HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/21/2021 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
APRIL 21, 2021
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to order
by Council Chair Arryl Kaneshiro at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street,
Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, April 21, 2021 at 8:33 a.m., after which the
following Members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr.
Honorable Mason K. Chock
Honorable Felicia Cowden
Honorable Bill DeCosta
Honorable Luke A. Evslin
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i
Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Good morning. Today's meeting will be
conducted pursuant to Governor Ige's Supplementary Emergency Proclamations with
the most recent relating to the Sunshine Law being his Nineteenth Supplementary
Emergency Proclamation dated April 9, 2021.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the agenda, as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Carvalho.
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or is there any
discussion from the Members?
The motion for approval of the agenda, as circulated, was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
April 7, 2021 Council Meeting
April 7, 2021 Public Hearing re: Resolution No. 2021-13
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve the Minutes, as circulated, seconded
by Councilmember Cowden.
COUNCIL MEETING 2 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or is there any
discussion on these items from the Members?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding these agenda items.)
The motion to approve the Minutes, as circulated, was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2021-95 Communication (03/19/2021) from the Mayor, transmitting for
Council consideration and confirmation, Mayoral appointments to various Boards and
Commissions for the County of Kaua`i:
a. Liquor Control Commission
• Lorna A. Nishimitsu—Term ending 12/31/2023
b. Planning Commission
• Gerald T. Ako (Labor)—Term ending 12/31/2023
C 2021-96 Communication (04/06/2021) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the Period 8 Financial Reports — Statement of
Revenues, Statement of Expenditures and Encumbrances, Revenue Report, and
Detailed Budget Report as of February 28, 2021, pursuant to Section 21 of
Ordinance No. B-2020-866, relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i for
Fiscal Year 2020-2021.
C 2021-97 Communication (04/06/2021) from Mark L. Bradbury, Deputy
County Attorney, transmitting for Council information, the Quarterly Report on
Settled Claims filed against the County of Kaua`i from January 1, 2021 through
March 31, 2021.
C 2021-98 Communication (04/12/2021) from Councilmember Cowden,
providing written disclosure of a possible conflict of interest and recusal relating to
C 2021-87 and ES-1050, as these items involve a stipulation agreement that she was
a party to.
C 2021-99 Communication (04/14/2021) from Councilmember Evslin and
Councilmember DeCosta, transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution
Supporting Digital Equity And Urging Development Of Broadband Infrastructure To
Bolster COVID-19 Recovery And Foster Economic Development.
COUNCIL MEETING 3 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to receive C 2021-95, C 2021-96, C 2021-97,
C 2021-98, and C 2021-99 for the record, seconded by Councilmember DeCosta.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or is there any
discussion from the Members?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding these agenda items.)
The motion to receive C 2021-95, C 2021-96, C 2021-97, C 2021-98, and
C 2021-99 for the record was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Clerk, we are going to
go to page 4, and we are going to take public testimony on Resolution No. 2021-13.
There being no objections, Resolution No. 2021-13 was taken out of order.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2021-13 – RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
ACQUISITION OF EASEMENT INTERESTS IN LAND REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC
USE, TO WIT: THE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATH THAT CONSTITUTES
PART OF THE COUNTY'S PUBLIC PARK SYSTEM, WAIPOULI, DISTRICT OF
PUNA, COUNTY OF KAUAI, HAWAII, AND DECLARING THE NECESSITY OF
THE ACQUISITION THEREOF BY EMINENT DOMAIN
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules. Again, please state
your name for the record when you start your testimony. You will have six (6)
minutes total. If you can see the light, the light will turn green when you start, it
will turn yellow when you have thirty (30) seconds, and it will turn red when your
six (6) minutes are up. I will interrupt you when you have thirty (30) seconds left
and when your time is done. Also, if you want to continue watching the meeting after
providing testimony, you can go to www.kauai.gov/webcastmeetings. With that, we
will start with Thomas Noyes.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
THOMAS NOYES (via remote technology): Aloha, Council Chair Kaneshiro,
Council Vice Chair Chock, and Members of the Kaua`i County Council. In the 1990s,
then—Councilmember Bryan J. Baptiste convened an advisory council to provide
stakeholders a forum to shape what is becoming Ke Ala Hele Makalae, the
twenty-mile path that goes by the coast. That advisory council evolved into Kaua`i
Path, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, and I serve as the Executive Director of that educational
nonprofit. Over the years, Kauai Path has collaborated with the County of Kauai;
the State Departments of Transportation, Education, and Health; the Federal
Highways Administration; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as well
COUNCIL MEETING 4 APRIL 21, 2021
as Wilcox Health Systems, and Kaua`i Veterans Memorial Hospital (KVMH) to
improve safety and awareness of people who walk and bicycle in our communities.
As a major federally-funded infrastructure work in progress, the team designing and
building Ke Ala Hele Makalae have complied in good faith with the stringent
environmental review process that entailed taking the concept for a coastal trail
through the Environmental Assessment (EA), securing a Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI), developing an exemplary ho`oponopono process led by cultural
practitioners, and meeting all of the criteria for Special Management Area (SMA) and
shoreline setback variance permits for the Planning Commission and the Planning
Department. The portion of the project under consideration this morning is now at
the land acquisition stage. Kapa'a's topography determines the path's elevation.
Although a historical commercial hub, Kapa'a was built on drained coastal swamp
lands. All of Kapa'a is close to sea level, hence all of Kapa'a is at risk of sea level rise.
Despite this fact, it is the host community for the Royal Coconut Coast Association
members and is a fast-growing visitor destination. The opportunity to invest Federal
Transportation dollars for a walking path system that bolsters our local economy,
while benefitting the resident population is coming to fruition. We all agree that Ke
Ala Hele Makalae is awesome, as confirmed when it placed fifth in USA Today's
competition for the best recreational trail in the nation. Since April 8th, Kaua`i Path
has collected and submitted three hundred forty-seven (347) petitions from residents
and visitors in support of Resolution No. 2021-13 to the County Council. Of the two
hundred eighty-five (285) Kaua`i residents responding, eighty-eight and four tenths
percent (88.4%) identified as registered voters. I am still receiving more petitions as
we speak. We all agree that sea level rise and coastal erosion are serious concerns
and we want to build a durable facility for the benefit of the entire community. I urge
you to trust in the expertise of the University of Hawai`i (UH) Sea Grant professionals
providing testimony on these concerns during the Council Meeting. We all agree that
the safety of people who walk and bicycle on or near the path is paramount. The time
has come to make a decision. I urge you to move forward with this project. This is a
difficult and nuanced decision and now is the time to act for the public's benefit.
Imua! Thank you. Tommy Noyes, Executive Director, Kaua`i Path.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Tommy. Next up, we have Larry
LaSota.
LARRY LASOTA (via remote technology): Good morning, Councilmembers.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to give my testimony in regards to the path.
I have been following the progress of the coastal path since the first announcements
I read in The Garden Island back in the 1990s and I was very pleased that former
Mayor JoAnn A. Yukimura came up with this concept that has been followed through
the years. As an avid cyclist and dog walker, I have enjoyed the path on many
occasions, at least four (4) times a week at various stages. As a Committee Member
of the Friends of Kamalani and Lydgate Beach Park, enjoying the path within
Lydgate park, as well as all the way to "Donkey Beach." Having done the creation of
COUNCIL MEETING 5 APRIL 21, 2021
Kamalani Playground back in 1994 and personally (inaudible) that this golf course to
Lydgate in 2018—I have been part of the many who have contributed sweat equity of
over sixty-seven thousand (67,000) volunteer hours since 2001 and (inaudible) more
than two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000) in Federal funds to
enhance the park. Speaking today as a Kamalani Committee Member, and in my
personal opinions the County should go forward with the purchase of the easement
in front of the Islander on the Beach and continue "the path that runs along the
coast," Ke Ala Hele Makalae, from this point northward. Whether you are walking
or on a bike, the best, safest, and ethically, aesthetically pleasing access to the rest of
the coastal path would be to purchase this easement in front of the resort. If you are
heading north on the path from Wailua Beach along Papaloa Road, it is a widened
sidewalk with many trees and safe for both walkers and bikers, but once you get to
the Kapa'a Shores Resort Condominiums property it all stops and becomes a complete
debacle. You are first in one parking lot in one direction, then you are either in the
Coconut Marketplace parking lot, or you are on the street with cars coming at you in
both directions—whether parked or in motion, it is just chaos. Aleka Place is a point
of much confusion until you get to the circle at Aleka Loop. On a bike, when you
traverse Aleka Place you are in the middle of the road and cars are coming at you in
both ways—it is a very dangerous situation to be there and I have been a serious
cyclist for over fifty (50) years and I find that every time I am in this small section of
road—it scares me, cars are coming out of nowhere and they could care less whether
you are a biker or walker. Therefore, I believe it is imperative that the County
acquire this land to have that access easement in perpetuity for the safety of all those
who enjoy the coastal path. If not for the path today, I think a lot of people would
have been deprived of the recreation facilities and the general exercise. The path is
a beautiful thing, it needs to come back, it needs to be safe, after all, the name of it is
"the path that runs along the coast," not"the path that runs through parking lots and
shopping centers." Thank you all for hearing my testimony today.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Larry. Next up is Tom Summers.
TOM SUMMERS (via remote technology): Good morning, Councilmembers.
My name is Tom Summers and I live on the bike path in Kapa'a Town right next to
Pono Kai on the Kealia side. From my house, there is just the bike path and then the
ocean, so I have enjoyed watching tourists, local people, people walking their dogs,
and bicyclists, just enjoying life on the path next to a lot of people that are using the
path to just get out and exercise, especially local people. I see them out there in the
mornings or the evenings and it is really a draw and it also shows everyone on Kaua`i
and all the tourists the beautiful coastline we have on the coconut coast here on the
east side of Kaua`i. I strongly recommend that the Council pass the Resolution to
purchase this easement in front of the Islander on the Beach and I think that is the
only connection we need that is going to make it a continuous path. I think on one
side of the Islander on the Beach, we have already received commitments from the
path and the other side where Coconut Marketplace is, we also have that easement
COUNCIL MEETING 6 APRIL 21, 2021
already taken care of. There are also developers that have granted us easements
through their property and I think there are one or two that are in agreement that
help pay for the path itself. Where I live, the path is as far back from the ocean as it
could possibly be and there is no threat. Even if it was to erode, some of the beach
must have moved back, which it has in the last twenty(20)years it moved back inland
a little bit. In my situation there is a lot of room between the bike path and where
the beach and sand is. At Pono Kai, there is a wall there; the bike path is just on the
other side of the wall, so that wall needs to be restored a little bit, but I am still in
favor of getting this easement to the Islander on the Beach. I think it is very
important and I think the funds that have been allocated to move this project
forward...that is why this project needs to be approved immediately, so they can keep
the funds that are in place to make the improvements to go through the Islander on
the Beach easement. I strongly urge the Council to pass the Resolution to go forward
and purchase this easement on behalf of the bike path. I just wanted to say, I ride
the bike path every day, my wife walks her dog on the path two (2) or three (3) times
a day, and I see all kinds of people and I enjoy watching the people, and waving at
people just saying, "Hi." I see how much enjoyment people are getting when I am on
my deck watching everyone go in front of my house—it is a total pleasure for me and
I hope everyone else sees it that way. Thank you very much for listening to my
testimony. Aloha.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Tom. Next up is Trisha Sears.
TRISHA SEARS (via remote technology): Aloha and good morning, Kaua`i
Council. My name name is Trisha Lei Sears, also known as Patti Sears. I would like
to point out a serious problem of the planned section of the pedestrian and bike path
fronting the Kaua`i Coast Resort at the Beachboy on the Islander on the Beach, which
will be right up against the natural vegetation next to the beach, and also where the
shearwaters nest, and it is nesting season right now. All the analysis and research
that went into its environmental impact on the coastline were done years ago—it has
literally expired. The huge increase in global climate evolution has rendered it
virtually irrelevant. Considering the rising tides, beach erosion, and endangered
wildlife, I think that adding twelve (12) feet of concrete and all the traffic it will bring
to this small area will just accelerate with what Mother Nature is already doing.
Another problem is this narrow area will not have the room to dodge the
environmental bullets that the path already completed along the coast just north of
here has, because of having enough room to be placed over twice as far from the beach.
What good reason is there to not turn the path out to the street and have it going
around the sensitive area, then reconnect with its original route. I ride my bike every
day and I do not mind going around the Kaua`i Shores Resort in town where there is
not room to put it on the coast. It is high time we start heeding the most obvious
lesson we can learn from the Native Hawaiians—the coast is to be enjoyed, not built
on. The easement in question is just adding a few feet to what is already there. We
already have an easement coming up to the beach, and it is used daily by all the
COUNCIL MEETING 7 APRIL 21, 2021
residents who want to come and walk through here or even ride their bike through to
get to the five-foot path that is parallel to the shoreline. This is about just adding a
few feet, so two (2) bikes go perpendicular to the path in a dangerous corner where
the carts from the Islander on the Beach, groundsmen, maids, luggage racks, and
maintenance carts are coming around the corner at the same time and would literally
have to be riding on that section of the path that is in question today. So I urge all
of you Councilmembers who have not been out here, and I know you all have not been
out here, to come and look for yourself. The pictures I sent you yesterday—come
stand on that dangerous corner, it is the south east corner of the Islander on the
Beach, and see for yourself how dangerous it would be. We pay enough in taxes. All
of you who have spoken in favor of the path, you have high-paying jobs, realtors, you
can pay the high taxes that is going to incur. What about the white collar worker on
Kaua`i who struggles to make a living and will be paying these high taxes to either
get it repaired or will not be repaired, such as Lydgate, sitting there for so long now,
where it is fenced off with the orange plastic fence, I have to get off my bike and walk
it around that area—no fun, it comes out of taxpayers' money. We pay enough in
taxes. We do not want it. I ask that you defer this judgment today until all of you
have come out here and see how dangerous this situation is and see the erosion that
is happening already on our coast, which would be putting the planned path right
next to...we already see what is happening across from Coco Palms and at Lydgate,
also across from Pono Kai, where Tom Summers lives right behind, has major erosion
there also where they had to put a wall up. Who is paying for that? Us taxpayers.
No more taxes. I urge you to defer this until you all get out here to make an honest
vote for us people of the island, the citizens who voted you in. Thank you very much
for your time. Aloha.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Trisha. Next up is Rick Powers.
RICK POWERS (via remote technology): Aloha and good morning. First
of all, I would like to thank all of you for hearing my testimony. I also want to
comment before I start, that I know there is opposition to the people who are trying
to reroute this path. We do not want to kill this bike path and I believe a lot of the
signatures that you have from the Kaua`i Path people who want this to go through
were gotten by deceit, by telling people that we are trying to kill this bike path—that
could not be further from the truth. We want this bike path. We think it is essential
to the community. We are just asking that you use good judgment in trying to access
this path through this narrow coastline. With that being said, I will read my
testimony to you now.
Aloha and good morning, to the Members of the Kaua`i County Council. I made
a brief testimony before you at the Council Meeting on April 7, 2021. In brief, I
implore each and every one of you visit this section of the shoreline where the
proposed bike and pedestrian path is slated to be routed through the shore here. If
you did so, you saw it for yourself, the delicate ecosystem that exists along this coast,
COUNCIL MEETING 8 APRIL 21, 2021
the erosion that is consuming the shoreline, the nesting grounds of the endangered
shearwaters, and the disaster safety issue that routing the path past those two (2)
buildings would cause, especially the south east corner of the Islander on the Beach.
You also saw two (2) beachfront resort condominiums at less than fifty percent (50%)
capacity with residents, guests, and local community peacefully enjoying the path,
the small stretch of lawn, and the beaches. I have had the fortunate privilege to meet
three (3) of you at the site and I thank you for taking the time to see the situation
here for yourselves. Mahalo.
Today, you are voting on Resolution No. 2021-13, to use eminent domain to
acquire property from the Islander on the Beach, so that a ten-foot wide cement path
can be routed along its southern border. This path is intended to connect to the
twelve-foot wide cement path along the shoreline. The Resolution states the
acquisition of easement interest in land required for public use. Also, declaring the
necessity of acquisition thereof by eminent domain. This is not about public access
to the shoreline. There already exists an easement and public access to the shore and
there has been for years. There also exists that hard surface multi-use path that is
five-foot wide used every day by the people. This path is absolutely and perfectly
proportioned up to the landscape between these two (2) buildings and the beaches
they face. Building along the shoreline is always fraught with problems—erosion is
the most significant. If the above access to the pathway did not currently exist here,
we would have a tough decision to make whether or not to use eminent domain to
take private land for public access, because even then, whether or not to route this
path along this fragile shoreline is still risky. But your choice is easy here. There is
no requirement or necessity for eminent domain, because the public access already
exists. There is a public pathway that serves the community and there are
alternative routes that are safer, less costly, and completely mitigate the erosion issue
entirely. There is no necessity to pour concrete on our coast and as a bonus,
merchants at the Coconut Marketplace gets much needed visibility and are
overwhelmingly in favor of this. This is your win-win scenario. Please, vote "no" on
Resolution No. 2021-13. As Patricia said, at the very least, have an updated erosion
study done before making such a landmark decision regarding our shores and look at
the current and most recent data. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Rick. Next up is Padraic
Gallagher.
PADRAIC GALLAGHER (via remote technology): Hi. I will be short and
sweet, because I have another meeting I have to run to. I just want to give my support
for Resolution No. 2021-13. I have been an avid cyclist on Kaua`i for over ten (10)
years. I have used several paths and we really need something that is going to be
away from traffic. Bike paths along the roads are great, but they do not eliminate
the potential for bike accidents. Over the past year, I have seen so many more people
out on the bike path,whether they are walkers,joggers, cyclists, or walking with their
COUNCIL MEETING 9 APRIL 21, 2021
kids, that type of thing, because of this pandemic I really think that we need to move
forward with this Resolution as soon as possible. Any delay is just going to extend
that and it is one of those things where we just keep extending something, this opens
the door for other problems that may come up, if we delay this now. We really need
this for our community because we want to really work on that healthy community
and I think this path is fundamental for that. Thank you for your time. I am sorry I
have to run. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Next up is Thomas Christy.
THOMAS CHRISTY (via remote technology): Good morning. My name is
Thomas Christy. First of all, I want to say aloha Chair Kaneshiro, Vice Chair Chock,
and all Councilmembers. I am currently the Vice Chair for Kaua`i Path. I am
seventy-eight (78) years old. I bike three (3) to five (5) times a week and I attribute
my good health to that path. I want to take a little different approach and tell you
some of the other values of the path. I am also a member of...we teach safety classes
to our children in elementary and middle schools. Mainly, we teach them safety
issues and how to ride safely. We teach them the basics. Some kids can hardly
balance when they start. We also teach adult classes. It is a little more advanced
course and what it does is teaches all riders who use the road, and we teach this to
the kids too, to follow rules of the road. Being visible, being respectful, and being
predictable—things like that—we teach you all these things. The path provides an
excellent space with no traffic to hone the skills that you are going to need to move
onto the highways, that you can perform safely, not just to protect yourself, but to
protect others—other pedestrians, vehicles, motor vehicles—your predictability helps
save them from a possible problem. So these are some of the values of the path and
that path provides a safe place for all who use it. As I ride, I also say hello and wave
to everyone I pass. I pass courteously and we try to teach everyone to do that to who
they come across. First of all, I would like to mention that the goal is to provide a
continuous path—it has been for many years—from the Kapa'a area into the Lihu`e
hub and I would like to compliment this Administration, the Council, and past
Administrations that have worked so hard to improve road conditions by placing bike
lanes throughout the Lihu`e hub and also the Transportation Investment Generating
Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant development of Rice Street; I actually live on Rice
Street and I can tell you that it is a blessing to be able to ride my bike safely using
the bike lane and share roads that have been done, and the improvement that it has
done to traffic flow. With that said, I would encourage all of you to know that
many...just ridding along our beautiful coastline and enjoy watching the whales
jump, to parents ridding cycles with their seven (7) and nine (9) year olds, because it
is safe. I would encourage you to pass the acquisition acquiring the land in front of
the Islander on the Beach. I want to thank you for this opportunity for allowing me
to testify and I hope that you can make a decision today to move this effort forward
without delay, because I think we all agree that when things are delayed, they are
not just delayed for a week, month, or even a year sometime, but maybe they are
COUNCIL MEETING 10 APRIL 21, 2021
delayed way too long and that would hamper the full development of the goal that
has been foreseen by many members of our government and our island to move
forward. So with that, I thank you for this opportunity to make my testimony. Aloha,
and I wish you all well. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Thomas. Next up is Mary
Ransbury.
MARY RANSBURY (via remote technology): The biggest decision that this
Council is going to have to make is the ability to restrain from making a decision. As
I listen to all the testimony in front of me, I am perplexed by the misinformation
many of these people are testifying, who do not understand what this is about—the
Resolution the acquisition of the south side, it has nothing to do with what is in front
of the Islander on the Beach. When we talk about cyclists, we are talking about riding
a bicycle less than thirty (30) seconds, this is what the space and the land we are
discussing. What I am asking is that the Council just take this opportunity to pause.
I am hearing how we have to have another environmental study—that is not true,
that is not factual. First, I want to address the notion around rerouting the bike path;
it is on record now, there is a safer path that has been offered and an alternative path
through the Islander on the Beach, which actually is not the parking lot. There is an
area between us and the Coconut Marketplace that is a natural course; it is already
loaded with cement, it is safe, and there is not through traffic to where you are talking
about that thirty (30) seconds we are discussing right now in front of the Islander on
the Beach where you have over eight hundred (800)people in less than a thirty-second
space crossing over on to the beach. There is nowhere else on this bike path that we
are talking about with such high dangerous area where it is high density housing.
The "automatically require the new environmental impact study to delay the
construction"—that is not true. Councilmembers, I am just asking that...we spoke to
Tom Isen at the Office of Environmental Control yesterday, and I believe you have
his E-mail in front of you to the effect that it is up to the Kaua`i Department of Public
Works whether we have to have another environmental study. I am just asking that
we move forward. First of all, I would like to think about all of us losing the Kauai
shoreline—it is unprecedented. What is occurring right now with the amount of
shoreline erosion...I mean history speaks for itself. North of us and south of us, it is
chunking away into the ocean. We cannot bring back the bike path once it is out into
the ocean. The amount of money that will be spent by tax dollars to be able to repair
the orange cones and the orange fences that are going to be riddled over our
shorelines, because we are pushing this because of all of the money. I am just asking,
"Kauaians" deserve better, they need better, they need a sustainable bike path that
is beautiful that is going to last. In regards to the one thousand (1,000) feet of the
shoreline path, which is the subject of debate here, as bad as the erosion problem is
along the short section of the bike path, there is another far more dangerous problem.
In order to understand the magnitude of the other problems, I would ask you to
consider this: if you go ahead with this shoreline section of the path in front of the
COUNCIL MEETING 11 APRIL 21, 2021
Islander on the Beach and Kaua`i Coast, you will be constructing a path situation
that exists nowhere else on Kaua`i, or the State of Hawai`i, or for that matter,
anywhere in North America. The reason it does not exist anywhere else is because it
is simply far too dangerous. The reason it is far too dangerous is every week you will
be forcing an upwards of one thousand (1,000) people, including young children, to
P
cross the concrete path on a way to the beach in front of oncoming cyclists. It is one
thing to educate the cyclists, but we are not talking about educating cyclists. We are
talking about people who are just out to enjoy the beach with their buckets to make
sand castles or who are listening to music. I am asking, and I think you can readily
see that the unmitigated recipe for disaster gets worse. We got a legal opinion from
Milton Motooka, which I believe we have sent—who is a highly respected Hawaiian
legal mind—it says, "The Mayor and Kaua`i Council should seriously consider the
risks they are placing the residents, the visitors, and the resort guests, including
young children in by forcing them to cross a bike path to get to the beach, when
alternative paths are available. It is difficult to understand why they have chosen a
path, which poses such a threat to human life and safety. Should any injury occur
where a cyclist injures a pedestrian attempting to access the beach, the potential
liability will be substantial. The fact that the County has been put on notice of the
risks will expose greater potential liability. Most importantly, the injury will receive
substantial national media scrutiny. We are not opposed to the bike path. We want
the path, but we are talking: if you are riding a bike, it is thirty (30) seconds that we
are talking about that path. If you have walked that path and you have to be able to
turn on that makai side of the north end of the Islander on the Beaches "Moloka`i"
building, it is insane that they are trying to force that through. That is all.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Mary. Next up is Brian Curl'.
BRIAN CURLL (via remote technology): Aloha, Councilmembers. Thank
you for allowing me to speak today. My name is Brian Curl'. I am the Vice President
of Hui 0 Mand Ka Pu'uwai Outrigger Canoe Club (Pu'uwai Canoe Club), and
presently sit on their Board of Directors. I am a member of the Kapa'a Rotary and
Lion's Club here on Kaua`i. My organization, the Pu'uwai Canoe Club, has been
serving our community on Kauai for a good thirty (30) years. We offer a multitude
of programs for adults and children. We have taught over four thousand (4,000)
children in the Kawaihau District over this time. We are in support of the path. We
are in support of a midsection of the path. We believe that enhances the already
wonderful opportunity for residents and visitors alike. I believe it is in our best
interest to move forward. Pu'uwai Canoe Club supports the community. We have,
over the last year, with the Kaua`i Independent Food Bank, provided twenty-nine
thousand (29,000) pounds of food, potable water, and supplies to those at-risk in our
community who have been displaced. We are looking forward to helping them get
into permanent housing. The community of Kaua`i is one of service to each other.
Individuals, all of us, occasionally have to give up a little something so that everyone
somethingadded to their plate. I think it is important that we
else can have a little P
COUNCIL MEETING 12 APRIL 21, 2021
move forward. I believe that you have the Federal support across the board, at least
in my organization, and I will certainly let everyone know how much we love the
island and all the opportunities provided for people moving here. I have one comment
about the shearwaters; the greatest danger to them is light pollution and the light
from the windows along the shoreline. They are also in danger from feral cats and
rats. Those are the big dangers; if you are interested in protecting shearwaters, you
need to control the feral cat population. Thank you for your time, mahalo.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Brian. Next up is Julio.
JULIO MAGALHAES (via remote technology): Good morning and aloha.
My name is Julio Magalhaes and I am here to testify on Resolution No. 2021-13. I
am a member of the Executive Committee of the Sierra Club of Kaua`i. I am here to
represent the Executive Committee's position. Mahalo to Council Chair Kaneshiro
and the Council for this opportunity to provide oral testimony. I am only able to
participate via audio today. I wish it were otherwise, but of course, it is the words
that matter rather than seeing me. Earlier this week we submitted written testimony
expressing our opposition to this Resolution. I would like to direct your attention to
that written testimony. Out of respect to your time, my oral remarks will only focus
on two (2) of the most important concerns with respect to that letter. The first concern
is the contradiction between the proposed routing of the multi-use path and the
conclusions of the Hawai`i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report. That
report was issued by the Hawai`i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation
Commission in 2017. I will elaborate on that concern momentarily. The second
concern is making sure that the County has learned the relevant lessons of the
extensive and rapid erosion of Wailua Beach next to the multi-use path segment
there. Focusing on our first concern, which is the contradictions with the
Vulnerability and Adaptation Report, if you look at the Report, which is publicly
available and easily accessible on the web, the Report includes several figures
covering the coastal area to which the Resolution refers and the location of the
proposed path segment is well within the sea level rise exposure area or even the
minimal sea level rise considered of one and one tenths (1.1) feet, as well as the three
and two tenths (3.2) feet scenario. It is important to note that the one and one
tenths (1.1) feet sea level rise is a very minimalist approach. Both of these scenarios
are considered quite conservative amounts in current planet-change science. The
Sierra Club of Kaua`i believes it is irresponsible to locate the multi-use path in a sea
level rise exposure area. I want to repeat that for emphasis. The Sierra Club of
Kaua`i believes it is irresponsible to locate the multi-use path in a sea level rise
exposure area. We find that it is irresponsible for two (2) reasons: 1) The County
would be placing public infrastructure funded with taxpayer dollars in harm's way,
in the way of coastal erosion from sea level rise and increased frequency of strong
storms due to climate change; and 2) Taxpayers' dollars would be unnecessarily
wasted. Although the funding for the proposed bike path would be covered with a
Federal grant, those dollars come from the dollars of the vast majority of us pay when
•
COUNCIL MEETING 13 APRIL 21, 2021
we file our Federal Form 1040. Moreover, all the repairs to the multi-use path, after
placing it in harm's way would be up to all of us to pay with the local taxes since the
Federal grant would not cover repairs. Focusing in on our second concern, the
shocking erosion at Wailua Beach next to the concrete multi-use path...I know every
time I go by Wailua Beach, I am shocked by the rapid erosion that has occurred and
is occurring. I imagine that you, as well as everyone who is testifying today, are also
shocked by it. The expansive erosion at Wailua Beach presents a cautionary tale of
placing the multi-use path close to the coast on terrain that is very close to present
sea level. This major erosion should give great pause to the Council as it considers
Resolution No. 2021-13. The County must understand and learn the lessons of this
expansive erosion at Wailua Beach before moving forward with the proposed new
section of the multi-use path. In particular, the County must do a reality check on
how the studies that were done prior to construction of the Wailua Beach section of
the multi-use path compare to the amount of extensive erosion that has actually
occurred at Wailua Beach. To do otherwise would be an irresponsible use of public
moneys. Again, I want to repeat this, because I think this is critical. In particular,
the County must do a reality check on how the studies that were done prior to
construction of the Wailua Beach section of the multi-use path compare to the amount
of extensive erosion that has actually occurred. In conclusion, we support an
alternate path further inland on the makai side of the Aleka Loop road. This
alternate path will take the route out of the high-risk sea level rise exposure area.
For this alternate route, we support a design that uses the latest theory and practice
of Complete Streets design, which gives equal priority and safety to pedestrians,
bikers, and vehicles. This routing was also more naturally aligned with the existing
interim segment of the multi-use path to the northeast...
Council Chair Kaneshiro: You have thirty (30) more seconds.
Mr. Malgahaes: ...and northwest of the proposed new section.
In conclusion, the Sierra Club of Kaua`i does not support the routing included in the
County Council Resolution No. 2021-13. Thus, we do not support the passage of this
Resolution. A "no" vote by the County Council will send a clear signal that the
Council understands the imperative of bold action now on climate change. It would
also show the Council...
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Julio, your time is up.
Mr. Malgahaes: Can I just finish my last sentence?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay, you can finish your last sentence.
Mr. Malgahaes: It would also show the Council has the
courage to make the much needed tough decisions regarding coastal development and
COUNCIL MEETING 14 APRIL 21, 2021
mitigation that are and will be needed to deal with the climate crisis. Thank you very
much for your consideration. I apologize that I went a few seconds over my time.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you for your testimony. Next up is
former Councilmember and Council Chair Mel Rapozo.
MEL RAPOZO (via remote technology): Good morning Council Chair,
Council Vice Chair, and Councilmembers. I am testifying on Resolution No. 2021-13.
This is not about the benefits of the path. This is not about the health benefits, there
is no disputing the benefits of the path and that it is in fact a world-class amenity.
We all know that. There is definitely no objection to that statement. There are
two (2) issues here. The first issue is the recent...unless things have changed...the
Islander on the Beach has rescinded their offer because of misrepresentations by the
County that in fact they would use permeable pavers and now it has changed to
concrete. I think that is the first concern. What was once a friendly condemnation
has now become a hostile condemnation. For the new Councilmembers who have not
been through the condemnation process, the cost of a hostile condemnation jumps
quite a bit, so I think that is one of the concerns. The Sierra Club of Kaua`i and Julio
made some comments that I was going to read, but he already covered it. I just want
to ask that each and every one of you reads that Hawai`i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability
Adaptation Report that was issued by the Hawai`i Climate Change Mitigation and
Adaptation Commission in 2017. That is relatively recent. Relatively speaking, 2017
is relatively recent. I would ask that each and every one of you read that and see
exactly what Julio was talking about. In fact, the sea level rise there should be of
concern there for everyone. Sally Jo Manea, who I dearly love, in the newspaper,
stated, "Please do not be distracted by concerns that the physical structure would be
damaged by coastal erosion. This is inevitable for all our coastal roadways and is a
separate issue. The issue here is public access." I agree with a couple of the
comments. The structure would be damaged by coastal erosion and that this is
inevitable for all of our coastal roadways. I agree with that. But I disagree with her
statement that it is a separate issue. It is all the same issue. You are making a
decision that is going to impact the erosion and damage on a structure. I also agree
with her that the issue here is public access. We already have public access for people
to use to get to the beach. We already have it and we already hold it. We have that
easement. Retired County Eastside Roads Crew Supervisor Steve Sarita who is a
frequent user of the path also is quoted as saying, "The coastal erosion I have
witnessed fronting these resorts would surely keep costing taxpayers money to fix it
if it is not rerouted further away from the coastline than now planned." Again, a user
of the path. I know last time Councilmember DeCosta asked me if I use the path, I
do not have to use the path to be concerned about the cost and the impacts to our
environment. That is exactly what my testimony is about today. We have to
understand and accept the fact that things change every day. You all know this
regardless of how long you have been on the Council. We need to be flexible to adjust
to that change. The environmental processes that were done years ago may not apply
COUNCIL MEETING 15 APRIL 21, 2021
today. I think that is what Julio was talking about. We have seen the devastating
impacts of erosion and sea level rise here on Kaua`i, especially on that coastline,
already. SMA permits, unless things have changed, are only good for two (2) years.
At the very minimum, I would think that you would need a new SMA permit to
construct anything on that coastline. My request here today is that all of you please
defer this. There are several pieces of information that are missing, at least to the
public. What is the cost going to be? What is the cost now for a hostile condemnation?
Then, what is the cost going to be for the maintenance? The last time I testified, I
watched the meeting and Doug Haigh was asked about the cost. He could not provide
a number. I would think that there needs to be a number attached to this request of
what is the Council or County willing to pay for this amenity when in fact much has
been said already that many path users are saying that an alternate path would be
sufficient and beneficial. It does not have to be along an eroding coastline. I think
that is my biggest concern. The Sierra Club of Kaua`i said it best that it would be
irresponsible to move forward with this. For me, as a taxpayer, I am concerned about
the cost. I am concerned about the cost of condemnation. That will increase
significantly. I am concerned about the natural habitat of the shearwaters
there—that needs to be reviewed. The studies and all of that was done to get the
initial approvals may no longer be valid. I am just asking that this...I would love for
this to be received and that an alternate path option be looked at. At minimum, defer
this until that information can be received by the Council and shared with the public,
so that we can make an educated decision. Thank you for your time.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Mel. Next up is Bernardo.
BERNARDO LIZARRAGA (via remote technology): Hello. Thank you
for your time. I am a resident of this island for many years and have lived here for
most of my life. I have enjoyed the benefits of the access to the coastline and I love
the path. We have access to this pristine coastline. My concern is related to the
erosion and the narrow pathway that exists already in this area here. I have
currently been a resident of the Islander on the Beach and I have seen that more
closely, the impact that it has. I am opposed to the path and locating it in this pristine
area that will be dangerous. There are concerns with safety and I walk that path
with my grandson and I am concerned about that. That is my opposition at this time
for...I would like to see it located elsewhere and to hear a better understanding of the
area to make it safer so that a better decision can be made to locate it in a place where
it is safer and in an area we can all use. Safety is a big concern for me. That is all I
have to say at this time. Thank you for your time. Thank you for arranging this.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you, Bernardo. Next up we have
Judison. Is Judison Paleracio there? If not, that was the last testifier for this item.
I would just like to thank everyone for your testimony. We will be taking this item
up a little later on our agenda. Again, if you want to watch the meeting live, you can
watch it at www.kauai.gov/webcastmeetings.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 APRIL 21, 2021
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Clerk, we were on page 2 under
Communications.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2021-100 Communication (04/06/2021) from the Executive on
Transportation, requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend a Fiscalcal
Year 2021 Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5339(c) Low or No
Emission (Low-No) Bus Program competitive grant, in the amount of$2,550,000.00,
and to indemnify the FTA. The 5339(c) grant will provide eighty-five percent (85%)
of the cost to replace three (3) diesel-powered buses, which have exceeded their useful
service lives with three (3) electric-powered buses.
Councilmember Carvalho moved to approve C 2021-100, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions from the Members on
this?
Councilmember Evslin: I have a question.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: Thank you for being here and for applying for
this grant. If we receive the grant, when would you expect that we would actually have
the buses? Also, would there be expected County costs for the charging infrastructure,
or is that included in some capacity.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
CELIA M. MAHIKOA, Executive on Transportation (via remote technology): In
regards to the bus receipt, we are working as part of a statewide coordinated effort that
we are applying for the funds and carrying out the project along with the State of
Hawai`i Department of Transportation's Planning Office. We anticipate it will likely be
late next year, if not moving into the following fiscal year. However, we need to be
prepared for the timeline as it comes out so we are working with the consultants in
regards to the actual implementation of the project. I could not hear the second portion
of your question.
Councilmember Evslin: Sorry. Would there be expected additional
costs for the charging infrastructure? How would we make that aspect work?
Ms. Mahikoa: Yes, we anticipate additional costs for charging
infrastructure. We are relying on the consultants that are on-board via our first Low-
No Grant award that was received a couple of years ago, who are also handling the
statewide initiative, to provide with the numbers on that. We anticipate needing to
COUNCIL MEETING 17 APRIL 21, 2021
identify the source for that as well. Thankfully, the Federal funds in this area...the
opportunities have been more available lately. We anticipate being able to utilize either
existing or soon-to-be provided funds for that purpose.
Councilmember Evslin: Great. Thank you.
Ms. Mahikoa: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
Members?
The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion? Councilmember
Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I would just like to thank Celia for her work
and for looking outside of the box in getting outside funding. You are always looking to
bring us in a new direction. It is important to at least experiment with these
electric-powered buses. Thank you very much for a job well done.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I echo what Councilmember Cowden just said.
Thank you, Celia. I know that this is going to require some heroic efforts on your
Agency's part to make this transition. Certainly whatever we can do to accelerate its
transition is definitely needed. I am looking forward to us getting three (3) electric
buses for Kaua`i. Thank you.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Mahikoa: Thank you. We greatly appreciate the support
from all of you. Aloha.
The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have any comments?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion to approve C 2021-100 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
C 2021-101 Communication (04/07/2021) from the Fire Chief, requesting
Council approval to accept a donation of five (5) Custom Surf Rescue Boards, valued at
$10,563.00, from the Kaua`i Lifeguard Association (KLA), on behalf of the friends and
family of Zachary Rose.
COUNCIL MEETING 18 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to approve C 2021-101 with a thank-you letter
to follow, seconded by Councilmember DeCosta.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions on this item? Is there
any final discussion? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I remember when Zachary had the fall on the
Na Pali Coast. I would just like to acknowledge the pain to his family. I want to
formally acknowledge gratitude to his family and friends in their loss for continuing
to help other people not experience that type of loss. With these five (5) rescue boards,
I am assuming that it is going to the five (5) different moku. Do we know that? That
might be a question. If we do not know, that would be my presumption. I just want
to mahalo the friends and family of Zachary Rose and certainly the Kaua`i Lifeguard
Association. They are a big partner in keeping our waters safe. Mahalo.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have anything to add?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion to approve C 2021-101 with a thank-you letter to follow was then
put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion passes. Next item.
CLAIMS:
C 2021-102 Communication (03/25/2021) from the County Clerk, transmitting
a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Arnold A. Lane, for damage to his vehicle,
pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i.
C 2021-103 Communication (03/29/2021) from the County Clerk, transmitting
a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Makai Water Service's, LLC, for damage
to personal property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i.
C 2021-104 Communication (03/31/2021) from the County Clerk, transmitting
a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Leslie A. Burgermyer, for damage to her
vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i.
C 2021-105 Communication (04/05/2021) from the County Clerk, transmitting
a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Wendy Nishida, for damage to her vehicle,
pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i moved to refer C 2021-102, C 2021-103, C 2021-104,
and C 2021-105 to the Office of the County Attorney for disposition and/or
report back to the Council, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 19 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions from the Members?
Is there any discussion?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding these agenda items.)
The motion to refer C 2021-102, C 2021-103, C 2021-104, and C 2021-105 to
the Office of the County Attorney for disposition and/or report back to the
Council was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
PUBLIC SAFETY& HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-PSHS 2021-02) submitted by the Public Safety and Human
Services Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
"PSHS 2021-02 — Communication (03/19/2021) from Todd L. Watts, PE,
PMP, Director for Real Property Investments and Deployments, U.S.
Department of Defense, requesting agenda time for Dr. Buff Crosby, Charla
Schreiber, and local consultant Dawn Chang, to present information regarding
the Missile Defense Agency's Homeland Defense Radar - Hawai`i (HDR-H)
Environmental Impact Statement,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Cowden.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or is there any
discussion from the Members?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
FINANCE & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-FED 2021-02) submitted by the Finance & Economic
Development Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the
Record:
COUNCIL MEETING 20 APRIL 21, 2021
"FED 2021-01 — Communication (03/05/2021) from the Director of
Economic Development, requesting agenda time to present an update on the
distribution of Rapid `Ohi`a Death and status of detections across the island, as
well as share the management and outreach efforts that are being undertaken to
slow the spread of the disease,"
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for approval of the report, seconded by
Councilmember Carvalho.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or is there any
discussion from the Members?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion for approval of the report was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
Resolution No. 2021-13 – RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
ACQUISITION OF EASEMENT INTERESTS IN LAND REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC
USE, TO WIT: THE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PATH THAT CONSTITUTES
PART OF THE COUNTY'S PUBLIC PARK SYSTEM, WAIPOULI, DISTRICT OF
PUNA, COUNTY OF KAUAI, HAWAII, AND DECLARING THE NECESSITY OF
THE ACQUISITION THEREOF BY EMINENT DOMAIN
Councilmember Kuali i moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-13 on
second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his
approval, seconded by Councilmember Carvalho.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We received written testimony and we heard
public testimony a little earlier today. Do we have any questions on this item?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I think we have Doug and Troy available.
Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I was trying to let Council Vice Chair Chock
go first. Thank you, Doug and Troy, for the work that you have done. I want to thank
all the people working on the path. I agree with some of the testifiers. I believe that
every one of us should look at this path. When this was done in 2012 and we are now
in 2021, it is a pretty different scenario. I have a couple of different questions. You
answered that the cost of the area is two million two hundred thousand
dollars ($2,200,000). Is that the correct amount that we are considering including
condemnation?
COUNCIL MEETING 21 APRIL 21, 2021
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
DOUGLAS HAIGH, Chief of Buildings (via remote technology): Good
morning. For the area with this portion of the path we are looking at the cost as being
seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000).
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. Can you look on page 2 of your answer
to me under question 3 where you say, "The expected life of the path in consideration
of undermining due to shoreline erosion varies by location. In some areas there is no
threat as the coastline is accreting or has no history of erosion." I highlighted this for
myself. "In areas of coastal erosion the average life of the path is three hundred
fifty-two (352) years with a minimum life of forty (40) years." What about the areas
where the path is clearly eroded. I can think of at least five (5) places where as one
of the testifiers stated that there is orange webbing around it, what about those
places?
Mr. Haigh: We have two (2) currently where we have
orange fencing adjacent to the path that I am aware of. There are three (3) areas
where there is coastal erosion nearby. The first area is near the Pono Kai seawall. I
discussed this at the last meeting. The Pono Kai seawall issue is a seawall problem.
The problem was created by the seawall. During our repairs of that seawall, we tried
to extend the seawall to minimize more erosion. The Department of Land and
Natural Resources (DLNR), Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL),
denied our request to extend the seawall. They said that we were just going to move
the problem. I think they were right, appropriately. We ended up working out an
agreement with them and they approved our beach nourishment program. We
coordinated with the State Boating Division and they have given us sand twice now
from when they dredged the nearby canal for boating access. We have set up a
program to nourish that area. The coastal erosion there varies over time. We went
for a whole year without having to do any beach nourishment. Right now it is ripe
for some nourishment. There is a good beach there, so it would be a good time to do
nourishment and there is still sand available. That is that situation.
Wailua Beach is the most significant one. I think we are all hurting looking at
what has happened at Wailua Beach over the last year. But, while it is frustrating
and hurtful, it is not shocking. That beach has had a history of having episodic
erosion events. Actually, right before we were doing the final design of the path in
that area, we had a significant erosion event at one part of Wailua Beach, where it
came within ten (10) or fifteen (15) feet of where the path was going to be. At that
time, we totally redesigned the path in consideration of that in conjunction with the
State Department of Transportation. The path there is located in the highway
right-of-way and is located in their shoulder. It incorporates a safety bumper for the
highway there. We designed it so that it is removable. Is it cheap to remove it? No.
It could be removed. Regardless, if that path goes...it is kind of like a canary...if they
COUNCIL MEETING 22 APRIL 21, 2021
lost the path, they will lose a travel lane because it is such a narrow area there. It is
really a State Highways question about protecting the highway and the path is
incidentally there as a part of the highway.
The other area where we have erosion is at Lydgate Beach Park. That erosion
was from stormwater erosion. Unfortunately, it was not repaired as part of the
emergency repair project, which would have been okay. My memory is that it
occurred during a disaster-declared storm event and it could have been repaired
under emergency rules. They are going through the regulatory rules and it takes a
long time to get through the regulatory process.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you. At the very south end there, it is
struggling also, where the little hale is located at the end of the park. At Lydgate
Beach Park where we have the Bynum Bridge, how is that area? Am I remembering
that correctly? It seems like that area is having a hard time? Maybe it is just the
building?
Mr. Haigh: The Bynum Bridge is Tim Bynum's legacy.
He was very much into Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) access. He spent a
period of his childhood with accessibility challenges. He was very sensitive to ADA
access. What we did is we created this ADA outlook at that pavilion by the bridge.
We built it as furniture, not as infrastructure, because we knew it was in a very
sensitive environment. That is the one area where you are seeing erosion. It is not
a part of the path. It is a piece of furniture that if it eroded, it would be time to pull
it out and we at least got to enjoy it for a little while. That is not a part of the path.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. I have a short "yes" or "no" question
and then another hopefully short question. The Federal grant is not paying for
repairs, is that correct? The County Department of Public Works will be paying for
repairs when we do them? Is that a "yes" or "no?"
Mr. Haigh: Federal Highways will not be paying for
repairs.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. This area along the shoreline and the
easement that is perpendicular, we already basically own that. The condemnation is
just for a little small easement piece, is that correct? Do we own both the walkway
and the area along the coast? •
Mr. Haigh: We do not own the area along the coast. That
is a requirement of the regional subdivision that they install and maintain lateral
access. We have a six-foot wide easement between the two (2) hotels there for the
vertical access. We need a minimum of eight (8) feet for a shared-use path in that
area.
COUNCIL MEETING 23 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Mr. Haigh: That is why we are acquiring a little bit of
land from Islander on the Beach and a little bit of land from Kaua`i Shores Resort. I
always forget which one it is. I am sorry.
Councilmember Cowden: When one of our speakers talked about
thirty (30) seconds for bikes, that is what I thought when I went by it. It is just a
heartbeat before you are right out there again. What if our path diverged and
pedestrians, strollers, and things like that stayed along the coast where it takes more
time and then they can make that right-angle turn easily without running anyone
over? Our bikes can go inland for thirty (30) seconds earlier. I was hit by a truck
when I was twelve (12) years old and had very serious head injuries. I get the fear
and the problem of cars and traffic. We are talking about thirty (30) seconds of
additional challenge. Can we have bikes go one way and walkers go the other way?
Mr. Haigh: What we have done there for safety is
providing signage for that narrow corridor for cyclists to dismount. That is already a
part of the path plans. Safety is a primary issue for us and developing the path in
conjunction with the Hawai`i Department of Transportation (HDOT), Highways
Division. We looked at those issues and in conjunction with them, we came up with
the idea that the cyclists should dismount for this narrow corridor. That is what we
have there for that safety issue.
Councilmember Cowden: I understand what you have. That was not
the question that I asked. I asked can we have walkers go one way and bikers go
another?
Mr. Haigh: The challenge with having the bikers go the
other way...this is interesting to me...in 2019, we were working with one of the board
members at Islander on the Beach, and they requested us to look at going on the
mauka side of their property. In order to do that, to get the safe width of a path, we
would be taking out about twenty-seven (27) parking stalls from their hotel. When
we responded back to them that this would be the consequences, they responded and
said, "Never mind." Now, I am hearing them saying, "Go use someone else's land."
We have looked at that. Aleka Loop was looked at. I think you recently talked to
other property owners or had correspondence with other property owners in the area,
the Aleka Loop option is not an easy thing to do. To just divert it, there is really not
enough room to easily do it there. It will be a significant challenge to do it safely.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
Members? Council Vice Chair Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Chock: I have a bunch of questions. Doug, because
there has been a lot of discussion, my main question is about the timing of this request
and how time-sensitive it is for our process to consider if we can deliberate further on
it or not. Are there any hard-pressing deadlines that we need to consider in making
this determination today?
Mr. Haigh: You should have a copy of the April 19, 2021
memorandum from the Department of Public Works requesting Council to take action
on this item today. In that memorandum I lay out the time-critical issues. I will do
it here. We were recently notified by HDOT, Highways Division that we have to have
all of our project documents in by May 31, 2021 in order to secure the Federal
Highways funding for this year. We are looking at securing one million five hundred
thousand dollars ($1,500,000) for this project. The Resolution document is necessary
for the right-of-way certification, which is one of the documents that has to be
completed by then. The issue is that our right-of-way certification...I need to put
together a package. When we put together this package, we send it to HDOT,
Highways Division, Right-of-Way Branch, and they review and approve our
right-of-way certification. That usually takes two (2)to three (3)weeks. We are really
at that time-critical period in order to secure this funding. If we do not meet that
deadline, it is very likely that we would not be able to receive the funding. They said
that this is the deadline. That means that we do not use those funds this year and
we will have to go back on the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)
list and reapply. Currently, the County of Kaua`i Department of Public Works has
put off funding for future bike path projects until Federal Fiscal Year 2026, because
we have other priority projects that we need to spend the money on. Basically, we
would be deferring...if we did not meet the deadline and secure the funds this Federal
Fiscal Year, we would be waiting until Federal Fiscal Year 2026, which starts in
October 2025.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you. In your second paragraph you
talk about the alternative boardwalk construction, can you explain that a little more
in detail?
Mr. Haigh: Okay. We have been continually sensitive to
the erosion issue. During the SMA process we made changes to the path to move the
path further from the coastline. We have always selected concrete as our number one
choice for the path for long-term maintenance issues. We have looked at doing
crushed coral and asphalt, but concrete was the least cost and since we had the
frontend cost paid by the Federal Highways, it was in the best interest of the County
to go to the option that had the least maintenance cost, which was concrete. Now,
looking at coastal erosion issues, if we...what I said there is that we want to work
with the Planning Department and look at the current view of potential impacts. We
do not have that final information yet. In the worst case scenario that we are looking
at much sooner coastal erosion events than we were previously planning on, which if
COUNCIL MEETING 25 APRIL 21, 2021
you look at that memorandum that we sent you, it included a 2017 study and
comments we brought to Council, we were looking at fifty (50) years or so, was the
minimum life of the path based on sea level rise impacts on coastal erosion. We were
comfortable that concrete was good. We are seeing now that...and I have talked with
our Sea Grant Specialist and there are some new assumptions being made. We are
going to explore those. We are going to have an expected life now with sea level rise
impacts of maybe ten (10) to fifteen (15) years, then it makes a lot of sense to look at
an alternative boardwalk type of construction. If you look at the Kawaihau elevated
boardwalk, your decking would be like that, but of course it will not be twenty (20)
feet in the air. It will be on top of the sand. With that type of structure, if you get
erosion, you could easily dismantle it, move it, and put it back with much less effort
than concrete. I also included there an option that we may need to get an additional
erosion reserve easement. If we see that sea level rise and the changes as to how
people are looking at sea level rise is a much shorter life, then it would be responsible
for us to secure another five (5) or ten (10) feet of easement for future erosion so that
we have a place to move the path more mauka if we get serious erosion. I am sure
the Islander on the Beach would not be happy with that, but if the facts or the latest
review...in coordination with Planning determines that this is a serious concern, then
I would be going to Federal Highways and HDOT to say that we should be looking at
this additional easement to be funded for this project because of the expected life. Of
course it would be up to the courts to decide if it is in the public's interest to get that
additional easement.
Councilmember Chock: Okay, thank you for that. It brings me to one
of my main questions. When can we expect a little more direction...I asked the
Planning Department and Ruby to be present...do we know when we might be able
to get some of that impact information to make a better determination? Doug, you
might be able to answer that, and if not, perhaps Ruby or Ka`aina could answer that.
Mr. Haigh: It is a two-step process. Someone is already
working on the numbers. Then, we have to spend the time looking at the design and
cost. The process afterwards is anywhere from two (2) to four (4) weeks to do the
review on the design and cost side, but I will defer to Ruby on what is the expected
process to get this additional analysis.
RUBY PAP, University of Hawai`i Sea Grant Coastal Land Use Agent (via
remote technology): Before I speak, I just want to...for those that
I have not met or talked to, I just want to explain Sea Grant's role in all of this. We
do not advocate one way or another on developments or anything. We like to think
of ourselves as neutral purveyors of information. My involvement in this path over
the years...I have been on Kaua`i working in this position for nine (9) years and have
seen different changes on different parts of the path. I came before you when Wailua
was being discussed. We typically take the strategy of providing different options
and scenarios for consideration and what the pros and cons would be. I just wanted
COUNCIL MEETING 26 APRIL 21, 2021
to fully disclose that I am a cyclist and I have used the path. I am not advocating one
way or another. I just want to give you the information that you need. With that
being said, I will say that...and I know that this is probably more than what you
asked for...when this first came up and was requested in 2017, to get an analysis of
path life based on sea level rise, that was before the Hawai`i Sea Level Rise
Vulnerability and Adaptation Report came out. I did reached out to the University
of Hawai`i at Manoa (UH) Coastal Geology group scientists who are involved in the
erosion projections and she did some calculations for us based on a scenario of three
and two tenths (3.2) feet of sea level rise by 2100. A lot of times when you are
projecting into the future, especially with sea level rise, you have to look at different
scenarios because there are different uncertainties associated with different
projections. At that time, when she did the calculations, the path life in front of the
Islander on the Beach ranged from fifty-seven (57) years to hundreds of years
depending on the erosion rate. In some places in front of the Islander on the Beach,
the erosion rate is near zero (0). In areas where it was historically eroding, she
calculated fifty-seven (57) to seventy (70) years. This is just one scenario with three
and two tenths (3.2) feet by 2100. Since then, there have been the publication of the
Vulnerability Report for Hawai`i and the more recent sea level rise projections that
suggest that three and two tenths (3.2) feet might be a more of a mid-range or
mid-century scenario. Again, it is all about the timing. The path estimate that she
provided could be a little more conservative. It also did not take into account the
variability in the erosion data the way the sea level rise data does. There are some
differences as Doug described. I have reached out again and the Coastal Geology
group will be recalculating the path life for us. I have requested they look at a couple
of different scenarios. When you are talking about planning for scenarios, scenario-
planning is really the best way given the uncertainty with various projections. You
could pick an extreme projection and a conservative projection, then it is on the
decision-makers to really discuss your tolerance for risk within those scenarios based
on the nature of the development proposed. In this case, it is the path. This is a
coastal access path that could easily be removed. There are stipulations about no
future armoring. Again, what is the County's tolerance for risk with looking at those
scenarios. You could compare that conversation to one if we were putting in a road
or a wastewater treatment plant, that might be very different than looking at a public
access path. I just wanted to set up that stage for you as well, based on my experience
with planning. There are further analyses to augment the previous analysis that
resulted in fifty-seven (57) to seventy (70) years.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you. With what we are working with
now, our next shot at this would be in five (5) years if we do not approve this right
now. How far do you think, along the lines of our studies on sea level rise and its
impact, will we have come in five (5) years in order to make a better determination?
COUNCIL MEETING 27 APRIL 21, 2021
Ms. Pap: I see your question. That is difficult to
answer. I think we will have better information, especially if we do more monitoring
along the coast, but we have a lot of good information now.
Councilmember Chock: I appreciate that. What I am hearing from
you is that you are comfortable with what is being proposed based on the information
you have now and that is really what I want to clarify.
Ms. Pap: Yes, I would clarify that I would be
comfortable...there are pros and cons. Obviously, if you put the path where it is now
it could be undermined and we are not just talking about sea level rise, but if there
is a storm. That is the case with any section of the path. The fact that there is a
commitment not to armor to protect that path, because that is really where we get
into the damage of beaches. There seems to be a commitment to relocate. That makes
it definitely a better option, whereas if there was not a plan or acknowledgement of
that, there would be fear that there would be more seawall construction or armoring
to protect assets when we knew there was already a threat. I also think that if there
is additional monitoring of the shoreline erosion...if there was a contracted geologist
during regular beach profiles or drone work, that would actually really help the
planning process. When you add that in, there are enough safety nets there to put in
this public access amenity. I also think that if the decision were to be made to reroute
it, obviously I would say that the path would be much safer in that location, but then
you lose the potential coastal path. There are cons to that as well.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you. Sorry, I have a couple more
questions, but if you have to interject, please do.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: No, you may proceed.
Councilmember Chock: This is a Doug question. There is now the
possibility of moving the path even a few feet further inland. I was under the
assumption that we were up against as far as we could possibly go to the building.
Can you clarify this, Doug?
Mr. Haigh: Yes. It really goes back to our negotiation
process and our relationships with Islander on the Beach. The very first EA that we
did in this area was in 2007. We were looking at this section and during that time I
remember I took Phase "D" out of the EA and Tim Bynum was mad at me at the time.
He said, "Doug, why did you do that?" I told him that one of the hotels was giving us
resistance and I wanted as little resistance as possible so that we could get moving
forward with what we can move forward at the time with. One of the managers of
those hotels was saying that they were concerned that bike path users are going to
go into their units and steal television sets and whatnot, because all of a sudden you
are going to have a lot of public access where you did not have it before. That is why
COUNCIL MEETING 28 APRIL 21, 2021
we did not at that point. Now we have to come back and when we made the decision
to move forward with this section of the path, Phase D, we had to redo our EA. I am
so sorry, I got lost. What was your question again?
Councilmember Chock: I was under the impression that we were not
able to move the path any further...
Mr. Haigh: Okay. As we moved into this Phase D section,
I started discussions with Islander on the Beach. There have been different managers
there and different board members. We had approval of our path from the President
of the Board and they signed approval of the alignment. That alignment was based
on a negotiation. Two things. We are trying to minimize the land that we are going
to get from them. We are taking five (5) times seven hundred (700) or whatever the
length is in front of that hotel. You owe us that amount of easement for the public,
therefore, we are going to meander in and out with our path and use some of our
property and some of your property so that we minimize the impact of having to pay
for the land and minimize the impact to your hotel. We are sensitive. They approved
that. We were working as partners. We were moving forward. Even as recent as
last June, we got confirmation from the new President that they were comfortable,
accepted the alignment, all is good, they were good with the Property Adjustment
Agreement, and that we could ahead and do a concrete path between the two (2)
hotels as long as we provide them their wall. We were good. If you look at the
document that I sent to you that you received on April 19, 2021, and I show you the
potential offsets...you are looking at a five-foot offset or a ten-foot offset, there is room
there. The Islander on the Beach is not going to be happy about it, I do not think. It
brings the path closer to their buildings and it is really significantly close to their
buildings in a couple of places with the ten-foot offset. This is just a quick stab at it.
If we are really going to look at this coastal reserve, we would look at these future
erosion rates that we are going to do in our study and see where the most sensitive
areas are, making sure we are getting the area to retreat in the most sensitive way.
Right now we know that the closest or most sensitive area is right at that southeast
corner. There is plenty of room between their property line and their building. To
move in ten (10) feet there, it would not be that big of an impact on them. Do we do
that now before we start construction? That is a big challenge. I would rather stick
with our original agreement with the Islander on the Beach. "We agreed to this and
this is how we are going to put it now, but in the future, if we are subject to erosion,
we are going to change the design so we can move it easily. We are going to move it
in this area, but for your current enjoyment of your resort, we are going to keep it as
we agreed to."
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Doug. That was the specific
question that I had when we first heard this...our ability to interject within the
condemnation, the ability for us to move this, because so much of this is sensitive to
what sea level rise will incur upon us.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 APRIL 21, 2021
Mr. Haigh: Just to clarify that, this would have to be a
separate condemnation resolution. To do this additional easement, if we are going to
use Federal Highway funds, we have a process we have to go through. We would
have to do additional appraisals, we would have to contact the owner, and negotiate.
I would expect that would take us three (3) to six (6) months to be able to come back
to you with a resolution for the expanded coastal erosion buffer reserve area.
Councilmember Chock: To confirm, does that mean we would pay an
additional amount to what it is we are currently planning in order to move that?
Mr. Haigh: Absolutely. I just did a rough calculation
based on the current appraised value of fifteen dollars and forty-six cents ($15.46)per
square foot. For a five-foot easement it will be approximately ninety-one thousand
dollars ($91,000) and for a ten-foot easement it is about one hundred thirty-seven
thousand dollars ($137,000). I would be looking at getting Federal Highways funds
to pay for that, because if we do this study and it shows that we are at risk, then this
is a responsible thing to do. I am optimistic that both HDOT and Federal Highways
would say that that is a reasonable request to include in the project.
Councilmember Chock: That is helpful. This leads to my second
question about the condemnation process. Particularly, because this is not, as former
Council Chair Mel Rapozo said is not an amicable condemnation. They are not in
agreement. I am a little skeptical on the process of this in our ability to move forward
on it. Can you explain that? Typically, these condemnations that are challenged
become litigious and take years of back and forth. I am skeptical on the timing that
we are being requested, which is the end of the month, to complete this and our ability
to act on it.
Mr. Haigh: First, I have not seen a formal letter from the
Islander on the Beach Board telling us that they are no longer supporting the
condemnation. I know there are members and residents of Islander on the Beach
who have felt very strongly in presenting this. I have not seen a document from the
Board. There have been some interesting communications. The Property Adjustment
Agreement to build the wall...that is not related to the condemnation, but that is
really the only thing that they have actually corresponding with me on. I think on
Sunday, I received an E-mail from the Board President assigning one (1) individual
as the spokesman for the Board on the issue. I got an E-mail from that individual
saying that the Board is rescinding the rescindment of the Property Adjustment
Agreement if we agree to maintain the pervious concrete per a certain standard. I do
not think we are going to have any problem committing to that maintenance because
it is the right thing to do. We need some time to review that and respond back to
them. I think the Property Adjustment Agreement rescindment will be rescinded.
The latest communication I have is that they will rescind it if I agree to say that we
agree to maintain it. That is kind of a given anyhow. I think that is still good. Going
COUNCIL MEETING 30 APRIL 21, 2021
from a friendly to a non-friendly condemnation...I reviewed this with the County
Attorney, but you might want to get it directly from them. We go to the courts and
we pay the value of the land. The value of the land, they could contest that. We go
through a very thorough process of our appraisal of the land following HDOT and
Federal Highways rules and regulations. We actually do two (2) appraisals. We do
a first appraisal and then we have a second appraiser come in to review the first
appraisal to confirm that it is correct. We are pretty solid on our pricing. Since the
County Attorney will be doing the legal action on this, if it is unfriendly, I would have
to defer to them to tell you how that complicates the process once it gets to court.
Once it gets to court and is accepted by the judge, then we have access to it. We have
the land. It is the price of the land that gets contested in court. Even if it turns out
that the price is going to be a little bit higher, we still have funds from Federal
Highways right-of-way moneys to pay for a higher cost.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: This is back to Ruby, if possible. Is there any
evidence or reason to believe that the path leads to higher erosion rates?
Ms. Pap: Does the path itself...sorry.
Councilmember Evslin: Yes, that the path itself...in the areas where
the path is existing, has that increased erosion possibly? If we look at Wailua where
there is unprecedented erosion, anecdotally, people believe that. Could you address
that concern?
Ms. Pap: I do not believe the path contributes to erosion
rates, no.
Councilmember Evslin: Okay. That is all, thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: This question is for Doug. My mind is
spinning right now. It seems like we are trying to satisfy two (2) groups of people. I
believe my job is to make sure that the overall constituents of Kaua`i are satisfied. It
seems like a big outcry to continue this bike path is important. What worries me a
little bit is the talk about sea level rise and the damaging of this concrete bike path
if the ocean deteriorates the sand while the Islander on the Beach hotel might sooner
or later lose their oceanfront or even the access to have that building reside there.
Are they going to depend on the County for us to put a wall that protects their
building from being washed away or possibly we have to condemn the building and
COUNCIL MEETING 31 APRIL 21, 2021
have them move elsewhere? There are a lot of things that play a role in my decision.
We always talk about hypotheses, studies, and what can we do to do a better job. Is
it building the sidewalk using concrete, using removable boards that we can move
with the sea level rises, et cetera? How about a sidewalk with a retaining wall or
pillar that goes underneath the path so it is not seen, but it is there in case the sand
erodes? We will not have a cement pad that is floating on the sand, but we will have
some kind of pillar or wall underneath that protects the path from erosion.
Yesterday, Councilmember Evslin and I went out there and we saw an area that
looked around five (5) feet deep by the ironwood tree that looked like the sand eroded.
It has not been touched for about three (3) years and we came up with that judgment
call because the vegetation grew back and the driftwood was there. It seems like the
ocean does many strange things. I know we have geologists doing studies, but we are
so unique in the world. There are no other islands in the Pacific Ocean like us to do
these studies, except here in Hawai`i. Over time, we can make a judgment call. We
do not have anywhere else in the world to grab our data to compare it to. What
Councilmember Evslin and I looked at was if there was cement that went under the
sidewalk, whether it is two (2) or three (3) feet deep in certain areas that look like it
might wash away in two (2) to five (5) years, we might actually build a bike path that
could be resilient to sand being removed by the ocean. That is the question that I
want to ask you. Did we talk to our engineers, including you, if there was some kind
of bike path like that that we could take a blueprint and draft a bike path in case
there is something like this in the future, five (5) years out, we would still leave the
bike path there without removing it?
Mr. Haigh: Thank you for that question. I want to just
state that in the recent 2020 study for the Planning Department on coastal erosion
rates, and this does not include consideration of sea level rise, but it does include
historical data, we are looking at a three tenths (0.3) feet erosion rate per year. Three
tenths (0.3) feet erosion is four (4) inches. We are losing four (4) inches per year.
That is the maximum in that area. Some of it is at one tenths (0.1) feet or two
tenths (0.2) feet. According to the historic data, and I think it was updated maybe in
2018 when they actually pulled the data, historically we have not started going faster
in that area again. Your proposal is a creative and cool idea. Sorry, we cannot do
that. We cannot harden the coastline. That was our commitment through the
environmental process and in our SMA permit, that we would not harden the
coastline. That was from day one. We had these same discussions for Kapa`a-Kealia
and at Kapa'a Beach Park. I remember Councilmember Rapozo being very concerned
about that area and he was upset because Chip Fletcher said that the path will not
cause coastal erosion, because we were not hardening the shoreline. He said it is
okay as long as you do not harden. We are not hardening the coastline. It is a cool
idea, but that would be a seawall in disguise and we want to stay true to our
commitment to the public and to the regulators that we are doing what we said we
would do.
COUNCIL MEETING 32 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember DeCosta: Thank you, Doug.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I have a quick follow-up and this would be
directed to Ruby again. Doug just mentioned the historic erosion rate being three
tenths (0.3) feet per year and we have heard often from Chip Fletcher and others that
the historic rate will become increasingly irrelevant moving forward. I know that a
little bit is sort of magic thinking in that I am going to be asking you to pull a number
out of...if you had to give your best projection for how long a path there could last
based on everything that you know, what would you say that range would be?
Ms. Pap: I cannot say. I can say what I said earlier,
which was that we have some estimates about fifty-seven (57) to seventy (70) years,
and that was based on a particular sea level rise scenario of three and two tenths
(3.2) feet by 2100. I can say that that scenario of three and two tenths (3.2) feet could
happen earlier based on more updated sea level rise, projections that say that up to
six (6) to eight (8) feet is actually physically plausible by 2100. As you go up in those
more extreme projections for sea level rise the uncertainty gets higher and higher.
You are looking at modeling of ice sheet loss and that is a science that is still
developing, but getting better. I would rather wait to see what comes out from the
actual modelers who are doing this work for us. Based on the work that was done
before and the fact of fifty-seven (57) to seventy (70) years, and the fact that it is a
low-eroding coastline historically, I think you have a few good years, assuming we do
not get a hurricane or something that takes the whole thing out. That is very possible.
I will say that other sections of the path have higher erosion rates. Next door at the
Kaua`i Coast Resort at the Beach Boy they have higher erosion rates there. I will
also say that there is a fringing reef. That makes the area more stable compared to
somewhere like Wailua. It is a rapidly evolving science. That is my answer, sorry
that it is not more definite.
Councilmember Evslin: Was that fifty-six (56) to one hundred (100)
years, was that just a "bathtub analysis" at three and two tenths (3.2) feet or did that
include the data that...
Ms. Pap: Tiffany Anderson was the researcher, she was
the one that contributed to the sea level rise exposure area and the erosion lines. I
am not a mathematician, but she used an algorithm that included historical erosion
rates, future sea level rise projections, beach slope, and a very big mathematical
equation that is done to calculate the future erosion.
Councilmember Evslin: Thank you, Ruby.
COUNCIL MEETING 33 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay, we have a few more questions. We have
about five (5) more minutes before we have to take a break. I do have a follow-up
question for Doug. It is just a clarifying question. Councilmember Cowden asked
what is the cost of construction for this portion of the path and you said, "seven
hundred thousand dollars ($700,000)." I wanted to clarify a little further that that is
not moneys out of the County's pocket. From what I heard earlier, we will have to
pay some fee to acquire portions of the land which is in the twenty-four thousand
dollar ($24,000) range, and then everything else will be paid for with Federal moneys
based on our types of matches. Can you please clarify that? As I was listening to a
lot of the testifiers, they were worried about the cost to the taxpayers on building this
section and if it ends up eroding...can you clarify the cost to the County again?
Mr. Haigh: That is correct. The cost to the County
besides my labor is zero dollars ($0). Federal Highways is paying for all the path
improvements and the right-of-way acquisition costs. Our attorney's costs we are
paying for and our regular salaries, we are paying for. The actual cost of the path is
one hundred percent (100%) funded by Federal Highways. That is because we have
had this soft match. It all started with volunteers on the Lydgate Bynum Bridge.
Those hours were the soft match to allow us to start the path at Lydgate Beach Park.
Then, it was the Kealia Kai land donation that kicked us off and created our soft
match. Since that, we have had various other donations that have further increased
our soft match amount in order to pay and to get one hundred percent (100%) Federal
Highways funding for the projects.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: With that, we will take our ten-minute
caption break and we will come back to this. We still have more questions from the
Councilmembers. We will take our break and we will be right back.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 10:28 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 10:42 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. I have a question from
Councilmember Carvalho.
Councilmember Carvalho: I have a question for Doug. Thank you for all
of the information. There is an emotional side to the path as we all know. I just
wanted to dive into the communication that you sent.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Haigh: I am here.
Councilmember Carvalho: Back to the one million five hundred thousand
dollars ($1,500,000) that you mentioned and the need to secure that per your
COUNCIL MEETING 34 APRIL 21, 2021
communication, I wanted to clarify that and more importantly, to clarify what you
mean by, "Working with the Planning Department" and what some of those follow-up
details will entail overall as you continue to work together once we secure that
funding and everything moves forward. I wanted to get more specific details on that.
Mr. Haigh: In developing the path, the Planning
Department is the key regulator for the shoreline area. It is in the SMA permit
process that we really deal in-depth with the shoreline issues. We expect that within
the SMA process we may have to modify our design based on the feedback that we
get. We did that. In fact, our Sea Grant Specialist wrote a report on the path as part
of the Planning Department's review. We reviewed that and because of that
information we moved the path further mauka in a couple of places and probably
most at the Kaua`i Coast Resort at the Beach Boy property. The owner there was
agreeable after he saw the explanation of why we wanted to move it a little more
mauka, so we did. In her initial report, she was talking about the boardwalk option,
so that is where I came up with...I did not pull this boardwalk option out of thin air.
I got the information in the process and that was a softer way of potentially doing the
path. That is where I got that idea from. Since they are the regulatory agency, any
changes we make to the path, we need to do in conjunction with their approval. I look
at them as the experts of regulating this area. The County Council has passed the
laws that has given the ordinance and the power to the Planning Department and
Planning Commission to regulate these areas. We follow the permitting process to
get the permits and in accordance with the approval of the Planning Commission,
and if we are going to make any modifications, we are going to want to be hand-in-
hand with the experts, which to me is the Planning Department. We work together.
We are all a part of the County government and we know each other. We have worked
together. With those relationships, it is easy for us to look at the best information
that we have to-date. Getting the Sea Grant Specialist and her connections with UH
geologists to do further studies, that is awesome. To be able to get that kind of help
is awesome. We could not do it on our own. We could not have our consultants easily
go out and get that information. There are resources within the County and the
Planning Department has the strongest resources for the coastal environment, so we
want to work with them in partnership to do the best that we can to answer and
address coastal erosion concerns.
Councilmember Carvalho: I want to clarify that working together
internally is very important, as well as securing whatever resources we can abroad,
which is why the resources came back home so that we can move forward on this
opportunity for Kaua`i. I just wanted to clarify the importance of that so people
watching understand that there is that relationship that is strong and moving
forward as we work towards addressing this entire discussion. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
COUNCIL MEETING 35 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden: I have mostly clarifying questions. There are
just some things that I do not understand fully. This first question is for Doug. Can
you clarify for me...condemnation centers on public purpose, correct? It is not about
land value. We would condemn because there is a public purpose, is that right?
Mr. Haigh: That is correct. That is what allows you to
condemn land...if there is a public purpose; the court will determine if there is a
public purpose for the condemnation.
Councilmember Cowden: Does this condemnation have to be complete
by May 31st for the HDOT approval? Will it be completed by that time? How long
does it take for this condemnation to be completed?
Mr. Haigh: It will not be completed. How long it takes is
very hard to say. As soon as we file with the court and the court accepts the
documents, my understanding is that we then have legal access rights to use the
property. As far as our right-of-way certification, HDOT Right-of-Way Branch has
accepted the Council's approval of the Resolution as an adequate document to secure
that the County has a commitment and is in the process of gaining the land.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, so we have to be in-process? It does not
have to be complete.
Mr. Haigh: Correct.
Councilmember Cowden: Is "SMA" Special Management Agency?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Area.
Councilmember Cowden: Special Management Area. We use all of
these acronyms and I do not even know what we are talking about. We have a Special
Management Area permit. Is that permit only for two (2) years or is it ongoing?
Mr. Haigh: It varies. We actually had a contested case for
this SMA permit and variance approval. There were conditions and we had to start
the process within a certain amount of time. We have confirmed that we have started
that process. The SMA permit covers from Papaloa Road all the way to Uhelekawawa
Canal Bridge over by the Waipouli Bridge Resort. The Sheraton Kauia Resort at
Coconut Beach has actually already built the path on their property. They agreed
that they would build it at no-cost to the County, but they want us to pay for the
easement. We are still in the process of...it is a Land Court issue and we are stuck
in Land Court trying to get our mapping approved for the easement. That process is
ongoing. They actually built it. We started the SMA work within the timeline that
was required to start the work.
COUNCIL MEETING 36 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Mr. Haigh: We have provided documentation to the
Planning Department that we are progressing along adequately for the project.
Councilmember Cowden: Just for clarity, Doug, thank you for all of your
work. I have spent about three and a half(3 1/2) hours in the past week or so on the
path. Half that time with proponents and half with opponents. I have really walked
a significant loop. I saw the cool design that Councilmember DeCosta suggested, that
is being used a little bit further inland just where they took out some tennis courts,
it had that perpendicular piece right there. They were pouring it when I looked at it.
That is behind what is now called the ISO Hotel. How about the two (2) undeveloped
resort lots between Kaua`i Coast Resort and the Sheraton? Is that part of this two
million two hundred thousand dollars ($2,200,000) bill? Is that where it would be
meeting up with the Sheraton portion of the path?
Mr. Haigh: What you saw by the Mokihana area is
actually a privacy wall that we are putting in for the Village Manor. It is part of the
path project, but it is not part of the path. That is a privacy wall through a Property
Adjustment Agreement that was approved by the Council. That is what is going on
there right now. The two (2) vacant parcels, and I also have a challenge remembering
the names for all of these different ones...we have already come to Council and the
Council already approved the easement for that. The easement agreement is that
they are donating the land and they are also going to donate the construction costs to
build the path. Once that resort moves forward, we have a recorded easement
document that says that they are going to build the path. The path and that section
is a part of their SMA permit.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, we are solid on that piece. We see that
it has already been wet while I have been over there between the ISO and the
Sheraton. If I am remembering right...the reason I am asking about that is...getting
back to the condemnation...if we put a concrete path along those hotels and then it
comes up to Kaua`i Coast Resort at the Beachboy, that first building, what if we
condemn the land, but we do not commit to the concrete? Can we do that? Can we
just condemn the land and not commit to putting concrete on it? There is already
that five-foot piece. Having spent a number of hours there plus I walked this coast
and I ride the coast...for Tommy, I get it that it is harder once you go inland a little
bit. Can we do the condemnation without committing to the concrete? People could
just use that five-foot path that is already there? It is right in that area. Can we not
just do that for this commitment today? Can we take that out?
Mr. Haigh: The condemnation is for the easement. We
are acquiring the land. I do not believe, and I would defer to the County Attorney,
COUNCIL MEETING 37 APRIL 21, 2021
that our improvement...well, in a way our improvements are required because we are
condemning it for public use. We are telling the judge that this is how we are going
to use the land. Whether we can say that we want this corridor, but we have not
decided how we are going to build it yet...I would defer to the County Attorney.
Councilmember Cowden: That is what I am asking.
Mr. Haigh: If we did go that route, it is going to throw a
big "monkey wrench" in our funding for the project, our commitments, and all of our
environmental work that says we were going to build a path there. We could secure
the land, yes, but if it is not being secured for the project that has been approved,
Federal Highways may not pay for that condemnation if we are not doing it for the
project that is currently being funded.
Councilmember Cowden: There are natural traffic-calming devices
there right now. You say that you are going to put in signs that tell people to get off
their bikes or skateboards, when there are already the trees and the plants that are
still there, it is going to be naturally calming. People will have to get off their bikes
and skateboards. It gets rid of a lot of the injury, the lack of safety, and other
concerns. If you are building the path the rest of the way, if we do not do this we are
going to lose...I am trying to find a middle-ground here. You can think about that
before you say, "No." I can say "No" and I think you might get a"yes" from everybody
else, but I am trying to look at what can I live with. When I look there, if that is
concrete that is going to be filled with water and it is going to basically be a culvert
down to the ocean. We could ask Ruby in a moment here, but even if she feels that...I
hear a lot of hope, but also a lack of commitment, but even if she feels that that
shoreline will be okay, would it be different with...it is saying six thousand (6,000)
square feet...I do not think it is that much, or however many feet of concrete, it is
going to be flowing water down there. Ruby, will that create water runoff that might
create what you called stormwater erosion? Every time it rains we are going to have
that come down there. Those parking lots are flooded with even just a little bit of
rain.
Ms. Pap: That is a good question. I think in the
environmental review they covered stormwater impacts of the impervious surface. I
did not review that. We see examples of scour from stormwater at other sections of
the path that Doug already described at Lydgate. In those cases, there are significant
slopes mauka of the path channeling the velocity of the water; when it hits the path
it scours out the beach. I am not sure that would be the same experience here. I am
stepping outside my expertise, I did not review that part of it. Doug or his consultant
might have reviewed it.
Councilmember Cowden: I have another Ruby question. When I walk
along that pathway there...along the edge of the water...I see ironwoods bent, falling,
COUNCIL MEETING 38 APRIL 21, 2021
fallen, et cetera. The root balls come out and rip out a chunk of land. When we are
talking about little incremental sea level rise and erosion pieces, if a tree falls down
and washes out, then we get a big chunk that accelerates erosion. It seems like most
of those trees are leaning significantly. I saw it in front of the Sheraton that a lot of
those trees had simply been removed. When we are looking at those trees, what is
the impact for you of removing those trees or having them fall? They are at clear risk
of being at the end of their lives. If those trees are either removed or fall down, how
is that going to impact the coastal edge?
Ms. Pap: The ironwood trees are nonnative and they
have impacts...well, you can see what they do to the erosion scour when they fall
down. They become very top heavy and they do not allow natural dune vegetation or
anything else to grow underneath them. I am not a fan of ironwood trees.
Councilmember Cowden: I am not really asking if we like them or not.
There are a lot that are laying there on the shore. I am saying that as they come
down, will it make the coastal edge more or less vulnerable?
Ms. Pap: I do not think it will be significant. The
historical erosion data that we are using, the coastal geology group analyzed the toe
of the beach and how that has changed the watermark over the past one hundred
(100) years. They used aerial photos and they used that as a proxy for the erosion
rate. They did not use the vegetation line. They could have, but they used the toe of
the beach because that cannot be as manipulated. That is how the erosion rates were
determined over a century...by analyzing historical photos. Whether an ironwood
tree falls and that exposes...I think you have to look at the overall rate of erosion
rather than that event occurring.
Councilmember Cowden: That might be my unskilled eye seeing tree
after tree falling down with those big "C" shapes cutting away leaving two- to
three-foot drops between the grass and the new sand below it.
Ms. Pap: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: At an anecdotal level, there is a very clear and
evident impact. My next question...
Council Chair Kaneshiro: There is a follow-up question to that.
Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: This is a follow-up question to the ironwood
trees and the invasive species. I think we should not get overly excited about
removing invasive species like ironwood trees. I spent hours out there myself and I
spent some time with Councilmember Evslin, and what we noticed is that if the
COUNCIL MEETING 39 APRIL 21, 2021
ironwood trees are cut and made smaller, their root system in place is key. Again, I
am going to tell you it is key to keeping our shoreline intact. Let us not get excited
about removing invasive species right away. We did that in Hanapepe with the hau
bush and now the streambanks are falling down. We did that in Hanalei on the road
to create that grid with the wire mesh and the whole side of the highway fell. Let us
take it into account that roots in certain areas, whether they are native or non-native
trees, as long as they are maintained, they can be good for our environment and
erosion.
Ms. Pap: I think that we do not have any scientific
study on that. Any experience that we have with that is anecdotal in seeing that. I
certainly would not recommend removing a bunch of ironwood trees without replacing
it with native plants or doing a dune restoration. I think there are a lot of sections of
our east side that are subject to wind that is great for dune restoration and bringing
in more sand and native plants. Again, there is a debate about whether the roots are
holding things in place. It is an outcome of the way we have developed in what we
are left with. Whether it is the ideal situation for the coastline, I think is obviously
a different matter.
Councilmember Cowden: Councilmember DeCosta is in agreement with
me that anecdotally at Waipa, Waikoko, Hanalei, and even in Kalihiwai, as we see
these ironwoods go down, it coincides with the coastal edge receding. That is what I
have seen over the years. When we are walking along the path there, you can see
where the Sheraton is, there is just a clean, smooth, and green grass where basically
a forest was removed. We see along the land ownership different pieces or types of
vegetation. My next questions and it is pretty much my last question, is for Troy or
Michael Dahilig. This is about the STIP, is that on a two-year or a five-year cycle?
TROY K. TANIGAWA, Acting County Engineer (via remote technology):
Thank you for the question. The STIP program is a five-year program. It lists
projects that have funding and have various phases for the five-year period.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. Thank you. I do not know if this is for
you or for Doug. Are we finished with the soft match portion? He mentioned the
piece about the families volunteering. I was one of those volunteers. It was a
wonderful three (3) days down there when we were doing art on the Bynum Bridge.
You said that soft match was the beginning. Have there been incremental soft
matches that go along with this or are we done?
Mr. Haigh: No, we still have additional funds in the soft
match. This is something that we manage with HDOT. We have a spreadsheet that
tracks the soft match coming in and the funding going out. HDOT keeps track of that
for us.
COUNCIL MEETING 40 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, thank you. Those are my questions
that I was unclear on.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
Members? Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: This question is probably for Troy or maybe
Doug. It is more of an engineering-type of question. I do not presume to be an
engineer, but I do have some experience in that. I remember building powerlines on
O`ahu when I was in college. We had to build some concrete landing pads on top of
the ridges in Pearl City and `Aiea. A lot of those open ridges were subject to rain and
water runoff, similar to what you have if there were sand erosion. Doug, I brought
this to you about the seawall underneath. I get it that we are not going to construct
a seawall. I think there is a big concern with doing concrete or trusses, we do need
some stability underneath that path, whether it is a concrete slab or a track
boardwalk type path. Would we be able to sink some kind of pillar every so many
feet with the engineering akamai from your Department? I am only bringing the
construction part of it. You do not need an engineering degree to know something
about engineering. I think whether it is truss or concrete, we need to sink some kind
of pillar every six (6) or ten (10) feet that ensures that if there was some sand that
was removed, we do not have to go and put the orange netting right away. The path
would still be secure with a little bit of erosion, because underneath we had one of
those circumference cardboard things that you can pour concrete and you can build
your houses to two (2) stories that they have in Hanalei, I am sure that would not be
eroding or would obstruct the coastal erosion. If we did truss, we could sink some
kinds of redwood posts. I think redwood lasts fifty (50) to one hundred (100) years.
We would still be able to not have to condemn our path if it lost a little bit of sand
over the next five (5) or ten (10) years. It is always harder to go back in and do it
than to just do it when the construction is first taking place. In our design, do we
have some kind of pillar that can be in place whether we do concrete or trusses to
ensure that if there is a little bit of sand that erodes in the next five (5) years, we do
not have to put that orange netting and we can still use our path?
Mr. Haigh: It is another great idea, but our
environmental commitments, and this is due to the archaeological nature of the area,
this is working with the State Historic Preservation Division and Native Hawaiians
through the Section 106 process through Federal Highways program, there are a lot
of cultural deposits and potential burials in the area. We committed to minimal
excavations. In order to do something like that, we would have to go back and redo
some of our environmental work and get the approvals from the State Historic
Preservation Division, which is something we certainly do not want to do. For
example, we are waiting to just get approval of a sign. They came back to us in
October, we responded in November and we still did not get a response from them on
a simple sign. That is a challenge. It is a good concept and I hear exactly what you
COUNCIL MEETING 41 APRIL 21, 2021
are saying, especially for the boardwalk-type construction. That would be normal. In
the boardwalk, we have to look at what is the maximum depth of the foundation that
we can do. It is going to be driven by the cultural and archaeological issues, not by
the engineering issues.
Councilmember DeCosta: Thank you for answering that and I am sorry
for bring that forward. Sometimes common sense plays a bigger role than just the
engineering document. This is common sense construction mentality. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
Members before we call this meeting back to order?
The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion from the
Members? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Some of our earlier testifiers asked that
everyone go out and look at the area. I am hearing that Councilmembers DeCosta
and Evslin went. Did anyone else go out and give it a look? Did you go recently,
Councilmember Chock? And you too, Councilmember Kuali`i?
Councilmember Carvalho: I have been on it this whole time.
Councilmember Cowden: Have you gone recently?
Councilmember Carvalho: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: Have you gone?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I did not have a chance to get out there. I
know where they are talking about. I have been there before.
Councilmember Cowden: I know when I went there, I appreciated all of
the comments that people were making, but I thought that I would go and who would
want a big path in your front yard? I expected that. When I looked at it, to me, it
looks overwhelmingly like it is too vulnerable to put what is planned there. I think
that concrete pathway...the perpendicular pathway with the six- (6) foot wall, does
not make good sense at all, when I look at how much depth of water sits in one of
those parking lots. In high rain, it is quite deep there. I feel like it is not common
sense to support what is here. It is very difficult for me. I would like to be seeing
something where we could hold that land and not put that commitment to concrete,
it takes out every plant pretty much between those two (2) buildings. You are not
going to have all of that absorption that comes from having the roots, plants, et cetera.
COUNCIL MEETING 42 APRIL 21, 2021
Common sense says that this is a bad idea to put what they are suggesting there,
even though I want it to be there and I fully support the path. I do not support that
plan.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: In a perfect world, maybe we would have the
choice between the coastal path or on Aleka Loop with full analysis done for each with
perfect sea level rise modeling. Obviously, we do not have that choice. We are
choosing between a coastal path or waiting six (6) years for funding and maybe
nine (9) years for another Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), putting the future
of the path on hold. We do not have great sea level rise modeling for the area. Lots
of the alternative analyses have been done in the past already. Given that, we have
some imperfect options here. My opinion is that it is our responsibility to choose from
the best of the imperfect options, which in my mind is supporting this Resolution
today. For me, it is because I support lateral access along the coast, I strongly support
the bike path as a whole, I support the vision of a connected path between Kapa'a and
Lihu`e, and I know the vital importance of the path as a gathering space and a space
for community exercise. I do not want to put that on hold for six (6) plus years here.
That said, while I will be supporting the Resolution, I still hope that there can be
more work done looking at Aleka Loop at least as an alternative if and when this part
gets washed out. How can we then retreat and make this other area a viable option?
Maybe we could possibly have two (2) routes through there, one going above that goes
to the Coconut Marketplace and one along the coast. I will be supporting the
Resolution today. Lastly, I heard reassurance from Doug that there is nowhere else
along the entire proposed route that comes this close to the coastline. I just want to
urge that that be the case, that we are not stuck in this position again trying to
approve a Resolution of a path well within the shoreline erosion exposure area.
Thank you all.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Carvalho.
Councilmember Carvalho: This path is important to Kaua`i and the
example that it sets throughout the state and the world. Having been involved from
day one and understanding all the different issues we had to go through to ensure
that we are doing it the right way and to ensure that we could secure the
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant, we had to
ensure that we had the documentation and planning details in line. This is just the
next step. I understand both sides and I am having difficulty here and there. Overall,
to follow through and understand the need to continue this connection and with all
of the details and understanding what is the responsible or irresponsible thing to do,
the responsible thing to me is to complete it, knowing that there are adjustments that
have to be made along the way. We knew that sea level rise was going to be an issue,
but at the same time, we are a team. Everyone completed it with the right
COUNCIL MEETING 43 APRIL 21, 2021
information and the right documentation. For me, I will support this Resolution and
the continuation of the path knowing some of the challenges that we have. We knew
that from day one. I think we now have the opportunity to adjust, receive, and secure
additional support for funding, because we followed the right path to complete Ke Ala
Hele Makalae. Ke Ala Hele Makalae is the "path that goes along the coast." I want
to support this effort.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have any comments?
Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I primarily want to thank Council Vice Chair
Chock for all of his questions. They were my questions as well. I want to thank the
Administration for all of the information. I appreciate all of the time that we spent i
on this. We definitely got all of the information, not only from the Administration,
but from testifiers as well. I have the exact sentiments as Councilmember Evslin. I
think this is a tough decision, but we have to go with what is before us. I think
supporting it at this time is the right decision. I will support this Resolution.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: I have to concur with Councilmember Kuali`i.
This is a tough decision. Council Chair Kaneshiro, you forgot to tell everyone that I
did FaceTime you out there. He was out there with us. We all did what we had to do
to see that area. It is important that we do not just take it lightly, because there are
only a few residents in the Islander on the Beach and most of them are vacation
rentals or tourists. Most of our Kaua`i people enjoy walking and riding along the bike
path. Everyone is important. Every voter, non-voter, or resident of Kaua`i is
important. The big picture like Councilmember Carvalho said, we had a vision, we
set it in place, we are going to continue it, and we had much cries out to complete this
project. A lot of people enjoy this project and I personally enjoy it. The point I want
to make here is that when we decide to go with the concrete versus the truss, please
use your best judgment which would be the most cost-efficient for removal if we need
to remove it a little or to tweak it, as sea level rise comes into play. With that being
said, I am going to be supporting this Resolution. I am very sorry if there is a group
of residents from the Islander on the Beach that may not enjoy their lemonade out on
their front lawn because the bike path is going there. At the same time all of the
people on their bikes will be enjoying the beach and enjoying walking their dogs. A
lot of them have to go back to a rural area and they do not have beachfront property.
Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Council Vice Chair Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I want to thank my colleagues for indulging
me on the questions that I had today. I want to thank Doug Haigh, because I think
COUNCIL MEETING 44 APRIL 21, 2021
he was really able to clear up a lot of the information that I was trying to grasp over
the last week in looking at some of the issues that have been emerging. Ultimately,
the time sensitivity is one of the major factors that I think we need to consider. Just
like every Council decision, it is risk versus benefit. Oftentimes our decisions are not
easy and we always have to figure out if it leans in one direction or another.
Particularly, that is where I was today. I can tell you that I have had huge concerns
from the standpoint of us as a County being an example for our residents of what is
forthcoming. We are going to expect our residents to retreat. By us not being able to
model it is problematic. That is what has been heavy on my heart and head here in
making this decision. That being said, I am and have always been a huge advocate
of the bike path. I think everyone around the table has clearly voiced their support
for it. Based on the mauka-to-makai access request for this condemnation, I am
supportive. I think we need to take any opportunity we can in order to secure those.
The biggest piece for me has been the lateral piece with the concerns about sea level
rise that have emerged. I am pretty confident and I wish I was a little bit more
confident with some of what I have heard from the studies piece and I wish I had
more time for this. However, what has helped me through this is sort of the
recognition that there are some other options available to us. What I have received
in writing here from Doug is saying that the boardwalk could be an option. I think it
is a really good option. If I could put that into this Resolution, I probably would. I
will not, because I will tell you what it does not say in this Resolution...it does not
say "cement" in here. It says "pathway." I think that is also defining for me...it is
keeping that open and I need to trust and I will trust Doug and his team and everyone
else at the Department of Public Works to make the right determination when it
comes to where we are a little further down the road and what kind of construction
should be there. I am of the mind that it should be in something temporary like a
boardwalk that can be easily removed. The last piece was the condemnation process
and it holding us back in terms of the time that we have to act on this. I am hearing
that there may be more of a compromise occurring within this week. The fact that
the condemnation does not have any bearing on this and that our vote does here is
really telling for me. I would really recommend on behalf of the Islander on the Beach
residents, consider what their requests are for the permeable options. I think that
will go far in meeting people halfway. I also would agree that I like some of the
options that were put on the table today by my colleagues as far as keeping other
routes open, because I think...this is a multi-use path and we need to be able to figure
out multiple ways for people to travel not only by bike, but by walking. I think the
safety concerns raised by being open to multiple routes will be helpful to all of us.
With that being said, I will be supporting this Resolution.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Can I have Doug back on?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING 45 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Do you have a question?
Councilmember Cowden: It is relative to what Council Vice Chair
Chock just said. I do not feel at all that I heard any flexibility in the options. I felt
like I heard a firm "no" that we are doing concrete, we are doing a six (6) foot wall,
and we are going to put concrete on the beach (inaudible) feet wide. I heard there is
no flexibility. Am I right, Doug, or are you flexible? I felt that I heard "this way and
no way else."
Mr. Haigh: To talk about the easement between the
two (2)properties, we are right now looking at using pavers or pervious concrete. We
have designs for both. We are now reviewing the maintenance issues with those
two (2) options and we will be talking with the Islander on the Beach. They have
come back in their latest communication that they were okay with pervious concrete,
if you maintain it. That we are flexible with either way. We have the design either
way and we can plug in the final design to move forward. In front, we will be
proceeding with our final design and obligation of funds based on the concrete option.
But, we are going to be reviewing the alternative option of a boardwalk based on
further studies that the Planning Department is going to help us with. I do not see
any problem with making the change from the concrete to the boardwalk after
approval of the funds, before construction, and even during construction we could
always do a change order and make a modification. I am confident we will have a
decision made prior to us being ready to go out to bid. I already have our consultants
working on what a boardwalk structure would look like. Fortunately, with the way
the plan documents are set up, if they give us the details, it is very easy to change
the plans. You have a layout of the path and where there is concrete or a boardwalk,
the layout stays the same, it is just the details on what that path actually looks like.
Making that switch to the construction documents is not that difficult. We are
flexible.
The meeting was called back to order and proceeded as follows:
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you. I feel completely irresponsible to
say" yes" to this. I want to speak to the larger picture. When I walked with Tommy
Noyes from Kaua`i Path, we looked at the different hotels that are going in. There is
clearly openings for two (2) more hotels to go in. As we see shopping centers go in...we
looked at the canal between what is now called the ISO, right next to Bull Shed, it is
sand. We are not taking care of our watershed well. I know that I will not win, and
I know that will lose a lot of happiness with people who really want this to happen,
but I feel pretty confident that we are going to ruin the beachfront right there,
particularly where the lateral path is going to be turned into a hardened surface. If
someone was doing this right in front of my house, I would feel very awful that it was
going to erode away that piece of the beach. I watch that happening everywhere. I
COUNCIL MEETING 46 APRIL 21, 2021
do not have faith that the study that was done in 2012 was accurate and it missed at
least three (3) places that we are talking about, that there is erosion. I know that we
are working on a holistic watershed plan that hopefully will help fix this. As we have
all these trees coming down Wailua River and washing up against the shoreline, I am
not comfortable with it. I really want to be unanimous on this, but I really cannot
vote to be unanimous on this. I want the path to continue, but I need greater
flexibility than I heard. I need quite a bit more. I did not hear about a boardwalk
down that little pathway. That might help that water from shedding in a difficult
way. I did not hear that option. I am really uncomfortable and I wish I was
comfortable. You hear the pain in my voice because I am fully supportive of the path.
Tim Bynum, Bryan J. Baptiste, Bernard P. Carvalho, Jr., JoAnn A. Yukimura, and I
think even Maryanne Kusaka was a part of this. I have been a part of this
throughout, providing light support. I cannot go along with this.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Carvalho.
Councilmember Carvalho: I just wanted to mention one more thing that
is really important to me. Mahalo to all of the people who volunteered their time.
The sweat equity that was placed into this entire project, I cannot tell you how many
hours were invested. A big mahalo to all of the people who volunteered their time
and effort to help support and who continue to support this entire path. We will make
adjustments along the way as we continue to move forward. Thank you for that.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to say one more quick thing.
When Councilmember DeCosta talked about people who live away from the coast
having the ability to utilize the path to enjoy the coast, I think that is really
important. The majority of our residents do not live on the coast. I know for myself
personally, my friends, neighbors, and family, the ability to get on the path and enjoy
that has been really important. The sea breezes and the ocean brings up a healing
and calming energy that is important for us to continue with this access. In regards
to the example of retreat with facilities and structures having to retreat, the ability
to get on the path and access the coast becomes even more important. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: I said a lot earlier, but I would like to sum up
my thoughts. This is why we become Councilmembers. We run for a vision for certain
issues on our beautiful island. People elect us because they believe we are going to
make the right decision. Today, there are two (2) types of decisions that will possibly
benefit two (2) different groups of people. We have to be okay with what we do. I am
okay with supporting this Resolution. I need to provide a little bit of experience to
this erosion process. I have lived on the west side for my entire life. A lot of you
know, when going out to Waimea, Kekaha, or Polihale, there has been a lot of erosion
COUNCIL MEETING 47 APRIL 21, 2021
rip e
on the beach. State Highways back in the 1970s installed a large p ra p wall
to ensure that we would not lose our highway. If you look at it now, we have some
beach sand that came back. I know we depend a lot on our geologists and our studies,
but we do not really know what Mother Nature holds for the future. This placement
of concrete on top of sand will not ruin the beach or erode the beach. It will not ruin
the beach, again, if you lay concrete on top of sand. If anything, the ocean waves will
undermine that concrete and we may have to remove the concrete or remove the truss
depending on what Doug and his group recommends, to do the right thing, like
Council Vice Chair Chock ensured. With that being said, please go out to the west
side to look at what happened over the last sixty (60) to seventy (70) years. Beaches
come and go, they installed the rip rap wall, and there are ways to ensure that we
can stop the erosion. I will be supporting this Resolution. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else with final discussion? If
not, I guess I am the last to comment. I am in support of this Resolution. One of the
biggest issues during my time on this Council and what we hear from the public is
about maintaining and perpetuating access to the ocean, access along the coast, and
mauka-to-makai access. For me, that overrides any decision. We hear all of these
concerns about birds and safety, but ultimately, our residents and the public deserve
to have a nice, improved way to get to the ocean in that area. That is why I am in
favor of the Resolution. In this case, I heard about cost being a big factor. We are
actually getting federal funds to do a lot of these improvements. Granted, the public
can go to the area now, but it will be improved even better. That is good for the
residents. I heard about concrete-hardened surfaces and
I think Councilmember
DeCosta addressed that already. A concrete-hardened surface does not cause erosion.
Climate change, sea level rise, and changing tides cause erosion. It just so happens
that your concrete is there and it will get affected. Those factors that we have no
control over are what is going to cause sand to erode from the beach or to refill the
beach. We really have no control over that. I am just looking at the bigger picture.
No matter where weg o around the island, we always hear the resounding noise from
the P ublic that theywant to preserve our coastal access and our mauka-to-makai
access. In this case, this is going to be an improvement and something that the public
will enjoy for years to come. Will erosion happen? It probably will, but I am willing
to say that I am in favor of voting for this now and giving our residents the
opportunity to enjoy that coastline. We need to finish that little section and actually
have a wider and improved mauka-to-makai access. That is where my vote is. I have
heard all of the concerns. There is no way to satisfy everyone. The overall picture
for me is to give all of the residents and everyone the opportunity to get to the coast.
Is there any final discussion? If not, we will take a roll call vote.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-13 on second and final reading,
and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Carvalho, Chock, DeCosta,
Evslin, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Cowden TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 APRIL 21, 2021
JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Six (6) ayes, one (1) no.
The motion passes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Next item.
Resolution No. 2021-18 — RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MAYORAL
APPOINTMENT TO THE LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION (Lorna A.
Nishimitsu)
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-18,
seconded by Councilmember Carvalho.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone have any questions or is there
any discussion? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I want to start by acknowledging the gift that
comes from the people who volunteer. I appreciate all of them. I will be supporting
Lorna. She is a very bright and brilliant woman. I am wanting to speak for a moment
because it was not lost on me that she did not volunteer, but was selected. She worked
with the Boards and Commissions Administrator's husband for decades. I struggle
with these types of relationships that get built. This is an industry in distress and
that is due to State and County COVID-19 response policies. On that very important
Commission, as long as I have gone to those meetings...they have really incredible
people on there. What I have not seen to my knowledge is someone who works in that
industry. I think that we need to be having people who worked in the industry. They
spend one percent (1%) of their gross sales. These restaurants and bars are lucky to
net five percent (5%) at the end of the year. I think what we need, is that I want to
be looking at a Charter Amendment to allow a transparent application process. That
is what we need. I want to know that people want the job and that they have a
background in it, and when they come to the table, they are going to be bringing
knowledge from different parts of the industry and different parts of the island. They
will be coming together to be able to assist what is happening. When I go to the
Liquor Control Commission meetings, it is mostly about the amount of the fine that
they are getting. There is no strategizing about how to help the industry. Thank you,
Lorna, if she is listening, for being willing to spend your time. I do not think it will
be too stressful. I appreciate your willingness to serve and for your brilliance and
ability to do the job. I think we need to be looking at having people want the job and
having it open to other people. We should not be hand-selecting people from a small
pool of people.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have any discussion?
Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: I am a little confused with your statement,
Councilmember Cowden. I believe Lorna had the ability to defer or reject her
appointment, did she not?
COUNCIL MEETING 49 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden: Yes, sure.
Councilmember DeCosta: Apparently, she wants to be there.
Councilmember Cowden: Do you want my clarification? I know on
different commissions, there are people who apply and would like to be on different
boards and commissions. In the future, I would like to see a way that we change the
system so that there are people who have background, knowledge, and an eagerness
to serve who are the ones serving, rather than the ones who selflessly will say that
they are willing. I would like them to be wanting. There is a difference between
willing and wanting.
Councilmember DeCosta: With that being said, I know that the Mayor
appoints them and we elect our Mayor for a reason. We believe in them when they
run for Mayor to elect them. As Council Vice Chair Chock recently stated about
believing in the Planning Department and Doug that they will make the right
decision for the bike path, we have to be able to believe in who we select as Mayor to
make the right decision in his or her appointees. I did some research on Lorna and
we talked about it the last time. She is a very well-qualified candidate. I personally
like her and know her. She is a great Kaua`i resident who grew up in our system.
She is a local girl who came up through our public school system. Her
accomplishments are impeccable, and I am honored to have her serve. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have any comments? If not,
roll call vote.
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-18 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Carvalho, Chock, Cowden,
DeCosta, Evslin, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
Resolution No. 2021-19 — RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MAYORAL
APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Gerald T. Ako—Labor)
Councilmember Carvalho moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-19,
seconded by Councilmember Kuali`i.
COUNCIL MEETING 50 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone have any questions or
discussion? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Similarly, the Planning Commission is a
really challenging job. I invite all of you to watch the video from the last Planning
Commission meeting. I ask you to look at the video at the one hour and
forty-three minute mark. You will see the critically important questions that these
people face. I am going to support this very capable and quality person. He did not
reach out to have this job, and I hope that he was able to see it. I have gone to the
Planning Commission meetings for years. For years, very rarely do the people
appointed to these positions attend previous meetings. Right now, our community is
in a crisis. Properties are flying away. This person is going to be stepping in to a
very difficult choice that ended in a 3:3 vote. We had former Attorney General
Marjorie Bronster against recent County Attorney Mauna Kea Trask, basically
putting the Commission of asking for a contested case intervenor status for a very
wealthy neighbor to stop a two thousand (2,000) square-foot home to be built. These
are the kind of items that are going before our Planning Commission. It is powerful
in what it means. At the end of it, there is a time where our former County Attorney
asked to have one last round and when the vote came out 3:3, he with the authority
of the County Attorney that he was, basically told that Commission that he won. He
determined the outcome for them. We had a Deputy County Attorney who was
staffing the Commission meeting who stood her ground, and it is coming back again
on their agenda. What happens with things like that is powerful. It takes away the
ability of our own Planning Commission and Planning Department to do their jobs.
I implore all of you to watch it. This is critical as to what is going on our island. We
have very wealthy people come in and we are asking so much of these people doing
the work. We have a responsibility as a check and balance on these appointments,
and we have the responsibility for their budget. When we have these things going to
contested case hearings, it costs a lot of money. We have people who are parties to
this paying one million four hundred thousand dollars ($1,400,000) as a small
restaurant trying to get parking. It is crazy. The party with the deepest pockets
often wins. We exhaust the financial capacity of our people and we really need to
take a deep look at...Kaua`i is the only County that has our Planning Department
Director be chosen by the Planning Commission. The person who chooses those
Planning Commissioners to guide them, when that person is married to someone very
key, the Mayor cannot even undo that. We are different than the other counties. It
gives just an extraordinary amount of power in the wrong direction. We have a
problem and we need to take a look at this. It is not about a very qualified or amazing
individual. It is the fact that we have these people express to us during their
interviews about what they like to eat, where they would like to go on vacation, or
how they like to shop. We need to take this seriously and ask them real questions.
We need to have people who are aware and support them so they know what they are
getting into. I think we need more staff in the Office of Boards & Commissions and I
think we really have a challenge there. You can hear that I am upset. If I do not ever
speak up, then I do not ever speak up. We are not supposed to be a rubberstamp. We
have a problem happening and we are losing our land for our local people because of
it. Whoever has the most money wins at Planning. I hope that there is more training.
I went to that last Planning Commission meeting, and I had gone to every single place
that was on the agenda. Every single agenda item was very significant, and I do not
COUNCIL MEETING 51 APRIL 21, 2021
think anyone in that room had gone to look. What is on paper is not the same thing
as what is reality. Councilmember DeCosta, you talked about common sense or a
regular person. We are not having a government that serves the regular person
anymore. It is really important to me that we think about that. I am using this
opportunity to state that distress that I have. I have brought it up many times. It is
consistently ignored. I am finally saying it on camera. Yes, I support this individual.
I do not want to put his name with the tone in my voice. I think he is a great guy. I
do not think we have a great system and we need to improve.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Does anyone else have any discussion? If not,
roll call vote.
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-19 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Carvalho, Chock, Cowden,
DeCosta, Evslin, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL—0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next item.
Resolution No. 2021-20 — RESOLUTION SUPPORTING DIGITAL EQUITY
AND URGING DEVELOPMENT OF BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE TO
BOLSTER COVID-19 RECOVERY AND FOSTER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Councilmember Kuali`i moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-20,
seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We received written testimony.
Councilmember Evslin, did you want to lead us into this item? I know you have some
resources available. We will let you take it from there. If they have a presentation,
we can take that, then we will hold our questions until that is completed.
Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: Councilmember DeCosta and I can give a
brief introduction to the Resolution. We have two (2) resource persons here, Burt
Lum and Ken Hughes. Burt Lum is from Hawai`i Visitors and Convention Bureau
(HCVB), and he may have had to leave. Ken Hughes may also have to leave soon. I
am going to try and keep my introduction comments brief. If you have specific
questions on the Broadband Hui or the declaration, those can be addressed to either
COUNCIL MEETING 52 APRIL 21, 2021
us or Ken Hughes. The Resolution is straightforward. It recognizes that there are
vast inequities in access to the internet. These inequities were exacerbated during
the COVID-19 pandemic, preventing residents from accessing employment,
education, healthcare, civic engagement, emergency preparedness, and other critical
services. There are many facets to the issue. One of the main drivers of inequitable
access is that a lot of the companies providing broadband services are for-profit
companies. Infrastructure is expensive so they are investing in infrastructure in
population centers. Rural areas like the outer islands, especially the rural parts of
the outer islands, are then not getting the broadband infrastructure that they need,
because the companies cannot pay off their investment. Honolulu has great access to
the internet, while the outer islands do not. There are other facets to the problem
including: low-income communities that do not have computers or any internet access
and the state suffers from aging fiberoptic cables to the mainland and interisland. In
response to these issues and others, the State developed the Hawai`i Broadband
Strategic Plan, which has four (4) primary goals: 1) Ensure robust broadband
infrastructure to all Hawai`i residents; 2) Expand digital inclusion in adoption to
achieve digital equity; 3) Enable Hawai`i to thrive through a digital economy; and 4)
Strengthen community resilience through broadband. The Digital Equity
Declaration, which this Resolution would sign us on to, sets the foundation for
ensuring that equity, affordability, and accessibility remain at the forefront of our
move towards expanding broadband. The Declaration is built on three (3) pillars of
digital equity: 1) Affordable quality broadband for all; 2) A baseline of digital
competence for all; and 3) Societal systems effectively leveraging digital opportunities
to improve lives. I will try and wrap this up really quickly. I think one of the primary
threads through both the strategic plan and the Digital Equity Declaration is that
the private sector alone cannot solve these problems. We need public-private
cooperation. For example, if it is not profitable to install hardware in rural areas,
that hardware will not be installed without some type of public subsidy. As I see it,
the purpose of these two (2) documents is to recognize the importance of broadband
internet and to recognize that public subsidies are critical to ensuring equitable
distribution. Most or a lot of this is targeted towards the State and how we are going
to best utilize federal moneys coming to us in ensuring greater resiliency. There are
some County-targeted items, especially in the Digital Equity Declaration. There are
things including: ensuring that all public buildings are offering free WiFi twenty-four
hours/seven days a week (24/7), ensuring that we have the ability to receive online
testimony, even post-COVID-19, ensuring there is a single online portal for online
government services, et cetera. There are things in this that I think the County could
take out of this more than just supporting the State in moving forward. I will pass
this on to Councilmember DeCosta. We also have Burt online and he will be a great
resource.
Councilmember DeCosta: I just want to echo what Councilmember
Evslin said. In our rural areas, there is no financial incentive for private companies
to invest in them. You all know many people who live on Kauai in rural areas where
COUNCIL MEETING 53 APRIL 21, 2021
the internet service is really weak or poor. You still pay the same price as everyone
else. Let us not forget when our undersea cable was severed and we had a blackout
on Kauai. Our infrastructure is almost at its lifespan. I believe within the next
two (2) or three (3) years, that will have to be replaced. Hawai`i is not the hub like it
used to be. Now they are running underwater sea cables from the west coast all the
way to Japan. We do not want to be left behind. This Broadband Strategic Plan will
improve robust infrastructure, digital equity, and digital economy. It will strengthen
the resilience of everyone. Remember, our children now are studying abroad. They
can go to college on the East Coast right out of their own living room. They can wake
up at 4:00 a.m. and make a 9:00 a.m. class. It is frustrating when that student in a
rural area gets cut off in his or her class at 10:00 a.m. at Yale University because they
are studying at home on their laptop because of the internet service. Let us remember
this Strategic Plan. With that, I will turn it over to Burt.
Councilmember Evslin: Burt or Ken, if you would not mind giving a
quick overview of the Boardbard Hui and the rationale for developing the Digital
Equity Declaration, then we can open it up after that for questions from the
Councilmembers.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
BURT LUM (via remote technology): We would be happy to. Aloha, Council
Chair Kaneshiro and Councilmembers. I am the Strategy Officer for Broadband here
at the State of Hawai`i. Councilmember Evslin asked me to provide some background
on what we have been doing in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. When I first took
this job back in 2018, it was really focused on how to make sure we stay connected to
the global internet and looking at key infrastructure. That is how I met Ken. I came
over and was doing a presentation on Kaua`i. In March of 2020, when the world was
sequestered at home, what we did was we called together some of the stakeholders.
In the early days of the pandemic, we were looking at what the carriers were
providing that will help to enable the students in education, that were now
sequestered at home, to access distance learning. At the beginning, they were not
really consistent with what it is that they were offering. We wanted to get everyone
on the call, including those from the Department of Education (DOE), Hawai`i
Association of Independent Schools (HAIS), the private schools, as well as the
University of Hawai`i and other colleges, to hear that information directly from the
carriers. That helped put the carriers on the spot to explain how they are
participating in at the time it was called the Keep Americans Connected (KAC)
program under the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). We continued to
commit to meeting every week. I have the meetings every Wednesday, and this
Wednesday, the meeting took place at 9:00 a.m. It is our fifty-sixth (56th) consecutive
week of meeting. We have expanded the discussion to include the wireless carriers,
as well as nonprofits, stakeholders, legislators, councilmembers, and we even have
Congressional representation. We are all basically on the call trying to understand
COUNCIL MEETING 54 APRIL 21, 2021
what are some of the gaps that exist in our communities and how can we bring
together the right resources to help address those gaps. Believe me, over the course
of the fifty-six (56) weeks...you have to remember that back in 2020, we were under
a different administration. We were following closely what President Trump was
doing. At the end of 2020, there was the Consolidated Appropriations Act and before
that it was the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES)Act. We had
to make sure we could address the existing gaps given some of the funding that was
becoming available. You fast-forward to 2021, and now you have the American
Rescue Plan (ARP). There is a recognition by the Federal government that more
funding is going to become available and realizing that the State itself is cash
strapped, we cannot depend on the State to put money in towards infrastructure to
digital equity programs. There is a recognized value in what the Federal government
can make available. As the Broadband Hui continues to meet and discuss, and of
course, all of the counties are invited to join us, we are on a constant weekly quest to
address what are some of the issues and resources, and how can we bring the two (2)
together to achieve these goals that we have set. Part of the guiding principles that
Councilmember Evslin has talked about were set towards the end of summer of last
year, the Hui got together and talked about what we were going to do as our guiding
light. That is what really prompted the creation of the Digital Equity Declaration.
We came together and formed subgroups, we identified some of the key goals, and
that is what you see in the declaration. During the process, we also had legislators
on the call and they agreed that this is really important. What they have
consequently done is, they have passed several Senate and House Resolutions
recognizing the digital equity integration, the week of October 4th through 8th to be
Digital Inclusion Week, and in another bill heard this past week, was to work with
the Executive Office on Aging to ensure that we do not forget about the kupuna in
terms of literacy access as well as the access to hardware. Our goal here is to help
marketize technology. How do we get it as far and wide as possible for people to take
advantage of for their education, health, and work, but also, how do they now
participate and hopefully excel in the digital economy? That is going to be the key to
Hawai`i's survival going into the 21st century. How do we leverage our connectivity
to the rest of the world? As everyone knows, we are in the middle of the Pacific Ocean,
and we cannot depend on any of our neighbors. We have to do it ourselves. That is
what we have done with the Hui and with some of the documents, whether it is the
Declaration or the strategic plan, and getting others, like yourselves, onboard with
what it is that we are trying to do. It is basically creating a unified movement to
make sure that Hawai`i is a very active and successful participant in this digital
economy. That is what I wanted to share with you all. I am available for any
questions you might have. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
COUNCIL MEETING 55 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Evslin: I just need to apologize to Burt. I think I said
you were from HVCB, but you are actually from the Department of Business,
Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT), right?
Mr. Lum: Correct.
Councilmember Evslin: My apologies for that.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you. As a former teacher, I definitely
experienced one year where I had a big plan using Khan Academy to support it, that
over half my students did not have internet when they went home. Many of them
were actually trying to use their parents' cell phones when they were somewhere to
do any of the online work. I want to recognize that there is a serious challenge. I
have been a proponent of the houseless encampments. Pretty much all of them are
in locations, except for Waimea, where the access to internet was very limited. There
is so much of this that I really support. When I look on page 3, the six (6) items that
are the area of focus, I only struggle with one of them. If it is okay with you, I want
to say thank you. I know you do not have a lot of time, at least that is what I have
been told. I was the one really asking. Number 3 says, "Wireless broadband
deployment, including 5G small cells." Can you tell us what those 5G small cells will
be and where they will be?
Mr. Lum: We try to be technology-neutral. We
recognize that 5G is the next generation of wireless technology. We definitely support
the wireless industry's evolution from 3G to 4G to 5G. We are not necessarily
advocating that communities embrace that regardless of any of the local interest. We
try to be, again, neutral with the technology. What we do want to enable is all of the
communities to be able to access the benefits, whether it is broadband, the access to
the internet, or the application and services. One of the things that we have tried to
do is, and you mentioned homeless communities...two (2) of the really shining
examples of what we were able to do included connectivity at Pu'uhonua 0
Waimanalo, which is Bumpy Kanahele's group. We were able to do that with strong
participation by the Internet Society. We were able to get them set up with WiFi
access. We are also in the process, and we received funding, to help connect
Pu'uhonua 0 Waianae. This was also through funding provided by the Internet
Society as well as from the Weinberg Foundation. The goal of that project is to
connect the community with fiber, but also distributing WiFi inside the community
so that they can have WiFi accesspoints and the ability to connect their laptops to the
network. We are neutral to the actual wireless technology. I want to point out that
whether you are talking about WiFi, 4G, or even 5G, the wireless frequencies that
are being used are consistent across those technologies. To call out 5G is probably
not fair in terms of...the frequency is currently being used in 4G as well as in WiFi.
5G is just the protocol. The protocol uses a variety of different frequencies. That is
COUNCIL MEETING 56 APRIL 21, 2021
what is enabling the faster speeds with technologies like 5G. I want to make sure
that when people start to get fearful of wireless technologies, the wireless
technologies are already there and are already being used. I think they are being
used quite successfully in distributing connectivity into our communities. I just
wanted to say that.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I have a follow-up question from
Councilmember Evslin, then we will go back to Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Evslin: I just wanted to quickly clarify that the area
in the Broadband Strategic Plan that Councilmember Cowden was referencing, it
references wireless technology only as part of the continuum of broadband. I think
the fact that we all use our phones to access the internet, it is clear that is part of the
continuum there. I am just clarifying that that is how it is referenced in the Plan.
Councilmember Cowden: Yes. Burt, thank you. Since before I was
elected...there are a lot of people who are concerned about 5G. I understand that it
is a protocol. They tend to have a different type of distribution system, that is my
understanding. They are smaller cells and a shorter wavelength. I am hearing you
say that if we agree with this, it is not committing to 5G, is that correct? Can you
speak to the people who are afraid of 5G to let them know the difference of what this
is? It is the internet of things. It is not just a step up from 4G. This involves the
internet of things. Can you speak to that for a moment?
Mr. Lum: Sure. The Resolution is not obligating the
County to deploy 5G. That is not the intent. To your question about 5G and the
technology that it uses...just like when you have...forgive me for being technical, but
when you talk about radio frequencies (RF), the higher frequency also corresponds to
a smaller wavelength. That wavelength is affected by objects, whether it is leaves
houses or other potential physical obstructions, those wavelengths will have their
paths broken by those objects. In the case of the 5G small cells, where 4G can traverse
longer spans of distance, 5G, because of its small wavelength, will need to be more
frequently, in terms of the small cells, be placed so that there are...the chances of
running into obstructions over a longer distance is minimized. It is just like your in-
house WiFi. Your in-house WiFi has a frequency that it uses that could be obstructed.
With 5G and using frequencies in the gigahertz range, there is a potential for
obstruction. That is why there is a need for more of them and that is why it refers to
the small cells. I hope that made sense.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. Yes, that did make sense. I have been
following this pretty closely because there is a deeply concerned community. They
have not really had the opportunity to weigh in, that I saw. Are you familiar with
Starlink?
COUNCIL MEETING 57 APRIL 21, 2021
Mr. Lum: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: Is Starlink part of the Keep Americans
Connected group?
Mr. Lum: Starlink recently was awarded something by
the FCC called the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF). RDOF was an auction
over various telecom broadband providers to service an area. In Hawai`i, the two (2)
companies that got RDOF auctions was Hawaiian Telcom as well as Starlink.
Starlink is the low-orbit Earth satellite project that is spearheaded by SpaceX and of
course, you all know Elon Musk. Starlink is part of SpaceX. They are launching
satellites that will orbit the Earth and provide wireless internet connectivity. The
reason I bring it up in terms of RDOF, is that they won the contract or the auction
for delivering internet to Ni`ihau. That will be received directly in your backyard and
in your County.
Councilmember Cowden: That is an area where people have concerns.
I believe they are planning to have maybe one thousand six hundred (1,600) satellites
up in orbit by the end of 2021. Is an agreement with this document here in any way
giving a green light to...I think it is going to happen regardless, correct?
Mr. Lum: The signing of this Resolution does not have
any part in the Starlink, RDOF, FCC agreement that has already been signed with
the Federal government.
Councilmember Cowden: I think Starlink's goal is...were they approved
for forty-two thousand (42,000) satellites? Is that correct? They had twelve
thousand (12,000) approved and they are almost finished with another thirty
thousand (30,000). They are going to be up everywhere, correct?
Mr. Lum: They are in the process of deployment,
correct. They have announced preliminarily that they will be in service by the end of
the year.
Councilmember Cowden: We hear from people who deeply fear this like
a dystopian story. You are never going to get away from it. I know that the military
has the surface of the Earth mapped in real-time. There are low-level satellites all
around the planet right now. This is just essentially doing this for the private-sector.
The military knows where we are at any time. I have gone to those meetings and had
those presentations. Starlink is independent of this paper, but this has to be
connected somehow, correct? It is part of the funding that is coming out of the Federal
government right now.
COUNCIL MEETING 58 APRIL 21, 2021
Mr. Lum: Councilmember Evslin? I do not see the
connection between Starlink and the Department of Defense.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I have two (2) quick responses. I hope we do
not get too sidetracked with conversations about 5G. It is clearly technology-agnostic
in this Resolution. I just wanted to point out on page 20 of the Broadband Strategic
Plan, which might help reassure Councilmember Cowden a little bit, it says
"submarine fiber is currently and for the foreseeable future, the only practical
technology to enable reliable, high-speed broadband access to broadband subscribers
to all islands." At least for me, that is not saying that it is lifting up satellite
technology over other technologies. It would also reassure Councilmember
Cowden...I would like to clarify that the World Health Organization (WHO) has a big
section on their website about 5G. It says, "To-date and after much research
performed, no adverse health effect has been causably linked with exposure to
wireless technologies. As the frequency increases, there is less penetration into the
body tissues and absorption of the energy becomes more confined to the surface of the
body, provided that the overall exposure remains below international guidelines, no
consequences for public health are anticipated." Again, I do not want to go too far
down that road. I think it is important to clarify. Someone watching could get the
wrong impression here.
Councilmember Cowden: I am going to follow that...it has not been
causably linked because it has never been tested. It is not possible to test it and it
has never been tested. When they said that it has not been proven or linked to a
problem, that just simply means that it has not been tested. If it has been tested,
they say, "It is tested and these are the results." It has simply not been tested. That
is the kind of thing that upsets the trust. I will raise it back beyond 5G now. It is a
little alarming to get six (6) days notice and to have to vote on this today. I know the
people who are passionate about this topic, they picket in front of our building, it feels
like every other week, and are called "For Our Rights." People call them the
"Anti-Maskers." It is not about the mask. It is about 5G. I feel like when we are
doing something like this, it would be good if we had had outreach where these people
have a chance to be able to hear about it, digest it...I really love the part that says
that this is going to help everyone. I really want a new cable, for sure. When we are
up in these places that are in the far reaches of the valleys, I do not know how we get
that cable up there. It is not very cost effective to put a tower up there. When I
looked at Starlink's website, they use very similar words. When I look at the Starlink
discussion, they use very similar words to helping the indigenous people. I am very
much someone who cares deeply about those who live closest to the earth, and I pay
close attention to it. It is a challenge. I like the warm and fuzzies of all of this. Where
do we find Keep Americans Connected? If people want to watch some of the recorded
Wednesday meetings, is there a website?
COUNCIL MEETING 59 APRIL 21, 2021
Mr. Lum: Thep rimary website that I have is
www.broadband.hawaii.gov. I try to post some of the links to the videos of the
meetings. If people wanted to see a specific week, they can just E-mail me and I can
share the videos.
Councilmember Cowden: Can people join? Can they become a part of
the group or is it by invitation only?
Mr. Lum: The Broadband Hui is open. We try to
encourage constructive discussion about how do we move forward with identifying
the gaps and finding resources to address those gaps.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you. That is what is important to me.
I do not want to always be the conduit between the distressed and the policy. I want
people who are concerned to be able to watch and learn in a way that is comfortable
for them. I was very surprised by this and only had six (6) days. I wish that we had
another meeting before we were to confirm this so that anyone who did want to talk,
they would feel like the door was open to them and they would be able to listen. I
read it and I liked everything it said. The only thing I was picking on was on page 3,
item 3. I just wanted to make sure that we were able to talk about that.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: This item was posted like any other item we
post.
Councilmember Cowden: Yes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions from the
Members on this Resolution?
Councilmember Evslin: I think Ken might have wanted to say
something. You are on mute, Ken. I have had the same thing happen to me many
times on Council Meeting days. Before we lose Ken and Burt here, I just want to
thank you for staying on all day and being here to answer all the questions. I really
appreciate it. This Resolution was brought to us by Ken after every other island had
passed it. I really appreciate that, Ken.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
Members? If not, is there any final discussion from the Members?
There beingno objections, the meetingwas called back to order and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 60 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Chock: I just wanted to thank the introducers and
those on the call. It is really a timely discussion. The digital equity divide is really
prevalent everywhere. We need to do what we can. This is sort of one of those risk
versus benefit topics. I am thankful to Councilmember Cowden for bringing up some
of the concerns as well. What I am really looking forward to is how the private sector
embraces this. They play such a big role in being able to provide this. When I first
looked at this, one of the first things that jumped out was the study that you all did
and how it is that we are integrating the public-private partnership. Without it, we
will continue to suffer. We are in the middle of the ocean, so we need to do everything
that we can to ensure that the connectivity is accessible to everyone. Thank you so
much.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Kuali`i.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I also wanted to thank the introducers. I
think this is a very important Resolution and I think it is really important that we
all put some time and resources behind broadband connectivity, especially when it
comes to digital equity. When you look at the map you will see...even on Hawaiian
Homesteads land in Anahola, it is darker shaded so it has less connectivity. I just
want to tell you too, that it is National County Government Month, and you should
go to the National Association of Counties (NACo) website, www.naco.org, and you
will find many resources about broadband there as well. They started a tested
application back in 2019. It is not only important that you have connectivity, but
what level of connectivity you have, how fast is it and is it good enough at a minimal
level so that you can do what you need to do? NACo has a Broadband Task Force
that they just started last October. Last month in our Legislative Conference, we
heard from the FCC Acting Chairwoman, Jessica Rosenworcel, and she told us about
the Emergency Broadband Benefit and the three billion two hundred million
dollars ($3,200,000,000.00) Congress directed to the FCC to establish this program.
It is a new program that could bring fifty dollars ($50) a month for internet service to
low-income households and up to seventy dollars ($70) a month for low-income
households on tribal lands. I know that the tribal lands issue also includes Hawaiian
homestead lands. As long as you qualified for the Lifeline Support for Affordable
Communications program in the past, you received free or reduced-priced lunches in
the past, have had a Federal Pell Grant, or had a substantial loss of income since
February of 2020, you could qualify. The annual income eligibility levels are ninety-
nine thousand dollars ($99,000) for single and one hundred ninety-eight thousand
dollars ($198,000) for married filing jointly. This is actual money in your pocket to
help with this. If you did not know about the Lifeline support benefit, which has been
in place for a very long time...since 2005...they updated it in 2016 to include
broadband connectivity. That could be up to nine dollars and twenty-five
cents ($9.25) per month discounted off of your bill. More information can be found at
COUNCIL MEETING 61 APRIL 21, 2021
www.lifelinesupport.org. I fully support this Resolution and we need to do as much
as we can.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Carvalho.
Councilmember Carvalho: Mahalo to the introducers of the Resolution.
This is a very important area of discussion. I like the details and the layout of the
Resolution and the added information. I really like that it involves everyone from
keiki to kupuna, as we really have to include that entire spectrum. When I heard
about the elders part of it, they need a lot of support there, too. That is the part that
really got to me. Thank you for the Resolution. I look forward to more discussion.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Our remote work time during the
stay-at-home orders through COVID-19 has really exemplified how valuable remote
work can be. We are seeing many people both moving here and bringing more types
of funding into the economy. It is not opening up a new industry. They are bringing
their industries with them. What my hope is that we can learn for our young people,
whether they go to college or work on the ground in the continental United States,
that they can pretty quickly come home and work remotely with solid employment
that helps them compete at a national level. I think there is so much value that is
possible. I have been jumping up and down wanting a new high-speed cable over
here. We do all of our remote meetings. There is a high demand. We here on Kaua`i
clearly need to upgrade our technology. I am behind that. I am behind really all of
it. I will support this. I am kindly asking that if there is not a deadline on this...like
the last Resolution we had a deadline...I would like to have had two (2) weeks on the
Resolution regarding the bike path near the beach...if we could just wait two (2)
weeks so that people, when they read about this in the newspaper or when they hear
about this, that they will feel that they had a time to be included and to learn. I think
when people are shocked with something, then they lose trust in government. I know
that was not the intention of any of this. This was so beautifully written. I am
grateful for all of the people who are a part of our Keep Americans Connected group
and the opportunities that this brings to the future. I do support this. I will vote for
it regardless, but I am respectfully asking my colleagues to consider including the
population in being able to know about it. I would like many people to be excited
about it, instead of just finding out that it happened and it was over. My role
seemingly in this community is that I usually hear from the people who are the least
happy. I know that Council Vice Chair Chock and I have spoken to the same groups
of people since before I took office, that this might feel unsettling to. I would like to
have that opportunity to be able to share it with people so that they are not unsettled
and they feel happy. That is my position. That is my request, if you could consider
that. Thank you both, Burt and Ken. Ken, I would like to talk to you later about this
as I know you will be a beautiful resource on-island. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 62 APRIL 21, 2021
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I am ready to vote on this now. We posted it
properly and we followed the process that every other resolution goes through. I
understand that maybe it did not reach as many people you feel it should have
reached. I am ready to vote on the Resolution right now. When looking at the
Resolution, if we put if off another two (2) weeks, I do not think any of the contents
of the Resolution would actually change, including any type of amendment to the
wording or the exhibit. Nothing in the Resolution will change and we can always get
the information out to everyone. This can be shared with anyone at any time. That
is just my opinion. Councilmember Kuali`i, then Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Kuali`i: I just wanted to add that when
Councilmember Evslin talked about public buildings offering free WiFi, during
COVID-19, it became more apparent how important that was. I believe that the
County is working towards that end. I think it would be good to know how we are
proceeding with that in terms of whether our neighborhood centers are equipped with
free WiFi. I assume that the State libraries have been. I will add that maybe there
is a way to incentivize and encourage other public types of buildings to do the same.
I know our homestead facilities at our marketplace and our open-air pavilion cafe in
Anahola has free WiFi for the public as well. That is important. I am happy to
support Councilmember Cowden's request. I do not know if there is any kind of
urgency from the introducers. It would just give us another opportunity to provide
more information and perhaps to hear from some of the people she is afraid that have
not had the chance to comment. I know it is unusual.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: Thank you for all of the discussion today.
Thank you again to Burt and Ken for being here. My hope is that we can pass this
today. I do not think there is anything huge or hidden in here in that it really clearly
supports that as we make this transition, to make sure that we are not leaving people
behind and that we are prioritizing equity, affordability, and accessibility in
broadband deployment. If there are people who are opposed to those things, I would
be happy to meet with them afterwards. I was not aware that there were groups
opposed to that. Most people that I see understand the importance of that. I would
be happy to meet with anyone who wants to discuss these things. For me, personally,
I used to live kind of in the mountains. I used to connect to the internet through
tethering my iPhone to my computer. It was a nightmare for seven (7) years to not
really have internet. I received an online Master's degree and I could not even attend
a class at my home. Every day to go to class, I would go and sit at Coffee Bean and
Tea Leaf. All day Saturday and Sunday, I would be at Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf
trying to take a test...it is not the greatest place to be. Now that I live in a house in
Lihhu`e, it is amazing, almost like magic that I can connect to the internet in a second.
It is also amazing how quickly you end up taking it for granted. For those of us who
COUNCIL MEETING 63 APRIL 21, 2021
have really good internet, we can sometimes forget what it is like not to have great
access to internet. That is really what this is trying to support.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember DeCosta.
Councilmember DeCosta: Thank you, Councilmember Evslin, and I
much appreciated working on this with you for the betterment of the people here on
Kaua`i and in the State of Hawai`i. Sunshine Law prohibits us from working outside
of two (2) people. We were not able to talk to anyone else about this. We put this on
the agenda like any other item, six (6) days prior. We did our due diligence. With
that being said, we were open to any negative or positive testifiers. We had none.
Our job is to look into it. I went out to my constituents as you did and I did not hear
one negative comment about this. In fact, I heard a lot from our rural areas and they
are crying for better internet service. The children are going to college on the East
Coast. They do not want to have to go to Starbucks to take a 3:00 a.m. class at Yale
University, because that is the only time they can get internet service. They can now
do it out of their bed at 3:00 a.m. or 4:00 a.m. The East Coast time difference is about
six (6) hours. People are trading stocks and commodities in New York, and they are
doing worldwide business. This is a no-brainer. We understand that there are some
passionate cries out there about health issues. Councilmember Evslin and I did
research, and the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institute of Health
(NIH), and the National Toxicology of Program (NTP) did many studies and none of
them showed that RF energies show any type of cancer in any type of human beings.
We would be willing to talk more with constituents out there. I am ready to vote on
this and move forward. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: All of those studies are acute studies and they
are not long-range studies. It is also an invalid study. We are a democracy or in
theory that is what we are. When we do our normal notification of six (6) days ahead,
very few people know what any of this is about. I try hard to get the word out. Most
people who are not paying attention do not know. When we have non-COVID-19
times, when this building is open, there are people in here. There are reporters here.
There are people who are involved and we hear from them. They are not involved
right now. What we are doing is making a whole lot of choices that people find out
about after-the-fact. Our role is to include the public. Most things that go on the
agenda—we have a first reading, a committee meeting, a second reading, et cetera.
A resolution goes through really quickly. I am going to respectfully move to defer to
May 5, 2021.
COUNCIL MEETING 64 APRIL 21, 2021
Councilmember Cowden moved to defer Resolution No. 2021-20, seconded by
Councilmember Kuali`i, and failed by the following vote:
FOR DEFERRAL: Chock, Cowden, Kuali`i TOTAL— 3,
AGAINST DEFERRAL: Carvalho, DeCosta, Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL — 4,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We are back to the vote on the Resolution.
Again, for me, this is just informational. It is not going to change the world. It is a
Resolution. It is an agreement of the Council and what we would like to see moving
forward. It does not hold any weight as far as whether we are going to stop or move
forward with this proposal. If we want to get the information out, we can still provide
this information to the public. I could see if this is a decision that the Council was
making that would affect our County or a decision that was going to impact our
residents...this is a Resolution and I feel like we have talked about it, we heard the
information, we can have people watch the meeting on the webcast, they can access
the documents that we have here, and we can move on. I am ready to vote on this.
Is there any final discussion on this item? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: For those who did not get a chance to hear
about this, I respect you, I respect how important it is to include you, and I am sorry.
(No registered speakers requested to testify regarding this agenda item.)
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2021-20 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Carvalho, Chock, Cowden,
DeCosta, Evslin, Kuali`i, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL —
O 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Next, let us read
ourselves into Executive Session. We will then take the public hearings and then
take lunch. We will not need to be back on camera. Everything will be in Executive
Session after lunch.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
COUNCIL MEETING 65 APRIL 21, 2021
ES-1051 Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), on behalf of the Council, the
Office of the County Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council to
provide the Council with a briefing, discussion, and consultation regarding the
Quarterly Report on Pending and Denied Claims. This briefing and consultation
involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities
of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
ES-1052 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County
Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council to provide the Council with
a briefing and request for settlement authority on workforce housing requirements
for Tax Map Key No. (4) 2-8-014-032. This briefing and consultation involves
consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the
Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
Councilmember Chock moved to convene into Executive Session for ES-1051
and ES-1052, seconded by Councilmember Carvalho.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions or discussion?
(No written testimony was received and no registered speakers requested to
testify regarding these agenda items.)
The motion to convene into Executive Session for ES-1051 and ES-1052 was
then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: That concludes the business on our
agenda. Not seeing or hearing any objections, this Council Meeting is now adjourned.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the Council Meeting adjourned at 12:38 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
041 1
JAD 011111. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA
County Clerk
:jY