HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/25/2019 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
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, September 25, 2019 at 8:31 a.m., after
which the following Members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Arthur Brun (present at 8:36 a. m.)
Honorable Mason K. Chock
Honorable Felicia Cowden
Honorable Luke A. Evslin
Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro
Excused: Honorable Ross Kagawa
Honorable KipuKai Kuali`i
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Councilmember Chock moved for approval of the agenda, as circulated,
seconded by Councilmember Cowden.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the public wishing to testify
on this?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, members, is there any
discussion?
The motion for approval of the agenda, as circulated, was then put, and carried
by a vote of 4:0:3 (Councilmembers Brun, Kagawa, and Kuali`i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Clerk, next item,
please.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
August 14, 2019 Council Meeting
August 28, 2019 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2757
Councilmember Chock moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded
by Councilmember Cowden.
COUNCIL MEETING 2 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on the Minutes?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any discussion from the
members?
The motion to approve the Minutes, as circulated, was then put, and carried
by a vote of 4:0:3 (Councilmembers Brun, Kagawa, and Kuali i was excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is carried. Clerk, can you read in
C 2019-210 and remove C 2019-209 off from the Consent Calendar?
There being no objections, C 2019-210 was taken out of order.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2019-210 Communication (09/12/2019) from Councilmember Chock,
transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution Accepting A Public Access
Easement To Kauapea Beach Over And Across Tax Map Key (TMK) (4) 5-2-004-071 As
Shown On File Plan 1554 Recorded With The Bureau Of Conveyances On
April 26, 1978: Councilmember Chock moved to receive C 2019-210 for the record,
seconded by Councilmember Cowden.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on the Consent Calendar?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any discussion from the
members?
The motion to receive C 2019-210 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 4:0:3 (Councilmembers Brun, Kagawa, and Kuali i was excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Clerk, can we go back to C 2019-209?
COUNCIL MEETING 3 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2019-209 Communication (08/23/2019) from the Director of Finance,
transmitting for Council information, the following reports:
a. County of Kaua`i Bond Summary of General Long-Term Debt Roll
Forward for Fiscal Year 2019;
b. County of Kaua`i Bond Supplemental Summary of General Long-Term
Debt Amount Outstanding as of June 30, 2019; and Excluded County of
Kaua`i Bond Supplemental Summary of Long-Term Debt Amount
Outstanding as of June 3, 2019: CFD No. 2008-1 (Kukui`ula
Development Project) Special Tax Bonds, Series 2012, sold April 25,
2012.
Councilmember Chock moved to receive C 2019-209 for the record, seconded
by Councilmember Cowden.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden had some questions,
so I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you, Director of Finance. I appreciate
this Supplemental Summary of Long-Term Debt Report. I think it is important for
all of us to grasp the one hundred sixty-six million dollars ($166,000,000) that I look
at as the County's mortgage. I am wanting to see if you can help me understand what
this entire list is. The first, which is "GOLF"—looks like that is all paid off.
REIKO MATSUYAMA, Director of Finance: Correct.
Councilmember Cowden: Number 2, what is Public Improvement
Refunding, 2001 Series? We only have one million four hundred sixty thousand
dollars ($1,460,000) left, but what is that?
Ms. Matsuyama: Instead of going down these individually, I
will say that the total debt outstanding we have as of June 30, 2019 is one hundred
sixty-six million dollars ($166,000,000). Of that, fifty-three million seven hundred
thousand dollars ($53,700,000) is Department of Water, so those are the last five (5)
lines or so.
Councilmember Cowden: Are those the Build America Bonds?
Ms. Matsuyama: One (1) of them is, yes.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Ms. Matsuyama: The remainder would be the County's portion.
This dates back from 2001, which is the most historical one that we still have money
COUNCIL MEETING 4 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
left to pay. As far as all of the bond proceeds are concerned, it is all written into the
ordinance when you folks approve the bond float, at that certain time. Any money
that is unencumbered during budget time, that is what we can reappropriate to
different projects. Like in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2019-2020 Budget, we did some
reappropriations to fund projects and that is all laid out in the Budget Ordinance for
FY 2020.
Councilmember Cowden: What is this Build America Bond for
thirty-eight million dollars ($38,000,000), it started at forty-seven million dollars
($47,000,000); do you remember what that one is for?
Ms. Matsuyama: I would have to go back and look at each
individual float when it came by Council and what the proceeds were intended to be
spent on.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Ms. Matsuyama: I do not have that information in front of me
for each of the individual ones. I do have the 2017 float, which is the most recent
twenty-six million dollar ($26,000,000) and I can tell you straight...six million dollars
($6,000,000) of it was for Lima Ola, six million dollars ($6,000,000) of it was for Kaua`i
Police Department (KPD) Kapa'a Substation, and then there is other
projects...Adolescent Treatment and Healing Center, Kohea Loa cost-share, Kalaheo
Neighborhood Gym reconstruction, so if these projects...
Councilmember Cowden: That is super helpful. I like just being able to
know what we are funding, so I appreciate that.
Ms. Matsuyama: Yes. This was the most recent twenty-six
million dollar ($26,000,000) float.
Councilmember Cowden: It looks like we have about six million eight
hundred thousand dollars ($6,800,000) left for the landfill. Do we have about eight (8)
more years on the landfill?
Ms. Matsuyama: This is just what is outstanding. We have
probably spent a good amount of it, right. In the FY 2020 Budget for the Bond Float,
we have twenty-seven million dollars ($27,000,000) appropriated for projects, so
anything over that we have encumbered already. This list is only for things that are
unencumbered. We would have spent it on things that were initially addressed in
the floats or reappropriated during budget time. Each of the floats have language in
there to say that it can be revised and reappropriated during budget season.
Councilmember Cowden: At the bottom, eleven million six hundred
thousand dollars ($11,600,000), Kukui`ula Development Project, their residents are
actually funding that money.
Ms. Matsuyama: Correct.
COUNCIL MEETING 5 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Cowden: It is not coming out of any of the taxpayers'
money.
Ms. Matsuyama: Correct.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions on this? Seeing
none, thank you. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this? Lonnie.
LONNIE SYKOS: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. I am going to
guess that the answer to my question is, "hire an auditor." The Administration's
presentation raised a question of whether or not the money is spent on what it was
actually intended for. My question is, do we audit or how would we audit whether or
not the money is being spent on what it was intended for, since the implication is it
can be spent on other things. The next question that I have is like an informational
question for the public is, if and when we float bonds, included in the language is
language that it can be used for purposes other than the stated intention, then how
is the public assured that the money gets spent on what it was supposed to be spent
on versus whatever is politically expedient for whoever is in office at the time? That
is never in the public's interest. Thank you.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else wishing to testify?
Seeing none.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
The motion to receive C 2019-209 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2019-211 Communication (08/22/2019) from Ka`aina S. Hull, Clerk of the
Planning Commission, transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to
amend Chapter 8, Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to Additional Rental
Units (ARU): Councilmember Brun moved to receive C 2019-211 for the record,
seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: This is just the communication, we are going to
be going through it in Bills for First Reading. Is there anyone in the audience wishing
to testify on the communication?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 6 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
The motion to receive C 2019-211 for the record, was then put and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2019-212 Communication (08/28/2019) from Ka`aina S. Hull, Clerk of the
Planning Commission, transmitting the Planning Commission's action to receive for
the record and provide no comments relating to policies involving Additional Rental
Units (ARUs): Councilmember Brun moved to receive C 2019-212 for the record,
seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
Seeing none.
The motion to receive C 2019-212 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali`i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item.
C 2019-213 Communication (08/29/2019) from the Director of Finance,
requesting Council approval to dispose of the following government records,
pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Section 46-43 and Resolution
No. 2008-39 (2008) as amended, which have been kept for over seven (7) years and
are no longer of use or value:
• Closed Contracts and related work folders (various
Departments/Agencies)
Councilmember Chock moved to approve C 2019-213, seconded by
Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 7 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Do we have questions from the members?
Councilmember Cowden: I have a statement.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is it a statement or a question?
Councilmember Cowden: (Inaudible).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions for the
Administration? I have a question. Reiko, it might be a simple question, hopefully.
I know we were going through and making copies of a lot of our documents. These go
back to 2010, was this in the time period where we actually made copies or are these
prior to us making copies of all of the documents?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Ms. Matsuyama: We have no use for these anymore, so no
copies were made.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I looked through this long list and one of the
reasons I accept it is because it is a big physical space that all of these things takes
up and it is very difficult to go through and find it. Some of them I was hoping that
we have taken some sort of information from Solid Waste...there must be some gross
numbers that are being saved at some level, right?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I am sorry, when I meant "copies," I meant
"electronic copies."
Councilmember Cowden: Yes.
Ms. Matsuyama: It is all in the accounting system.
Councilmember Cowden: It is in the accounting system?
Ms. Matsuyama: Yes, so we do not need the actual contracts
themselves.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions from the
members? If not, thank you.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 8 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion from the
members? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I am good. I just wanted to help myself and
everyone to understand; it is just physically big boxes all over the place with all this
information. I just wanted to confirm that we have the totals of that in our records.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: With that, the motion is to approve.
The motion to approve C 2019-213 was then put, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali`i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item.
C 2019-214 Communication (09/13/2019) from Ka`aina S. Hull, Clerk of the
Planning Commission, transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to
amend Chapter 11A, Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to Environmental
Impact Assessment on Land Development: Councilmember Brun moved to receive
C 2019-214 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
Seeing none.
The motion to receive C 2019-214 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
C 2019-215 Communication (09/13/2019) from Ka`aina S. Hull, Clerk of the
Planning Commission, transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to
amend Chapter 10, Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, Relating to the Lihu`e Town
Core Urban Design District: Councilmember Brun moved to receive C 2019-215 for the
record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 9 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
Seeing none.
The motion to receive C 2019-215 for the record was then put, and carried by
a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item.
LEGAL DOCUMENT:
C 2019-216 Communication (08/27/2019) from the Mayor, recommending
Council approval of a Dedication Deed by Kaua`i Habitat for Humanity,
Inc., conveying to the County of Kaua`i Lot 109, located at `Ele`ele, Koloa,
Hawai`i, Tax Map Key (TMK) (4) 2-1-001-052 (por.), for roadway purposes.
• Dedication Deed
Councilmember Brun moved to approve C 2019-216, seconded by
Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Do we have any questions on this from the
members? No. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Any final discussion from the members?
Seeing none.
The motion to approve C 2019-216 was then put, and carried by a vote of 5:0:2
(Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item.
CLAIM:
C 2019-217 Communication (09/04/2019) from the County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Kevin Johnson, for damage
to his personal property, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i:
Councilmember Chock moved to refer C 2019-217 to the Office of the County Attorney
for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? Anyone from the
public wishing to speak on this? Lonnie.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 10 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. Just for the
public's edification. Could you inform us as to the generality of what this claim is
about? Is this a vehicle that hit a pothole or a coconut fell on the vehicle...thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I know I saw it last week when I signed the
agenda. We do not have it in our file right now, but I will probably have to get back
to you on that, Lonnie. I will have Matt look it up. This was an item about an active
shooter training in a classroom and possibly damage in the classroom to a computer
during the training process. Again, when it comes to Council, the Council sends it to
the Office of the County Attorney, so the County Attorney has not even seen it yet.
Is there anyone else in the audience wishing to testify on this? Seeing none.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Any further discussion on this item?
The motion to refer C 2019-217 to the Office of the County Attorney for
disposition and/or report back to the Council was then put, and carried by a
vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali`i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Next item, please.
RESOLUTION:
Resolution No. 2019-50 — RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PUBLIC ACCESS
EASEMENT TO KAUAPEA BEACH OVER AND ACROSS TAX MAP KEY
(TMK) (4) 5-2-004-071 AS SHOWN ON FILE PLAN 1554 RECORDED WITH THE
BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES ON APRIL 26, 1978: Councilmember Brun moved for
adoption of Resolution No. 2019-50, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules, so we can have a brief
description of what the Resolution is and how it came about.
Councilmember Chock: Maybe we can ask the Planning Director up,
but I will briefly comment. About a year and a half ago, we did have a briefing about
the amount of properties that have not enacted on for easement rights. The question
came up because we were seeing the Public Access, Open Space and Natural
Resources Preservation Fund Commission (Open Space Commission) look at specific
properties and then finding out what we had once, a right, and these were in conflict.
If we do not act on some of these as we have seen over the years, we will lose them.
This particular property at Kauapea is one of those. The Planning Department can
confirm that there were close in the upwards of about seventy (70) properties that
were in question and that Adam Roversi, former Deputy County Attorney, was
looking at. This one in particular was once established and then sort of in
mitigation...we are thankful that we can exercise our right for this. I know there may
be some questions about where it actually traverses. I know the map is small. If we
can have the Planning Director give us a briefing on it.
COUNCIL MEETING 11 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
MATTHEW M. BRACKEN, County Attorney: Matt Bracken, County
Attorney. There was a lawsuit filed in regards to this easement. Adam Roversi was
working on it from our office, he is still kind of to some extent, even though he is now
the housing director. He is on his way over, but I cannot answer any specific
questions that you may have until he arrives.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I am really happy to see this come before us.
This is a 1978 resolution, so it has been some time. Oh, good, Mr. Roversi is here. He
can probably help us. The Kilauea Neighborhood Association has been working on
this for...it seems like about ten (10) years. This is what is also known as Secret
Beach. We have had at least three (3) of our accesses removed from us over time by
pretty wealthy landowners. I was trying to study this map to really understand
which access. Coming from Kilauea Road, as you turn down Kauapea, is it the first,
the second, or the third beach access that has been closed off?
ADAM P. ROVERSI, Housing Director: Here is the lighthouse road.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Mr. Roversi: Kilauea Town is down off the map, down here.
The lighthouse is off the map, up here to the right. The left-hand turn is Kauapea.
This dotted line here is the trail easement in question. If you are coming from the
lighthouse road, down Kauapea, it is about just past the third driveway. This is
referred to locally as "third beach," at the lighthouse-end of...
Councilmember Cowden: That is right, "third beach." This is the first
access from Kilauea Road, so I know this will be real contentious. Can you show us
the next picture?
Mr. Roversi: This is the satellite image of that area looking
from the ocean side, back towards Kauapea Road, which is at the very top left-hand
corner of the image. It is a little hard to see, but the purple lines are approximation
of the tax map key (TMK) lines and you will see that narrow strip here. That is where
that dotted line on the map runs and this lot was effectively created during the
subdivision of this land for the purposes of that easement.
Councilmember Cowden: I know that there are some significant
contention even amongst those three (3) homeowners that we are seeing right there.
They all each want individual access. There has been quite a bit of contention over
that, but that was where fishermen went down, a playground, and walking distance
from Kilauea Town. This has been high conflict over the closing of that, so this
Resolution that was in 1978, can you help us understand the process? I appreciate
that we are doing this.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Mr. Roversi: Quick historical background. All of this land
that we are looking at in this image used to be sugarcane fields.
Councilmember Cowden: On the top.
Mr. Roversi: Everything above the cliff edge that you see
here was all cane and Kilauea Town was a plantation town. As I understand it from
talking to people in the community, they regularly used this trail and several others
during that time period. The sugarcane plantation did not restrict access in any way.
It was free access down to this beach. In 1970, the plantation shutdown and this land
was subdivided and sold off for a subdivision. In 1978 when the subdivision was being
finalized, one (1) of the conditions imposed was to dedicate this easement. It was
effectively dedicating the easement that the community already used during the
plantation period. It was placed on the map, which we showed you a moment ago.
That was the official subdivision map. For various reasons, some of the paperwork
was never completed. Despite the fact that the community continued to use that trail
from 1978 until sometime in the `90s when the property was finally developed and
houses were built; one (1) of the landowners fenced off the easement and block access.
From well before the subdivision, following the subdivision up until the '90s, the
community was using the trail, and then it was closed off. The exact date is not exactly
clear. It was some time in the `90s. I believe since then this has been a reoccurring bone
of contention for the community in Kilauea, I believe it has been a recommendation in
the Open Space Commission's list of access ways, since the Open Space Commission
was founded. I think it has been on its list every year.
About two (2)years ago, the Administration, then the Carvalho's Administration
entered into discussions with the landowner to cooperatively open reopen this
easement. Those discussions failed and the County at the time made the decision to file
a lawsuit to force the reopening of this trail and that lawsuit is ongoing. I rather not get
into the details about that, but as one of the procedural elements of securing the
easement, the Resolution is proposed to formally accept it as a step in the process.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: That was going to be my question; why do we
need the Resolution if we are pursuing it in court?
Mr. Roversi: Without getting too deep into the litigation, as
a defense to the lawsuit, one (1) of the possible defenses to the lawsuit will be to point
out historical procedural problems in the County's paperwork. This is simply one of
those dotting the "I's" and crossing the "T's" that could assist in the litigation.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock and then
Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Chock: We talked about us losing all of these
easements over the years and the need for us to move in...you have been working on
trying to expand our efforts on that. Obviously these private landowners are going to
fight and I am just curious though, the way I read this and everything else that we look
at in terms of our easements is that these were recorded and documented. They are our
right. I am just curious in terms of the legal battle...I do not want the details of this
COUNCIL MEETING 13 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
particular case, but do we have any case law that says that lays out where we are as a
government body that has attained these rights? How successful do you see us being at
trying to achieve some of these and get back some of these access points that we are
going to have to fight for?
Mr. Roversi: I do not want to comment on the litigation and
the percentage chance that the County has of winning or losing in an ongoing court
case. I think when the Office of the County Attorney reviewed this case in particular
and discussed it with the Administration, we felt confident in moving forward with this
litigation.
Councilmember Chock: Okay. I guess the point I am trying to make is
that it is clearly written and documented what our rights are here for the public and I
just want to make sure that we have decided as a County that we want to and need to
act on these easements, because we are losing them over the years. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Stop me if I cannot say any of this, but when I
watch in these areas typical ways, including on this one, really former planning
directors who become these attorneys representing these properties...I can point on this
one, but what happens is big, huge, mature arica palms are planted across the existing
access. They cut the access. If you go up straight, it gets cut off and then they open up
a secondary one and they allow people to go down the sideway, a different pathway for
maybe seven (7) years. Long enough to interrupt an original pathway and then they
cutoff the new pathway and that is at least an argument that is put before the
neighborhood associations. We are seeing systematically not only in this area,but down
the eastside...this is walking distance to my house, so I am really aware of what has
happened there and the battles that go on over this. It is a chest game of moving around
these openings and it is terrible what happens and I am glad we are working on it. I do
not want to say too much,but the office is looking at all of those patterns, is that correct?
Mr. Roversi: I can say broadly that enforcing easement
rights across the island is something that the Office of the County Attorney...I am no
longer with the Office of the County Attorney, but when I was, that was something that
they were certainly interested in.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: Thank you for doing double-duty for the
County. That is impressive. I do not know if you are comfortable answering or not, but
do you have an estimated timeframe for going forward for land, if there is a good
outcome that the public could be anticipated that we would get this easement back?
Mr. Roversi: The actual trial date for this case is set in the
Spring of 2020. I do not have the schedule with me, so I do not remember the exact
date. I want to say it is in April, but I could be off. Unless the case is continued for one
COUNCIL MEETING 14 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
procedural reason or another, there should be a resolution at that point. The legal
decision would be the first step in...I presume and I say, "Presume," because this will
be up to the Administration and the Council that there would be some sort of community
process to decide in what fashion this easement would be reopened, to deal with just the
practicalities of how that happens.
Councilmember Evslin: Spring of 2020. Is there a possibility of appeal
either way however the lawsuits goes? Could this be dragged out for...
Mr. Roversi: Certainly. The right of appeal exists in any
case and we cannot control that.
Councilmember Evslin: How long will the trial generally take, starting
the Spring of 2020...what would be a best guess on when that would be resolved?
Mr. Roversi: The trial would be at most two (2) weeks,
probably significantly less.
Councilmember Evslin: Great. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions from the
members? For me taking a step back...have we been identifying instances like this
where...for us, this is the County's fault for not follow through and actually recording
the easement. I am sure we have a lot of these in the past, but have we tied that up in
our process so that it does not happen? Obviously, as it go to the Planning Department,
we request this easement, and then who follows-up with that? Does it go to the Office
of the County Attorney and they have to record it and make sure the paperwork gets
recorded, but there has been a break in the line of duty and that is where we ended up
with a situation like this. Where we come back, I do not know how many years later,
from 1977, and say, "Hey, we never filed the paperwork on it and now we are trying to
fight for it." I think it would be easier at the time for us to go through and finalized all
those things at the time and then it is set. We would not need to go to court and fight
different landowners.
KA`AINA S. HULL, Planning Director: Thank you. Ka`aina Hull, on behalf of
the Planning Department. In the past essentially what was happening is that it was a
condition of subdivision; however, what it looks like is that the conditions essentially
provided that easement, but it was never recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances, as
an example. The department was not, from my research, following up on that
essentially. Since that time, we have lost a few through that process. We have made
checks in the department where the subdivision in any public access easements that
are on those, our subdivision planner and team is looking specifically after the final
approval was given by the Subdivision Committee and the Planning Commission that
ultimately is recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances. Furthermore I can say that
particularly as it pertains to coastal accesses, we are going through the procurement
process because we have a list of all accesses to the coast that was done back in the `90s.
It is where our consultant went through all the records with the Bureau of Conveyances
as well as all of the Special Management Area (SMA) permits and their respective
conditions to draft up this list of all the accesses that exists. It is roughly thirty (30)
COUNCIL MEETING 15 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
years old at this point, so we did receive Coastal Zone Management (CZM) moneys to a
tune of about seventy thousand dollars ($70,000)to hire a consultant to go back into our
permits as well as other accesses that are dedicated and recorded with the Bureau of
Conveyances; to update that list, essentially. We have not selected a consultant yet, but
we are going through procurement right now.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Can you just remind us...I know there was a
figure, at least, originally of what the amount of coastal accesses we are looking at?
What are on the list?
Mr. Hull: Existing?
Councilmember Chock: Sixty (60)?
Mr. Hull: Sixty (60) or seventy (70) that are on that 1990
list, but once this is updated, there should be a few more.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden and then
Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Cowden: I am trying to be very delicate at how I say this.
The attorneys that represent these properties and the realtors who sold these properties
who are highly well-funded individuals...each one of those houses right there, they
probably have more in their annual income than the County budget does, so it is
difficult. That particular easement problem really happened in the `2000s, in the first
decade of this century. The people who represent them are so closely related to the
Planning Department, how are we blocking that now? We still have a very tight
connection with that and we really need to be working on...maybe the people who are
making all these choices know exactly how to dodge the bullet that should be coming
from our County.
Mr. Hull: I will just say delicately that at least with the
department that I am running right now, we are not colluding with any individuals to
ensure that they do not meet their conditions of approval.
Councilmember Cowden: I am not making that accusation. I am just
saying that the people who are making these choices are highly skilled in our policies.
It has been hard to watch and I am just calling it out that we have more skilled people
on that team with the County policy than the people that we are developing on the
inside now, so we have a problem and we have to really work on it.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Evslin: Ka`aina, you were speaking in general saying
the issue with a lot of the accesses is that they were not filed with the Bureau of
Conveyances, but for clarity, this one (1) was?
Mr. Hull: Yes.
Councilmember Evslin: Okay.
Mr. Hull: I will add too that the Charter Amendment
that was recently adopted, as well as the ordinance that this body approved a few
months ago concerning the Open Space Fund...to what Councilmember Cowden was
getting into with these trees growing into easements and who gets into the maintenance
of them. The Department of Parks & Recreation does not really have a budget to
maintain these easements and accesses, so the way somewhat of a strategizing within
the Planning Department is to say to utilize the Open Space moneys, as it was approved
in the Charter and by you folks to either use that moneys to improve open space
acquisitions or specifically existing coastal accesses. There are indeed group that would
like to on a voluntary basis maintain these, the Open Space budget can be proposed to
this body and will ultimately will be to improve some of those accesses so that it is
demarcated, so these voluntary groups can go into these accesses and maintain them
without a threat of being arrested for trespassing. The issues are where exactly are
those accesses? We are going through that exercise with the Open Space Commission
to identify specific accesses that they think is prudent to approve and then submitting
the proposal to you folks to improve those and then again, those voluntary groups can
now actually go in there and maintain them.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I had a question on the last sentence of the
Resolution,where it states, "BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED...any documents and expend
such funds as necessary of effectuate this easement," are you still going to have to come
in front of Council if you need more money once this case goes to trial, correct? Are we
just entitling the Office of the County Attorney to expend whatever they want?
Mr. Roversi: I think that would be a question for Matt.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Matt, the entire sentence states, "BE IT
FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Office of the County Attorney prepare any documents
and expend such funds as necessary to effectuate this easement."
Mr. Bracken: Matt Bracken, County Attorney. We would
come to this body if we needed additional funds. Our budget already consists of litigation
funds, but if we would need additional litigation funds, too, for this case, we would come
forward at that time. As long as we can stay within our current budget, we would not
come for any additional funding.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Just to clarify. We are doing this in-house, we
are not going out for special counsel for this. I just wanted to make sure that is correct.
COUNCIL MEETING 17 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Mr. Bracken: Correct, this will be done in-house.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I am just wondering if consideration when you
are looking at the original easement, where that came through about ten (10) maybe
fifteen (15) years ago, rather mature plants were planted in there, so it is not evident
where that easement began. They have grown very robustly there, so you would not
see that there was an easement there. Where do we deal with that? Do that come out
of the Open Space Commission fund? Do we have a way of looking for when we are
trying to identify the easement, that we are just going to be looking at the lines and not
looking for evidence of that original easement that has been scrubbed?
Mr. Hull: Arguably the survey can be done using Open
Space Commission moneys, but that would have to be approved by this body.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there further questions? If not, thank you.
While the rules are still suspended, is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify
on this item? Lonnie.
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. A big mahalo to
this Council and the Administration for beginning to take this issue seriously. It is just
a matter of law. If the County fails to exercise its rights sufficiently, you lose them,just
like everyone else. It is imminently easy for the County to lose the public's access to the
ocean or to the mountain. We thank you for the actions you are taking, but the
conversation today raised some questions. When is the consultant going to be hired to
come up with a new list given that we are aware that all of these easements have time
constraints on the County's ownership? When are we going to do this? If it is a matter
of money, we have plenty of money to fly people to foreign countries for junkets to bring
more tourists to Kaua`i, but we do not have money to pay in-house to take care of our
easements. The money to come through this ought to be a no-brainer. Take it out of
something that does not have to be done. This has to be done if you want your children
and your grandchildren to be able to go to the beaches. I will also point out that in 1978,
I believe I was twenty-three (23) years old, I am sixty-five (65). My entire adult life
(inaudible) being up in the air and not just this easement, the entire host of them that
we were alluded to during this conversation. Thank you for the steps you are taking
today, but in some ways, these are little small steps that you are taking and not the
race that we are in against the clock to preserve our easements. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else? Bruce.
BRUCE HART: For the record, Bruce Hart. I will concur with
what Lonnie said. I have lived here for forty-six (46) years. When I was younger I used
some of these easements. I do not frequent them as much as I used to. Several years
ago, I asked former Council Chair Rapozo and Councilmember Kuali`i to go out to
Moloa`a to make access available on the public easement that was being diverted by the
property owners out there. They did that, thank you Chair Rapozo and Councilmember
COUNCIL MEETING 18 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Kuali`i. I have seen several easements that are overgrown. In fact, there is one right
downtown Kapa'a behind the laundry mat, there at Kapa'a Missionary Church, which
I took pictures of just the other day. They are so overgrown that it be trouble for a beach
rat to get through there. I have one of the original copies of the list that Mr. Hull was
referring to by Tony Kunimura and the Planning Department. That was very important
at the time to know because the public does not know where all these accesses are. To
Councilmember Cowden, yes, this is a real problem. It is something I am passionate
about. We must assure future access to the public to these "public" beaches. Property
owners that think they can block off what we own, we need to fight. I think that the
Planning Department is currently doing a good job and I do not think the current
Administration should be blamed for what has happened in the past. We have to record
them. There is one bone of contention with me at Nukulii. The one there and phase 2,
that was never recorded and I complained for years afterwards that it was never
recorded. Those are just some of the ones that are on the list. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else wishing to testify?
KEN HUGHES: Ken Hughes from Kapa`a. I would encourage
the Council to pass this Resolution and to aggressively work with the Planning
Department to update this easement list and continue to fight for the people to get
access to all easements that we have rights to. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else? Is there anyone else for a
second time? Seeing none.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the members?
Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I am happy that this Resolution came to us for
a couple of things. First is to say to the community broadly that this Council and this
Administration will go after what our rights are. Part of the issue has been that private
landowners have slowly tried to block off or create diversions from people's access. We
have seen it so many times over the years and we are finally taking a stand in terms of
fighting. If the message can be made clear that we will fight for it, because we have no
choice, of course we do not want to, but if we can get into compliance and people can
really recognize the need for public access and the need to work with the County to
establish these accesses, that are conditions of these subdivisions that we have a right
to; we will save on money and the community will get what they want. On the flipside
of that as mentioned, is the community needs to step up as well. The government cannot
do this alone. We need stewards and groups to take care of this. In general, we need
the public to step up to take care of these areas. This is the reason that no one wants
them in their backyard. We need to develop ways to coexist in order to provide the
rights that we all have. In regards to hiring a consultant, we already know that there
is at least sixty (60) or seventy (70) access points that need to be looked at. I am not
certain we need a consultant. When you look at the real issue, it is a capacity issue for
our government. We have empty seats with positions that are needing to be filled in
COUNCIL MEETING 19 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
the Office of the County Attorney. Let me say that if you want to fight the good fight,
come out and help us. We need lawyers to follow-through, negotiate our rights with the
land owners, and we need them to help us fight if it goes south. Matthew, I tried my
best.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I would like to back-up what Councilmember
Chock said. For the three (3) landowners that are around them, they bought this with
no understanding. No one told them the history. They are all new landowners since
that easement was blocked. They bought the property with a different understanding
and bought it for privacy. What we are seeing is an incremental theft over time. I am
not suggesting that there is collusion especially with the current Administration. It is
incremental use of good knowledge that happens. On that particular piece of property,
there was"paid intimidation" against the fisherman and the people that are going down
there. I was in the middle of stopping some of the retaliatory fights. One of the reasons
I am so passionate about the Criminal Justice System is seeing our people becoming
adjudicated or in prison for these types of anger that boils over in them over issues like
this. All along the north and eastside, the accesses have been taken away. It is not
because the County does not go out and take care of it, all of the heavy-use of these
pathways are being taken care of by the people who are using it. As a matter in fact,
there were people who used to live there and children were born in that little valley. It
is a taking of evidentially high-use property. It is an incremental move. What I
understand is for the County, we have all of these affluent people who are buying these
properties. How do we afford to take on all of these people? It is a question of awareness
and change. When you watch the incremental type of taking, those that are invited are
still able to go down when I raise it. I do not go down to these places. The reason for
this is that it is incrementally being taken away from the community. It is the
upstanding or influential people who are allowed this access. It is a cultural challenge
that we have. This is a big issue and it is almost bigger than what the County has the
capacity to fight across the board. It is one of the reasons why I ran for Office. We have
to keep the community for the community. These are fishermen that I have known
since little children. Many of them who have gone to jail in between then and now for
having the wrong size fishing net. When you have a property as big as what we saw
that is put right on the estuary, we have a real stratification of what is legal and what
other people can afford to take. I am not putting down any of those people who own
that land. However, we need to take a stand to protect the island for the people. If we
do not, we will not have what we have now. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: It feels that in my lifetime we have lost a
number of accesses. In every few years, it seems that we are losing something else that
we used to have access to. I feel that this is a problem that is going to go on forever as
long as plants continue to grow and people continue to buy property. There will always
be a pervasive threat. If we blink it will be gone and we will need to spend a lot of money
to reacquire the property. I really appreciate the efforts of the last and current
Administration to ensure that we are not possibly repeating mistakes that were made
COUNCIL MEETING 20 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
in the past. This is especially in regards to this fight, it was a big fight that the last
Administration and the former Deputy County Attorney Adam Roversi committed to
doing. It is going to be a long fight for all of us moving forward. I would like to express
my appreciation for the willingness to fight. If there are any resources we are able to
offer on this end, we are all in this together.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I will be voting in favor of this Resolution. This
is an example that we need to continue to fight. This is a fight that I wish we did not
have. It would have been easier to have done everything we needed to do at that time.
Unfortunately, we are dealt the cards. There is approximately sixty (60) to seventy (70)
other instances of this happening. I am glad we are moving forward on this. If
everything was done at the time that it needed to be finalized, this would have not cost
the County any money. It was a condition of the subdivision, it would have not cost the
County any money, and we would have saved a perpetual easement for eternity and for
the community. I do see that it is important for us to follow-up on this. If it were a
condition of the subdivision, we are entitled to it. They were able to subdivide, build,
and do whatever they wanted to do under the condition of the County getting this
easement. I believe it is our right to have this easement and to fight for it. I am happy
that we are looking at this and tying up any loose ends so this does not happen in the
future. Anytime we are able to get an easement in the condition of the subdivision, we
do not have to spend any Open Space Commission money to purchase the access. We
do not need to do anything. It is a free easement to an area that the community is able
to enjoy. We need to be serious about this, finalize paperwork, record, and we need to
do everything that we need to do. Twenty (20) years from now, you do not want a
Council in the same situation trying to fight for this, spend money, and going to court
because there is new landowners that never heard about the easement. I am glad we
are aware of the situation. I hope that we have a policy that prevents us from going
down this road again and not completing what we need to do. With that, I will be voting
for the resolution. Are there any further comments from the members? If not, roll call
vote.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2019-50 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kuali`i, Kagawa TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Next item please.
COUNCIL MEETING 21 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
ADDITIONAL RENTAL UNITS: Councilmember Chock moved for passage of
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a
public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred to the
Planning Committee, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we have a registered speaker for this
item.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is someone able to give a brief overview on
this? We will take public testimony after.
Councilmember Chock: On all of the bills?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We need to go through them individually.
One at a time, I know there are seven (7).
Councilmember Evslin: It is important to quickly state that there is a
package of bills. The goal is to remove permitting fees in its entirety on affordable
Additional Rental Units (ARUs). Bill No. 2740 gives the Housing Agency the power
to draft the rules and regulations. Within a year, they are able to set-up a process for
determining the definition of an affordable ARU. If they certify an ARU as affordable,
this bill would eliminate the application fee for a zoning permit. It would also set-up
a repayment structure to appropriate money annually to the Housing Agency, for the
housing Development Fund to subsidize the Facilities Reserve Charges (FRC). This
bill would set-up a repayment structure if the homeowner does not stay within
affordability. I would like to introduce an amendment.
Councilmember Evslin moved to amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740) as
shown in the Floor Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 1,
seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Evslin: The purpose of the amendment is to simply
give the Housing Agency the power to place a lien on a home that fails to stay in
affordability and fails to repay the subsidy. If you stay in affordability for three (3)
years and they do not remain as affordable, they would need to repay the subsidy to
the Housing Agency. If they fail to repay the subsidy, this amendment would give
the Housing Director the authority to place a lien on the property in order to recover
those funds. The amendment slightly changes the amount of the appropriated value.
We previously appropriated one hundred twelve thousand nine hundred
dollars ($112,900) to the Housing Development Fund, which was based on an FRC
calculation we felt was slightly different than the actual FRC calculation. The new
change in dollar amount is one hundred thirteen thousand two hundred dollars
($113,200), which would allow the Housing Agency to subsidize eight (8) FRCs
annually.
COUNCIL MEETING 22 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: For the viewers, "FRC" means Facilities
Reserve Charge, which is the money that you have to pay the Department of Water
to receive water. "ARU" means Additional Rental Unit which means if you have a
piece of property, you are able to put a second house on your property. This allows
residents and homeowners to be a part of ARUs which helps all of us on the island.
"FRC" means Facilities Reserve Charge which is money for the water, and Additional
Rental Unit is a second house on the property.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I am sorry, I would like to add to the overview
on why we are doing this. ARU is eight hundred (800) square foot. Every
residentially zoned property on Kaua`i outside of Rice Street and west of the Hanalei
Bridge is able to build an ARU. The ARU has to be eight hundred (800) square feet,
and the cost to permit the ARU can cost up to nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000).
It is highly prohibitive to anyone who is trying to add-on a small structure. The
rationale here is to eliminate those costs for people who are committing to
affordability.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Did the County Attorney review the language
regarding the lien?
Councilmember Evslin: Yes, he is the one who drafted it.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. Are there any questions on this
amendment from the members?
Councilmember Cowden: On the amendment?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: I would like to look at it for a minute.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will take public testimony on the
amendment. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this?
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: We have one (1) registered speaker, Pat
Griffin.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Okay. We will have Ms. Griffin come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
PAT GRIFFIN: I was not testifying on the amendment, but on
the five (5) bills.
COUNCIL MEETING 23 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: If you are going to testify on all five (5) bills,
you are able to testify at one time.
Ms. Griffin: Yes, all at once.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Do you want to testify after? Do you want to
let the amendment go through? If the amendment passes, you are able to testify on
the bill as amended. Mr. Sykos.
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. This is a public
audit. I believe Councilmember Evslin said that there was seventeen thousand
dollars ($17,000) for the water hook-up fee?
Councilmember Evslin: Fourteen thousand one hundred fifty
dollars ($14,150).
Mr. Sykos: Fourteen thousand dollars ($14,000). If we do
this, how much would it reduce the cost? I am all for lowering the cost of building
ARUs, but if we do go through this, what is the savings that we would expect? Thank
you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin...I think it all
depends. It depends on how long they rent their house out at an affordable rate in
which we already have the structure set. The longer you rent it out the higher the
subsidy is, and the shorter you rent it out the lower the subsidy is. Councilmember
Chock.
Councilmember Chock: There are other subsidies to take into
consideration in the whole package and it could accumulate. It all depends which
ones you end up having.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I was hesitant to speak on the package as a
whole. We can reduce County fees to zero. There is a fee for a building permit,
plumbing, electrical, sewer connection fee, the planning fee, and the environmental
fee. There are all of these fees in which we have the authority to reduce and that we
are through these bills if they pass. For the FRC, being that the Department of Water
is separate, we have zero authority to tell them to change this. In order to eliminate
the permitting costs, in theory, we need to subsidize it. If someone stays in
affordability, their permitting fee will be entirely eliminated. If someone is
converting a portion of an existing house site, there is no FRC charge. If you are not
changing the footprint of your home, based on the way the Department of Water does
their calculation, there would be no...FRC is only for new separate construction. It
is anticipated that a lot of the ARU applications, in theory, will not need the FRC
subsidy because they will not be charged. There is little discussion that the
Department of Water has a reduced FRC rate for affordable units built in partnership
with the County. We are currently in some discussion about whether this would
apply, but it is unclear at this time.
COUNCIL MEETING 24 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else in the audience wishing
to testify on the amendment?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none. Are there further questions on
the amendment? Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I am trying to look where we are changing.
Councilmember Evslin, are we changing this to this? So, it is saying "Section 1 has
been changed to Section 2?"
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The highlighted items are the
amendment...the new items or changed items from the original. It would be the one
hundred thirteen thousand two hundred dollars ($113,200), the language of an ARU
subsidy repayment, and the entire paragraph regarding the lien.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Everything else will remain the same from
the original bill. Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Am I able to make a statement now?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: In general, I am supportive of this effort
because I believe it is really important that we are able to create ARUs. In the ARUs,
I want to acknowledge that when we do not charge a FRC or these amounts, all the
burden of the economics is being shifted onto other people who is having to pay it. I
want to ask Councilmember Evslin the question of when there is no FRC for a house
with the same footprint, is that the existing situation or are we adding that?
Councilmember Evslin: Right now, through the Department of
Water's own rules, if you are not adding to the footprint, you will receive a credit to
your existing FRC charge. They have somewhat of a complicated formula. If you are
not adding anything, there is no charge. If you are currently building new
construction, for any dwelling unit, it is going to be fourteen thousand one hundred
fifty dollars ($14,150).
Councilmember Cowden: In here, we are not charging that fourteen
thousand one hundred fifty dollars ($14,150).
COUNCIL MEETING 25 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Evslin: This is only allowing through an existing
Affordable Housing Development Fund, to allow the Housing Agency to subsidize up
to the amount that we appropriate.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, right. Perfect.
Councilmember Evslin: To add, the Director of Finance did a financial
analysis of us to show that even with the fee waivers and in theory lost revenue, the
County will end up cash positive after eight (8) years from increasing property taxes
from these areas. This makes money for the County and the median term.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, that also helps me to recognize when
the County tries to create an ARU it typically costs us four hundred fifty thousand
dollars ($450,000). The homeowner is helping to build out that objective for us.
Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions of discussion on
this amendment?
The motion to amend of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740) as shown in the Floor
Amendment which is attached hereto as Attachment 1, was then put, and
carried by a vote of 5:0:2 (Councilmembers Kagawa and Kuali i were excused).
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion carried. Let us go back to the main
motion. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Ms. Griffin: Aloha, Council Chair Kaneshiro and
Honorable Councilmembers. My name is Pat Griffin. I am privileged to serve as the
President for the Lihu`e Business Association. Our mission is to co-create a
sustainable, prosperous, strong, vital, united, and beautiful island community; with
Lihu`e being the heart of Kaua`i. Amongst the roles specified in our bylaws, is to take
an active role in master planning, to assist in evolving community development, and
to provide a voice to Government. As we looked at various plans, we took an active
role in the Lihu`e Town Core Urban Design Plan, the Lihu`e District Community Plan,
and the General Plan. One of the aspects of envision in the General Plan that has
followed through every general plan on Kauai since the very beginning is that people
on Kauai want their own compact and unique communities separated by scenic open
space. In the first plan dated back to 1970, there were less than thirty
thousand (30,000) people living on Kaua`i. Today, there are over seventy
thousand (70,000) people that are here. The average price of a home is over seven
hundred thousand dollars ($700,000). It is no surprise that we have a housing and
an affordable housing shortage. We do not have more people per house than we have
COUNCIL MEETING 26 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
had in the past. As a result, having ARUs that are available and affordable makes
sense if we are going to keep the open spaces in compact communities. If we have
twice as more people on the island, adding density to the community is a reasonable
solution. As a result, the Lihu`e Business Association broadly supports Bill No. 2740
through Bill No. 2745. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to
testify on the Bill as Amended? Seeing none.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion from the
members? Can I get a roll call vote on the Bill as amended?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740), as amended, on first
reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be
scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred to the Planning Committee was
then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Next item please.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2741) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 11A, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT ON LAND DEVELOPMENT:
Councilmember Chock moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2741) on first
reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Planning Committee, seconded by
Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: I want to provide an overview on what this
does. Right now, there is a two hundred fifty-eight dollar ($258) Environmental
Impact Assessment that I believe is charged for all zoning permits. The Planning
Director has made interpretation to currently not charge this fee for ARUs. A future
director could change this. This is codifying that.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions?
COUNCIL MEETING 27 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Cowden: Can I have Ka`aina Hull, Planning Director?
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Yes.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
KAAINA HULL, Planning Director: Good morning, Councilmembers.
Ka`aina Hull, on behalf of the Planning Department.
Councilmember Cowden: Are you able to help me understand this?
Does two hundred fifty dollars ($250) goes towards the building of an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS)?
Mr. Hull: Yes, for single-family residential structures.
For a multi-family it will be one thousand dollars ($1,000), and for Commercial or
Industrial it is assessed essentially from a formula derived from the parking that is
derived from the square footage of the space. Depending of what type of use is being
proposed, a respected Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) fee is charged.
Councilmember Cowden: So, it is not like an EIS is not occurring. It
does not occur. This is a collective payment into maybe what had been done to help
defray the cost on the whole area. I think of an EIS as a very expensive action that
needs to be created.
Mr. Hull: Yes, an EIS is a required study under the
Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) 343, which is totally different and apart from EIA
which is a requirement of the Chapter 11A, Kaua`i County Code 1987. Essentially, it
is the purpose and findings of the EIA section is that with residential, resort,
commercial, and industrial developments, certain impacts will be generated to the
surrounding area. An assessed fee will be placed upon the proposal that goes into the
County's general fund. There is no specific area, but it allows the counties to be able
to provide things like infrastructure in more than one area.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you very much for making that clear.
I had people reacting to why they did not have to do an EIS. An EIA, all of these
acronyms are very different.
Mr. Hull: Very.
Councilmember Cowden: An EIA is not an EIS. This is a small amount
that everyone contributes too. In this case, if this passes, they will not.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Cowden: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: I would like to state to what Councilmember
Evslin said, there are a series of bills here that are looking to waive the fees. Under
my Administration of the department, there is no strict line whether or not an ARU
COUNCIL MEETING 28 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
is an accessory or a dwelling unit, and what to encounter that as. What I conveyed
to Councilmember Evslin and Councilmember Chock is that under my interpretation
of the Code, I am saying it is an accessory use, therefore no EIA is assessed. However,
a different interpretation from a different Director could say, "No, I am going to
interpret this as a dwelling unit," which would then hit some of those costs. The
department is appreciative of that proposal. It also recognizes in some other areas
you have before you on these bills, other agencies do not necessarily have that liberty
that we do.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: Currently, there might be a number of
unpermitted ARUs or additional living units. It could be that there is no money being
paid for the additional living units on a person's property. This helps people be
brought up into code and to bring them to compliance. Is that accurate?
Mr. Hull: I believe that is an accurate statement for
those who have these "illegal modifications." The department has stated before that
it is not in our interest to go and shut down something that is providing housing units.
Now that there was an avenue established via the ARU bill for people to come into
compliance. That is okay, but when you are looking at fifteen thousand
dollars ($15,000) to twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) in permitting fees, when you
want to bring them into compliance, you have a lot of property owners hesitant to pay
that amount for something they already have in their structure.
Councilmember Cowden: If they have an existing square footage, and
they are not on a sewer, is it going to change their septic/cesspool situation? If they
come into compliance...so that people are prepared.
Mr. Hull: Yes, the reality is that some of the properties
that may have these modifications done illegally, if they do not have access to a sewer
system, they have to upgrade to a septic system.
Councilmember Cowden: For people who are on a sewer system, this
may be a good opportunity to bring their place into compliance for a lesser amount of
money.
Mr. Hull: Not on this specific bill, but on the package.
Yes, absolutely. It waives the three thousand nine hundred dollar ($3,900) hook-up
fee.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Hull: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions for the
Administration? If not, thank you.
Mr. Hull: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: While the rules are still suspended, is there
anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this item?
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any final discussion for
the members? Clerk, can I get a roll call vote.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2741) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Planning Committee was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Next item, please.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2742) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 6, ARTICLE 9, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND: Councilmember Chock
moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2742) on first reading, that it be ordered
to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred
to the Housing & Intergovernmental Relations Committee, seconded by
Councilmember Cowden.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin, would like do a...
Councilmember Evslin: Yes, just a second.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Or Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Yes, this informs the Housing Agency on the
Housing Development Fund and the issuance of that fund towards FRC for ARUs as
certified through affordable housing program.
COUNCIL MEETING 30 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions on this from the
members? Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any final discussion
from the members? Can I get a roll call vote?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2742) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Housing & Intergovernmental Relations
Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Next item, please.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2743) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 25, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY ASSESSMENT: Councilmember Chock
moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2743) on first reading, that it be ordered
to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred
to the Public Works & Veterans Services Committee, seconded by Councilmember
Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: There is a three thousand nine hundred
dollar ($3,900) sewer assessment fee which is applied to anyone who is trying to
permit a dwelling unit. Unlike the FRC, which is not charged if you are converting
an existing portion of the house, the three thousand nine hundred dollar ($3,900) fee
is charged. It is not if there is additional demand if you are converting, but it would
be charged regardless. This is supported by our Wastewater Division partially
because they are able to...with a lot of these illegal units that are not paying a second
sewer fee if they are built out, in the long-term, this will help to get these legal so
they are intern paying a sewer fee. It also has the same repayment schedule as the
FRC subsidy. The reason there is no lien language in there is because the
Wastewater Division already has the same authority they use to recover unpaid
wastewater bills.
COUNCIL MEETING 31 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I would like to acknowledge the range of
letters and information that we have from the departments that are supporting this.
Therefore, it makes it easy to support this.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions? If not, is there
anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any final discussion
from the members? Can I get a roll call vote?
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2743) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Public Works & Veterans Services
Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL — 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Next item, please.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Next item is on page 4.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2744) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 12, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
BUILDING PERMIT FEES: Councilmember Chock moved for passage of Proposed
Draft Bill (No. 2744) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing
thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred to the Public Works &
Veterans Services Committee, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: The Building Division would waive their
building permit fees for certified ARUs. I believe the pricing starts somewhere
around eighty dollars ($80) and ranges depending on the price of construction. There
COUNCIL MEETING 32 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
is some formula they use base on construction. By waiving the building permit fee,
it waives the plumbing fee and the electrical fee which is two hundred dollars ($200)
each.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions from the members?
If not, is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this item?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Seeing none, is there any final discussion
from the members? Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I would like to reference the information from
our Director of Finance under the financial analysis conversion for a building permit
application fee on conversions versus new construction. It is a significant amount
from up to four hundred dollars ($400) to one thousand dollars ($1,000) under new
construction which is what is listed here.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else? If not, roll call vote.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2744) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Public Works & Veterans Services
Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Next item, please.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2745) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
CHAPTER 10, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
LIHU`E TOWN CORE URBAN DESIGN DISTRICT: Councilmember Chock moved
for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2745) on first reading, that it be ordered to
print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for October 23, 2019, and referred
to the Planning Committee, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
COUNCIL MEETING 33 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: This would allow ARUs to be built within this
Special Planning Area-D (SPA-D), the area around Rice Street. The rationale for this
is that if we are incentivizing the construction of ARUs by eliminating permitting
fees, it is important that we are allowing those with an area slated for the most
intense development of where we want most of our population to go according the
General Plan. ARUs are allowed everywhere on Kaua`i except for Rice Street area
and west of the Hanalei Bridge. This would be changing that ARUs are allowed
everywhere except for west of the Hanalei Bridge.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I am going to suspend the rules. I have a
question for the Planning Department.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Hull: Good morning, Chair and Councilmembers,
Ka`aina Hull on behalf of the Planning Department.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I wanted to know if the Planning Department
was in favor of this. I believe it was last year that we doubled the density in the Rice
Street area from R-20 to R-40.
Mr. Hull: Yes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: There was discussion going back and forth on
increasing density in an area. Ultimately, the Council decided to increase the
density. We are now doubling it again. It would have been R-20 to R-40, and now
they are going to go from R-20 to R-80. Is that the intent, and is the Planning
Department okay with that?
Mr. Hull: Yes, the department is supportive of this. I
believe as the previous member of the public spoke, Pat Griffin, I could have not put
it more eloquently in the way she described the way she described the General Plan
does direct infill development in places such as Lihu`e and our town cores. I will
stand-by her testimony as-far-as it goes as a long-range policy. Yes, last year, the
department in working with Councilmember Brun looked at increasing density in the
SPA-D, which is Rice Street District-2 from R-20 to R-40. There was a concern raised
at the eleventh (11th) hour from a member of the public concerning if an ARU would
push that into the R-80 potential. It was ultimately deliberating and decided to
remove the ARU ability in SPA-D to ensure the R-80 did not happen. The department
is cognizant of this. A year ago, the department was supportive in both measures by
moving the R-40 up as long as we were able to get that, the department was
supportive as it supports infill development in our most dense area. The department
reviewed the Councilmembers draft bill. Being that it conforms to the long-range
policies and infill development in our most dense areas, we are supportive. We also
recognize that it has only been a year ago, this Legislative body made a proactive
decision not to have ARUs. We are supportive cautiously so, but we are supportive.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
COUNCIL MEETING 34 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Cowden: I was listening to that at the time. Do you
have confidence that we have the water and sewage to support an R-80?
Mr. Hull: Yes. What we need to always look at is not
every property is going to build out to its fullest density. If you have a property of
one (1) acre, it does not mean that it is automatically given that an R-80 density will
have R-80. It is very often and in most cases, most properties are not fully built out.
It is giving those abilities who want to increase their capacity, they will have the
ability to do so. If every single residential property is built out to its full capacity
today, right now, we would not have a housing crisis, end of story. The fact of the
matter is each property owner has the utility and the ability to use their property to
a way that they see fit. To those that may want to increase their density, this provides
the opportunity to do so.
Councilmember Cowden: If I am correct, it is seventy (70) acres that are
within...I am not good with acronyms but SPA-D...
Mr. Hull: Special Planning Area-D, the Rice Street
District.
Councilmember Cowden: Special Planning Area-D. So, that is
seventy (70) acres at R-80. That does not work for me, and I am going to say that I
have a hard time with that. Did we make that entire area R-40?
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Cowden: How tall is an R-80 building that would have
two-bedroom units? It could be a one-bedroom as we need small units. How tall
would an R-80 be?
Mr. Hull: It would really depend on what is proposed. I
can say that a three (3) story structure on Rice Street...for the life of me, I am not
able to remember the name. That structure is built at an R-60 capacity. We have
examples of higher than R-40 here on island today that is within the fifty (50) foot
envelope. It will depend on the property owner and the developer should they choose
to do an R-80 building. You need to be careful not to think that we are now going to
allow eighty (80) unit structures. R-80 means, for one (1) acre you are able to have
eighty (80) units. If you have one half(1/2) acre, you are able to have forty (40) units.
If you have one quarter (1/4), you are able to have twenty (20) units. It all depends on
the size of the property and what that particular owner wants to do.
Councilmember Cowden: When I try to visualize studio units, it is still
eighty (80) units on one (1) acre, which is most likely four (4) stories. Do I have that
right? Where are they going to park? I believe we have really big parking issues. If
there is one (1) stall per unit, that is eighty (80) stalls per acre. What I am hearing
from people in the Po`ipu and Lihu`e areas, when there is only one (1) unit, we do not
have anyone to come and help them. When we are looking at fifty percent (50%) of
our population being over sixty-five (65) by the time these buildings are complete,
COUNCIL MEETING 35 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
they are going to need assistance. Someone is going to have to come to help them.
Where are they going to park?
Mr. Hull: It is still a requirement that they will also
need the off-street parking requirements.
Councilmember Cowden: What would the off-street parking
requirement be for eighty (80) units?
Mr. Hull: There is a formula that it can either be
two (2), or if it is an extra transect section it would be one point five (1.5).
Councilmember Cowden: One point five (1.5)?
Mr. Hull: Stalls per unit.
Councilmember Cowden: Would we need to build a parking garage? I
am trying to visualize this because we are narrowing Rice Street to two (2) lanes,
correct?
Mr. Hull: Three (3) lanes.
Councilmember Cowden: Three (3) lanes, a turn lane in the middle. So,
we have three (3) lanes on there and we would be doing R-80. Is that about one and
one half(1 %) miles for the seventy (70) acres? How long is it from start to finish?
Mr. Hull: Off the top of my head, it is roughly
three- fourths (3/4) of a mile or one half(1A) of a mile.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, it is only three-fourths (3/4) of a mile.
Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Councilmember, it is an important discussion
to have. There has not been a lot of discussion with folks around parking. The
developer who is providing these units will have to install parking lots. If they want
to go for reduction, they are also able to ask for that via the one point five (1.5) or the
one (1). There has been some complaints that will definitely come across to this body
concerning some of the housing developments that the County has done to tackle the
affordable housing crisis. There are some individuals who complain about the fact of
not having more than two (2) stalls per unit.
Councilmember Cowden: Not even one (1) stall.
Mr. Hull: We need to begin addressing the fact of the
matter. If you want more parking stalls, it is going to costs more. If we are able to
implement rules over what would be parking stalls to address the housing crisis, that
you would only be allowed one (1) car with that type of unit, that is what we are going
to have to do. If you are wanting to buy another unit that has two (2) stalls, you are
going to have to pay the premium on that. To a certain degree from the Planning
COUNCIL MEETING 36 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Department's perspective, that will be part of the solution in providing for the
housing crisis. We will pick between a two-unit parking provision with a studio
apartment versus being able to put more units, and only having to provide one (1)
stall, we are going to pick housing units over the parking stalls.
Councilmember Cowden: When we are looking at market rate houses, I
have been meeting a lot of people in their nineties (90's) that are driving. Where do
their friends and services providers...where do we plan for people to park if we are
wanting to do R-80 in Lihu`e? People need to park somewhere. The more we are
aging, how are the people able to walk there if they have mobility issues? Do we have
a plan for parking? Will they be parking at the Kaua`i War Memorial Convention
Hall? Where will be park in order to go these places and what happens if there is an
event at the Kaua`i War Memorial Convention Hall?
Mr. Hall: The Kaua`i War Memorial Convention Hall is
open to utilize for general public parking for those who want to go around in the
Lihu`e area. Councilmember, that is the nature of the beast. When we are looking
at infill development, we need to say, "Do we want to have the ability to park
immediately fronting the restaurant, the bar, the retail center, or the house that we
want to access?" In the outskirts of the suburbs, that is needed and you pay the
premium for that. If and when you have a downtown or a town core and you are able
to park right in front of the retail restaurant, bar, or apartment unit you are intending
to access that you do not live in, quite honestly you do not have a downtown. If you
go to any downtown that is vibrant, active, and there is economic activity occurring,
you are going to have to circle around and spend some time to find parking. Why,
because it is a draw. People are wanting to go there, people are there, they frequent
the stores, and there is a synergy between the various retailers and restaurants. You
are not going to be able to find parking directly fronting the place that you want.
That is a reality of what we are going to have to accept when we are looking at infill.
In this particular area, I believe this bill is not looking at parking and infilling the
entire the island. You are talking about Rice Street, Lihu`e, which is arguably the
most dense part of this island.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: It is only Bills for First Reading. If it passes,
it will go to Public Hearing and Committee where we will hear more. That has been
the issue and contention when we went through this the first time where we are
doubling density. If there is an ARU, we would be quadrupling the density being that
we would be able to add units to the doubled units that we already had. I believe the
saving grace for me is that we are not increasing the height limitation for buildings.
It is going to be the decision of the developer to design their units and parking to fit
as many units as they want if it is quadrupled to R-80. If we start to say, "We are
going to increase the height of buildings," we would then need to step back to think
what the character would be that we are creating now with the higher density and a
higher building. Right now, the gas pedal on the type of buildings that are being built
is that we are not changing the height of the building. Councilmember Cowden, I
had the same concerns as you did. How are they going to fit more units and parking
stalls? Councilmember Brun.
COUNCIL MEETING 37 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Brun: Ka`aina, what was the Planning
Department's stance a year ago?
Mr. Hull: The Planning Department's stance was
supportive of having the R-40 and ARU, in which was transmitting to Council. When
the memorandum was proposed, we were also supportive because we recognized that
it was necessary to get the R-40 passed.
Councilmember Brun: Thank you.
Mr. Hull: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any other questions?
Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe you answered
the question that I had about the height restriction being enforced. I am trying to
remember where we were on this discussion before. For me, one thing that stood out
now in talking to the Planning Department is the General Plan and the infill
discussion. I wanted clarity for the community in terms of what the specifics are in
the General Plan in terms of what we envisioned. What is the capacity? Is the
increase to R-80 in alignment and are you able to point out specifically where that
will be. We are only at first reading and this could be a question for us moving
forward. The reasoning for this is because when I hear that we want to move to R-
80, if we do not start to look at the zoning first, we will not get wastewater, water, or
any of those things. How do we inform our growth? It is not only through the General
Plan, it is also through the zoning amendments. We need to push how it is that we
build for the future. I am not sure if you are able to shed light on this.
Mr. Hull: Absolutely. It does look at the long-range
growth metrics for infrastructure. For example, water, wastewater, and upgrading.
It is going to look at zoning and what the long-range plans are. When you have
specific numbers of how much housing is to be allocated to Lihu`e and how much
deficit we have, I do not have that off the top of my head, but I am able to provide
that at the Committee Meeting. That will help to drive the upgrades. There is a lot
of capacity for both wastewater and water wise here in Lihu`e that is not being taken
advantage of. To the point in driving the discussion of zoning being the first, it is.
The developers are not even considering R-80 and how they will fit the parking into
it because the zoning is not there. Why would the developer or the property owner
have that conversation if they do not even have that potential? I am in agreement
with you folks. I believe it is a tough path to figure out how to pencil in that many
parking stalls. However, I am not a developer and there is many reasons for that.
By putting faith into the ability that these people know what they are doing...they
are not going to have that discussion until a zoning amendment like this passes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: As you talk about development, affordability,
and the reason why we have not been able to push development on Kaua`i in general,
COUNCIL MEETING 38 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
is because of this equation that we are talking about. I have another question that
you are able to answer in the Committee Meeting. When we talk about what is
feasible based on Rice Street and this request, I would like more details on a map on
what we are really looking at. I think it would help this body to generally see that
this could happen here, this could happen there, and what is not able to happen. Is
that possible?
Mr. Hull: Absolutely. A few months ago,
Councilmember Evslin transmitted a request. They had brought it to my attention
and that has fallen a little through the cracks. My staff answered the request, did
the mapping process, and responded to the areas that we are specifically looking at.
For new structures, we are possibly looking at seventeen (17) lots. There is only a
handful of vacant lots, and there is a handful of large parking lots that are not being
utilize to the fullest potential. There is not many lots that you are really looking at.
I just dropped that map off to Council Services this morning. I apologize, but it will
definitely be ready for you folks to take a look at it before the Committee Meeting.
Councilmember Chock: The map that is forthcoming already
identifies the seventeen (17)lots, and the build-out potential on those. Is that correct?
There is a map here.
Mr. Hull: Yes, it does. I am sorry, it is not in the map
that was transmitted in the packet.
Councilmember Chock: It is this one here.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Councilmember Chock: Okay, thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Brun: Did you talk to Public Works if they are in
support of this?
Mr. Hull: Yes.
Councilmember Brun: They are in support.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: I have a question on the calculation for Rice
Street. When we begin to look at Rice Street, we will start to talk about mixed-use
with commercial on the bottom and residential on the top. How does that affect this
calculation on residential unit density and how does it affect the calculation for
parking? If one of these buildings puts a small Mini Mart underneath where they are
going to need parking with residential units on the top. I am able to picture that this
is what we are trying to do. How does that work? Does that affect the amount of
density that they are allowed to put for residential and does that affect the amount
of parking that they are going to need.
COUNCIL MEETING 39 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Mr. Hull: Yes, the commercial and residential
capabilities will remain the same. If they put a commercial on the first floor and put
residences on the second or third story, the density will remain the same. Right now
it is R-40, it would be R-40 plus the ability to do ARU should they want to. The
parking formula is actually different for residential and commercial uses. You would
still need to provide the one point five (1.5) or two (2) parking stalls for each
residential unit. Depending on the type of commercial use if it is retail or restaurant,
there is a different formula that is used.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Ultimately, it will be up to the developer to
figure out how all these units will fit. If they do an entire commercial floor unit, it is
not likely that they would be able to do the max units of residential above because
they will be limited by the height restrictions.
Mr. Hull: Correct.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: It would be a business decision on their end,
how much parking they would need on their lot, and an overall calculation for them.
Mr. Hull: It really is. At the end of the day, we are
trying to ease up the regulatory barriers for developers in this particularly dense area
of Lihu`e.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden, and then
Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, for clarification, the only entities that
will be developing and able to be utilized the R-80 would be for the units that are
affordable. The way that this is being written, is that correct?
Mr. Hull: No.
Councilmember Cowden: No. So, it is open to anyone. If there is
affordability or any public funding...would most of this be market rate development
or can it be any of the above.
Mr. Hull: Any of the above.
Councilmember Cowden: The concern that I have is that while we need
to keep our people who are struggling with housing and put them somewhere, there
is nothing necessarily saying that a number of these buyers that are purchasing this
will be from Honolulu. These people may purchase this to have a place to stay when
they come here for work. These buyers could be coming from the Continental United
States, or they could be coming from anywhere. Correct?
Mr. Hull: Correct. For the most part, the department
was supportive in the initial increase of R-40. In this body, where we are seeing
places like Lihu`e in particular, it is not so much a speculative market as it is in Po`ipu
or Hanalei.
COUNCIL MEETING 40 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Councilmember Cowden: Yes, I do not think it would be a speculative
market. What I foresee is people or companies that come here to do business having
a series of units that they are able to put their people in. It could be very convenient
for that community. Maybe they are in a hotel anyway. I am thinking about our
waste. We have a real issue with managing our solid waste. If we are essentially
increasing our population by these units rather than adjusting our struggling
population into these units, I am thinking about our sewage and water. I know that
we have issues that are sitting in court right now with the water, right?
Mr. Hull: Yes, to a certain degree I would need to
disagree a little with that statement.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Mr. Hull: The provision of housing is not what is going
to increase our population. Our population is already increasing by the function of
our natural birth rates. We are not able to keep up with our housing stock that we
currently have. In trying to increase the housing stock to address the housing crisis
and the housing deficit that we have right now is the primary function of the bill.
Councilmember Cowden: I am going to agree that the best way to solve
a housing crisis is to build housing. I believe that is inarguable.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: That was well said, I agree with you. I have
a quick question. Being that we are not changing the height restriction or the lot size
requirement, if someone is going to fit all of those units in there, the units are getting
smaller and smaller. In your experience as the Planning Director, is there an unfilled
demand for smaller units that the market is not filling right now?
Mr. Hull: Yes, absolutely. In fact, when we went
through the ARU discussion, it was decided to be kept at eight hundred (800) square
feet. It was actually the Board of Realtors that brought this to our attention. While
they mentioned for profitability sake, having larger units is better. What they
brought to our attention and we appreciated was that right now, there is a really high
demand for studio rentals that is not being met. You either have single-individuals
or young couples that for the price point is what they really want. However, there is
virtually no inventory for these smaller units. These smaller units, if there is going
to be a mainland buyer or a snowbird approaching the small units is not a desired
demand. The smaller unit is generally aimed towards the local population.
Councilmember Evslin: Have you seen other property owners on Rice
Street that you know of that are looking to add units upstairs to their existing
buildings?
Mr. Hull: So far, I am able to think of two (2) property
owners that came in to have that discussion with us.
COUNCIL MEETING 41 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any further questions? If not, thank
you.
Mr. Hull: Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We will take public testimony. Is there
anyone wishing to testify on this? Mr. Sykos.
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. In general, I
will support the wisdom of the Administration and the Council for these matters.
However, Councilmember Cowden brings up excellent points about our sewage and
other infrastructure capacities looking forward ten (10) to twenty (20) years. For
example, we are doing construction on Rice Street and in the midst of pouring cement
over where they excavated. Is the sewage line capacity running underneath the
cemented area the sewage capacity we need in forty (40) years from now? If not, you
will have to empty the piggy bank to cut the cement apart to replace the lines. The
urban renewal planning is extremely complexed, and I am someone who is seeing the
outcome of numerous urban renewal projects on the mainland. What I have never
seen is a single affordable housing unit come out of it. What happens is areas have
declined in regards to their tax value to your local government or encouraged to be
developed to increase the taxation value which by definition takes you out of
affordable housing. What you would generally see going on is one building being
bought by a developer and he is in the midst of turning it into art studios. What is
the cost for the art studio monthly lease if he puts...I am making a number up, but if
he puts one million dollars ($1,000,000) into refurbishing the building? That is
"chunk change" in today's world. He has a huge investment in the building and it is
unreasonable to think that he would be looking for struggling artists to rent for a
small monthly fee. The next up and coming Robert Wyland will be able to afford the
studios. It can be argued that it is a benefit to Kaua`i, that you have created an art
colony, you are able to develop your local artists, and bring in artists from the outside.
Ultimately, all that is going to become properties that are high-end value which does
not help us with affordable housing. So, I am skeptical if there is ever going to be
affordable housing built in that area unless this County is able to get ownership or
control over one of those properties...preferably an undeveloped property. I will be
back.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else wishing to testify?
Mr. Hart.
Mr. Hart: For the record, Bruce Hart. Ka`aina
mentioned that about a year ago we discussed this when it was introduced by
Councilmember Brun. I was the person who brought up the concern with the increase
of density. I am going to repeat it again to this Council. No one mentions noise. This
County is in dire need of a noise ordinance. I will echo what Mr. Sykos mentioned in
which other Councilmembers brought up, that I do not believe that most of this will
be affordable. In regards to what the Planning Department said is that it will take
time to be built-out to the full density, but it will be built-out to full density. It is a
matter of time. The infrastructure needs to be in place. As Mr. Sykos and
Councilmember Cowden said...if we are going to do this, we should have looked at
COUNCIL MEETING 42 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
sewer capacity and everything else before we started laying down all of that concrete.
I do not believe it will be forty (40) years, I believe it will be twenty (20) years. If it
is forty (40) years I will not be around, and if I am, I am coming in. I do believe that
people who move into an area that we are talking about, they are the type of people
who want town living. I have an idea. Are we able to make it a requirement that a
car is not permitted for these units unless you have legal off-street parking
somewhere. Why not give it to the people who have somewhere to park their car or
they do not want a car. One and one half(1 %) spaces is not enough.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to
testify for the first time? Mr. Sykos, would you like to speak a second time?
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. Given that we
have expended a lot of money in Administration and Council costs going through this
whole process, I have a few questions. Do we have an estimate or how would we
estimate what we think would be a productive outcome from all of these measures
and all the effort to the number of new ARUs? What are the different permutations
of adding more affordable bedrooms? Do we have an estimate on how this would
affect the large inventory of illegal construction that we unfortunately need to deal
with? Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else wishing to testify?
Seeing none. I actually have a question for Lyle regarding water and sewer capacity.
Are we prepared for this future growth and what is our water and sewer capacity?
LYLE TABATA, Deputy County Engineer: Lyle Tabata, Deputy County
Engineer, Department of Public Works. Good morning, Chair and Councilmembers.
In regards to wastewater, for the anticipated location where the build-out is
anticipated on Rice Street, there is adequate capacity and pipeline to extend out a
number of years. The pipeline where we anticipate growth is in the area towards the
end of the pipeline which is the largest size. Currently, the pipeline runs down to the
middle of the road so there is no concrete interference. I am very confident and assure
the Council that wastewater will not be an issue. As far as water, the Department of
Water is needing to identify the request when it comes in. There has been issues with
capacity. As previously mentioned, there is litigation that is currently going on that
we are not able to speak to at this time. There are options out there. It all depends
on who comes in first and applies.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I have a few follow-up questions. Thank you,
for letting us know that there is enough sewer capacity and that it is in the center of
the road.
Mr. Tabata: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: That is good to know. I was in the meeting
but I was not participating when it was in the galley when this came up with a shout-
out to (Inaudible) for helping us to understand that there would be a potential ARU.
COUNCIL MEETING 43 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
We had a robust discussion. When we talked about that, whoever builds would have
to put the water in, right? That was part of the problem that they are bringing in an
eighteen (18) inch pipe that apparently needs to come in. There were a lot of costs.
The first building would probably have to put in most of the costs. Did I understand
that correctly?
Mr. Tabata: That is not for this particular location. There
is a project that is on hold right now.
Councilmember Cowden: There would not be an impact on this?
Mr. Tabata: I am not able to answer if it is for this
specifically.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay.
Mr. Tabata: We would need someone from the Department
of Water to answer that.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay. I have been going to the Department of
Water meetings and I have been asking in the background. I know most of the water
wells that we had in the Lihu`e area is dry, correct?
Mr. Tabata: That is my understanding.
Councilmember Cowden: We are not getting that. We are definitely
very dependent on it coming from a different area.
Mr. Tabata: Yes.
Councilmember Cowden: How are we doing in solid waste? Do we have
any concerns if we increase capacity by over one hundred (100) units? Would there
be a problem?
Mr. Tabata: We are presently under construction for the
next lateral expansion at the Kekaha Landfill. Solid waste is always an issue as we
continue to grow in the community. However, we have multiple diversion programs
which we are working on. The present Administration has authorized us to move
forward on several programs that will help to improve our diversion from the landfill.
Councilmember Cowden: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Tabata: Are there any further questions for Lyle while
he is here? Thank you.
Mr. Tabata: Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
COUNCIL MEETING 44 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any further discussion? It is only
Bills for First Reading, I know that we will most likely have more questions as we go
through public hearing and Committee. This vote will be to get this item to public
hearing and Committee. Councilmember Evslin.
Councilmember Evslin: First of all, for the package as a whole, I would
like to express my appreciation to all of the department heads who have spent a lot
of time with us trying to figure this out. From the Planning Department, two (2)
different Housing Directors, the Department of Public Works, the Building Division,
and Wastewater. There was a lot of moving parts in order to get a working set of
bills, I appreciate that. In regards to R-40, I would not be introducing this specific
bill if we did not have the incentive package. There is a number of properties within
the Rice Street area with existing buildings that are looking to add two (2) or four (4)
units to the top of their building, which is all that they are able to add. Right now, if
they were to build four (4) units, they will pay enormous fees, so they are not building
them. If they are able to build four (2) units, two (2) of which are ARUs, they would
be able to do that at one half(1h) the permitting cost. It is guaranteed that by doing
this it will be affordable for a time period and that it will be smaller units. That is
the only reason I am bringing this up now. If we are trying to incentivize the
construction of ARUs, I believe it is important that we are incentivizing where we
want it. The reason why we want all of this growth here is because there is more jobs
in walking distance on Rice Street than anywhere else on Kaua`i. As our General
Plan says, "The reason of pushing infill is to help with our congestion crisis elsewhere
on the island." In regards to affordability, we currently have a housing ordinance
which requires thirty percent (30%) of units to be affordable. There is also
conversation of how the ordinance is changing. Regardless if it is changing and the
numbers are less, we are still going to have some type of inclusionary zoning policy.
If so, we will have zero affordable units if zero homes that are being built. If we are
incentivizing and allowing more homes to be built, that inclusion of zoning ordinance
will apply to the new construction buildings. Those will be affordable in perpetuity
if they are built. By the nature, smaller units are more affordable. Again, we are not
changing the height or lot size requirements. In order to get more units in an existing
building that does not change the shape of the building but be built smaller. Thank
you for all the questions today and everyone here who is working diligently on these
bills.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Brun: I will be voting yes today in order to get this
to public hearing, but I most likely will not be supporting this. I remember one (1)
year ago we did not have the capacity and all of a sudden we have the capacity. I
most likely will not be supporting this, but I will support this today to get it to public
hearing.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Cowden.
Councilmember Cowden: I appreciate that every one of you is going to
vote "yes" for this, I am going to vote "no" on first reading. This will be the first time
I voted "no." I am in agreement with what Councilmember Brun just said. I am
COUNCIL MEETING 45 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
hearing something different. I appreciate all the hard effort that has come forward
by the department heads. I have spent some time doing due diligence with two (2)
different developers. Asking and going with them...they are not necessarily trying to
build there but they could. I am trying to educate myself of what a developer looks
at. One thing that is really important is the speed of the build. For it to be built
quickly and to have the low carrying costs. Both developers said our inclusionary
zoning numbers are simply too high to pencil out and giving me comparisons of other
cities where it could work better. These are people who have experience in this area.
I feel like we are opening this up for future problems. It is really hard to pull
something back from an R-80, and I do not see where it is realistic. In particular the
cars and to decide that people are not able to have a car. That will not happen. In
talking to these developers that work in a number of different locations, we do not
have a type builds and draws the city living. It is compared to a chicken and an egg
where there is enough excitement in an area. People want urban living in New York,
Boston, London, San Francisco, or someplace where it is exciting. We have a long
way to get there. If we do fill these with affordable housing...say that everything
went in at one hundred percent (100%) affordability, if these passed which I am likely
to pass unless we learn something otherwise, the rest of the fleet of bills that excludes
all of the carrying costs from affordability...if we do that somewhere someone is going
to have to pay for all of this build-up. This means that we are shoving it onto market
value housing somewhere, right? We went through...we have been having great
summits and forums in talking about the barbell where we have the high-end, the
low-end, and we do not have the mid-range right now. Almost all the build-out is on
the low-end, which is pushing the carrying cost of the island up to the high-end. The
short answer would be that I appreciate all the effort and I appreciate your effort. I
am going to say "no" at this point because I feel that it is bringing up a false
expectation and it would make it harder for me to get excited about of the rest of the
fleet of bills for the ARUs. It may be that we are able to include an amendment
somehow that if it is a piece...actually no, we do not need to do that. It is all R-40,
and I do not need an amendment. I am going to vote "no."
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone else? If not, let us take a roll
call vote.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2745) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
October 23, 2019, and referred to the Planning Committee was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL — 4,
AGAINST PASSAGE: Cowden TOTAL — 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL — 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Four (4) ayes, one (1) no.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: We will take a ten (10) minute caption break,
we have two (2) items left, and one (1) is an Executive Session. We need to take a
caption break, let us take a ten (10) minute caption break, and we will be back.
COUNCIL MEETING 46 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 10:40 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 10:51 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Brun was notes as not present.)
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Welcome back. Clerk, can you please read our
final item.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, this is on page 4.
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2759) –A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
ADDITIONAL RENTAL UNITS (Additional Rental Units—Planning Commission
Recommendation):
Council Chair Kaneshiro: The motion is to receive.
Councilmember Evslin moved to receive Proposed Draft Bill (No.2759) for the
record, seconded by Councilmember Chock.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Councilmember Evslin, do you want to
explain the receipt of this Bill?
Councilmember Evslin: Briefly, this came from the Planning
Commission. There was discussion about removing the Housing Agency component
from Chapter 8, which is the Planning Department's Comprehensive Zoning
Ordinance (CZO). It was ultimately determined that our best route forward was to
keep all of that in as originally submitted. We will receive this for the record, and
that has been approved by all department heads.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Are there any questions? If not, is there
anyone in the audience wishing to testify on this? We will be receiving Bill No. 2759.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any final discussion from the
members on this receipt? If not, roll call vote.
COUNCIL MEETING 47 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
The motion to receive Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2759) for the record was then
put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR RECEIPT Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST RECEIPT: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes to receive.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Clerk, can you please read us into Executive
Session.
ES-1006 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 discuss the Kekaha
Landfill operations and the obligations, remedies, and disputations concerning the
Waste Management of Hawai`i, Inc. contract and for settlement authority. This
briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges,
immunities, and liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda
item: Councilmember Chock moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-1006,
seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this item? Mr. Sykos.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony:
Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. For the general
edification of the public and my sincere hope that this conversation might spark
someone to pay attention to what goes on in the County government. Could you
please inform the public in the generality of why you are going into Executive Session
and I will assume it is because we have a lawsuit involved or the possibility of a
lawsuit. We realize what you are not able to tell us is restricted. Thank you.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Yes, we are going into Executive Session for a
reason. It is basically regarding the Kekaha Landfill operations and Waste
Management who manages the landfill. I hope that clears it up. Is there anyone else
wishing to testify?
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? If not, roll call vote
to go into Executive Session.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 SEPTEMBER 25, 2019
The motion to convene into Executive Session for ES-1006 was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Brun, Chock, Cowden,
Evslin, Kaneshiro TOTAL — 6,
AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Kagawa, Kuali`i TOTAL— 1,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Kaneshiro: With that, that concludes the business on our
agenda and we will not be coming back out after this Executive Session item.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the Council Meeting adjourned at 10:55 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
JA► ,' . FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA
County Clerk
:ks
Attachment 1
(September 25, 2019)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740), Relating to Additional Rental Units
Introduced by: LUKE A. EVSLIN, Councilmember
Amend Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2740) by amending Section 2 to read as follows:
SECTION 2. Chapter 8, Article 30, Kaua`i County Code 1987, as
amended, is hereby amended by adding a new Subsection to be appropriately
designated and to read as follows:
"Additional Rental Unit (ARU) Subsidy; Purpose. There is hereby
established and created an account to be known as the "Additional Rental
Unit (ARU) Subsidy" within the Housing Development Fund (Fund No. 512)
for the purpose of subsidizing efforts associated with the Facilities Reserve
Charge (FRC).
Administration. The County Housing Agency shall certify an
applicant's qualification to receive an Additional Rental Unit (ARU) Subsidy.
Applications for an ARU Subsidy shall be processed on a first-come,
first-served basis, subject to funding availability. Copies of all ARU Subsidy
Applications, regardless of affordability certification result, shall be provided
to the Planning Department, the Public Works Department-Wastewater
Division, and the Public Works Department-Building Division prior to any
waiver of fees.
Appropriation of Funds. An appropriation of afrom the Housing
Development Fund shall be set aside to assist property owners with efforts
associated-with the Facilities Reserve Charge. Annual appropriations from
the Housing Development Fund shall be subject to Council approval. Any
balance remaining in the Additional Rental Unit (ARU) Subsidy account at the
end of any fiscal year shall not lapse. The moneys in the Additional Rental
Unit (ARU) Subsidy account shall not be used for any purpose except those
listed in this section. Any violation of the affordable housing restrictions
required by the Housing Agency may result in - nems'We" . `� °.
as follows:
Percent of
Number of days in Affordable Rental Program ARU Subsidy Repayment
Less than or equal to 365 days (1 year) 100%
Less than or equal to 730 days (2 years) 75%
Less than or equal to 1,095 days (3 years) 50%
1
Repayment he ARI,T Subsidy Repayment constitutes aen upon_the
real propertyin which .he ARU is situated. The lien may be recorded it" the3
appropriate la d recordsystem. After any failure to pad the an-taunt due, the
lien may beenforced $y any legal action. including foreclosure proceed .s I
the event legal act-ion is instituted;tituted for collection. the County_ shall be
rennb irsed. for1.11 coats oLco. le tion nclu ding,re4soiiable at tornevs' fees:
Rules and Regulations. The Kaua`i County Housing Agency is hereby
authorized and directed to promulgate rules and regulations as may be
necessary to implement subsection 8-30.1(g) within twelve (12) months from
approval of this Ordinance.
Preemption. Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt or
prohibit the authority in any other provision of the Kaua`i County Code 1987,
as amended."
(New material to be added is underscored. Highlighted material is new.)
V: 2019-548 FA-2740 LE AMK mn
2