to any other departments whether or not to cap or give the cap? Ms. Nakamura: No directions on the cap. It is left to the Commissions to go through their processes. Some have already done those evaluations and some will be doing it. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions for Administration? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 29 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: The only other question is I am bothered that now there is a legal issue because I think Councilmember Kagawa said it best, and I asked for the minutes to be brought from the Salary Commission meetings because it was made very clear to this body by the County Attorney that this Council had the ability or the authority to set the funding. If it is a legal issue now, I am very concerned because that may have impacted the vote back for the Salary Commission and that a problem. That is a major problem. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I get it too, that Mauna Kea has a salary based budget that does not have much maybe operation type of accounts that he can find little shortages here and there. I think this kind of cut can be dealt with on an individual basis. Mauna Kea could plead his case later as the year went on. Would that not be a solution? Councilmember Yukimura: Oh my goodness. Councilmember Kagawa: As he goes halfway through and says, "I am going to run out because I paid my salaries to my attorneys as provided by the three (3) vote Council, I am paying the maximum, and I do not have any of that fat that I talked about." We could look at each department on a case-by-case basis. You have some large departments where there are two (2) department heads. There is guaranteed some fat in there. I am saying I think this is just again, trying to go along the lines of well, you folks went in a sneaky way and got three (3) votes to get your salary raises passed. Well, you folks are going to help us out and meet us halfway and do some work to bring accountability to the taxpayers who are saying you folks are broke, but you folks can give raises for $566,000. I think we are just saying to meet us halfway and bring some accountability. I think big departments can find that fat because there is fat somewhere. I just talked about it. We can look at the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the past twenty (20) years, there is about $10,000,000 every year. You folks have different interpretations about lapses, but to me, a lapse is you get more revenue than expenses. That is what a lapse is. I do not know, can you do that on a case-by-case basis? Mr. Shimonishi: Again Councilmember Kagawa, what my position is and what I am saying is I obviously agree with the County Attorney. It is within the Council's authority to establish a budget, to make reductions to any line items, increases, et cetera. But what I am saying is that the actual positions, and my position currently without actually getting the confirmation is that the Council needs to reduce those line items that are in there. If you are saying that you would reduce the Office of the Mayor salary budget, then reduce those amounts within those positions, reduce those amounts within those benefit accounts, et cetera. Councilmember Kagawa: I got it. That is all you are asking? Mr. Shimonishi: Right. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. I thought we were at the point where no, you folks cannot and have to fund the maximum. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 30 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Trask: No, it is the accounting part of it. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Mr. Trask: And not the lawyer part. I would just like to add, too... Councilmember Kagawa: That is reasonable. Mr. Trask: Yes. To respond to Councilmember Kagawa's statements, we are bringing in money and we do not keep any of that money. When we get collections for dues and fees, it goes to the General Fund. When we foreclose, it goes to the General Fund. We are seeking recovery expenses now. It is the first time ever with $2,300. We are going. The realizations you see, we do not see. I have said before, we pulled in about $200,000 plus this year. We have reduced Special Counsel by three hundred percent (300%). I have done everything that has been asked of me. I am not going plead my case further. I have done it and if it is not satisfactory, well then, it is what it is because I am not going to beg. I am going to work. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The question is whether the Council can legally budget at a salary that is less than what the salary that is owed or set at. If, say, a department head is not paid the salary that they are owed, do they then sue the County for it? Where does that take us? That is the question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think that is the million dollar question. If you need time to look at it and we come back after lunch on this item, then we can give you the time rather than trying to answer it up here. Mr. Trask: Can I frame the issue real quick as far as how I see it, and then I would like to speak with Councilmember Yukimura to make sure we have it right? What we have here is the Salary Commission. As you know, the Resolution, as I stated before, and Charter Section 29. "The Commission's salary findings shall be adopted by Resolution" as it provides. However, if you go Section 19.07A, third paragraph, "Upon the conclusion of the hearings, the council may reduce any item or items in the mayor's proposed budget by majority vote and may increase any item or items therein or add new items thereto by affirmative vote of two-thirds of the entire membership." The laws of statutory construction go from there, you evaluate a charter like you evaluate a constitution, you look for intent as phrased in the language, and you read it so as to effectuate all portions of the document. So that is what I am going to try to be doing over lunch. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, I was going to say, we will have to withdraw the motion so we can move forward on new things and then after lunch, bring it back in and then we can get the answers to it. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to make one (1) more point to the attorney to make sure it is clear because I think Councilmember Yukimura's question is wrong in the premise because she says can the Council legally, basically undo the salary DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 31 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING that is set by the Salary Commission. It is not the salary that is set. It is the salary cap. Let us just make sure we have that distinction. The budget to pay salaries is between the Administration and the Council. The ability to set a cap is by the Commission with approval or failure to deny by the Council. So the difference between salary and salary cap, which has always been told us to every time during the Salary Resolution. So make sure you make that make that distinction. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I think Councilmember Kuali`i makes a good point that the Salary Commission sets a cap; however, the salary provision in the Charter is part of a whole system of salary setting. If the Council sets the salary at below what the process determines, that is, can the Council subvert the process of each commission and each department head to set the salary? If they set it at the current salary and do not allow for any of the discretion that is allowed indeed authorized by the whole salary system, what does that do? Mr. Trask: I propose this, under Sunshine Law under the rule of two (2), two (2) members of a board can discuss a matter without committing to voting thereto. I highly doubt both of you will commit to vote the same way. So let us go have that discussion at lunch so I can get both sides of issue and make sure I understand it completely. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. With that, so we can move forward, Councilmember Kualii, are you willing to withdraw the motion? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes, and if there is going to be any kind of legal opinion or answers to the questions, I want it to be in writing. Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further cuts across the board? No further cuts across the board? Councilmember Kuali`i: I have. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: This proposal has to do with appointed positions that the proposed raises are proposals that automatically follow bargaining unit raises, lump sums, and different mechanisms of bargains increases that happen for the bargaining units, but these are appointed positions. At this time, the Administration just proposes to follow as opposed to treat them differently like we treat positions with the Salary Commission, the highest level positions. Obviously, many or most of these appointed positions are the positions also at the highest level, just below the positions that are covered by the Salary Commission. It effects twenty (20) positions that are all appointed positions. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 32 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i moved to include a Council budget reduction under salaries and associated benefits for all appointed positions listed on the attachment and not included on the Salary Commission Resolution, at current amounts (no comparable collective bargaining increases). Councilmember Kuali`i: So twenty (20) positions for a total proposed increase that is $45,187. Councilmember Kagawa seconded the motion to include a Council budget reduction under salaries and associated benefits for all appointed positions listed on the attachment and not included on the Salary Commission Resolution, at current amounts (no comparable collective bargaining increases). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am just trying to understand it. What are you talking about? Are these appointed positions? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. We have positions in the County that are covered by the Salary Resolution. We have been talking about those fifty (50) or whatever positions and then we have most of the other positions that are covered by bargaining units by Hawai`i Government Employees Association (HGEA), United Public Workers (UPW), State of Hawai`i Organization of Police Officers (SHOPO), and Hawai`i Fire Fighters Association (HFFA). Then there are a few positions such as these twenty (20) positions that are appointed positions. Appointed positions such as, and I do not have the departments here, but Private Secretaries in numerous departments and Commission Support Clerks. Councilmember Yukimura: What is B&C? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Boards & Commissions. Councilmember Yukimura: Boards & Commissions. Sorry. So you have these Support Clerks, Specialists, and the County Attorney's Private Secretaries. Are these assistants and secretaries to the people that are covered in the Salary Resolution? Councilmember Kuali`i: They are not covered anywhere, that is what I am saying. Councilmember Yukimura: But they are assistants to the people covered... Councilmember Kuali`i: Oh, I see what you are saying. Councilmember Yukimura: ...in the Salary Resolution. Councilmember Kuali`i: Maybe. I do not know if we can understand why they are appointed and not otherwise. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 33 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. You have Economic Development Specialist II, III, and IV. Are you saying that you are not wanting to appropriate moneys that could be given to them in raises because it might track the Salary Commission raises? Councilmember Kuali`i: It is not could be. That is proposed to be. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: They are proposing to fund it. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: This is not the same as the positions covered by the Salary Resolution. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Councilmember Kuali`i: I am assuming if they are proposing to have that dollar in there, they are proposing to give raises because they are proposing to follow the bargaining unit raises, which includes a lump sum of $1,200 January 1, 2017 and then I think some other percentage increase. Councilmember Yukimura: Are you saying these should not track the collective bargaining increases? Councilmember Kuali`i: I am proposing that that not just happen automatically. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: It sounds like, and correct me if I am wrong, these are positions or people, I should say, that are not protected by any union or bargaining unit and will not get raises, but everyone else will get raises. Normally they would track the raises given by the bargaining unit that is comparable. I cannot support this measure. I think that if their colleagues and other people that these people are working with are getting raises because they are part of a bargaining unit, we should not penalize these other employees just because they are not protected by organized labor. I cannot support that if that is what we are doing. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? I have a question just trying to understand it. Are we trying to reduce the budget by $45,000 or are we trying to prevent the raises? I may have to ask Human Resources. My question is... Councilmember Kuali`i: It is basically a proposal to not fund the raises. If the Administration does it another way, they can, much like the others. It is not a lot of money. It is only $45,000, but (inaudible) $20,000 or $200,000. This is our job. The thing I would say is that this is the limited opportunity. We have heard all the talk about how we do not have control over this and we do not have control over that. I am just using the mechanisms that are in place that we figured out to put before you of what is possible. We have the opportunity to approve or not approve. We have not looked at it this way in the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 34 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING past because we just assumed that everything that involved a raise was already done either by the Salary Commission, or the bargaining units, or what have you. I am just saying there is a group of employees that are appointed, but the Administration's choice is to just follow. They are not contractually obligated to give the raises, but they just follow, it is in the budget, and it just has gotten approved in the past. Now I am saying, look at it and make a decision to approve it or not approve it. This is your chance. There could be good reasons why you would not approve this denial, this cut, but you need to look at it. That is all. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you have a question for the introducer or for the Administration? Councilmember looser: I just want to point out that these are appointed positions, but these are not supervisory, they are not directors or deputy directors. These are secretaries and clerks, who work alongside other secretaries and clerks, and should be paid accordingly to the people that they work with. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to suspend the rules. There being on objections, the rules were suspended. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am trying to see how this will all play out. If you reduce the salary for a particular position and the Administration still wants to provide them with that type of money, are they able to take it from the budget and then move it back up to that salary, or if the salary is the reduced, the salary is the salary for the whole year? JANINE M.Z. RAPOZO, Director of Human Resources: Janine Rapozo, Director of Human Resources. The salary line item is fluid and if they have extra funding in there, they can move it to give them the raise. However, we have budgeted very tight this year and so if every position is filled, every dollar will already be used. So just to clarify, although these positions are not covered by the bargaining unit contracts, they are covered by the executive order that is already in place. If we are going to not be able to give them these salary raises, then we would be violating the executive order that is already in place. I just wanted to clarify that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I want clarification on that executive order because I was under the impression that it was for Excluded Managerial, and that is considered a different category than these appointed positions. Ms. Rapozo: The executive order covers Exclude Managerial. It also covers excluded members that are not part of the bargaining unit. The may still be civil service, but they are excluded by the nature of their position. Most of the staffing in my office are all excluded from collective bargaining and from the union contract because of the nature of their work. Then there is another category of exempt appointees that is also covered by the bargaining unit. So there are three (3) different categories that are covered by the executive order. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 35 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: Can you provide the executive order that shows that these twenty (20) positions are included, because I do know that it was an executive order from five (5) years ago that applied to a set of years and this new year being last year. I thought I read it as covering Excluded Managerial. I went through the reports and found those positions and excluded them from this proposal. Ms. Rapozo: Okay. We can provide that for you. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kuali`i withdrew the motion to include a Council budget reduction under salaries and associated benefits for all appointed positions listed on the attachment and not included on the Salary Commission Resolution, at current amounts (no comparable collective bargaining increases). Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The motion has been withdrawn. Are there any further cuts across departments? If not, we will take cuts and additions. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Are you talking about combinations? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Combinations; cuts and additions. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Alright, put on your seatbelts. Councilmember Kuali`i: We already crashed the car. Councilmember Kagawa: There is plenty of fat. Just kidding. One of the biggest changes in the Mayor's budget was to move all of the repair & maintenance workers and janitorial from the Buildings Division, which it has been in ever since I remember since my dad was Deputy County Engineer, and going to move that entire unit to the Department of Parks & Recreation. While I agree that the Department of Parks & Recreation, under the Charter, should be responsible for repair & maintenance of park facilities, I do not believe that it makes sense for the Department of Parks & Recreation to take care of non-park facilities repair & maintenance. Therefore, I am proposing that we move the entire shift back to where it was in the Building Division, and instead, I have a breakdown of how I would recommend, and I hope to have four (4) votes to recommend that perhaps we can begin the shift and the splitting of the Department of Parks & Recreation under the Buildings Division. I want to put this up on the overhead if I can. Councilmember Kagawa moved to eliminate the Facilities Maintenance Division from the Department of Parks & Recreation (including the Building Manager in the Department of Parks & Recreation Administration Division) and add the budgeted positions, associated costs, and level text back to the Building Repair & Maintenance Division and Janitorial Division under the Department of Public Works, with the recommendation that the Administration consider a division of responsibilities following the proposed table of organization that is attached hereto and after further DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 36 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING consultation with affected supervisory employees, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I just also want to make clear that are now in the cut and add portion of our budget. So everything that goes on now is going to need five (5) votes. Councilmember Kagawa: Here is the breakdown, if I can get this. Councilmembers, this is on the back page. We are going to put it up. My reasoning... Councilmember Hooser: I have a question for the County Attorney at some point. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will go through this first. Councilmember Kagawa: My reasoning for the change is that we have an EM-7, Buildings Division Superintendent; we have an EM-5, Building Maintenance Manager; and we have another manager under them that are all in their job description (inaudible) says that they will (inaudible) the repair and maintenance. (Inaudible). My feeling was that (inaudible) responsibilities of these people under their job description and shifting it under to the Department of Parks & Recreation and (inaudible). I have concerns with that because what are the people that we are taking away responsibilities from going to do? They are getting paid big money to (inaudible) repair and maintenance for all these years, and we are going to take away all the experience and management duties of the Building Division Superintendent? I think that is pulling the trigger a little quick. My proposal is that we have the County Engineer, the Deputy County Engineer, and we have the Code Enforcement, which would be handled by the Buildings Superintendent who will also oversee both. So his name should be right under the Deputy County Engineer, but he will handle the Code Enforcement and he will supervise both the Building Division Maintenance and the Department of Parks & Recreation Maintenance, which would be split in half. They will be split up with each side having a Building Maintenance Supervisor that will be Brian Inouye. The Department of Parks & Recreation Maintenance side will be Warren Koga now. They both will have office managers. Under Maintenance, they have five (5) supervisors each, five (5) maintenance workers under the Building Division Maintenance, seven (7) maintenance workers under the Department of Parks & Recreation; one (1) janitorial supervisor each; and twelve (12) janitors under Building Division Maintenance and ten (10) janitors under the Department of Parks & Recreation side. This was based on the information provided on the park and buildings list that was provided by the Department of Public Works. I think this will bring accountability to both sides. I think we finally will have the Department of Parks & Recreation hopefully working in coordination with the Building Superintendent to have the Department of Parks & Recreation take care of parks, the Building Division side take care of non-parks, and hopefully it will bring more accountability and better management to each side. With having that split, you need working supervisors who would be the point persons for the carpentry side, electrical side, and the plumbing side. Yes, it does include a little bit more funding. I believe it amounts to about $3,000 for each working supervisor, but I believe that cost is well-worth it because it follows what the Charter and voters wanted, which is to have the Department of Parks & Recreation take care of parks, not the Department of Parks & Recreation rely on the Building Division to assist them. I think it was difficult to split it in half from the legislative side knowing all of the equipment, materials, and DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 37 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING supplies. I think it is easier to keep it as-is for now and start this split internally, and perhaps next year you folks will have a better plan to propose to the Council where we could pull the Department of Parks & Recreation out of the Building Division completely, and leave buildings repair & maintenance under the Building Division. That is my proposal. Are there any questions? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I appreciate the presentation. This has to be a discussion with our Administration. I just want to be sure we are not crossing the boundaries in terms of structure and administration. I can see where the transfer of the budget items are appropriate. So I just want to make that clarification and make sure we are not crossing those boundaries of separation. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are these questions for the introducer or for the Administration? Councilmember Yukimura: The introducer. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I too appreciate the thought that has gone into this. I am not clear. Are you proposing this with budgetary issues or are you proposing this in terms of positions? Well, if you propose new positions, that will have a budgetary impact. Are you saying let us go back to what was and you want the Administration to consider your proposal and come back? Councilmember Kagawa: Exactly. We are just putting it back where it was with our recommendation to satisfy what they wanted. They wanted to follow the Charter. They did not consult and get to an agreement with HGEA and UPW, which recommended keeping the whole group under the Building Superintendent, because they said in his job description, he oversees them. They did not approve of moving him, especially moving the Building Division side under the Department of Parks & Recreation. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: They said it is okay if the Department of Parks & Recreation side only moved over and the Building Division side was kept in, but HGEA and UPW opposes moving buildings repair & maintenance under the Department of Parks & Recreation. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. I too had concerns about having the Department of Parks & Recreation take care of buildings that are not under their jurisdiction. I have a proposal that would just move the positions back, which is similar to yours. I feel like it is the Administration's kuleana to go back to the drawing board and try to figure this thing out. I do not mind then, considering your proposal. There would need to be cost factoring in here so we would know the cost implications. I also suggested an Assets Management Division that should be looked at, too. Basically, we are respecting the division between administration and legislative, and we are just giving some suggestions. But for the purposes of the budget, we are restoring the budget to the original or last year's arrangement. Is that what we are doing? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 38 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. I am putting it back the way it was. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Councilmember Kagawa: I am recommending a split. My addition at the Council is we are trying to approve that they can move the workers into supervisors to create the division. Councilmember Yukimura: In this budget, you are actually creating the arrangement you are suggesting? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. I am trying to get approval from this body that will approve that they can move the supervisors so that we can do the split. If you do not approve of the supervisors, then you are not approving of this Administration to do a split of any kind. It will just stay the same the way it was. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: If you folks are fine with that, I am fine with that. Councilmember Yukimura: Just to let everyone know, I have another proposal that would just put back the thing to status quo and ask the Administration to rethink all of this. Councilmember Kagawa: Then that would be no change and they are recommending a change. They wanted parks under the Department of Parks & Recreation as the Charter states, not as I state, but as the Charter states. Councilmember Yukimura: I know. Councilmember Kagawa: They want the Department of Parks & Recreation to take care of parks maintenance. My recommendation covers that idea or philosophy. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Councilmember Hooser: I have a question. Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Did you run this by the County Attorney? Councilmember Kagawa: I did not run this by the County Attorney. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: I think it is the same move as what they proposed. They are proposing to put building repair & maintenance under the Department DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 39 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING of Parks & Recreation, and under the Charter, the Department of Parks & Recreation is not obligated to take care of buildings. Councilmember Yukimura: That is correct. Councilmember Kagawa: They are only required to take care of parks. Councilmember Hooser: I guess the reason I am asking you is because with the flow chart of management and the suggestion to rearrange management and rearrange departments, seems to certainly be outside of the normal budget process. The Charter clearly says the Council and is Members not interfere with the administrative process as delegated to the Mayor. It sounds like this Council straying is into the administrative role, outside of the legislative roles. That is what it sounds like and that is why I thought that we should hear from the County Attorney before we go much further. Councilmember Kagawa: In the Mayor's original and supplemental budgets, I think he offered a huge change. I think I am not a rubber-stamp. I am proposing an improvement to the process that both unions agree with. It is not just my idea. The unions agree that this is not appropriate to put buildings maintenance under the Department of Parks & Recreation, period. Councilmember Hooser: I think though, that it is the legal purview of the Administration to negotiate with the unions, not the legislature to override the Administration on behalf of the unions. That is why I think the County Attorney should address this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions for the Administration or the County Attorney? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I am assuming that the County Attorney heard the discussion. Mr. Trask: Correct. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. If you could comment on whether or not the Council is within its legal purview with what has been presented in terms of rearranging management positions and suggesting department reorganizations. Mr. Trask: The executive authority is vested in the Office of the Mayor. The Mayor is charged with making sure that all daily operations are managed honestly, efficiently, lawfully, et cetera. Councilmember Hooser: Could you speak up, please? Mr. Trask: Yes. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 40 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: The audience also cannot hear you, I cannot hear you, and people at home are struggling. Mr. Trask: Sure. Can you hear me? Councilmember Hooser: Yes. Mr. Trask: Alright. The Mayor does executive actions and the Council does legislative policy and controls the budget. Budgetary actions that have an administrative effect are appropriate; however, actions that are purely executive in nature, such as reorganizing and everything like that, are outside of the legislative body's purview and fall within the Mayor's. I do not fully understand specifically how all of this works. As was said, I was not consulted. I am looking at the spreadsheets right now and trying to understand it. So beyond that, I can just say generally, executive does executive and legislative does legislative, which includes purse strings and under Section 3.18, the legislative body is prohibited from interfering with administrative processes. Councilmember Hooser: I have a follow-up if I could. Are you able to review the action that is being proposed and let the Council know whether it is legal or not for us to take the action? Mr. Trask: At this time, no. I would need more time. Councilmember Hooser: How much more time would you need? Mr. Trask: Well again, I would ask the lunch opportunity. I would like to speak with Councilmember Kagawa further so I can understand it. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Just conceptually, if the proposal is to move positions unilaterally, that is the Council is making this move, not the Administration, move positions from departments to departments, is that an executive or legislative prerogative? Mr. Trask: When you say "move positions," you mean to order positions from one department be put in another department? Councilmember Yukimura: Correct. Mr. Trask: As opposed to...without more, it would seem so, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, it is an executive? Mr. Trask: To move positions as opposed to funding positions... DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 41 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Correct. Mr. Trask: ...is an executive action. To fund the positions though, is a legislative one. Councilmember Yukimura: Right. Mr. Trask: Right now, that is kind of question. What is it, how is it articulated, and how is it classified? That is what I need to understand further. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Obviously, we have a lot of questions to the County Attorney. If we need to, my thing would be that we withdraw this. If there are any other proposals that might need the County Attorney, then we will try and get through whatever proposals we have now, and if we get done early, we will take an early lunch, and maybe we will come back at 1:30 p.m. to allow enough time to vet it out. If there are any other proposals also that might need legal answers on, I would say bring it to the County Attorney. If we do not have any more cuts, we will take an early and long lunch to try and get the answers to these questions. When we come back, we will have answers from the County Attorney, we will be able to make the decisions, and continue to move forward with these types of proposals. Councilmember Kagawa: I have a question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Mauna Kea, I have a question for you. Did you review the original budget submittal and the supplemental budget submittal, and rule whether or not it was legal or abiding by the Charter to move the entire building and repair and maintenance from the Buildings Division under the Department of Parks & Recreation knowing that the Charter specifically says that the Department of Parks & Recreation shall be in charge of repair & maintenance for all parks facilities? I do not believe this County building is a park facility and neither is the Police Department. Mr. Trask: Thank you for the question. Again, this goes to executive purview. Under Section 23.14, the proposal by the Administration as articulated to me, would be legal under the Charter under the coordination of work provision. Currently, the Department of Public Works takes care of parks. The executive can coordinate work, subject to the agreement of the department heads, to coordinate, look for efficiencies, et cetera, which is my understanding of what it was. Councilmember Kagawa: My problem with that is that the Building Division was grandfathered-in doing it for, I do not know, one hundred (100) years or whatever taking care of both buildings and parks, and then the voters voted-in the Department of Parks & Recreation. It was not like we created something new. The Department of Parks & Recreation came on-board. If we wanted to abide by the Charter, we would have separated the building and repair, but it was grandfathered in there. Now, we are not grandfathering anymore. We are doing something totally different knowing that it violates the Charter. Mr. Trask: Under Section 23.14, it states "The head of any department may empower or require an employee of another department, subject to the DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 42 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING consent of the head of such other department, to perform any duty which he might require of the employees of his department," and "The mayor shall devise a practical and working basis for the cooperation and coordination of work by the various departments, eliminating duplication and overlapping of functions, and shall have the various agencies cooperate with each other in the use of employees, land, buildings, quarters, facilities and equipment." You are correct. The Department of Parks & Recreation used to be under the Department of Public Works. There are residual redundancies, which is another reason why when the Charter is amended, you really have to look at it and make sure that when it is amended, it is clean going forward, which is a whole other discussion. In looking to decrease overlapping, increased responsiveness, and repair of our parks maintenance facilities. For example, in learning about this program, I was informed fifty to eight percent (50-80%) of all of the work orders to the Department of Public Works, Building Division actually goes to the Department of Parks & Recreation, which under the Director's reasoning, is why facilities takes so long, like Po`ipn Beach Park to repair, like Kilauea Gym, and whatever else. So that is the Administration's purview. Under Section 23.14, it acts as a vehicle to keep it legal under the Charter. That is the best I can describe it. Councilmember Kagawa: That is a good answer. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? LEONARD A. RAPOZO, Director of Department of Parks & Recreation: For the record, Director of Parks & Recreation, Lenny Rapozo. Councilmember Kagawa may have been in contact with the unions, but for the most part, our contact with the unions that when or if the budget stays and we are given the authority to manage the building facilities maintenance, the concern from UPW was the overtime policy, the uniform policy, and the organization as to how it was represented. I had mentioned earlier when we did have this discussion during our budget reviews or budget presentations, that we have been in contact. For the most part, the unions have not said that they were against it to me. If Councilmember Kagawa has had a different conversation, then that is okay, but HGEA and UPW...because there is really no change from the UPW side in our organization in terms of who they will report to. The only ones affected again, was HGEA with two (2) HGEA members. I just wanted to make that clear. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I have a letter from Mr. Dill. I will have to go look for it. In the HGEA's letter as the union agent, he said that he would prefer we split it and leave buildings under the Building Division and parks under the Department of Parks & Recreation. I think that is opposing what you did. You folks moved everything under the Department of Parks & Recreation. So I would not say they agreed with it. For UPW, they also agreed that a split would be good in complying with the Charter. If they are agree that the Charter is the accurate method of following, I would agree with them as well. Mr. Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa, I do not doubt your discussion, but it would have been nice for them to have told us that since we have had meetings with them. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 43 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: With that, obviously we have three (3) things that are going to need to be worked on by the County Attorney before we come back from lunch. Are you open to withdrawing your motion and then we can move forward? Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the motion to eliminate the Facilities Maintenance Division from the Department of Parks & Recreation (including the Building Manager in the Department of Parks & Recreation Administration Division) and add the budgeted positions, associated costs, and level text back to the Building Repair & Maintenance Division and Janitorial Division under the Department of Public Works, with the recommendation that the Administration consider a division of responsibilities following the proposed table of organization that is attached hereto and after further consultation with affected supervisory employees. Councilmember Yukimura withdrew her second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us continue to move on. Again, the plan is we will get maybe...we will see where we are at. I am thinking that the County Attorney is going to need some time and if somebody could bring him lunch too, because he is probably going to be working through lunch, trying to get his opinions out. Let us continue to move on. Are there any more cuts and additions together? No more cuts and additions? All of the cuts and additions that we have seen so far balance each other out, so let us go into additions. Councilmember Kagawa: I have one. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Again, these all take five (5) votes. Actually, can I ask that we do some of the bigger (inaudible)? I believe we have some bigger additions like the County... Council Chair Rapozo: I have one for $35,000,000. Councilmember Yukimura: Second. Council Chair Rapozo: I passed that around yesterday. It was just to watch their reactions. Councilmember Kualii got it last night when he was dreaming and flipped out like, where are we going to get the money from? These are the auditor funds that were removed yesterday. As I said, it would be coming with a companion addition. It is the same amount, $366,969, for performance audits in the Council Services budget. Council Chair Rapozo moved to add $366,969 to the Office of the County Clerk, Council Services Division for Other Services, Performance Audits, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Council Chair Rapozo: That is my only add. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, I know we have these big additions from yesterday's meeting. I would rather get the big additions out so we can get a truer balance of what our balance is. I also have the addition for Unit 14, which is going to be coming up. I just want to true-up the balance so we do not have a very big balance to add to. Is there any discussion on this? I know we had the discussion on it when we made the cut yesterday. Is there any further discussion on this from the Members? Again, this is going to take five (5) votes. Can I get roll call vote, please? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 44 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING The motion to add $366,969 to the Office of the County Clerk, Council Services Division for Other Services, Performance Audits was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Then I have a big one, too. It is the Unit 14 increases that we have previously voted on and should be coming up within the next year. I do not want us to see that we have all of these cuts and our unassigned fund balance is big when I think it is about $433,000. Councilmember Yukimura moved to add funding for the Unit 14 Collective Bargaining Agreement, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I have a question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: What did you mean when you said, it should be coming up in the next year? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We voted on it. Councilmember Kuali`i: July 1st? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It will be effective July 1st. Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I believe this is the same ones that have not been passed by the Maui County Council. Council Chair Rapozo: It has passed. Councilmember Hooser: It has passed? Council Chair Rapozo: Maui did pass it. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: One (1) more reading. Councilmember Hooser: One (1) more reading? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 45 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Did we pass it? Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. We are done. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I believe we passed it and it did not have a chance to get incorporated. I think we passed it last week, so it did not have a chance to get incorporated into the supplemental budget. This add is there because it should actually be in there. It is something that is coming up anyway. Do we have any discussion on it? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: My only discussion and point is, was it a matter of timing that it was not included in the supplemental? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes. I believe... Councilmember Kuali`i: It could not have been? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I believe we voted on it after the supplemental budget was done. They could not incorporate it until the voting was completed. It was just a timing issue. Councilmember Kuali`i: It was our final vote, but the amount was already in place. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We knew what amount was, but they could not put it in until our final vote was done, and that happened after their supplemental budget. Councilmember Kuali`i: They could have planned for it. We are paying for it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I am supporting this. I do not think the Fire Department should be paying something that was not included in the supplemental budget, and it is nobody's fault. Maui is going to be approving it on its final reading, I believe, next week. There were a lot of lifeguards there Maui because they knew that Maui was the last on one and there were a lot of lifeguards that showed up. So it passed committee. My only concern is that this is a big one and I was hoping that we would have at least $1,000,000 or I was hoping for $2,000,000 to put into some additional road repaving. As we make these large additions, we just start wiping it out. We are going against what we said. We said we will try and find some money and show improvements without adding taxes. I am just getting concerned if we have any more large additions that we will basically come up with a wash budget with no significant improvements to repaving. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 46 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The lifeguards were really left in the dust during the time when the State and the County were going through very difficult budgetary issues. While public safety, which includes them, but the public safety in police and fire were allowed to keep their raises, which I think were eight percent (8%) compounded for two (2) years, the lifeguards were not. They really deserve this increase and it brings them more up to par. We all voted for that basic approval. We need to put our money where our mouth is and do the money part now. Council Chair Rapozo: I have one (1) comment. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: This is a really broad comment to everybody; fire, police, lifeguards, and everybody. I have been pounding this in. The Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) is so vital. It is so important. Again, I hate to keep saying this, but this should have been TAT money paying for this. It should have been. I know the lifeguards on Maui lined the street with signs and all of that, but I did not see anybody at the Legislature. Next year, we have to go strong. It was just me and Mayor Carvalho. Most of the time, it was just me and Mayor Carvalho and they could never see me because he stood in front and they only saw Mayor Carvalho. Seriously. We have to focus on that because this is the kinds of expenditures that those funds should be going to. As Councilmember Kagawa said, this is actually potential road paving money, which I fully support, but at the end of the day, we have got to get our TAT so that it is not as painful when we do this process. I just wanted to make that comment. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? Again, this is truing up our financials. This is what it is. This money would have come in as a money bill. If we did not include it now, it would come in as a money bill and get taken out of the Unassigned Fund Balance or whatever balance we have left. This is basically truing up our financials as we are moving forward towards July 1st, and there is really nothing...we all agreed on this Unit 14 collective bargaining and it has to be incorporated. It is what it is. We worked hard to do cuts and there is other money that still has to be accounted for. With that, we need five (5) votes. Councilmember Kuali`i: I have discussion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: After you made that comment, it makes me think that maybe it should come later as a money bill because then it would come out of moneys that we are not budgeting right now that, I think, should have been budgeted by the Administration. We have actually had to make the cuts to come up with this $400,000 for something that we knew was happening. Everybody knew this was happening. Only Maui, which they only have one (1) vote for the statewide approval. So maybe it should come as a money bill because then it would come as them having to find the money. Right now, we found the money. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 47 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: In the end, it will end up coming from the Unassigned Fund Balance. Councilmember Kuali`i: Right, which is more efficient. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: They cannot budget for it if it is not completed. That is all that came down to, was timing. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I get a call vote? The motion to add funding for the Unit 14 Collective Bargaining Agreement was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7*, AGAINST MOTION: 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 Kuali`i was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is that our true balance? Councilmember Kuali`i: Based on what was approved so far? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other additions? Councilmember Yukimura: I have a small one for $50,000. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa and then Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Chair. I had a late request from Kauai Senior Softball. They are running into a deficit going into the State tournament, which they will be hosting again. They host it every four (4) years. Hats off to the Department of Parks & Recreation. They always do a fabulous job working with the seniors and hosting this enormous tournament. It is projected to have sixty-four (64) teams in the tournament. I think fifty-four (54) teams are from O`ahu and the rest are from the other islands. It brings in huge amount of supporters, fans, and it definitely does a real positive experience for our tourism industry during the August 2nd to August 4th weekend. They made a request and said that it would be wonderful if the County could fill the void in their budget. They actually asked for $10,000, and I told them that we would be offering $7,500. They said that would be great. I saved $2,500, so I would like to propose that. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 48 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa moved to add funding in the amount of$7,500 in the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid to Kauai Senior Softball for the Hawaii State Senior Softball Tournament, seconded by Council Chair Rapozo. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to take a real quick recess just to confirm our balance that is on the board. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 11:32 a.m. The Committee reconvened at 11:37 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. Sorry, it was just a mistake on my end. I am looking at the numbers too well. I know we made some big adjustments, but the number showing now shows that there is still $355,000 worth of cuts. I was thinking we were chasing $355,000. We went back. I got it now. So that is what we are working off of, and that is the correct number. Councilmember Kagawa has a proposal. Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. I am going to withdraw my motion because I just discovered...thank you, Lenny, that the Department of Parks & Recreation has $5,000 and they are donating the balls too. So there is sufficient moneys. The seniors had contacted me hoping that I would approve that. I thought they wanted me to do it. So therefore, I am going to be withdrawing my motion. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the motion to add funding in the amount of $7,500 in the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid to Kaua`i Senior Softball for the Hawaii State Senior Softball Tournament. Council Chair Rapozo withdrew his second. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I think this is the last item we well take. We will take lunch right after this and we will come back. I will see if there are any more additions after this. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura moved to add $50,000 for the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid for West Kauai Mauka Farm and Food Center—Iwikua, seconded by Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I have no idea what that is, but she can explain it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Chock: Chair, I have to recuse myself from this one. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura: Can you make that public? Councilmember Chock: I thought I did. I will have to recuse myself from this item, as I am on the Board for this organization. (Councilmember Chock was noted as recused.) DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 49 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, this takes five (5) votes to pass. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I was at the West Kaua`i Business and Professional meeting a couple of weeks ago, and there was a really amazing presentation by three (3) gentlemen who have a proposal to develop an agricultural center on the west side in the works. They are in discussions with Scott Enright, who is the Chairman of the State Agricultural Department. It is for a Makai and Mauka Farms. It would be on State owned lands and they do not have the permission yet, but that is what they are working with the Agricultural Department on. They would train young farmers and there has been a real concern about whether there are young farmers. They have a very amazing business plan, which I will pass around. The three (3) gentlemen are Josh Morey, Chris Kaiakapu, and Clint Schneider. They are very imbedded in the west side community. They have a really big vision to be a living ahupua`a model grounded in the ike kupuna, which is ancestral knowledge, incorporating modern technology to serve as an educational and cultural resource utilized for sustainable food production, wellness, and community enhancement to benefit West Kauai and future generations. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura: They are highly educated. Josh is a professor and Clint is both a minister and a youth worker. They are just doing very good things. This $50,000 is just a small portion of their budget, but it would show County support for something that, I think, we have all been wanting. We have supported the agricultural park on the north shore, but we do have a vision for an island wide agricultural park system, and we need something on the west side that is going to be producing food. This is the proposal that would do it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Is there any discussion by the Members? Council Chair Rapozo: I have a quick one. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Are these people farming now? Are they farmers? Councilmember Yukimura: They have a farming background. Council Chair Rapozo: What kind of background do they have? Councilmember Yukimura: Let me read through here. Council Chair Rapozo: Then I have a question for George if he is even familiar with this project. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 50 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I probably have the same question about why does it not get vetted through the Office of Economic Development? Council Chair Rapozo: Well again, the north shore farm stewardship agreement, I thought, was going to be the model going forward. I do not want to see ten (10) models of farming operations scattered around the island. GEORGE K. COSTA, Director of the Office of Economic Development: For the record, George Costa, Director of the Office of Economic Development. To answer the question, I was made aware of the project, yes. Council Chair Rapozo: How much do you know about the project? It is enough to manage the project? Mr. Costa: Not yet. I have not fully... Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, I figured you just got it just like we did. Councilmember Yukimura: Given their background, I do not know that it will take that much management like the north shore one. Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? I think Council Chair Rapozo got his answers already. Is there any further discussion from the Members or questions for the Administration? Is there any final discussion before we take the vote? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Clint Schneider is an arborist. He has worked on several farms growing `ulu, Olen, ginger, and raising poultry for eggs. He has been certified in permaculture and he has worked on projects in sustainable agriculture. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I am really sorry, it is just a procedural thing. I submitted the excuse letter and I made a mistake. It should have been for 11:45 a.m. because I have to run out the door. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: So I am going to be excused from this vote. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Mr. Costa: Can I just add something? Councilmember Kuali`i: If you take longer, I have more questions. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am ready to vote on it. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 51 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: I am ready to vote. Councilmember Kuali`i: I am not ready to vote. Council Chair Rapozo: Are we back to discussion? Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Chair Rapozo: Right now, right this second, I got this. I do not have a clue who these gentlemen are and I am sure they are qualified. But this is how I see giving away $50,000, they formulate a plan, business plan, farming plan, crop plan, and all of these things; they come with their stakeholders to OED or come to the County at some point, the Mayor or whoever; you folks get buy-in from the Administration; and then you folks come and present the plan like we did with Kilauea. That is how I give away $50,000. Not just, I have three (3) gentlemen, they are experienced, they have Master's Degrees, they need $50,000, and I think it does not really take much managing. No. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser and then Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Hooser: I would like to suggest that we have this discussion when we are not all rushed, perhaps after lunch. I think there are other ways to approach this issue. I think Councilmember Yukimura is absolutely correct. We need to have some farming opportunities on the west side of Kauai. There is State land there, there are lots of earnest people in our community who want to start farms, and perhaps another way to approach it might be to allocate $100,000 to the Office of Economic Development for them to have in place to review grant proposals like this, but dedicated towards the west side and towards small emerging farms, things like that. That is the proposal that I will be making depending on the success or not of this proposal after lunch. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to go to Councilmember Kuali`i and actually, we are going to run out of time. I know it will take five (5) votes. We have people gone already. Councilmember Kuali`i and then we are going to take lunch. It will be a long lunch. We will come back at 1:30 p.m. to give the County Attorney enough time to hopefully get us his opinions and then we will be ready to work again. Councilmember Kuali`i: If we are definitely coming back, I will ask my questions later. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. With that, we are going to take a long lunch. Councilmember Kagawa. (Councilmember Kuali i was noted as excused.) Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, but do we not need five (5) votes to pass this? I think we are wasting time because I am with Council Chair Rapozo, this thing is not DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 52 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING ready. It is not ready. $100,000 grant to the Office of Economic Development without knowing anything, I cannot support either. Councilmember Hooser: Excuse me. It is not $100,000 to the Office of Economic Development. The proposal is a $50,000 grant to a farming proposal. My suggestion was that depending on what happens to this proposal, that we possibly provide the Office of Economic Development with a pool of funds to then evaluate farming proposals on the west side. That was a secondary thought. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: That would be a future proposal coming through. Council Chair Rapozo: That is much more palatable for me so there is a vetting process. This earmarks the funds. I cannot support that. I have no clue. I do not have enough time to read that proposal and I do not enough time to validate it. I think Councilmember Hooser brings up another opportunity where let we OED decide, if in fact the body feels that is where it should be, then I am much more inclined to listen to that argument. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Being able to count the votes, I think we probably can go forward on it. It needs five (5) votes, Councilmember Chock is recused, and so it only takes... Councilmember Kagawa: Councilmember Kuali`i would be a yes. Council Chair Rapozo: But Councilmember Chock would not be recused if it was a pool of funds. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Yes, but we are voting on this one. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I would like not to have a rushed discussion. If we can just recess and come back when everybody is around the table. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It is not a rushed discussion. I know how I am voting on it already and I am open to the discussion. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If people are ready to vote on it, I am ready to vote on it. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, then I want to discuss it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: We gave $100,000 to the Kilauea Agricultural Park. It was called "agricultural park" at that time. They did not have a business plan. They did not have any kind of plan at all when we gave it to them. I do not even know if they have a business plan right now, but these people do. Let us be consistent in the criteria that we use. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 53 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, let me just say this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: You talk to George at lunch, have George come back and give me his commitment that he is going to see this through like he did with Kilauea, and I will support it. It is that simple. This is apples and oranges. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Council Chair Rapozo: George did not even know what this project was about. The Kilauea one, he did. He worked with them. How many hours did you put in it? Hundreds of hours. It is a different scenario. It is not the same, and that is where I am at. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Yukimura: So let us come back after lunch. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Why is it rushing if I know that the plan is not ready to be funded with taxpayer money? Do you want to just delay it knowing that I do not support it? Is it your way of dealing with not having the votes? I think it is silly. Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry. Councilmember Kagawa: I do not support your plan. It is not ready. Councilmember Yukimura: That is fine. I respect your position. I respect it and you have the right to be where you are, but we did not have the full discussion. Councilmember Kuali`i said he wanted to ask questions after lunch. So you can vote how you want to after lunch. Now, Council Chair Rapozo has said talk to George and after lunch come back. I would like that opportunity, too. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, his vote will be a yes because he is not here to add it. Councilmember Yukimura: No, that is not true. Council Chair Rapozo: No. He is excused so his vote does not count. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura: Council Chair Rapozo just said talk to George so after lunch he can come back. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Do you know what? We will take our lunch right now. We will come back on this. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 54 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 11:50 a.m. The Committee reconvened at 1:30 p.m., and proceeded as follows: (Councilmember Chock was noted as recused.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. We are on additions. We are still looking at a $50,000 proposal by Councilmember Yukimura for adding funding for West Kaua`i Mauka & Makai Farm and Food Center — Iwikua. I think some of us are ready to vote on it. I think we were going to have Councilmember Kuali`i ask some final questions if he had any. It is going to be very difficult to add because it needs five (5) votes. We can talk forever on it, but I would really like to just get the meeting going. If it does not have the votes, then we get going. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I understand. I believe during the debate or discussion, we should have all of the information possible. I would like to ask the Administration something. One (1) of the questions was Council Chair Rapozo's question to George Costa. He looked at the proposal during the lunch, so I would like to make sure he is here please, because he needs to give his input. That is part of the reason we postponed it for lunch. Also, I believe in discussing with George, another format may be appropriate. We need Councilmember Chock. So, I would like to have... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We need to clear this proposal first before we bring Councilmember Chock in. I am ready to vote on it. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I might withdraw the proposal and produce another one, which I think Councilmember Chock would be able to vote on. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Will George's answer make you decide to withdraw? Councilmember Yukimura: It may because I think we talked about a Request for Proposal (RFP) format that would satisfy Council Chair Rapozo's concerns as well. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Well, I want to continue to get towards an end goal of voting on this already. Councilmember Yukimura: That is fine. That is my goal too, to get to voting on it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: If the end is right in front of us and if I am a no and Committee Chair Kaneshiro is a no, you clearly do not have the votes already. Councilmember Yukimura: So you folks have discussed the votes? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. No. Councilmember Yukimura: And you know how many votes you have already? Councilmember Kagawa: I am just saying if there are two (2) that clearly is no, then why waste time because there are probably three (3) or four (4) that are no. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 55 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Because we do not know the vote until we take the vote, unless Sunshine Law has been violated. Councilmember Kagawa: I vote no. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: There are no Sunshine Law violations. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us start moving on with the meeting. We will stop arguing. I want to get this meeting going. I would really love to finish the budget today, if possible. Councilmember Yukimura: I share your goal, Committee Chair Kaneshiro. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Costa: I just wanted to... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: What is the question? Councilmember Yukimura: I would like it to ask it, please. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Well, he was going to answer something with no question. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I was stopping George from answering something that I do not even know what the question was. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. George, you had a chance to look at the proposal... Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: ...and you are familiar with it. Mr. Costa: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: I presume it is something that the Administration supports since the Mayor wrote a letter of recommendation. Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Do you have any objections to the proposal? Mr. Costa: Yes. My clarification went back to Council Chair Rapozo's question of if I knew about it. Yes, I had heard about the project. It was presented to me. I thought, "hey, great project." It is another agricultural project on the west side. I just did not realize it was going to be in our department. Councilmember Yukimura: Do you have any problems with it being in your department? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 56 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: No, but under one (1) condition though. Apparently, they are still trying to get approval for the Agribusiness Development Corporation (ADC) lands with the Department of Agriculture. So I would say it should be contingent on that. Councilmember Yukimura: I know that I spoke with Nalani earlier. Would you prefer that it be like an RFP process where you solicit proposals from the west side community for agriculture? Mr. Costa: I have seen the project. It looks like a good project. So if we go with a RFP, we would be talking about the same people... Councilmember Yukimura: No. You would be talking about putting it out for proposals; they would be among the people proposing, and according to Council Chair Rapozo, you would set up some criteria for whether they have a business plan, whether the goals meet the goals of the Office of Economic Development for agriculture, and those kinds of things. Mr. Costa: For me personally from what I have seen, they have been working with the Department of Agriculture. I would prefer it be a grant to this organization because they have already done that, otherwise if we do an RFP, then we would have to go out and pretty much run this process as opposed to giving a grant to an organization that would be spearheading the initiative. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? Council Chair Rapozo: I have a question for George. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: How much funding has this group secured so far? Mr. Costa: I do not know that part. I saw the plan and it looks like a good plan, but as far as funding and all of that, I am not aware. Council Chair Rapozo: That is what I am trying to say. It is very premature. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: George, you saw the plan, but did you see a budget for the plan? Mr. Costa: Yes, they have a budget. Councilmember Kuali`i: The $50,000 is the full budget? So they are asking the County to fully fund this project or are we are a partner? Are there other partners? Is there any leverage? Is there any other funding? In your budget, the Grant-In-Aids, there are these line items. There is a line item for Other Hawaiian Cultural Projects — $40,000. There is a line item for Food & Agriculture Food Production — $40,000? Would you be able to use any of these moneys to partner with this project for some portion of the $50,000 if$50,000 is their whole budget? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 57 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: Not from those other line items. Are you referring to the ones that are in our budget, right? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Mr. Costa: Yes. Councilmember Kuali`i: Well, it is a Grant-In-Aid, and that is what this kind of sounds like. Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Kuali`i: It is another added Grant-In-Aid by the Council in a sense. But you are saying, no. Mr. Costa: No. Councilmember Kuali`i: I thought I remember when you presented to the Council during the presentation that the Other Hawaiian Cultural Projects — $40,000 was not specifically earmarked for any particular established project, or entity, or deliverable, if you will. Mr. Costa: Right. Councilmember Kuali`i: So that $40,000 would be available for this project, which is a Hawaiian project for muaka to makai sustainable agricultural practices of the old ways, correct? Mr. Costa: I guess it could be looked at that way. Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Mr. Costa: We were thinking more of cultural sites that we are working on and having additional funds for the Kaneiolouma Heiau or any other the other cultural sites. Councilmember Kuali`i: If you looked at it that way, there would be $40,000. So this new project that is under consideration would have to come up with twenty percent (20%) or another $10,000. Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me. For factual purposes, their budget is more than $50,000, and it is right here if anybody wants to see it. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Well, I asked George. He saw it and I did not. Mr. Costa: Yes, and I am looking at it right now. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. (Inaudible) $40,000 would be available? Mr. Costa: What is that? Councilmember Kuali`i: The $40,000 is not earmarked for any particular Other Hawaiian Cultural projects right now? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 58 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: No, not right now. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion? Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I get approached by, and I am sure we all do, organizations that include Kapa'a Pop Warner Football Association (inaudible). A lot of people have great ideas, great motivations, great need, great desires, and all these plans, they have the volunteers, they want to do things, and they want the money. We do not have the money. We are broke. We are looking up at the screen at what is left over. (Inaudible). With all of the cuts that was proposed, you can automatically guarantee that the Administration will be back up in the next year with money bills. Topping the Unassigned Fund Balance. This is a major project. As I read through this $50,000 dollar project. It is a great project. It is huge. I also remember, George, when you were up here for the budget discussions, how strapped you are as far as time, resources, (inaudible). I do not know how you would (inaudible) project like this of this size. (Inaudible) the County is in the business of just writing checks because "hey, you have good program, boom, go run with it, and come back to let us know if it works." Much has been said about Kilauea. Kilauea was our land. It was not (inaudible). They have an idea. When they are ready and work it through OED (inaudible), they work and get all of the logistics in order, I welcome them to come up with the Administration, not letter of support of the (inaudible), letter of support for the funding of the project, and then I will consider it. But until then, (inaudible). There are just too many people out there that we have had to say sorry to this year because we do not have the funds, and this is one of them. That is just my position. I am not going to support it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I think that is two (2) no's. So that makes this impossible. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I think we need to do something for the west side to support agriculture, that is number one. I think it was last year or the year before when the Administration eliminated the one (1) positon we had supporting agriculture. Now the Director, among all of the other duties, supports agriculture as best as has can. There is a huge resource on the west side; personal resource of people and land (inaudible). I think we need to invest in that. We do give money. We do write checks to all kinds of organizations and the directors do not have to manage projects. We write them for the Young Women's Christian Association (YWCA), we write them for the American Red Cross, we write them for senior softball, and it is simply writing checks and asking for reports when you are giving a grant out. We have a large number of grants that we give. It is clear that we do not have the votes for this project, but following this, I will ask and implore upon this Council to think about supporting agriculture, small farms, small local farms put together by local residents from the west side (inaudible). DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 59 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura and then Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Yukimura: We are talking about one of the major thrusts of this County, which is economic development and diversification. Economic diversification not only in agriculture, but smaller agriculture as well and food production, which is part of our sustainability goals. I feel like we really have a double standard here because when Kilauea came before us, they did not have budget or a business plan. They did not have anything except a desire, whereas over here, and it was a good desire and they have been working at it. They did not have (inaudible). George had to spend his time supporting and requiring that they pull these things together. But in this case, we have people who have already done their homework, and they have a budget and a business plan. Agriculture is really important economic development. I feel like we are applying a double standard. We should be consistent and also provide funding or support on the west side, not just on the north shore. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: It is not a double standard. IClauea Agricultural Park was funded prior to myself and Councilmember Hooser coming on board. (Inaudible) talked about for a long time before final funding was available to them. I believe it just came two (2) years ago or last year. The fact of the matter is this proposal in front of us just came up about two (2) hours ago. If that is not a big difference, then I do not know what a big difference is. The other thing is that senior softball actually has a State tournament that has been run numerous times with all of those teams. This proposal does not even have land. It is an idea. I think there is a big difference between actually having an event and actually having a farm to do what this funding is going to do. I just think that again, when you are going to talk about apples, talk about apples. If you want to talk about oranges, then talk about oranges. They are totally different. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I do not know how we can say it is a double standard. Kilauea was a condition of a development that occurred thirty (30) years ago or whatever, way before any of us. Maybe Councilmember Yukimura was around. Okay. My point is this, Kilauea did not show up day 2 of decision-making in the budget with the Administration coming up and saying, "Oh, I heard about it." That was years or decades until the Administration came forward with the plan. It is totally different. Really. As far as the YWCA, the American Red Cross, and all of that, those are existing programs that we fund every year. If the YWCA or the American Red Cross came up today and said, "I need $100,000 for a program we are thinking about implementing," I would not support that. Really, it is what it is. Apples and apples is what we should be discussing. It is an entirely different project. I am not about to sit here and burden you, George, with one (1) more project that honestly, they are not ready. They are just not ready. They can go secure farm loans or whatever kind of assistance through an application process and try to convince the federal government or the State or even the County through your grant process. I think that is the appropriate way. But for a Councilmember to drop a $50,000 request with the proposal at the same time and expect us to vote on it, that is difficult. It is very difficult. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I hear all of the concerns. I did this with the arts proposal last year, and because we were open and the Councilmembers around this table were open to new initiatives and to new ideas. I hope we are not saying the criteria is that you have been around for thirty (30) years, because the reason why that project was around DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 60 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING for thirty (30) years was because nobody ever put together a good plan for it. Are you going to wait around for thirty (30) years and then be qualified for funding? I do not think so. Yes, they do not have land and they need land. We could help them get the land by showing the State a small bit of support for their overall budget. It is showing that the County wants to see this kind of project happen, we have thousands of acres out on the west side that are owned by the public, and at least a small portion of it should go to growing food and training young farmers. That is one of the key needs right now if we want to see agriculture more forward. This is recognizing entrepreneurship, recognizing initiative, recognizing the need, and being willing to put a small amount of money toward it to help it grow and establish itself. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I will not be supporting this proposal. It is very difficult for us to decide on something when it comes here and it has not been vetted. The proper way to vet it is it goes through the Office of Economic Development amendment to our budget, and then we vet it. If it just so happens to make it through, then the project will get funded. You have seen projects that have been vetted there and still get cut here. I think that is the way it should go. It is just very difficult for us to just give away money here like this. It needs to go through the proper vetting. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I think last year we kind of came across this too, where maybe this Council needs a process of our own for our own type of Grant-In-Aids. As far as this proposal, I agree that we do need to do something for the west side in agriculture, with small local farmers, and growing local food. But that is why in our Grant-In-Aid program, we have all of these different categories. (Inaudible) in agriculture, which has tropical flowers, fruit growers, and water. There is all of these categories here. There is all of these things that is happening. Yes, we need to do more, but it needs to go through this system because that is what we have. I am satisfied with knowing that we even have a specific line item that is food and agriculture food production, which right now has $40,000. Hopefully this potential group of farmers and others, I have heard of another group of young Hawaiians that are cleaning up a place they refer to as Poison Valley in Waimea. With everything they clean, they replace with the growing or dry land taro and different things. I do not know enough about it to talk about it, but when I heard them talk to (inaudible) and Hawaiian Homelands, it sounded pretty awesome. It has to do with stream restoration and bring more water. There are potentially a lot of projects like this that would be really good and we probably should be moving in that direction. I want to tell you, George, please use some of this $40,000 that was already allocated (inaudible) in projects, to begin working in that area. (Inaudible) with more solid proposals to ask for a little more. We are talking about this huge budget and we need to invest in small amounts, but I need, like everybody else, to see more and to see the justification. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Kuali`i: Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I get a roll call vote, please? The motion to add $50,000 for the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid for West Kauai Mauka Farm and Food Center—Iwikua was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Hooser, Kuali`i, Yukimura TOTAL—3*, AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL—3, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: Chock TOTAL— 1. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 61 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i, Councilmember Kuali`i was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are on additions. Councilmember Hooser: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser, do you have an addition? Councilmember Hooser: Yes, I have an addition. Council Chair Rapozo: We have to get Councilmember Chock in here. (Councilmember Chock was noted as present.) Councilmember Hooser: I have an addition, which adds $100,000 to the Office of Economic Development to provide funds to make available to small farms for (inaudible) west side residents. The intent is that people would submit grants and this would be a pool for funds available for one (1) person. The department would evaluate the grants based on their merit and whether it was a $5,000 grant for tools, shovels, and implements or whether it is a larger grant to assist organizations that we just talked about or similar organization (inaudible). It is $100,000. We took away $50,000 from the EBT program, which supports agriculture and (inaudible) in vetting in agriculture at all, let alone agriculture on the west side. It is a small step, but an important step to tell these young farmers and various organizations that yes, the County believes in you enough to support it and support your business plan. It would also send a strong message to Scott Enright and the people of the Agribusiness Development Corporation and others that yes, the County wants to support it and be a partner in this. It is a relatively small amount of money. I think it would be a strong statement of support for agriculture on the west side, and I would hope that we could have a unanimous vote in support of this. Thank you. Councilmember Hooser moved to appropriate $100,000 to the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid account for West Kauai Residents' Small Farming Initiatives, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo and then Councilmember Kagawa. Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Hooser, would you be opposed to removing "West" so that it is available for all Kaua`i residents? Wailua has a lot of agricultural land. Councilmember Hooser: Right. I would defer to the will of the majority, but I believe the west side has been neglected. I believe the west side is where the opportunity lies because we have such a vast amount of land. If we want to add additional funds and (inaudible). I feel strongly that the west side really needs the support. They (inaudible). There is thriving (inaudible) Moloa`a that just got support from the State. The north shore is getting its support. I strongly believe that the west side of Kaua`i has been neglected in this area and we need to make a statement of support for them, but I will defer to the majority. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 62 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: I just think that besides Kilauea and Moloa'a, you still have Wailua, Lihu`e, and you have a lot of agricultural lands throughout this island. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Council Chair Rapozo: (Inaudible) people get excluded. I will give you my support if "West" is out. It is not that I want to not (inaudible). The process of the selection of who gets these grants would be left up to the Administration, and maybe they want to give preference to however they want to do it, but for me, I do not want to exclude and obviously, we just do not have more money. If we can do it for Kaua`i residents and leave the selection process up to the Administration, then you have my support. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Councilmember Hooser, do you have a cut that you have to do with that addition? Councilmember Hooser: I had proposed a $200,000 cut earlier that was rejected. Councilmember Kagawa: Okay, perfect. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The reason why West Kauai is so important is because there is publicly owned land. You do not have to find land, and land is a problem for farmers to farm. The other reason is it is the best land in the world actually, with the irrigation system that is there and the amount of sun that is there. We had the highest (inaudible) in the world when Kekaha Plantation was in operation. So that is why the west side is really important, plus the fact that it needs an economic boost. All of those growing conditions make it so perfect for at least one (1) of the economic legs for the west side to stand on as it was with the plantations. That is why, to me, it is so important. I am open to keeping it broad if the Administration, in its deliberation about the criteria for this request to proposal, can recognize some of those aspects of agriculture because we need to choose the most optimum conditions. We all know that agriculture is a hard thing. If you can get the optimum conditions to start with, that is the best place to start. If the Administration can recognize that in how they set up the criteria, I am thinking we can somehow manage with a broader title or scope. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: If you want, we can ask questions. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: George, can you remind me what the $40,000 for food and agriculture food production is being spent on? Where is it being expended on the island? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 63 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Costa: Is that the one in our present budget? Councilmember Kuali`i: Grant-In-Aid—$40,000. Mr. Costa: Is it under Kauai Economic Development Board (KEDB)? Councilmember Kuali`i: Yes. Mr. Costa: Yes, that is actually for the food production center, which is the business incubator and now it is the Kaua`i... Councilmember Kuali`i: At Kaua`i Community College (KCC)? Mr. Costa: Yes at KCC. Sorry about that. Councilmember Kuali`i: But central to serve the whole island? Mr. Costa: The whole island, right. Councilmember Kuali`i: Does Island Wide Agriculture Park System — $90,000 include (inaudible) into the west side? Mr. Costa: No. Councilmember Kuali`i: No plans? Mr. Costa: That title was changed to reflect the Kilauea Community Agricultural Center. What it originally was, and it came from the Mayor's Holo Holo 2020 vision, was an agricultural park in each moku. I had made presentations before and we continued to have discussions with different organizations like Knudsen Trust, who is looking at developing in agricultural park in Koloa. The Kekaha Agricultural Association is looking at developing an agricultural park in Kekaha. Then at the time, the Farm Bureau was looking at ADC lands up at Kalepa. So that is why it was entitled Island Wide Agricultural Park. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Does "island wide" not apply anymore? Mr. Costa: No, because for the $90,000... Councilmember Kuali`i: It is Kilauea? Mr. Costa: For the $90,000, it is specific to Kilauea. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. My last question is, would you be able to find savings anywhere in your department worth $100,000 in order to increase your Grant-In-Aid program by $100,000? Mr. Costa: We would probably look at other programs to reduce and then focus... DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 64 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: Are you saying yes? Mr. Costa: There could be other opportunities. It might not be something everybody wants. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. As we talked earlier about Other Hawaiian Cultural Projects — $40,000 possibly being available for such a project is the one that Councilmember Yukimura was talking about or the Poison Valley cleanup and farmers there, would that be the same thing in your department as far as if somebody approached you in the middle of budget time, you would still work with them and consider it and look for the money and savings? Mr. Costa: Yes. I would not focus on noneconomic development items in our budget and focus on economic development type projects. Councilmember Kuali`i: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions for George while he is up here? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: As I stated earlier, even though my preference is to make it a west side specific proposal, I would accommodate concerns around the table. I am open to making it an island wide proposal in confidence that the Director will see the importance of the west side and perhaps give preference. I do not know what the language is. I want to make sure the west side is not neglected in this process. So perhaps it could be open island wide, but with a preference given to the west side local residents. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I think it would take into account, and I think I am going back to criteria Council Chair Rapozo was suggesting; the viability of the proposal, how well organized the people are, whether they have the abilities to implement what they are proposing, whether there is already an agricultural park that has been getting County moneys, and what the overall direction of agriculture on Kauai for economic development is. It would have to be all of those things. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Prior to this discussion, I would say that I would be supportive if we removed "West" and left "Kaua`i," and also if we reduced it to some amount like $25,000 or $30,000. $100,000 is a lot of money and I am hoping that we can end our cut session with enough money to make some difference with road repairs, but I also think $25,000 or $30,000 potentially could be a good starter amount for a small project or two (2) that maybe George then could help identify. So with the $25,000 or $30,000 and with the $40,000 in the Other Hawaiian Cultural Projects line item, that would leave them DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 65 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING some money to get some things going if they are already at that point and ready to go. That is what I would support; removing"West" and lowering it to $25,000 or $30,000. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: As I mentioned earlier, I am willing to make this broader than just the west side even though my intent is to support local residents on the west side when we get into farming. I think we need to make a statement of support. While I understand the concerns of my colleagues about the budget and reducing the amount, in talking to farmers who are talking about going in together to buy a tractor, you cannot buy a tractor for $25,000. You just cannot. I think we need to make a statement that is of real support, not token support, not well, here is a few thousand dollars and we end up with nothing. $100,000 is a real statement of support. We used to have probably a $150,000 person in that job, and year after year, we do not have that. Again, we took away the EBT. We give hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not, millions or more to the visitor industry and to other things. How many employees do we have supporting everybody else? We have nobody supporting agriculture. I really want to see a strong statement of support and it can be island wide, but we need a statement. We have the funds available and I think it is just really important. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am looking for a win-win here. I am thinking if we did it at $30,000 for this island wide, and I think Councilmember Kuali`i has asked the Office of Economic Development to look for another $30,000 or $40,000 so that we are somewhere around $70,000 total with an amendment of$30,000. Maybe we could get close to what Councilmember Hooser is talking about, but also respect the other budgetary constraints. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa and then Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Committee Chair Kaneshiro. I find it kind of disingenuous to try and pump money into agriculture after the last Council passed Bill No. 2491 and now we are saying we support agriculture. Seed companies are agriculture. I think if we want to support real projects that have a viable chance of making a difference out there, it should be done on a case-by-case basis, and I think this Council should vet it through a public hearing process or a bill process if we have good projects. George, keep your eyes open. I will be voting this thing down, but if there is solid agricultural operations that may need a tractor or may need other equipment to survive and provide some real jobs and real food, then please, keep your ears open and bring it before us. I think other than that, this is just a whole bunch of pandering. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: My last comment is more of a process as far as how we are doing these additions when the cuts have not been completed yet. There is a couple of really large cuts that would make me feel a little bit more generous as far as adding another $10,000 or $20,000 if I knew we had accomplished those cuts. But we are still far away than I was hoping as where we could get to make even a little dent like Vice Chair Kagawa was talking about as far as road repairs. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 66 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: My intention is we take this item, we vote it up or down, and then we go back to the cuts that we had the attorneys look at so that we can complete that. If somebody else wants to come with a new proposal, we can look at it, but I do want to just get to decision-making. We either support it or we do not, we make a quick statement on why we do or do not, and we move on it because we can go in circles on this all day. Any final words on this? If nobody is willing to withdraw it, we are going to take the vote on this right now. Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I am supportive of this addition. I feel a little bit bad. I think we cut maybe not high numbers out of the Office of Economic Development, but certainly many line items out of his budget, and now we are asking for something that we definitely want. In terms of diversified agriculture, I am a huge proponent and I will support just about any measure that will take us to the next step. I will vote for what comes up. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: Mine is more of a suggestion because it is really difficult to pump money into agriculture and we do not have anybody designated as an agricultural person in the Office of Economic Development. I would ask the Administration to really look and consider restoring that positon going forward because it is hard, George. It is like running a mechanic shop without a mechanic. I agree, we have not served the agricultural community as much as we should because of the vast resources of land. But it is very hard to do when you do not have someone dedicated. Maybe we have some good news. I do not know. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Ms. Nakamura: Nadine Nakamura, Managing Director. Good afternoon. Just to answer your question, Council Chair Rapozo, when the Agricultural Specialist retired, we took a very close look at that vacancy. At the time, the feedback that we were getting from the Council was that we needed to cut positions. We needed to cut our operating budget. At the same time, we were also looking at, as we said, whenever there is a vacancy, we are looking at how we can do things differently. What we decided to do was to ask Nalani Brun to take over some of the administrative positions that George was formerly doing, and then to free up some of George's time, to take on many of the agricultural initiatives, which he has done and has made progress on many of these, especially with the Kilauea initiative. It has freed up his time to work with KEDB, to partner with the Farm Bureau, to do all of these things, and to oversee the Sunshine Market initiative with staff in really enforcing the rules of the Sunshine Market and so forth. Council Chair Rapozo: Nadine, the Sunshine Market is a very...that is not even what I am talking about. I am talking about developing agriculture. The Sunshine Market is an end-user. I hope you are not saying that you folks cut that because the Council said. Ms. Nakamura: No. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 67 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: That is what I heard. I hope not. We can go back to the cuts... Ms. Nakamura: I think we were looking at the... Council Chair Rapozo: ...and I can go find other positions to cut so you can restore the Agricultural Specialist. If you are saying that we caused that, then we will cut some positions. Ms. Nakamura: No. I think this was again, the whole look at when we do things differently. Council Chair Rapozo: I understand, but what I am saying is if we want to put an effort into agriculture and we do not fill the Agricultural Specialist position, how sincere are we? How serious are we, is what I am saying?. Ms. Nakamura: What we are saying is we found a different way to do that, and that is by freeing up and taking away some of the administrative duties of the Director, and allowing him to focus on some of the agricultural initiatives. Council Chair Rapozo: Who is working on developing agricultural projects? Who is our person now? Mr. Costa: I am. Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. In addition to what else, George? How many hours do you have in your day? Mr. Costa: So far twenty-four (24) hours. Council Chair Rapozo: I am not trying to be rough, but I am just saying that I took that response differently, that it was in response to the Council. Excuse me. I think this Council, as long as I have been on it, has really tried to put an emphasis on agriculture, but we cannot hire people. We cannot hire an Agricultural Specialist. We did not get rid of that. It is not like we cut that position. So I do not want that to get out. If you ask me, I will cut two (2) or three (3) positions so we can bring that Agricultural Specialist back. We can work on that in the afternoon, really, if you want to satisfy the Council. I think I speak for most of the Members here, if not all. I believe that the Agricultural Specialist is important. We have all of the resources, we have everything we want, and so we are going to pump $100,000, which I support, but then what? It sits in an account and we wait for...anyway, I think you get my point. I am done. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions for the Administration? Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: Never mind. There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We have had a lot of discussion on it. I have not said my piece. Councilmember Hooser. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 68 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: Maybe I should let you say your piece before I do. What I was going to say is that I have listened to what everybody has been saying. I get it, that we want the opportunity to be available for farmers all over the County to apply equally if they qualify, have business plans, and that kind of thing. I agree to that and will amend the proposal accordingly. I understand the concerns of Councilmember Kuali`i regarding the budget and I am willing to meet everybody halfway if we could and cut the proposal to $50,000, which is the same amount of money that we took from the EBT program and is still not enough to buy a tractor, maybe, but it is a start. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are you going to withdraw your motion? Councilmember Hooser: Withdraw or amend, yes. Councilmember Hooser withdrew the motion to appropriate $100,000 to the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid account for West Kaua`i Residents' Small farming Initiatives. Councilmember Yukimura withdrew her second. Councilmember Hooser moved to appropriate $50,000 to the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid account for Islandwide Kaua`i Residents' Small Framing Initiatives, seconded by Council Chair Rapozo. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? I have not had a chance to talk on either one. For this proposal, I think I have the same opinion. These types of projects should go through a vetting system. Without money of OED, it does not mean that people without a good business plan cannot come to them and say, "This the type of project I am doing and this is the kind of money I need to make my project work." Then in the next budget, George again, would put it in his budget, come here, present it to us, we will ask questions and vet it, and we either vote it up or down. If it passes all of that, then it will get the money. But I do not see how putting $50,000 into an account is going to do anything. I support agriculture. I work with agriculture every day. I work with agricultural tenants every day. Farming is not easy. It is expensive. If a person wants to do farming, they need to come in with a good business plan. I do not know why you are going to come in and ask for money right off the bat. How much is it going to help the farming community by coming in a just asking for money off the bat? That still does not even tell you if you are going to be successful. The equipment that you buy breaks down a lot. We have equipment that breaks down every two (2) weeks. You have labor, mowers, tools, and the list goes on and on for expenses for agriculture. If they want the money, then it should go through a vetting system or go to United State Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). You have to look around. There are a lot of programs that are going to provide money for agriculture. We cannot just give money away is what I am trying to say. What can we do to help agriculture? We should make policies that encourage agriculture and not put them down. We should make it easier for people to farm. Again, agriculture comes in many different colors. What if somebody on the west side wants to do a ranch and have cows? Are they going to get pounded because cows crap on the ground? We cannot limit it. How are we going to help agriculture? We should work on our policies. How do we make agriculture more successful and easier to do on Kaua`i, if that is our direction? To just dump money on it, I can tell you not many farms survive. We could dump money and there is no success in that. If we are trying to drive the economy, maybe we should offer grants to new business owners or all small business owners. There are a lot of things we can do, but again, it needs to be vetted. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 69 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING If someone has a proposal, they should go to the Office of Economic Development. If George thinks it is a viable project, then George puts it in the budget, and the budget comes to us. It would be nice if they came and propose it ahead of time before the budget so that we have time to vet it, ask questions, and think about it. Then we are going to know it is in the budget, even then, it still might get cut, but I think that is the process it should go through. That is just my own opinion and the way I am going to vote on it. Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: Just real briefly. I understand and recognize your concerns, and I share many of those concerns. I certainly do not think the County should be just writing checks and dumping money on any project, and that is why I proposed funding this way so qualified or unqualified applicants can submit proposals. Those that prove they have experience, have a business plan, have partners, and have the ability to be successful then will be the ones that I am sure the Director would be looking at supporting. This is not about just handing out things, and I understand your concerns. That is the purpose of this measure, to avoid those kinds of measures. I appreciate it. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Procedurally, we either have to vote on an amendment to the proposal that is on the floor or we have to withdraw the... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I thought you... Councilmember Hooser: We did that already. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It was amendment and seconded already. Council Chair Rapozo: It was done already. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh you did? Council Chair Rapozo: It is all done. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Sorry. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are looking at $50,000 for Islandwide Small Farming Initiatives. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion on this? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to make clear again, that without us finishing the cuts... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Actually, I need a second on the amendment. Councilmember Hooser: Council Chair Rapozo seconded the motion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay, got it. • DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 70 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: Without us finishing the cuts and knowing that George has said that he has at least this amount of money in his budget that he could access if he needed to if a worthwhile project came forward, I will not support it at this time. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I get a roll call vote, please? The motion to appropriate $50,000 to the Office of Economic Development, Grant-In-Aid account for Islandwide Kauai Residents' Small Framing Initiatives was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Rapozo, Yukimura TOTAL— 4, AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 3, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will go back to the cuts. I hope we had it vetted through our attorneys on any questions we had. I think Councilmember Kuali`i had two (2). We will go in the same order that we went as we did originally. Councilmember Kualii had two (2), then Councilmember Kagawa had one (1), and we will go from there. Councilmember Kuali`i: The easier one that was withdrawn is dealing with appointed positions and the executive orders. Human Resources did provide additional executive orders that confirmed what she had said, so I am not resubmitting that one. I will just make the point though, the Mayor has the power to write an executive order and is given that power by the State Legislature and Hawaii Revised Statues (HRS) Section 89(c) or what have you. I would just say that the Mayor can write this executive order for multiple years, and technically, if this is one that is expiring this next budget year, that means the budget year after that is not addressed, but this one is already included in a five (5) year plan. I would just hope that any future mayor not do executive orders of this nature that deals with giving raises to any of our employees for a period beyond their length of service. Our Mayor has not done that necessarily, but when it comes up again in a year, I would not like to see another executive order that ties us in for another five (5) years. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: What is the proposal on the floor? Councilmember Kuali`i: There is none. I withdrew them. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: For all of them? Councilmember Kuali`i: I withdrew that one and not this one. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Hooser: I have a question on that one if I could. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We do not have anything on the floor right now. Councilmember Hooser: Do you want me to put something on the floor? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 71 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: No, not on that one. Councilmember Hooser: No, but I would like to ask a question about what he was just talking about. Can I talk? I do not want to break the rules. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I want to just keep going. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can you not ask the question after or get the information later? Councilmember Hooser: No. The topic is about non-civil service employees getting raises, right? I think the conclusion was that executive orders by the Mayor means that administrative employees who are not civil service get the same raises that civil service employees get. Am I correct so far? My question is, why do Council Services Staff not get those very same raises? That is my question. I think it is only fair to ask. Everyone else is getting a raise. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We do not have anything on the floor. Councilmember Hooser: I will prepare an amendment to make an addition for the... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Just to get this answer? Councilmember Hooser: Well, if that is what it takes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us try and get the answer. Are we allowed to discuss it? Let us get the answer already so we can move on. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Ms. Rapozo: I am sorry, what was the question again? Councilmember Hooser: It is my understanding that employees of the County, by executive order, who are not civil service employees track civil service raises. We had a measure earlier to take that away. My question is why does Council Services Staff not enjoy the same benefit? Ms. Rapozo: The executive orders that are approved by the Mayor are for the executive branch. I believe in the Council's budget, you do have a salary adjustment line item whereby it says, "possible increases for appointed exempt employees and those not covered by collective bargaining." So that is your avenue to provide it. Councilmember Hooser: So there is a line item, but there is not money in it? Ms. Rapozo: There is money. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 72 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: There is money? Ms. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: So our employees are slated to get raises? Ms. Rapozo: I believe that is up to the appointing authority of the Council Services Staff. Councilmember Hooser: I guess that is a budget question. Okay. Thank you. My question is, in the budget, do we have funds to make sure that Council Services exempt employees track the same raises that the administrative employees get? That is my question. Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: They do? Council Chair Rapozo: We have the funds. Councilmember Hooser: But is it in the budget? Council Chair Rapozo: It is in the budget, except for our Clerk and Deputy. Councilmember Hooser: Okay, but all of the other exempt employees... Council Chair Rapozo: We have a line item. Basically, we just have to do the paperwork and get it across the street. Jade is the appointing authority. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We have it in here, possible increase for appointed exempt employees, and it is a line item in our budget. Councilmember Hooser: Okay, so it is funded. I just wanted to make sure that our Council Services Staff was getting the raises along with everybody else. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: It is funded. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can we move on? Councilmember Hooser: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The next one was... Councilmember Kagawa: It was his two (2). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: He pulled back his two (2). Councilmember Kagawa: Oh, you pulled the other one too? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 73 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kuali`i: No. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion. Which one is this? How much money? Councilmember Yukimura: $566,000. Councilmember Kuali`i: $566,535. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. The question before was, what was the line item that this is coming out of? Is it a negative salary balance line item? Councilmember Kuali`i: (Inaudible) legally if we could do it. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Mauna Kea, did you have a chance to review that? Mr. Trask: I did. First off, my understanding is that the motion before the body is to put a lump sum. Is it to put a lump sum deduction and leave it to the Administration to decide where the savings will come from, or is it a line item? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am not sure, that was the question. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: Let me look in the budget here for an example. There is an account, say as an example, it is still in all of the departments, right, Scott? Each department has, I think it is just named "wages and salaries." Sorry, "regular salaries." The account for regular salaries for the Office of the Mayor is 001-0101-512.01- 01. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: But I think the question is, what is the line item that is going to reduce the salaries? Councilmember Kuali`i: That is the line item. That is the account. Line items are accounts. It is not position by position, although I do not think positions themselves have line items. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to take a quick recess and we will follow-up on this. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 2:32 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 2:36 p.m., and proceeded as follows: DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 74 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I think what Councilmember Kuali`i has done and has brought to light is what I have been feeling strongly against. I still have sore feelings about the way the game has been played with the Salary Commission. I feel especially sore for the ones that did not get it on the whole list. Having said that, I think that at some point even if you do not like the rules of the game where three (3) votes dictated what happened, sometimes you have to throw in the towel. I feel like I am at that point with this one because I think the supplemental budget has shown that they have made the cuts. If we cut anything inside of there, I think we either have a lot of requests for money bills to fill those gaps especially from the Office of the County Attorney and the Planning Department that already said there is no way of finding it. Again, I feel you all the way, Councilmember Kuali`i. I am glad you brought it to light, but I think I would have to side with the "no" votes on this. It is no disrespect to you because I am with you. I am with you, I am still habut about it, but it is done and I want to reach an end. I do not think it is fair to force them to cut $566,000 that they do not have. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Anything else? Council Chair Rapozo. Wait, is this proposal still on the floor or did it get introduced? It is still on? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, I seconded it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I feel similar to Councilmember Kagawa. Over lunch I was thinking about this. In football and baseball, when the game ends, the game ends, and you move on whatever the case was. Sometimes you are not happy with the last call. I was watching girls softball last night, I swear Arthur Brun was the first base umpire. He made a really ridiculous call, everybody was going up, but he made the call, and in the end, the call was right. My point is when the game ends, the game ends and you move on. Am I happy with the way this thing went down like Councilmember Kagawa? No, I am not. The biggest frustration for me is every time I look across over here to Jade and I know what she does here, she is not getting a raise. She is not getting a raise. That bothers me. When I look to my left and I see Scott, he is not getting a raise. There is nothing this body can do about that. We can give everybody else a raise, but we cannot give Jade. Jade is in charge of Council Services, Elections, and everything else; Scott is her assistant; and we cannot give them a raise. The process is flawed and yet, when we went through it—I may offend a few people today, but that is just the way it is because I feel like I have to get it off of my chest. As much as I want to support what Councilmember Kuali`i is doing, I am not because the game has been played and the votes were taken. The chips fall where they fall. I just want the public to know that it is very unfair for Jade and Scott because somebody was not happy with the first result. I do not know who it is. I am not here to point fingers or what. Somebody was not happy with the first result, so they regrouped, they got the referees to add one (1) more quarter, and they played the quarter. At the end of the fifth quarter, some got what they wanted and some got screwed. Unfortunately, the people that got screwed are the people that I work with, and that frustrates me. It bothers me. It is everybody's responsibility and everybody's huleana. Councilmember Kuali`i is trying to make it right now, but the game is over. The game has been decided and some people got raises and some did not. it is unfair. I wish we can fix that process. If everybody had agreed with the end of the first game without the overtime or the extra inning, we would not be having this discussion today, but now we are having this discussion. I had to get that off of my chest, Jade, more for you and Scott because I feel like crap just knowing what you folks go through and not being able to do anything about it. Unfortunately, I will not be supporting this because I will respect the rule and process it DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 75 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING went through, and we will deal with it at the next Salary Commission whenever they get together again. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I want to say that the feeling that Council Chair Rapozo just expressed is the feeling that many people felt about the County Engineer, Director of Finance, and all of these positions that are on the list. They deserve raises. Why are they not getting it? Council Chair Rapozo, if you wanted to have Jade to have a raise, you could have voted for the whole list and made that happen. I do think we cannot take out different positions. We had to do it by tiers, but I hope that in the next Salary Resolution round, there will be some job audits that will really carefully define who is in the first tier, who is in the second tier, and have some more rationalization to it. I think following the rule and the decision that are made, even that overtime was part of the rules. This was all done by the rules. I think we might be able to do a line item deficits or minuses per this proposal, but the bottom line is we have to pay for the proper salaries. There is no way we get around it. We can force the Mayor to come back with a specific bill, then if we do not pass the bill, then the department heads will be able to sue us, and will go to court. In the end, we are not going to be making these savings. In fact, we are going to be costing more than what we have to pay in salary increases. We are going to be caught paying for costs of attorneys in lawsuits and that will get us nowhere. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Is there any further discussion? Again, I do not want to rehash the whole salary thing. We can see where the votes are going. I would really like to move forward. I can say things too, but I would rather just keep going. It has been a long two (2) days and I want to get through this. Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: My only request was that I know Members are talking about what has happened, but in all fairness to the Administration, there was a lot of talk that has happened. I want it to be clear for the public about why we are moving in this direction and I am not sure if that is absolutely clear for everyone. I just wanted to give the opportunity for that clarity. Councilmember Yukimura just kind of mentioned why. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not want to go and torture ourselves too much. We can get confirmation from the County Attorney if we want, but I think we pretty much got the gist of it. I understand what Councilmember Kuali`i was trying to do. We looked at doing things like this last year, too. How do we force the cuts? Like Councilmember Kagawa said, he brought up the whole binder. He said, "There is money in there and it is our job to find it," but it is very difficult on our end to find where that money is. I agree it is difficult. We have no clue. Every position or any budget item in here, you ask if you can cut it, and the answer is going to be no. I completely understand what Councilmember Kuali`i. was trying to do. We are trying to make a cut to force the Administration to show their lapses. Again, we cannot do it and I just want to move forward. Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I just want to make clear that we did not get to the end of the game. So we ended the game prior to the end, and that it is not clear whether this is possible or not. As far as I know, we have the authority to create a line item and we have the authority to even budget a negative amount in a line item. It is possible. It would take a whole lot of work to get that done. It probably could not be done today, especially if what I would end up doing, which was finding individual budget line items to propose where the cuts should actually come from. It is possible and I would only tell you that this is an important part of our work that we have to do, and we have to do better next time with the Salary Resolution. The point that we are at now, still leaves us with a worse DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 76 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING situation as far as equity from position to position. It creates more inversion. In essence, even without this budgetary approval, the Mayor and all hiring authorities still have the ability to act because those are only caps that were put in place. They have followed the caps to put budgets in place should they give those raises. So all of those raises are not actually given yet, and they still have the ability to not give those raises where they decide. If they did not give those raise, they would be able to realize more budget savings and then they would be able to help do what we are trying to do, which is to put more money towards roads repairs where we know we have a $100,000,000 backlog. We did not get all the way (inaudible). I am submitting questions for opinions in writing on what is possible because I am doing this on behalf of the citizens. We are talking about nearly $600,000 that we are giving raises to $100,000 positions or raises (inaudible) more $100,000 positions. So we get into the range of whatever, or fifty (50) $100,000 positions at a time when we are saying we are broke or we do not have to money to do the things that we absolutely need to do. This game is not ending because we played it to the end. Obviously, the other game should have ended with us having a winning score, but it did not. There is not right or wrong or what is still possible because the game (inaudible) possible, but it is ending because I clearly can see there is no vote. I am not withdrawing my motion because I want to take the vote. I did this work on behalf of the people, fighting for their interest trying to get a...this is not a tax cut, but (inaudible) taxes so we have to come up with money some other way. This is one of the ways, to cut $100,000 positions. Let us vote. I will vote (inaudible). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us take a roll call vote. The motion to incorporate salary and related benefits reductions for Salary Commission Resolution Officers and Employees so that each Department will find savings within their own Department was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Kuali`i TOTAL— 1, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL—6, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We have Councilmember Kagawa's proposal next. Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Again, this is not administrative orders what to do. This is merely moving back what you folks moved when you submitted your budget. We are just going to put everything back. We have a Civil Engineer VII making $137,000 and a Project Manager that they moved under the Department of Parks & Recreation making $95,000. They all have job descriptions that say that they will manage building repair & maintenance, and now we want to take away those duties from them. I just find that to not be a good decision and that is my reason why we are moving everything back under the civil servants that have qualified to have those jobs of(inaudible). Again, I put up my suggestion, my suggestion was vetted with the Unions, and the Unions have communicated to me that they have talked to the Administration. If the Administration does not want to listen to them, that is their prerogative. I think what the Union said was reasonable. They said, let the Department of Parks & Recreation handle parks and the Building Division take care of the rest of the County facilities. It is very simple. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I get a motion and a second? Councilmember Kagawa moved to eliminate the Facilities Maintenance Division from the Department of Parks & Recreation (including the Building Manager in the Department of Parks & Recreation Administration Division) and add the budgeted DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 77 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING positions, associated costs, and level text back to the Building Repair &Maintenance Division and Janitorial Division under the Department of Public Works, with the recommendation that the Administration consider a division of responsibilities following the proposed table of organization that is attached hereto and after further consultation with affected supervisory employees, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: I have a question for the introducer. Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Did you meet with the Unions about this? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Well, they called me and had concerns. Councilmember Hooser: UPW and HGEA? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, because I am the Public Works / Parks & Recreation Committee Chair. Councilmember Hooser: My question was, did you meet with the Unions, HGEA and UPW, and you said yes? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Did you also meet with the managers and the employees of the Department of Parks & Recreation and the Department of Public Works that are going to be impacted by this? Councilmember Kagawa: I talked to a couple. Councilmember Hooser: Did you talk to both of the managers of those departments so they know what you are proposing? Councilmember Kagawa: I do not know if they know what I am proposing. They just expressed a little bit of a concern about having everything shift under the Department of Parks & Recreation. I think they were for things moving under the Department of Parks & Recreation and having that split as the Charter recommends. Councilmember Hooser: The people in the Department of Parks & Recreation and the Department of Public Works feel the same way? Councilmember Kagawa: I am not sure. I did not talk to every single person, so I cannot answer that. Councilmember Hooser: But you talked to both people? I want to make sure that people in the Department of Parks & Recreation and the Department of Public Works know what is being proposed and are happy with it. Did you talk to people in the Department of Parks & Recreation or the Department of Public Works? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 78 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let me make this clear. When we had the budget come through, we had a whole division of people in the Department of Public Works. During this budget session, the Administration moved that to the Department of Parks & Recreation. This proposal is moving that back to where it originally was. Councilmember Hooser: Right. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: The additional language was to look further into doing it a different way. The financial ramifications of this is when they moved everybody to the Department of Parks & Recreation, it is just moving everybody back. Councilmember Hooser: I understand that. My question is, did the introducer meet with the employees that are... Councilmember Kagawa: It is not me, it is just talk. I have a lot of friends and you have friends too. Councilmember Hooser: Did you talk to the employees? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, I always talk to employees all the time. I talk about anything. Councilmember Hooser: You talk to County employees about the way their departments are being managed? Councilmember Kagawa: No, I do not manage them. I just talk story like I normally do. I just think this proposal is a better proposal based on all of my discussions with the Unions and employees who have some concerns about everything shifting under the control of the Department of Parks & Recreation. They want to make a split, if possible. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Just to clarify, are we basically just putting everything back to the status quo? I hear that there is a new arrangement that Vice Chair Kagawa is suggesting to the Administration, but that is only a suggestion. What we do here will not put any new arrangement into effect? Councilmember Kagawa: No. The motion clearly said that... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: It is a recommendation. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. As I said, I had one to go back to it. I am voting for this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 79 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion or questions for the Administration? Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: No. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Sorry. You lean up forward towards the microphone... Councilmember Chock: It does not work anyways. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions from the Members? Is there any discussion? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I do not want to see us rush into something this huge where you just shift over the whole department. We have it working for years under the management that has the job description under them, and then we are going to take away management and put new management over them? My question was, what is the old management going to do now? Are they going to do a different job than their job description to justify the EM-7 and EM-5? I think it is shadier that we are moving it, then moving it back. I think moving it back is actually less shady. The proof is in the pudding. I think if they want to see improvement, then split it the way the voters want it to be split and take some time. Do not rush and do it right before you submit the budget. Take your time; split everything up; and make sure that both sides are equally split so that both sides have the necessary tools, resources, and manpower to do the best job for our taxpayers. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: Yes. When this came up earlier before lunch, I raised the question about the Council. In the Charter it says, "The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor." It also says, "Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor..." So that is the source of my question to the County Attorney and to Vice Chair Kagawa. I believe that this Council is overstepping its authority and interfering with the Administration, and that we should not be discussing administrative processes with employees about how their departments are supposed to be managed. That is supposed to be kept with the Mayor and not direct to the employees. I would like to ask the County Attorney because the last time we talked to him, then they were supposed to talk during lunch, and I have not heard a response. Councilmember Kagawa: Can I respond? Councilmember Hooser: Sure. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: The Mayor and Lenny both called me in to meet with them. When they call me to meet with them, am I not supposed to listen? They are trying to work together and get the job done. You are trying to create some kind of legal problem. I guess that is how you work. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 80 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Hooser: The question is not dealing with the Mayor. The question is dealing with County employees contrary to the Charter, which says you shall deal with the Mayor, not directly to County employees. That is my question and it is a legitimate question. The County Attorney has yet to come back to respond to my initial question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to take a ten (10) minute caption break. When we come back, I will suspend the rules and have the County Attorney come up. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 2:57 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 3:05 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser, who did you have a question for? Councilmember Hooser: The County Attorney. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Trask: For the record, Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser, what was your question? Councilmember Hooser: We had some of this discussion before lunch about whether or not the Council was overstepping its authority in interfering with the administrative branch. It is my understanding that you were going to meet at lunch and then before we took a break, I read Section 3.18 of the Charter, Restrictions on County Council and Council Members. It says, "The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor." It further says, "Except for the purpose of investigative inquiries under Section 3.17, the council or its members, in dealing with county employees, or with county officers who are subjected to the direction and supervision of the mayor, shall deal solely through the mayor," and then it goes on to say, "neither the council nor its members shall give orders to any such employee..." My question is, is this body violating that given the discussions were are having and the discussions Councilmember Kagawa had with County employees about the reorganization of the Administration's processes with the Department of Public Works and the Department of Parks & Recreation? Mr. Trask: The way I look at Section 3.18 is it is three (3) general issues; one, whether there was interference; two, whether the question is "shall deal solely through the mayor;" and three, whether there was any orders given. Now, my understanding is that there were no orders given. The question of whether or not interference is a question of fact to be determined by a fact finder. I agree that the Charter says that the Council and all its members in dealing with County employee, shall deal solely through the Mayor. I advocate for that because it is a line in the sand. It is difficult. It is still in the sand, but it is a line nonetheless. However, the Mayor has and I think it is in last year's budget proviso or whatever, allows and encourages freedom of communication between department heads and committee chairs and generally has been maintained a permissive policy of the legislative branch speaking with the executive branch. I am not favorable of this because it perforates the line, but it is an understood policy as far as I am aware. I cannot say at this time based upon what I have heard on record today, say that there has been a violation. But I would state that the Council is the judge of its members and its own qualifications. Beyond DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 81 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING that, I really think it has been a tough day. It has been a long process. I think we should stick to what is going on, get business done, and I am sure these things can be worked out. That is what I am trying to say. Councilmember Hooser: Thank you for that. Actually, my broader question was the very first question that I asked. "The council and its members shall not interfere with the administrative processes delegated to the mayor." In my opinion, the proposal that is on the table now proposes to do that. It was discussed and we had an organizational chart. The discussion was about how to best manage the Administration. The discussion was not about saving money. The discussion is how we think or certain people here at the table think that they have a better idea and a better proposal how to manage an administrative functions. That is really what we are voting on. It is not about saving money. It is not about budget restrictions. What I understand the purpose to be is about managing the Administration of the County, and that is the fundamental question. The fact that Councilmember Kagawa was communicating directly with County employees outside of what maybe the Charter requires is a secondary issue. The primary issue is the fundamental question of the Council interfering with the administrative actions. If you could address that please. Mr. Trask: The executive branch via the Office of the Mayor does executive work. Without money, there is little or no work to be done. Government is structured via separation of powers. When the court looks at these issues, the court characterizes it as therefore an opportunity for the branches to work together. That is how I am trying to contextualize everything. Work together. Paddle together. That is how you are going to get the most efficient...the paddling metaphor is perfect. Now, the Council can cut by a vote of four (4) and add by a vote of five (5). All of your cuts and all of your additions have administrative implications. That is a fact. Is that within your purview? Correct? The case law and I looked at this over the lunch break, I looked at Harris v. DeSoto, Susil v. Fasi, City & County v. Fasi, and they all say generally the same thing. Although described separately, there is not a clear lined rule and sometimes it encroaches and sometimes it is both. In the case that is not on point but has a similar tone is Harris v. DeSoto, which stated the Council tried to redefine claims as any case involving anything beyond money. The court said that is not everything. If you have an injunction or something that does not touch purse strings, then the Council cannot dictate settlement. The executive branch has that authority. When it is purse strings, that is the Council's authority, but when it is both, they should come to an agreement. I think that is what I would advise you as your County Attorney to do. Look for an agreement. Look for a way to make this work. Anything further than that, I think, you would have to go to court to find out. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. To get back on track... Councilmember Hooser: Okay, I just want to clarify and then I am done, if I could. Because I think it is an important question whether Councilmembers can deal directly with County employees and discuss the operations of... Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I guess as Chair... Councilmember Hooser: ...County business or not. You talked about practices, encouragement, and perforated lines, but can we or can we not? The Charter says one thing and I need direction. I think the Council need direction whether or not we can deal directly with County employees and discuss the administration of the County directly with those employees or not. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 82 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not think this is a question for the budget. This might be a question that you can send over written. I want to get back to the budget item. Again, the question is all of this money was previously in the Department of Public Works and now this money and employees are all in the Department of Parks & Recreation. We had two (2) Councilmembers that had proposals to put it back because they were not comfortable with it. That is where we are at. We have heard from Mauna Kea and what his opinion was on our ability to do it. We could do it. If you want to go out of an abundance of caution, then you vote "no" on it, and we move forward. I just want to continue to move forward on our budget. Do you have a question, Councilmember Chock? Councilmember Chock: Yes, Committee Chair Kaneshiro. It is for the Administration or maybe Lenny and the Mayor. I want to thank Mauna Kea because I think the best advice that I heard today was get together and work it out. That is what I would like to see happen here. The vote is really determined on how much flexibility there is moving forward in this change. Obviously the change is big and that is why there is a lot of upheaval and peoples are saying, "No, we do not like it." Is there more room for maneuvering so that we can get to a place and what is the plan to do that in achieving the successful change that you are looking for so that we can stand behind it or at least I can? Mr. Rapozo: Was that a question to me? Councilmember Chock: Yes. Mr. Rapozo: For the record, Director of Parks & Recreation, Lenny Rapozo. When we gave our budget proposal and our budget presentation, we went through this. Our plan was, and we had extensive discussion here, that we do believe that as our structure would be to bring them all over, that there is capacity with the incumbent in that position that he would be able to manage it. Apparently, that is not the case. We have had discussion with the Unions. We have had meetings wherever there was an employee with the Mayor or myself. We have talked about it. Councilmember Kagawa has done his own due diligence, which on an island like this is going to happen. I am not offended by it. I think that makes for why we are having this discussion now. There was a question as to how we are going to manage it. If you look at the EM- person, twenty-five percent (25%) of it deals with the employee. That is part of his job description. So we are taking that away from him and giving it to another person who managed forty-one (41) individuals. I currently have someone now that is managing seventy-one (71) individuals. Does that seem fair? I think if seventy- one (71) can be done, so can forty-one (41). I believe the capacity is there. Now with respect to what the other twenty-five percent (25%), he is going to be handling the maintenance or repairs that currently the Department of Parks & Recreation had to assume from the Department of Public Works. When I came before this body when we had problems at Kapa'a Swimming Pool, nobody from this body looked at me and said, "Where is the Department of Public Works on this job?" That is a repair job. The Department of Parks & Recreation took it on. Eighteen (18) years of Kilauea Gym. I came up here and I get slammed by...you folks know who I am talking about. The Department of Parks & Recreation takes it on and I think we made the repairs. I can name you other projects that we have done that demonstrates that we can take on repairs. The legal part with Mauna Kea, that is it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock got his answer. Council Chair Rapozo. Council Chair Rapozo: I do have a question because I just want to make sure. If employees come to Councilmembers and share with Councilmembers, that is not a DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 83 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING violation of the Charter. That happens a lot. If the Councilmember goes and seeks out employees to go and interfere, then I see that as being a problem. But we are a small island. We are all on the baseball fields, soccer fields, and people are going to come up and say, "Oh, my God." I just shared with Lenny an issue that I just received and he dealt with it. Pau. Done. That happens. That is nothing interfering. Like what Councilmember Chock is saying, it is just sharing and trying to get to a resolution. I do have a suggestion once we get back to discussion that I think might be a better solution or a better way to handle it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I do not want to talk about ethical violations or anything like that. We are in our budget meeting. We see the motion at hand, I would like to stick to that, and move forward on that in this budget meeting. Are there any further questions for the Administration? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Kagawa: If the Administration is confident that this can work despite all of the concerns raised by the Unions, just the Charter and the commonsense thing, why are we giving the Department of Parks & Recreation the non-parks repair maintenance. If the Department of Parks & Recreation is confident they can do it and do it best, they are the Administration, and I will make a motion to withdraw. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew the motion to eliminate the Facilities Maintenance Division from the Department of Parks & Recreation (including the Building Manager in the Department of Parks & Recreation Administration Division) and add the budgeted positions, associated costs, and level text back to the Building Repair & Maintenance Division and Janitorial Division under the Department of Public Works, with the recommendation that the Administration consider a division of responsibilities following the proposed table of organization that is attached hereto and after further consultation with affected supervisory employees. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Who was the second? Councilmember Yukimura: I was. I am not going to withdraw my second because I am going to put it in again as my proposal. Councilmember Kagawa: We can leave it, but I am not supporting it already. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kagawa: They are confident. I love the gusto. I believe in working together. If they feel this is the best, I am going to trust them. I thought that perhaps I was helping them by having them comply with the Charter. I think we should try and comply with the Charter whenever we can. Like I said, all of the people that contacted me, I am not going to try to do the Administration's job. I have other things to do. As the Public Works / Parks & Recreation Committee Chair, I was doing my best to try to make sure that we made the right decision. With the gusto that he is expressing, he is saying he is going to do it, let us give him a year, let us see how it improves or does not improve, and then let us judge it from there. I think we have to trust them at some point. We have to trust their judgment to make things better and I am willing to trust them on this like Councilmember Chock just said. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo and then Councilmember Yukimura. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 84 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Council Chair Rapozo: The suggestion is that rather than...I am uncomfortable making this a budget issue. I really am. Councilmember Yukimura: Me too. Council Chair Rapozo: A resolution would probably be a better way to go if you wanted to have the discussion. You do a resolution to discuss this transition. I know Lenny folks did a presentation during the budget reviews, but subsequent to the budget discussions, we may have heard from employees, or unions, or whatever. I can tell you when people call me complaining, I send them to you because you are the Public Works / Parks & Recreation Committee Chair. I just have too much going on. That might be a better way to vet out this issue, through a resolution, where we can have the discussion and not here during the budget. That would be my suggestion. Councilmember Kagawa: I have a response. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: My response to that is the Mayor can submit such a drastic change like that during the budget process, and you are saying that as a Council body, we cannot decide whether a major change...say the Kaua`i Fire Department said, "I think the lifeguards belong with the Department of Parks & Recreation," and they just move it in one (1) year. Can we not do anything about it as the overseers of the budget? Do we have to go along with it and then do a resolution if we disagree? I thought that was our job and that is the only reason why I tried to propose that kind of proposal. If that is the way it is, then that is the way it is. Council Chair Rapozo: I think the way we could stop that is you basically defund the whole thing. At that point, the way I have been trained anyway for all of these years, if it is operation or if it is day-to-day we do not get involved. That is how I see it. The only opportunity we have is to defund, which I would hate to go down that road. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I concur with Council Chair Rapozo that it would be better to vet this as a separate issue. It is tangentially a budget issue because you are taking out the salaries of a couple of employees in one (1) budget and you are putting it in another budget. The net effect on the County budget is zero (0). I think this whole structural thing should be discussed separately and we should look at the long-term issue on that. I would like to pass this to restore the status quo and then have a resolution submitted so that we can discuss it separate from the budget. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We will take the vote on that. Is there any further discussion? Council Chair Rapozo: There is no vote. Councilmember Kagawa withdrew his motion. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: But she did not withdraw her second. Councilmember Kagawa: It is still on the table. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 85 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: If I withdraw it, I am just trying to save time. I am going to submit it again as my proposal. Councilmember Kagawa: Let us vote. I can second hers if that is how you want to do it. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us take a vote on it already. I am pretty sure I know where it is going and let us get through it. Roll call vote. Pursuant to Rule No. 6(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, "After a motion is stated or read by the Presiding Officer, it is deemed in the possession of the body, and shall be disposed of by vote. However, any motion may be withdrawn by the movant with consent of the second at any time before a decision or amendment." As the consent of the second was not granted, the motion to eliminate the Facilities Maintenance Division from the Department of Parks & Recreation (including the Building Manager in the Department of Parks & Recreation Administration Division) and add the budgeted positions, associated costs, and level text back to the Building Repair & Maintenance Division and Janitorial Division under the Department of Public Works, with the recommendation that the Administration consider a division of responsibilities following the proposed table of organization that is attached hereto and after further consultation with affected supervisory employees was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Yukimura, Kuali`i TOTAL—2*, AGAINST MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Rapozo, Kaneshiro TOTAL—5, 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 Kuali`i was noted as silent, but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We are on additions. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: I have one (1) final addition after discussing a request with Lenny. There has been some requests for porta-potties and lighting at the Lihu`e Bash that they are going to have this weekend. The account has run out of money. These are for large tournaments and large events relating to parks that sometimes the existing restroom is not sufficient and sometimes the lighting is not sufficient if they have valuables like concession booths and things that they have at the bash. This is $5,000 so that Lenny can fix problems when there is not enough restrooms and whatnot at events. Councilmember Kagawa moved to add funding in the amount of $5,000 to the Department of Parks & Recreation, Recreation Division for Other Services Parks Maintenance. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Oh, I need a second. Councilmember Kuali`i seconded the motion to add funding in the amount of$5,000 to the Department of Parks & recreation, Recreation Division for Other Services Parks Maintenance. Councilmember Yukimura: Are you talking about an event this weekend? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 86 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Kagawa: No. Councilmember Yukimura: Are you using it as an example? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, so there is money in there for next year's event and other events. He said that account has been taken away, so we are going to restore $5,000 into that account. Councilmember Yukimura: The account has been taken away? There is not other... Councilmember Kagawa: Well, it has been cut. Councilmember Yukimura: There is no other account to draw from? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We can ask the Administration for clarification on that also. There being no objections, the rules were suspend. Mr. Rapozo: For the record, Director of Parks & Recreation, Lenny Rapozo. Councilmember Kagawa came to me and brought up this suggestion, which is a good one because in our current budget even for this year, our porta-potty budget was cut was well as we do not have any other moneys to provide such events. I thought this was a good idea because it involves kids and a lot of teams coming from the neighbor islands that we can have additional $5,000 in our budget for next year when we have this bash. Normally, they have anywhere between twenty (20) to twenty-four (24) teams from off-island with a waitlist at the bash, as an example. Councilmember Kagawa: My question is, do you have other events besides the bash? Mr. Rapozo: Yes, there are other events. Kalawai also has an event. Kekaha has baseball and paradise events that we were able to help with porta- potties, but with our current budget, we are unable to do that. So this earmarked $5,000 for those types of events would be helpful for our budget next year. Councilmember Hooser: I have a question. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Hooser. Councilmember Hooser: How does it cost for porta-potties for an event like the bash? Mr. Rapozo: With a group, it ranges. The current contract ranges from $450 to $480, depending upon where they have to be taken. (Council Chair Rapozo was noted as excused.) Councilmember Hooser: $450 to $480 for... DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 87 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Rapozo: Depending on where it has to be taken. Councilmember Hooser: For one (1)? Mr. Rapozo: For one (1). Councilmember Hooser: For an event like the bash, how much are we talking about? Mr. Rapozo: The bash normally takes three (3) with one (1) Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant. You are looking at about a three (3) day rental. Councilmember Hooser: How much does that cost? Mr. Rapozo: Almost $2,000 for Group 2. Councilmember Hooser: So about half of it goes toward The Bash? Mr. Rapozo: Porta-potties are very expensive. Councilmember Hooser: About half of the $5,000 would go toward one (1) event? Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Hooser: Tell me what The Bash is again. Mr. Rapozo: The Bash is a statewide Mustang tournament that is held on Kaua`i every Memorial Day. Councilmember Hooser: Are those horses or is it baseball? Mr. Rapozo: If you follow baseball, the youngest kids start out at the Shetland. They play Shetland, Pinto, Mustang, Pony, and Colt. Those are the ages of horses. Pony stands for...I forget now. Protecting Our Nation's Youth. Councilmember Hooser: Is this every year? Mr. Rapozo: Yes, this has been every year. Councilmember Hooser: Did the County pay last year? Mr. Rapozo: The County paid for the last four (4) years. Councilmember Hooser: Can we not take it out of exiting funds? Mr. Rapozo: I do not have existing funds in a porta-potty contract. We were cut last year to make our targets. Councilmember Hooser: But you cannot shift anything? DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 88 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Rapozo: I do not have money earmarked to shift. Councilmember Hooser: But you had a surplus last year, right? Mr. Rapozo: If you look at my surplus, I always thought it was a sin to move "A" funds to "B" funds. It should be unexpended salaries. Yes, we do have a return, but if you look at it, I believe you are going to find that a good eighty to eighty-five percent (80-85%) of it comes from returned salaries in-between of hiring. Councilmember Hooser: Okay. It just seems like a relatively small amount that you might be able to find internally. Mr. Rapozo: I have said it before. Since Ken Shimonishi has come on, budgets have gone based upon actual spending. It is as close to spending that I have ever seen, and I have been in government for...I just made twenty-eight (28) years on April 18th. To see Ken do his magic with the actual spending is pretty incredible. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I have a question. There is a line item for Other Rentals, Portable Toilet, Yearly Rentals, Group I. Is that money not used for the porta-potties? Mr. Rapozo: Group 1 are the ones that are placed in stationary areas or different beach parks such as Hd'ena and Black Pot. Group 2 are ones that we use for example, the Council came with a request for the porta-potties out there to deal with some of our people out here. That would have been a Group 2, but what we were able to do was make some arrangements and talk to the vendor, and amended the contract because we were coming to the end of the contract. We amended the contract so we could get a Group 1 so that we could get a stable rate. Those are the things that we have to do. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can this money be used for those types of... Mr. Rapozo: That would be a Group 2, but we do not have moneys in that account to do such a thing. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I see $40,000, Special County Sponsored Events, Group 2; and then there is an additional fund for cleaning up porta-potties. Mr. Rapozo: Is that for this one? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: $40,000. Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Is that for this current proposal or for this year? The additional cleaning is done at Ha`ena and Black Pot where you folks get the phone calls from people that the porta-potties are in disarray. Normally the contract is Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays. With those additional cleanings, that incurs Saturday cleaning as well. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 89 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Some of these other rentals, whether it is Group 1 or Group 2, that is also for the Waioli Park too? Mr. Rapozo: Waioli does not have one anymore. It was taken out. Councilmember Yukimura: So you do not use any porta-potties there at all? Mr. Rapozo: Waioli, no we have not. Councilmember Yukimura: It used to be taken out of this account, right? Mr. Rapozo: Yes. We moved that portable. We established one (1) over at the courthouse for now. Councilmember Yukimura: The users of Waioli Park are now using portables at the courthouse? Mr. Rapozo: If they want to, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Which is why having access to a toilet from the outside might be a good idea. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, let us get to the line item. Councilmember Yukimura: I am talking about the line item. Do you have a listing of all of the uses in the next fiscal year that would show that it will use-up $229,000? Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: What was the lapse of this line item last year? Mr. Rapozo: I apologize. I do not have my book. I did not come prepared to talk about porta-potties today. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we know what the lapse is in that line item? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions for the Administration while we are looking at it? We will take a recess to get the answer. There being no objections, the Committee recessed at 3:32 p.m. The Committee reconvened at 3:37 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. Councilmember Yukimura had a question for Lenny, but I think we found the answer. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Councilmember Yukimura: I think $400 lapsed. So you are right, it is a tight account. But for the Department of Parks & Recreation entire budget, it was $900,000. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 90 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Mr. Rapozo: Can you go and find out how many of that was salaries as opposed to operational, because I believe a good portion of that $900,000 is salaries? Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Mr. Rapozo: In my government experience, it is a sin to use unexpended salaries for operations. Councilmember Yukimura: In fact, I think it... Mr. Rapozo: We try to live within our means. Councilmember Yukimura: I do not think you can even do that. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Let us not fight about it. It is $5,000. It is late. Let us keep moving. We can just vote up or down on how we want it. It is $5,000. Are there any further questions? There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion on this? I think $5,000 is a small amount. I am not going to vote for it. I think they can find it in their budget somewhere. It is $5,000. Anyone else? Roll call vote. The motion to add funding in the amount of $5,000 to the Department of Parks & Recreation, Recreation Division for Other Services Parks Maintenance was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Kagawa TOTAL— 2, AGAINST MOTION: Hooser, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 4, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Motion fails. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: We have one (1) more add. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. The staff is still working on it. Let me preface this by saying that it is pretty clear that this will not pass with five (5) votes, but I have to propose it because it is a need for this County. Councilmember Yukimura moved to contribute $355,160 from the General Fund to the General Fund-CIP and appropriate $355,160 to a *NEW* project called Materials Recovery Facility (MRF), seconded by Councilmember Hooser. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion or questions? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 91 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The MRF is something that has been part of our plan as a County since 2009, and we have funded the various stages of it. Now, we are at the point where we need to finish the design because we have found a site, we have closed in on the site, and we need to design it in order to build it. The $200,000 that is there now is not sufficient and needs another $400,000, but this will go a long way. Without the MRF, we cannot have curbside recycling, which was the Mayor's campaign promise in 2008. We cannot have the commercial and construction ordinance. We cannot move ahead on our Zero Waste goal of being able to divert seventy percent (70%) in a few years. If we did this, we might extend the landfill life presently and also require a much smaller new landfill. This is our commitment to do it, and do you know what? If we were not spending $550,000, probably $800,000 for this RFP process, we could easily fund it. All I am showing is that you can keep going off track by following this wild goose chase of trying to find a silver bullet, which is neither sustainable nor economically feasible. We need to move forward on a plan that we spent $300,000 for. But by not going for the MRF and not funding it properly, it is going to delay our effort and we are not going to get the kind of solid waste management that we really need as a County. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Any further discussion? Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you Committee Chair Kaneshiro. Ask yourself, where is the MRF on all of the other islands? Is that a silver bullet? The reason why I give you that answer is we are separated by the Pacific Ocean from any manufacturing company that can turn the rubbish back into something usable without creating any residual rubbish that needs to be buried. It is getting kind of redundant and brutal. What I propose is that on a small scale, this group of Zero Waste people, let us dump a pile of rubbish in their yard or wherever they can show us on YouTube and show us how you MRF on a small scale. How do you MRF all of that rubbish? Seeing is believing. You keep talking about silver bullets, lies, and whatever. Show us what your MRF silver bullet looks like. Thank you, Committee Chair Kaneshiro. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? I do not want to keep going back and forth. We heard a lot about a MRF. Basically, do we want to send all of the money into a MRF? Councilmember Yukimura, if you can make it quick. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. The reason why there is no MRF on the other islands is because they are all looking for the silver bullet. They keep spending money toward it and they do not get it. The Mayor of Maui has huge problems. Mayor Carvalho knows that. On the Big Island, they are finally beginning a big composting project that is part of the diversion, composting MRF, hard to recycle center. That is why we could lead the way if we only could stay on track, but we are going off looking for the silver bullet, spending a huge amount of money, and it is all going to be wasted. Every year we appear before the wonderful forum of people with disabilities or people with possibilities, and we tell them about the job possibilities that this MRF could be for them. They have a hard time finding jobs for their people. This is perfect. A MRF will create many jobs, as will composting and other possibilities that are part of the Zero Waste paradigm. That is what our Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan talks about and we are deviating from it. We are going to a dead-end if we do not fund this MRF. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 92 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Roll call vote, please. The motion to contribute $355,160 from the General Fund to the General Fund-CIP and appropriate $355,160 to a *NEW* project called Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) was then put, and failed by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Yukimura TOTAL— 3, AGAINST MOTION: Kagawa, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 3, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further additions? Councilmember Kagawa: Yes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa moved to move the remaining balance from the General Fund/Roads Maintenance to the Highway Fund and appropriate to the Island Wide Road Resurfacing Project, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am going to vote for this, of course, and I am so glad that we are doing this; however, we need $10,000,000. The thing is if we do not have enough of a critical mass of money, the roads continue to deteriorate, and the bill gets bigger. This is really showing why we need another revenue source. We have looked in this budget, we say we can cut millions of dollars and we can fund road repair, $355,000 is nothing. We need a MRF and other things. It is really evident that we need another revenue source in order to do the right thing with roads and to provide the kinds of services whether it is Zero Waste recycling or other things. We need another revenue source and we need to keep honing-in our budget, cutting waste, and funding the kinds of things we need in the future; climate change actions that will do our part. We have so many things that we have to do as our responsibility. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Kuali`i. Councilmember Kuali`i: I would just say certainly people are tired. I am disappointed that we are at this point. $355,000 is not enough to make a serious dent in the backlog of our roads, but it is something. We made some tough decisions. I think we could have come up with more money, but at least we did this. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? It is late and I guess we will see how the votes go. My intention was to put it in the Unassigned Fund Balance. We made some tough cuts this year and we told the Administration, "Come back with a money bill if you do not have the money." If we put this all to roads and then they come back with a money bill, then we are basically taking it out of our reserve fund. That is just me. I understand that our roads needs the money. We have had the discussions on DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 93 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING it forever. We had GET discussions and I understand why we want to move it there. I look at it as out piggy bank. Right now, we have some money to play with, but we know that when we made cuts, we may come back with money bills. Do we want to play with this money or do we want to play with our savings? That is just where I am at. Councilmember Kagawa. Councilmember Kagawa: My question is, if you do not support this here, then you try and appropriate it to the Unassigned Fund Balance and do not have the votes there, then what happens to that money? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Then we would need to figure out what we are going to do. That is why we have to take the vote, see where it goes, and then there may need to be a compromise in the end. Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I really admire and respect Committee Chair Kaneshiro for his commitment, which I share, to getting a really healthy Unassigned Fund Balance. I want to just point out again, when we are not responsible about revenue sources, we are put into this terrible place where we cannot fund all of the things we need to fund. These are needs. That is why the Vehicle Weight Tax and the Fuel Tax increases, which would have been less than twenty cents ($0.20) a day for the average or the half percent (0.05%) Excise Tax, those are the reasons why we have to make those tough courageous decisions so that we can serve our community. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Again, I do not know how the votes will go. We can plead our case. I think the two (2) decisions we have is if we want to put it in the Unassigned Fund Balance or do we want to put it in roads. We vote on it, if none of them have the votes, then we bring one (1) back, and we make a compromise. That is how we need to go. Councilmember Yukimura: Or we can wait for Council Chair Rapozo. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Council Chair Rapozo is not coming back. He is excused. Councilmember Yukimura: We have Monday. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: I want to get this done. Councilmember Kuali`i. There are six (6) people here. If five (5) people vote for roads, it goes to roads, and we move on. Councilmember Kuali`i: I hope people will vote for it to go roads. We have already voted to add $433,000 to fund the bargaining unit for Water Safety raises that the Administration was planning to fund with an appropriation bill at a later point. To put it there, it defeats the purpose of what we are trying to do, to get some money to the backlog of roads. There is talk about being responsible with revenue sources, how about being responsible with expenditures? That is what we do every year during the budget. We worked hard, but it is never hard enough for me. We made some cuts, but it is never enough cuts for me. It is a $180,000,000 budget. We ended up with $355,000. If you did a percentage, that would be pretty darn low. To say that every penny now that is being spent DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 94 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING in this budget is absolutely and critically needed, that is just false. Anybody would tell you that we can do better with more cuts. I hope we put this money to the roads. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I will just state that I will put my vote in for roads. I think it is kind of a joke. You are going to put $355,000 when we have a $130,000,000 backlog that was last spoken, which is two-thirds of our budget. We will never catch up. In terms of our budget, we will never catch up. I want to put this into perspective for our community because we are the ones that are going to have to deal with it, or maybe our kids. We have to start somewhere. We tried. I heard at least $5,000,000, maybe $2,500,000. We are not even close to $5,000,000 or half of the expenditures. How much more can we squeeze? How much water can we squeeze from the rock, is the question I have. What we are going to do is the question Committee Chair Kaneshiro asked. That is the question I want everyone to ask. Thank you. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further comments? I can count the votes. I am not sure where Councilmember Hooser is going. In all sense to get this thing going, I know where I want to put it, but I will vote to get this thing moving. Is there any further discussion? If not, I will end up voting on this so that we have five (5) votes. We might end up with six (6), but there is no sense in fighting about it when we are missing a Councilmember and we may end up in a deadlock. Roll call vote. The motion to move the remaining balance from the General Fund/Roads Maintenance to the Highway Fund and appropriate to the Island Wide Road Resurfacing Project was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 6, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Next. Are there any Budget Provisos? Nope. Are there any proposals to Real Property Tax rates? Okay. I need a roll call vote to accept the proposed Real Property Tax Rates...oh, can I get a motion first? Councilmember Yukimura moved to accept the Real Property Tax Rates, seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Can I get a roll call vote? The motion to accept the Real Property Tax Rates was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR MOTION: Chock, Hooser, Kagawa, Kuali`i, Yukimura, Kaneshiro TOTAL—6, AGAINST MOTION: None TOTAL—0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0. DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 95 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Before we adjourn, I would like to ask if we could have a motion and a second to provide the Council Services Staff with the ability to make adjustments after entering the various proposals, if necessary, to balance the budget. Councilmember Kuali`i moved to allow the Council Services Staff to balance, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. With that, we got the budget adjustments done. We are done with the decision-making session. Before we adjourn, I would like to go over a few more housekeeping items. Staff will be preparing our amendments made today and incorporating them into the budgets. On May 24, 2016, which is a Tuesday Committee Meeting due to a WIR Conference, the Budget & Finance Committee will be formally approving all decision-making items by procedurally amending and approving the budget bills and the Real Property Tax Resolution, along with receiving the Committee's report detailing the various pluses and minuses. It is my understanding Councilmember Hooser is not going to be here, but for all intents and purposes, we basically see, vote on it, and then our comments are going to be made at the next meeting in June. I would respectfully ask that Councilmembers refrain from making any final comments. That will take place on June 1st. Councilmember Yukimura: Is there not a public hearing? Committee Chair Kaneshiro: That is at the next Committee Meeting on Tuesday. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Members from the public can come in and testify. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the date? Councilmember Hooser: May 24th. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Tuesday, May 24th at 8:30 a.m. It is a regular meeting day. As I mentioned before, Committee and Council will then approve the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 budgets on June 1st during second and final reading, which will be accompanied by the Council's budget message on that date. On June 1st, Councilmembers will be able to make their final remarks on the budget in accordance with our Council Rules. Again, it has been a long budget season. I do not think there is any budget season that is quick. It has been arduous. I just want to thank the Councilmembers for allowing us to get done today before 4:30 p.m. I want to thank the Administration for all of their hard work getting back to us. Again, we had over three hundred (300) questions sent to them that they got back to us on. I think tempers flare. The budget is very passionate. You have people fighting for money and you have the Council trying to cut money to be responsible to the residents. It is not easy. I think you see it, but in the end, I think we all have the same goal. We want to use the taxpayers' money the wisest and have a good budget. At the end of the day, we can all be happy that wherever we got to, we got to. Fortunately, we are at a zero (0), but we are not taking out of our savings account, which is a good thing. We put some money towards the roads, which is also a good thing. Again, the expectation is to see them spend the money and we can say, "With the extra $355,000, these are the roads we did with that. So we are able to spend our money wisely." DELIBERATION & PRELIMINARY 96 MAY 13, 2016 DECISION-MAKING Councilmember Yukimura: Committee Chair Kaneshiro. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to say thank you to you for your excellent management of this budget decision-making process. Committee Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. No clapping, let us get this thing done. Again, I want to thank all of you. We are one (1) step closer to passing the Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Operating and CIP Budgets. With that, the Budget & Finance Committee decision-making session is now adjourned. There being no objections, the meeting was adjourned at 3:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, • (,l .iESS• -Cult ,ga Allison S. Arakaki Council Services Assistant I Codie K. Yamauc i Council Services Assistant I APPROVED at the Committee Meeting held on June 29, 2016: ARRY ``. A SHIRO Chair, I udget & Finance Committee