Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/20/2017 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING DECEMBER 20, 2017 The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to order by Council Vice Chair Ross Kagawa at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Suite 201, Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, December 20, 2017 at 8:36 a.m., after which the following Members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Arthur Brun Honorable Mason K. Chock Honorable Ross Kagawa Honorable Arryl Kaneshiro Honorable Derek S.K. Kawakami Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura Excused: Honorable Mel Rapozo APPROVAL OF AGENDA. Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We have a certificate at 1:45 p.m. for Bayada Home Health Care and we have 9:00 a.m. reserved for the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for our annual audit. The motion for approval of the agenda as circulated was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council: November 1, 2017 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2669 November 29, 2017 Special Council Meeting Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any discussion or public testimony? There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. COUNCIL MEETING 2 DECEMBER 20, 2017 There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: The motion to approve the Minutes as circulated was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: Vice Chair, we have a speaker that would like to provide testimony on an item on the Consent Calendar. The item is C 2017-274. Can Council remove C 2017-274 from the Consent Calendar? Councilmember Chock moved to remove C 2017-274 from the Consent Calendar, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: This is Consent Calendar item C 2017-274. COMMUNICATIONS: C 2017-274 Communication (11/13/2017) from the Acting County Engineer, transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution Authorizing Nighttime Closure Of Mihi Road To Vehicular Traffic And Granting Partial Responsibility For The Enforcement Thereof To The Seacliff Plantation Community Association, Kilauea Bay, Kaua`i, Hawaii, to help alleviate drug dealing, vandalism, and property theft: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2017-274 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The registered speaker is Lonnie Sykos. There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. LONNIE SYKOS: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. My only observation is as the public, we have a concern about liability and so it is the authority of our police department to enforce all of the laws et cetera. Therefore, we are turning over a portion of that responsibility to a community association. I am simply asking what are the checks and balances that are in place to reduce the liability that the public has for the actions that the community association might take in regards to the enforcement of this. Was I rational? Do you understand my question? Okay, thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Just for your information, the Department of Public Works has requested that we take this item after the CAFR discussion, so it will happen sometime after 9:00 a.m. The Department of Public Works said that community members are coming as well. Any further testimony on this? Seeing none, any discussion? COUNCIL MEETING 3 DECEMBER 20, 2017 The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: The motion to receive C 2017-274 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). CONSENT CALENDAR: C 2017-275 Communication (11/27/2017) from Councilmember Chock, transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution Establishing A "No Parking At Anytime" And "Tow Away Zone" Along A Portion Of Kalihiwai Road, Kalihiwai, Hanalei District, County Of Kaua`i: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2017-275 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any discussion or public testimony? There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: The motion to receive C 2017-275 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Vice Chair Kagawa, C 2017-276 will be handled at 9:00 a.m. This is C 2017-277. There being no objections, C 2017-277 was taken out of order. C 2017-277 Communication (12/01/2017) from the Director of Finance, transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to Ordinance No. B-2017-821, as amended, relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i, for the Fiscal Year 2017-2018, by revising the amounts estimated in the General Fund, to fund roofing repairs at both the Kapa'a Armory & Hanalei Substation facilities, estimated at $550,000: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2017-277 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any discussion or public testimony? There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: COUNCIL MEETING 4 DECEMBER 20, 2017 The motion to receive C 2017-277 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). C 2017-278 Communication (12/07/2017) from the Housing Director, requesting the Council's approval to perform the following: a. Acquire under the County's Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program a residential unit at 700 Akalei Street, `Ele`ele, Kaua`i, Hawai`i, 96705, Tax Map Key (TMK) No.: (4) 2-1-009- 090, for a purchase price of not more than $450,000.00, based on the fee simple market appraisal, which will be obtained through this transaction; b. Resell the unit (700 Akalei Street, `Ele`ele, Kaua`i, Hawai`i, 96705), by leasehold market appraisal, which will be obtained through this transaction; and c. Authorize the County Clerk to sign legal documents related to the acquisition and resale transactions. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: We do have a registered speaker. Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to approve C 2017-278, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Lonnie Sykos. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Lonnie. Mr. Sykos: Can I speak when the item comes up? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: This is the only time. This is the Housing item. There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. I am all in favor of the County helping to create affordable housing, but it does not make any sense, to me, that the County has the ability to acquire these units and immediately turns around and sells them into the market, which guarantees that the price is going to up and up and up in the future. It seems to me that it would make more sense for the County to adopt a different plan in regards to handling units like this in which the County would ultimately retain the ownership, so that you could put somebody into the housing, the price is subsidized. The longer the County owns the house, the greater the differential would be between current market value and what the County bought it at. For example, we are going to buy this unit for four hundred fifty COUNCIL MEETING 5 DECEMBER 20, 2017 thousand dollars ($450,000) today. In ten (10), what will be the value of that house? The value of the house would go up dramatically and in ten (10) years from now, we could be renting that house out or have an arrangement where somebody purchases the house; they get a portion of the increase in the value over time. When they sell the house, it goes back to the County whose input into this is still only five hundred fifty thousand dollars ($550,000), not seven hundred thousand dollars ($700,000) or eight hundred thousand dollars ($800,000) that it would be ten (10) to twenty (20) years from now. We need to come up with a program where we keep these housing in the affordable housing pool and not get these properties and immediately take them out of affordable housing, because that is what we are doing. I would like to have a program where the County retain long-term control over the properties and could cycle people through them enabling them to save the money to come up with a down payment and purchase their own home in the future. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Lonnie. Alice. ALICE PARKER: Alice Parker, for the record. I certainly echo Lonnie's testimony. We definitely need affordable housing any way we can and his proposal sounds really logical and financially wise to me. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any questions of the Housing Agency? You are up. Thank you for coming, Steve. STEVEN FRANCO, JR., Homebuyer Specialist: Steve Franco with the Housing Agency. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning, Steve. Thank you so much for being here. I know you came in while Mr. Sykos was testifying, but he basically said we should not buy and sell houses into the market, and I believe this program is actually exactly that. It insolates the housing from the market, allows the County to hold it long-term, but maybe you could explain? Mr. Franco: Yes, I can explain a little bit about how the CDBG Home Purchase Program works. The program was designed to set aside CDBG money for the use of purchasing homes at market price and then selling them at an affordable price to those who are at eighty percent (80%) and below the Kaua`i median household income. The way we make it affordable for that income group is by way of our leasehold sales program in which the County still retains ownership of the land and we basically sell the improvements that are on the property to the homeowner. Councilmember Yukimura: And that homeowner can stay in there as long as they want to, but should they decide to leave, then the County buys back the house. COUNCIL MEETING 6 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Franco: Right, so for the leasehold program, it is a ninety (90) year lease and the County does have the first option to purchase and in most cases, exercise their right to purchase their property, if for some reason the homeowner wants to sell during the term of the lease. Councilmember Yukimura: Which means then in ten (10) years or twenty (20) years, we still have some control over the price? Mr. Franco: Correct. The requirement will be to sell it to another participant on our Homebuyer List and also meet the income requirements for the eighty percent (80%) and below. Councilmember Yukimura: That means that it is available to qualified families from sale to sale, right? Mr. Franco: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further questions for Steve? Seeing none. Thank you. The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I want to thank Lonnie and Alice both for their concern and their thinking about how we can make more affordable housing available. If we were to allow things to be sold into the market after ten (10) or twenty (20) or thirty (30) years, that means that we would forever be playing catch-up because we would have to replace these houses that have gone into the market. Instead, thanks to the foresight of the Housing Agency, we are keeping them through leaseholds and making them available for multiple sales to qualified families, which really insures that we have an ever growing inventory of affordable housing. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Seeing none. The motion to approve C 2017-278 was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can we go to the CAFR? COUNCIL MEETING 7 DECEMBER 20, 2017 C 2017-276 Communication (11/30/2017) from Council Chair Rapozo, requesting the presence of the Director of Finance and N&K CPAs, Inc., to provide a briefing on the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), Single Audit Reports, and Management Advisory Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2017: Councilmember Brun moved to receive C 2017-276 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Chock. There being no objections, the rules were suspended: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Gentlemen, thank you for coming. If you can state your name, and then you may begin. BLAKE S. ISOBE, Principal of N&K: I am Blake Isobe. I am the Principal in charge of the audit of the County CAFR. This is John Bautista; he is our Senior Manager that has been in charge of the audit for many years now. Thank you for giving us time to go over the CAFR with you folks, the results of the audit, and any questions that you folks may have as a result of the audit. As a result of the audit, we issued three (3) different reports. The first one is the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, or the CAFR, and these are the financial statements of the CAFR. The second report we issued is the Single Audit Report. This is the report on the financial awards and expenditure of those financial awards of the County. The third report is a Management Advisory Report. This Management Advisory Report is just additional findings. It is not a required report of the audit, but it is just additional things that we may bring up as a result of the audit. I will start off with the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, which is the largest report, the fat one. The first thing I wanted to point out is the County received its twenty-fourth (24th) consecutive year of the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting on the 2016 CAFR, meaning this requires the CAFR to be prepared with accordance with accounting and reporting standards and also requires the County to submit the CAFR by the due date, which is December 31st. This is the twenty-fourth (24th) year. The CAFR contains the financial statements of the County along with a couple other sections, one is the Introductory Section with management's discussion and analysis or MD&A, the Notes, and then Other Supplementary Information, and the Statistical Section. Our part of the report is actually on pages 13-15, which is our opinion on the financial statements. Page 14 is our opinions on the Financial Statements. Here, we actually report that we issued an unmodified opinion or a clean opinion on the financial statements that they are fairly presented in accordance with generally accepted County principals. Moving on. Starting on page 28. Page 28 is the Statement of Net Position. This is the balance sheet of the County. The overall net position of the County had a slight increase of about five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) from the prior year, ending up with approximately four hundred two million dollars ($402,000,000) in net COUNCIL MEETING 8 DECEMBER 20, 2017 position. A few of the significant changes on the statement of net position where there was about a two million three hundred thousand dollar ($2,300,000) increase in your capital assets, which include approximately twenty-four million five hundred thousand dollars ($24,500,000) additions, three million six hundred thousand dollars ($3,600,000) in dispositions, and then offset by about twenty-two million dollars ($22,000,000) in depreciation. Netting out to about a two million three hundred thousand dollar ($2,300,000) increase. There are couple other large fluctuations and these are related to the pension numbers. The first large one was an increase of seventy-three million five hundred thousand dollars ($73,500,000) in deferred outflows related to pensions and then an increase of ninety-four million three hundred thousand dollars ($94,300,000) in your net pension liability. I can discuss these fluctuations later. There is a note in the financial statements that go over the components of your net pension liability. Lastly, your long-term debt decreased by about nine million three hundred thousand dollars ($9,300,000). That includes some additions in a form of about four million two hundred thousand dollars ($4,200,000) in State Revolving Fund loans and about two million six hundred thousand dollars ($2,600,000) in capital leases. The larger decreases included about five million one hundred thousand dollars ($5,100,000) in bond principal payments, along with about an eight million dollar ($8,000,000) reduction in the landfill closure and the post- closure liability. That is part of this long-term debt number. Moving on to the next page, which is your Statement of Activities. Overall, the government wide revenues increased by about nine million four hundred thousand dollars ($9,400,000). This is comprised of about five million one hundred thousand dollars ($5,100,000) in increase in real property taxes, which is mainly due to increase in property values and new construction or new property that got taxed. There was also an increase of about two million four hundred thousand dollars ($2,400,000) in operating grants and contributions, which were mainly increased in your public welfare grants for affordable housing. Lastly, there was about a four million three hundred thousand dollar ($4,300,000) increase in your capital grants and contributions. Those are mainly for landfill and highway projects. On the expense side, there was offsetting in your increase in revenues. There was actually an increase in expenses by about ten million eight hundred thousand dollars ($10,800,000). One of the large increases was the increase in your pension expense. Your pension expense increased about eighteen million one hundred thousand dollars ($18,100,000) from fourteen million five hundred thousand dollars ($14,500,000) in the prior year to thirty-two million six hundred thousand dollars ($32,600,000) in the current year. This was kind of offset by a reduction in your landfill liability, which affects your expense, so that was an eight million dollar ($8,000,000) decrease. The remaining increase was just your personnel cost of about five million dollars ($5,000,000). On pages 31 and 33 are your Fund Financial Statements. I will go over your main fund, which is your General Fund. Your fund balance there increased by about COUNCIL MEETING 9 DECEMBER 20, 2017 eight million eight hundred thousand dollars ($8,800,000). This is kind of similar to the prior year where the General Fund increased by about eight million seven hundred thousand dollars ($8,700,000). Similar to your government wide activities, this mainly came from an increase in your real property tax revenue, which was offset by an increase in your expenses by about five million dollars ($5,000,000), so there is a five million one hundred thousand dollar ($5,100,000) increase in revenue and a five million dollar ($5,000,000) increase in expense. On the expenditure side, you will notice that there is a fluctuation in your Public Works and your culture and recreation category. That is mainly due to a shift of the Building and Janitorial Division moving from the Department of Public Works to the culture and recreation category, so it is just a classification. I wanted to move on to the Notes to the Financial Statements. This is one of the larger liabilities and so I wanted to put a slide in here for this. Your net pension liability has increased from approximately one hundred fifty-three million dollars ($153,000,000) to two hundred seventy-two million dollars ($272,000,000) over the past two (2) years. The disclosure in the CAFR begins on page 82 and it is pretty long, so it goes all the way to about page 91. Within these Notes, they describe the description of the plan and the benefits that are provided through the State's Employees' Retirement System, or ERS. In Fiscal Year 2017, this large increase from one hundred seventy-eight million dollars ($178,000,000) to two hundred seventy-two million dollars ($272,000,000) in the net pension liability was mainly due to changes in the actuarial assumptions used to compute the net pension liability. One was a decrease in the investment return assumptions and the other was the decrease in the discount rate from seven point six percent (7.6%) to seven percent (7%). This decrease was one of the larger things, along with the change in the mortality assumptions, so I guess the assumption that people are living longer, that creates an increase in the benefits that they will receive. Some of the figures show up throughout this Note along with the breakdown of the deferred outflow and inflows, so like I mentioned on the face of the financial, there was a large increase in the deferred outflows. If you look on page 88, it breaks down the components of the deferred outflows related to pensions and one of the larger increases of that changes in assumptions which is one of the components that increased a lot and created the increase in the deferred out. Another large liability sitting out there is the Other Post Employment Benefit or what we call OPEB. This is your Employer Union Trust Fund funding. This is also part of Note 13 and starts on page 92. The County has been funding one hundred percent (100%) of the annual required contributions or the ARC. In Fiscal Year 2017, the funding was about fifteen million seven hundred thousand dollars ($15,700,000). The unfunded liability as of the last valuation, which was done on July 1, 2015, showed the County's unfunded portion of about one hundred fifty million four hundred thousand dollars ($150,400,000). There is a new accounting standard that is going to come effective next year as it relates to reporting of this unfunded liability and similar to a couple years ago when the County had to pick up the pension liability, COUNCIL MEETING 10 DECEMBER 20, 2017 the unfunded liability related to this OPEB will also be recorded on the County's books. Right now, it is only a disclosure and this will also shift as it relates to reporting next year. The last Note that I wanted to bring up and it is disclosed as one of the larger liabilities of the County, is the landfill liability. I had mentioned earlier that there was about an eight million dollar ($8,000,000) decrease in the landfill liability. This is primarily due to the completion of the gas collection system, which was accrued for as part of the closure/post-closure costs, along with there was a change in the estimated closure cost to the actual closure cost that was accrued from last year to this year, so that added to the decrease in the current year. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a clarifying question. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Regarding your statement about landfill, Kaheka Phase II. Is that the old landfill in Kekaha? Is that referring to... Mr. Isobe: That is the current open landfill. Councilmember Yukimura: The current landfill? Mr. Isobe: Phase II. Councilmember Yukimura: I just never heard it called Kaheka II before. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It is the Hawaiian name. Mr. Isobe: Kekaha. It is spelt wrong. Sorry. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, it is Kekaha. Mr. Isobe: We made a new one for you folks. I am sorry. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Councilmember Brun: Paying for something that is not there. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Good catch. Councilmember Yukimura: That makes it real clear. Thank you. COUNCIL MEETING 11 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: That is a great question. Anymore? No. You folks can continue. Mr. Isobe: Sorry about that. Councilmember Yukimura: No problem. Mr. Isobe: Lastly, there was a restatement in the 2016 CAFR as it relates to the Sewer Enterprise Fund. There was an overstated liability that was related to sewer credits that needed to be refunded that actually got refunded in 2016, but it was not really caught until 2017. So in the prior year, the expense was overstated by about seven hundred fifty-nine thousand dollars ($759,000) and the liability was overstated by that amount. We can go over that finding when we go over the Single Audit Report because any prior period adjustment shows up as a finding in the Internal Control Over Financial Reporting Section of the Single Audit Report. For the CAFR itself, those were the main points that we wanted to highlight in the CAFR. I do not know if you folks wanted to go through questions first or move on to the Single Audit Report. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We will go to questions first since Councilmember Yukimura has taken the time to read every single page. That is a great catch, though, good job. We do not need computers with you. You are a living computer. Do you have a question? Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you very much for the presentation. It feels like you have a lot of different language in this report or am I not remembering, like outflow and inflow. Is that a change? Mr. Isobe: The deferred ins and deferred outflows came in, I want to say, about three (3) to four (4) years ago. Councilmember Yukimura: You see. Mr. Isobe: I believe it came in the year before the pensions came on...it was a couple years now that we have had these different ins and outs. I guess what the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) wanted to distinguish is that they did not consider them assets or liabilities as it relates to the deferred ins and outs. Therefore, they created their own category. It is only in government accounting. You do not see it in any commercial or nonprofits. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the definition of inflow and outflow? It is not considered assets or liabilities? Mr. Isobe: It is future inflow of resources. COUNCIL MEETING 12 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Anticipated income? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You folks can go back to that. Councilmember Yukimura: Maybe you folks can help me. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: These pension items are pretty difficult. Councilmember Yukimura: It is related to pension though. This entire idea that GASB told governments that you have to incorporate somehow the long-term liability because if you do not, it is going to come and hit you really hard, like in Detroit. Mr. Isobe: Some of the deferred inflows and outflows related to pensions, what they are trying to eliminate is huge fluctuations in your pension expense. Some of the deferred outs and the deferred ins are actually amortized...I am getting over-technical, but it is amortized over either five (5) years and these are kind of set by the actuary. It is either five (5) years or right now, it is five point four (5.4) if it relates to...average remaining time between...thank you. RENEE YADAO, Accounting Systems Administrator: Good morning. Renee Yadao, for the record, Accounting Systems Administrator. If you look at page 57 in the CAFR, it is defined there in the Significant Accounting Policies. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Ms. Yadao: You can read the verbiage in there as to what a deferred in and out is. Councilmember Yukimura: "Deferred outflows of resources represents a consumption of net position that applies to a future period and will not be recognized as an outflow of resources until that time." So it is kind of an anticipation of a future expense. Is that correct? Ms. Yadao: Right. Mr. Isobe: Correct. Ms. Yadao: So it is not going to be realized in the current fiscal year, but an ensuing fiscal year. Councilmember Yukimura: But it does not have to be the immediately next fiscal year, it could be anywhere into the future? COUNCIL MEETING 13 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Ms. Yadao: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: Deferred inflows represents an acquisition of net position that applies to a future period that will not be recognized as an inflow of resources (i.e. revenues) until that time. The County has four (4) items that qualify for reporting in this category. Property taxes and fees collected in the fiscal year, for the ensuing fiscal year are reported in the government funds balance sheet. Property taxes and fees collected in the... Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It is like future revenues during that future time of the future inflow or future outflow, I guess. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. And it defines net position, which is used in the definitions of the inflows and outflows. Net position is comprised of the various net earnings or losses from operating and non-operating revenues. The County's net position is classified in the following three (3) components: net investment in capital assets; restricted; and unrestricted. What is restricted and unrestricted? Are we talking about balances? Ms. Yadao: If you turn to page 28, that is the face of our net position and on the bottom, it summarizes basically what our fund balance or what our balances are. The first one is net investment in capital assets, so that is pretty much primarily the bulk of our balance sheet items. Restricted per capital activity and other, that is basically for debt service payments, fund balance debt service. The other category is basically our restricted cash primarily in our Housing Fund. Unrestricted is the residual of what is remaining. Due to the pensions, we report a negative on restricted because of the large amount. Councilmember Yukimura: That means we do not have much. Our future unrestricted is actually restrained because of the future pension payments. Ms. Yadao: Correct. Next year, with the implementation of GASB 75, which is for OPEB, this amount will probably double, I anticipate, because pension and our healthcare cost is the bulk of our expenses for future years. Councilmember Yukimura: Like you were saying that right now we just have to do disclosure, but next year it is going to be actually incorporated into our fiscal statement. Is that right? Mr. Isobe: Correct. So that is GASB 75 that Renee just mentioned that will require the County to pick that last off balance sheet liability up onto the statement of that position. COUNCIL MEETING 14 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Therefore, we can expect next year for our financial position to be worse. Next year, we will have anticipated revenues from the General Excise Tax (GET) at least half year, but I do not know. I mean it is not... Council Vice Chair Kagawa: GET is 2019, right? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but it is the half of next fiscal year. It is restricted moneys; it is not like General Fund moneys. I do not know how you treat it. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next fiscal year is June 30, 2018. Councilmember Yukimura: Next year starts July 1, 2018 and it includes the first half of 2019, which is when we will start realizing the GET, correct? Ms. Yadao: July 1, 2018 is fiscal 2019. Councilmember Yukimura: Which is next fiscal year, right? Ms. Yadao: Well, we are in arrears for the CAFR, so we will be reporting... Councilmember Yukimura: Right, so you will be reporting on the fiscal year we are in right now? Ms. Yadao: Correct, so we are already half way through our current fiscal year, 2018... Councilmember Yukimura: Right, but we are not looking at that right now, we are looking back. Ms. Yadao: Correct, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: The fiscal reporting for this fiscal year is going to look pretty bad because GASB requires that what you are only disclosing now has to be actually incorporated into the financial statement. Ms. Yadao: Correct. Mr. Isobe: Correct. Ms. Yadao: And also with the new general obligation bonds, the twenty-six million dollars ($26,000,000). COUNCIL MEETING 15 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, our debt is going to increase. Ms. Yadao: Our debt is going to go up. Yes, you can anticipate it being higher than what it is today. Councilmember Yukimura: And maybe more than double if the pension alone is going to double this. Okay. Thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any more questions? Councilmember Yukimura: That is bad news, but we need to know it. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I am looking at page 28 and we are already recording the pension liability on the unrestricted line, right? Ms. Yadao: Correct. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: What is the difference next year? Ms. Yadao: It is going to increase due to OPEB. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Oh, you are saying that amount will increase significantly next year? Ms. Yadao: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Because of OPEB? Ms. Yadao: Yes, it will be a higher negative amount because of the implementation of GASB 75. Currently, we are presenting OPEB in our Notes, basically for presentation purposes. However, GASB 75 will now require us to bring it down to the balance sheet, so it will look not as well as it does today, even though it is negative. It will probably be double that amount, I anticipate, if no more. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I was trying to figure out accounting-wise, the one hundred twenty-four million dollars ($124,000,000) shows up as a credit. Where is the debit or most of the debit of that amount? Mr. Isobe: The one hundred twenty-four million dollars ($124,000,000) is actually a debit...like it is a deficit in retain earnings on a commercial account, meaning you are already in deficit, right, so the credit went to the net pension liability and then the debit went into your net position. COUNCIL MEETING 16 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Where is the net pension liability? Mr. Isobe: It is part of the long-term liabilities. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Oh, okay, I see it. Are there any more questions? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we show slide 6? Where you show a five million dollar ($5,000,000) increase in personnel cost, is that primarily due to the raises that were agreed upon for this past fiscal year? Ms. Yadao: Correct. That is all across the board Countywide and it includes fringe, all of the wages, and fringe benefits like healthcare. Councilmember Yukimura: Does GASB require that you anticipate the upcoming raises, too? Mr. Isobe: No. Those will not be picked up as any type of liability. The anticipated raises would be part of next year's expense when you start incurring those expenses. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: On page 28, going back to my previous question, the net pension liability number of two hundred sixty-one million six hundred seventeen thousand five hundred ninety-two dollars ($261,617,592), is that where the offset is? Mr. Isobe: Correct. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: And then the net pension liability is the number that will go up? Mr. Isobe: No, so there would be actually an additional line for your OPEB that would come on that will be...I do not know the exact figure, but the last actuary evaluation was the one hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000). That is around where it might be. It is going really depend on actuarial determination based on healthcare and you folks know what healthcare has looked like over the last two (2) years. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Okay. Are there any more questions? If not, he can go onto the next portion. If you have questions later, we can always go back. Are we on the next section now? COUNCIL MEETING 17 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Isobe: The next report is another required report of the audit because you folks do have a lot of federal awards. The second report is the Single Audit Report. In this report, there are other reports that we issue within it. The first one is a report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and Other Matters and this is required by Government Auditing Standards. This is on pages 6 and 7. On page 7, we do report that we did identify a deficiency in Internal Control that we consider to be a significant deficiency, and that is identified as Finding 2017- 001. Other than that, we did not note any other findings that we determined needed to be reported as Internal Control findings. The second report we issue is the report on the Federal Awards. This is on pages 9 through 11. On page 10, is our opinion on the County's compliance with each major federal program. Here, we issue an unmodified opinion or a clean opinion that the County complied in all material respects to the compliance requirements of these major federal programs. We also issue a report on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and that is on page 11. We report that the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards are fairly presented. On pages 12 through 20, is a listing of all of your different grants and the expenditure of these grants. On page 20, the total federal expenditures for Fiscal Year 2017 was about twenty-four million one hundred million dollars ($24,100,000). This is up from about twenty million five hundred thousand dollars ($20,500,000) in the prior year. I guess the main increase in expenditures on your United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) grants or your HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) program and about two million seven hundred thousand dollars ($2,700,000) increase in expenditures on your transportation grants. Part of the Single Audit Report is a Schedule of Findings and Questioned Costs on page 23. This gives a summary of the entire audit itself. First on the financial statements, it discloses that it was an unmodified opinion and we reported no material weaknesses and internal control over financial reporting, but there is a significant deficiency and no noncompliance material to the financial statements. On the federal award side, it summarizes here there was no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies. Also, that we issued an unmodified opinion on the major federal programs and also that there were no findings disclosed in accordance with the Single Audit. It lists the three (3) major programs that were audited as major programs for this year's audit, which was Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers, Homeland Security, and National Infrastructure Investments. We also disclosed that the County of Kaua`i did qualify as a low-risk auditee for this audit. On page 24, is the start of the Schedule and Findings and Questioned Costs. This is the one finding on Internal Control over financial reporting that we are reporting and this relates to the prior period adjustments. I guess any time there is a prior period adjustment, it identifies that there was some kind of breakdown Internal Control over financial reporting, and part of government auditing standards COUNCIL MEETING 18 DECEMBER 20, 2017 require us to report it as a significant deficiency to you folks. We have the criteria and the conditions, so in the condition we note that there was a prior period adjustment for seven hundred fifty-eight thousand five hundred fifty dollars ($758,550) for payment of accrued liability that was included in the Sewer Enterprise Fund expenses for 2016. That should have been just reducing the liability instead. It was because it was fixed, there was no other...like, it is not going to continue on. On the bottom of page 24, Federal Award Findings and Questioned Costs, there is no matters reported, so that is good. The back half of the report is management's response to the finding and the Summary Schedule of Prior Audit Findings and in 2016, there were no findings, so it is a clean report there too. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any questions on the Single Audit? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you again, Blake. This is a pretty good report if we look back on previous audits, to have no reportable findings in our federal grants management, right. Mr. Isobe: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: And then the one deficiency is that failure in sewers to accurately report their deficit. Mr. Isobe: That was a payment that should have reduced a liability that was recorded. Councilmember Yukimura: Untimely recording? Mr. Isobe: Correct. I think a couple years ago we had that finding on the recording of sewer credits that were due and refundable to the landowner and at that point, it actually got paid back, but it did not reduce the liability. What should have happened was the liability should have been reduced at that point instead of recorded as an expense. Councilmember Yukimura: That has been pointed out and I think our Finance Director accepted it and they are aware of it, so it should not happen again. Mr. Isobe: Correct. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I think they found the error, Finance and the Department of Public Works came up with a money bill, and we fixed it, right? Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Excellent. COUNCIL MEETING 19 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: That was to Kaua`i Lagoons. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, that was the Kaua`i Lagoons one. Thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any further questions on the Single Audit Report? Single Audit looks good, besides the prior year occurrence and we fixed that. Mr. Isobe: The last report we issued is the Management Advisory Report and I know we have reported this for many years, but I guess it is something that we just wanted to keep in front of you folks as it relates to the improving the internal controls over the pCard Purchases. We had brought it up from when the pCards were first issued and started to being used. During our testing, we noted these multiple instances where preapprovals were attained after the purchase was made, one instance where there was no documentation of the preapproval, and three instances where the purchase did not have the three (3) quotes, which is required for purchases greater than one thousand dollars ($1,000). We did look at eighty-one (81) different pCard transactions from different users and there is still these issues that we are noting through our testing. When you look at the status of the prior year's findings, which show up on page 6, there is some improvement, but there are still additional work that can be done in that area. We just wanted to report that to you folks. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any questions on that? I have one. Out of the eighty-one (81) that we pulled, how much were problematic where we are just missing a few steps as noted like we still have some occurrences of not following these basic instructions? Mr. Isobe: That is these ten (10) instances here. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Ten (10) out of eighty-one (81), so we still have some work to go as far as totally getting rid of the problem. Thank you. Councilmember Yukimura: I have a follow-up. How many pCard transactions are there in a year? If this is a sampling of eighty-one (81) and there is that frequency of error, I am just trying to gauge how significant these violations could... Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I think that is a more of a question for the Administration. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the Administration come up? In many cases, these are really small transactions by their nature, right?They are under COUNCIL MEETING 20 DECEMBER 20, 2017 one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500), but if you have a lot of them, they can accumulate and we also saw from the Big Island, that they can really be abused. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: If I can make a suggestion, at some point if we still feel like this is a problem that needs to be discussed, perhaps we should have a communication in Councilmember Kaneshiro's committee and we can focus on that, but you can ask your questions for now. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I do not know. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I find it concerning because last year we said, "Can we adopt a policy where management will take away the pCard from those who are not following instructions?" We made some recommendations here. We cannot order the Administration what to do, but our recommendation was to take some of those steps so that we could clean up their act. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you, Ken, for being here. We are just inquiring at this point, so we have a sense of how to gauge this. KEN M. SHIMONISHI, Director of Finance: If I am not mistaken, I believe the transactions range in maybe two thousand (2,000) to three thousand (3,000) transactions per year. I can confirm that with our Purchasing Director upon his return. One of the new things that we have agreed to is to have Purchasing do a sampling testing of the procurement process, which was nonexistent. We looked at that last year, did not get it up and running, but I have directed them to include that going forward. Again, it is for transactions that are one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500) or less. We had the bank put that automatic limit on any single transaction, so that does not occur going forward as well. Councilmember Yukimura: So if it is three thousand (3,000) per year and this is sampling of eighty-one (81), I think my math was...it is like three-hundred seventy (370) infractions, possibly, if it is ten infractions for every eighty-one. But I want to say I think the measures you have put in place are really good considering some other kinds of problems we have faced with improper process and procedures that have incurred huge fines and huge liability, this is not. We need to keep our prospective on this. Mr. Shimonishi: Correct. I think what you are saying is that we have not seen inappropriate use of a pCard to purchase things that are non-County related type of...or not a bona fide expense of the County. Where you saw the approvals where preapprovals were not obtained, but they were actually approved subsequent, again, that is a process issue. COUNCIL MEETING 21 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: In fact, there have not been any real improper purchases, they have just been mainly improper procedures. Mr. Shimonishi: Thus far. Yes, that is correct. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, that is good. I can see the Administration trying to put in place more safeguards, so that is good too. Mr. Shimonishi: We are trying. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further questions? Ken, are we trying to develop an internal control policy of trying to get this problem fixed? Mr. Shimonishi: Correct. That is the directive I have to our Purchasing Director to have a review because the purchasing authority was delegated to those who held all the p Cards and their supervisors, but obviously, we have been told a couple years now that there should be some overview from our side as well. It is not just, "You called a foul on yourself," so we will try to implement some type of sampling to have Purchasing review those transactions. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I agree with the steps you have taken because they have already found that there are some issues, so I am hoping that we take some steps. Mr. Shimonishi: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: Can we get some feedback about the larger issue that was brought up in the CAFR in terms of the pension and OPEB liabilities. That is going to present a major challenge for us on our budget, right? Mr. Shimonishi: Right. I guess when you look at the overall financial statement and our position, we were saying we need to recognize these liabilities as if we were...I mean, they are there and that is different from, "We are going to fully fund it right now," and that is why when we bring the budget forward and we have the actuary work done on the ERS, they are telling us we need increase the contribution rates so that the contributions going into fund ERS can get to a 25-year or 30-year amortization. That is what we need to be able to assure that we can comply with funding those requirements each year as we go forward, similar to the OPEB, which we said was one hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000) in current liability to fully fund that plan right now, but the reality is that we will fund that over twenty some odd years. The scary part is that we have yet to see the most updated actuarial work, which was done July 31, 2017. We have that scheduled in COUNCIL MEETING 22 DECEMBER 20, 2017 January, but that actuary work prior did not incorporate any of the changes we saw in the years related to mortality tables or if there were any changes in the investment rate or the discount, et cetera. If they had not incorporated some of those things, then obviously you would expect that liability to also increase as well. The ERS is done every year whereas the OPEB is done every two (2) years, so we will see what the actuarial work says come January. Councilmember Yukimura: That is why we have to scrutinize our commitments in terms of raises for employees because that is going to determine how much cash flow there is. Mr. Shimonishi: Correct. Obviously every dollar we pay out, we have these additional benefit costs on top of that. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I have a follow-up. Last week, we had Mr. Williams here from ERS and one of the questions I asked him was, "You send the County of Kaua`i every year a bill or a status of what our payment is due, is there a breakdown showing what the County of Kaua`i employee retirees liability is?" He said, "The ERS is not set up like that. It is set up Statewide." I am wondering how do we know the accuracy of the numbers that ERS gives. Do they divide it among employees? How do we know those numbers that they give us as far as projected liability, how do we know those are accurate if they say the ERS is not set up to break out which County or which State...what liability it is? He said the ERS is not set up that way and that it is set up that all the State is all together and we just pay as liabilities are our own, but we do not have a breakdown as far as the projection. How do we know that the projected figure that they give us that we are going to record on our books next year, we say it is going to be huge, how do we know that those numbers are accurate if they do not even have that system in place to divide it? That is not really your problem, but I am wondering how do we know that we booking an accurate number next year? Mr. Isobe: OPEB is actually separate buckets for the County of Kaua`i, Honolulu County, and so you folks actually have separate buckets and that is where you folks have been funding one hundred percent (100%) of your ARC as compared to maybe the State, who I do not know what they fund into their OPEB. I know you folks have been funding for how many years now, one hundred percent (100%) of your ARC and that is where your bucket for your liability is more controlled. On the ERS side, it is just one (1) bucket for the entire State and everyone who participates in ERS. As it relates to how they allocate this liability, it is based on that required contribution...the required contributions, correct? So, your proportion of required contributions for your active employees are kind of allocated out. COUNCIL MEETING 23 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: He said that is how we have been doing it all of these years and that is the way it is set up, so we just basically need to use that system until they change another system of accounting then? Mr. Isobe: Correct. That is how the ERS is set up and it is not...it is like a cost-sharing kind of thing. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: So OPEB and the ERS are both combined into the future liability line? Mr. Isobe: Next year, the OPEB will be a separate line as part of your liabilities and so that is one that is going to come on the...ERS right now is on, pension liability is on, the Other Post-Employment Benefits will come on next year. Once Ken gets the actuary work done, you kind of have an idea of what that liability will look like. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Further questions? Would it be more accurate if we try and change the ERS so that they have a system that more accurately reflects what each State agency, what their projections are, rather than have this system of"all in the bucket," and we will just project based on what bill we give you? Is it hard to say? Mr. Isobe: It is hard to say. I am not sure the work that would go into to divvy and determine that up. That is how the plan has been set up from day one. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Okay. Further questions? Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: I do not know if this is a good question, but I guess there is no such thing as a stupid question. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: They will answer what they can. I have asked stupid questions here. Councilmember Kawakami: Is there any benefit of how this ERS system is set up, meaning are we being possibly subsidized by bigger Counties as far as how...I mean, because I do not know. I was thinking in the overall scheme of things, I know that the City and County of Honolulu subsidizes a lot of the services on Kaua`i just because they have a bigger population base, but is there any potential benefit for this? I am trying to wrap my head around it. COUNCIL MEETING 24 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Isobe: That is a hard question. That may be something we can ask ERS if you folks are thinking that possibly, but that is probably something I cannot answer. Councilmember Kawakami: Okay. Sorry for that question. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I have been advised that I have been drifting off topic. They are not here to discuss the ERS or the OPEB, particularly, because they are just here to do the numbers, but I am at fault. Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura. Just do not answer if it does not pertain to your presentation. We are confused about the entire OPEB and the ERS and just because you folks are here does not mean that you folks are the ones that should be answering. Councilmember Yukimura: I am guessing that the subsidy would be there if they paid their bills. If they do not pay their bills, then we all get dragged down by the liability. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You folks can continue. Mr. Isobe: That was our last slide. That summarized the audit. I want to thank Ken and his office with Renee, Sherri, and Ann on the grant side for the continued support and assistance throughout the audit. It shows a lot when you can complete the audit early December that we did complete it. I know we currently do Maui and Big Island and I want to say that we finished first, so it is a good testament to the Finance Department. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Members? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Is Maui paying in full in their pension? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I do not know if that is appropriate. Councilmember Yukimura: It is public record. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Mauna Kea, is it appropriate to ask about Maui? Councilmember Yukimura: It tells us about our liability if we are all on the same boat. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You can answer. Mr. Isobe: Off the top of my head, I am not sure. COUNCIL MEETING 25 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are three any more further questions? You can ask about any topic on the Kaua`i County audit. I have one (1) and it is not about this year, but it was just brought up to us last week that the Mayor has ordered a two-day Administrative Leave. I asked him, "Do we account for that with any kind of journal entry..." because for me, it is like a gift. You are adding two (2) days of holiday for the day after Christmas and the day after New Year's Eve, so I am wondering is there any type of journal entry that needs to be recorded. I know we did not have one in this year here, but I am wondering because the prior year, they did one (1) day, so would the adjustment be necessary had we known that...because we heard numbers about two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) or three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) per day. It is not in their contract, you are adding a day of leave, so does the entry need to be made to record? Mr. Isobe: That is just a period cost, so as your payroll goes out in whatever pay period that they end up taking off, that Administrative Day, I mean the payroll would just be run like regular. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: So, no entries needed to say that a gift was made in the month? Mr. Isobe: No. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura, go ahead. Councilmember Yukimura: On slide 8, you show our pension liability going from one hundred fifty-three million dollars ($153,000,000) in 2015 to two hundred seventy-three million dollars ($273,000,000) in June of 2017. That is a one hundred twenty million dollar ($120,000,000) increase. Mr. Isobe: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: That is huge. In two (2) years, one hundred twenty million dollars ($120,000,000) and that is what Ken is talking about having to amortize. Mr. Isobe: As I mentioned, the increase between 2016 and 2017, the large increase is there, it is almost a ninety something million dollar increase and that was mainly due to these changes in assumptions that were used. One is the mortality rates, so they changed the mortality table where people are living longer and so that is one, and the other thing was the discount rate changing from seven point six percent (7.6%) to seven percent (7%). If you look in the CAFR, there is actually part of the pension note is the sensitivity. COUNCIL MEETING 26 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: What page? Mr. Isobe: Page 90 of the CAFR. There is a sensitivity to the discount rate change and they do a one percent (1%) increase and a one percent (1%) decrease. Right now, the County's share is two hundred seventy-two million seven hundred thousand dollars ($272,700,000) or so at the seven percent (7%) discount rate. If they were to change the discount rate to one percent (1%), the County's share would have been three hundred fifty-two million dollars ($352,000,000), so they kind of disclose that this discount rate is an arbitrary rate that is used by the actuaries that is determining a lot. Councilmember Yukimura: But they are predicting what we are going to have to pay out in the future, right, based on people's length of life and the cost of money, and things like that? Mr. Isobe: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: So it is telling us what our financial position is based on that. We can kick the can down the road and not pay attention to that or assume lower liability, but then we are really putting it potentially in the hands of our children or grandchildren to pay a really big bill that they have not prepared for or none of us have prepared for because we have not been putting aside money. Is that it? Mr. Isobe: Correct, and I think that is sort of why GASB wanted to bring this to everybody's consciousness by putting on the pension liabilities to all of the governments and now the OPEB is coming on as it relates to putting on that last liability that used to be shown on an off balance sheet. These liabilities have been there, it just has not been recorded on the statement on net position. Councilmember Yukimura: And we have been making budget decisions without that at front and center, so is GASB not wanting us to look more clearly at that because otherwise...I mean out of sight, out of mind, and somebody else is going to have to pay for it if we do not prepare to pay for it over time. Am I right? Mr. Isobe: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, that is a huge responsibility. This entire thing about when Mr. Williams was here from ERS, one of the major pivotal decision points was that of the State Legislature skimming off one hundred twenty million dollars ($120,000,000) or something, but it was probably before all of your time, but you folks need to know history because that is what is causing the problem here today. They took one hundred twenty million dollars ($120,000,000) off the top of the pension COUNCIL MEETING 27 DECEMBER 20, 2017 moneys and put it in the General Fund, so they could all look good in that year giving out money for various Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) or whatever, but then leaving us with this huge liability. We cannot do government finances like that because look at...and that increase now that we are looking at was from that. Okay. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any more further questions? Seeing none, thank you folks, great job. Thank you for the presentation. Mr. Isobe: Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We will have public testimony now. Did anyone sign up to speak? If not, Alice. Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. I think these folks did an exemplary job, however, would somebody please use the full name for the acronyms. I have said this before. There were all kinds of acronyms and we are going, "huh?" Alphabet soup. The other thing is and this is a technical issue. The filming, the picture is fuzzy, the captions are fuzzy, and that is the way it goes home, so can you advise Hoike? Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Alice. Anyone else wishing to speak on the CAFR? Lonnie. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. It was an impressive report and our County employees did a wonderful job. This is a very complicated subject and they make it as understandable as it can be for the general public. The thing that they brought up, which you have addressed a little bit, has to do with the management of the pCards. Since the inception of them, the Administration's inability to get their employees and managers to follow the rules is disconcerting. In auditing, Auditors as a rule, look for things that are easily abused and use that as a template as to whether or not if small things are abused, then you can assume that there are not good controls on larger issues. If there are good controls on small things, there is probably good controls on larger issues. That was the finding that came out of our Fuel Audit. This is very common in the auditing, and so the Administration's inability to control the usage of the p Cards does not bode well for their ability to control expenditures at larger levels. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Lonnie. Alice, Information Technology (IT) is aware of the problems and they are working on fixing it. Further speakers? No one else. Seeing none, the meeting is called back to order. Members, further discussion. Councilmember Yukimura. COUNCIL MEETING 28 DECEMBER 20, 2017 There being on further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Yukimura: I want to thank the Auditors for a good job and I want to thank our Finance Department for a good job. I know it takes cooperation, as Blake pointed out, and it also takes a well-run financial operation in general. I think we have seen great strides and improvements over the years and I really appreciate that from Ken and his team. Thank you to Renee, also. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion?Yes, I would like to thank our Finance Department and N&K. I am very happy with the job that they have been doing. They have been doing audits ever since I have been on and I am very satisfied. The other thing is that although the numbers look good as far as the County doing its job reporting those numbers to the Auditors, I am not totally satisfied with the p Card issue. It has been lingering for a while and I think the public hopes that we do even better. Although we say that we are improving, the Auditors are reporting that we are making strides. There are not as much problems coming up. We still need to do better. We are doing two thousand (2,000) to three thousand (3,000)transactions per year and I think we have to keep working on it until we get a number that is really immaterial and we are not at that immaterial level as Councilmember Yukimura pointed out. If you project those ten (10) out of eighty (80) problems, when you multiple that out, you have a significant number that still needs cleaning up. Even if it is still garnering our approval, just following simple instructions to not do it in certain instances is not acceptable. This is government money, taxpayer money, hard-earned taxpayer money. Do not feel entitled that because you want to rush or what have you that you can break the rules without any consequences, it is not acceptable. I hope that we will stay on it, we will develop an internal control program that will penalize employees from not following basic instructions. That is my only take. Other than that, great job County of Kaua`i on the audit. I am satisfied, I am happy, and I think the taxpayers are satisfied. With the pCard issue, let us take the next steps and clean it up so it is not an issue. Thank you. The motion to receive C 2017-276 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Motion carried. Next item, please. Council Vice Chair Kagawa relinquished his chairmanship to Councilmember Kaneshiro. (Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as not present.) C 2017-279 Communication (12/11/2017) from Councilmember Kawakami, transmitting for Council consideration for inclusion in the 2018 County of Kaua`i COUNCIL MEETING 29 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Legislative Package, A Bill For An Act Relating To Government, to expand the provision for expenditure of revenue derived from a county general excise and use tax surcharge to include affordable housing. Councilmember Chock moved to approve C 2017-279, seconded by Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Any discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to ask Councilmember Kawakami how much need for affordable housing does he anticipate? Councilmember Kawakami: I checked back and thank you for the question, I reached out to House and Senate leadership and the money committees. We had some discussions on the General Excise (GE) Surcharge and if there perhaps is going to be a surplus, what is going to happen with that surplus, and they are very open to having any surplus funds being able to be appropriated towards our affordable housing initiative, so that was the intent. The intent was just to have surplus funds be available for any type of affordable housing issue or initiatives that the County may have, but the primary focus is the legislative intent, which is public transportation, road construction, and road repairs. I do not know what the anticipated amount is, but I can tell you that their budget was twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in the Highway Fund and we are looking at scooping twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) from GE surcharge and then the existing Highway Fund is about sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000), so there is a surplus. There is a potential surplus. Councilmember Yukimura: What do you mean, "Existing is sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000)"? Councilmember Kawakami: Highway Fund. Councilmember Yukimura: Whose Highway Fund? Councilmember Kawakami: Our Highway Fund. Councilmember Yukimura: County of Kaua`i's Highway Fund? Councilmember Kawakami: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Is sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000) and you are saying we are taking twenty-five...I do not get it. COUNCIL MEETING 30 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Kawakami: What do you not get? Those are the numbers that the Finance Department gave us. Councilmember Yukimura: But sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000)...we need moneys on top of what we are getting now to fix our roads... Councilmember Kawakami: There was a budget of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000), right? Am I wrong? (Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as present.) Councilmember Yukimura: I did not see any budget of twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). I saw a repaving program, but they also had far more than twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) in anticipated projects. Councilmember Kawakami: Oh, no, there is far more than twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) in anticipated projects, but we are just talking per fiscal year. Councilmember Yukimura: I do not see any surplus. Have you talked to the Housing Agency about how much capital is needed? Councilmember Kawakami: No, I have not. This is just to float a proposal over to the Legislature being that they are going to be opening shortly in January. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but if we float a proposal to the Legislature, it has to be something that we thought-out that we can justify that we can show them that we need. If we do not need the money for roads and transportation, we should give it back to the people. Why would we use a regressive tax when we could use a property tax, which is a progressive tax, that is those who are able to pay more. Maui County is doing that for their affordable housing project. They are earmarking a percentage of their real property tax revenues for affordable housing as they and we are earmarking moneys for land acquisition, open space acquisition. This is a progressive tax, why would we put the burden of affordable housing on a regressive tax? Councilmember Kawakami: Councilmember Yukimura, you make some good points. I can tell you that the burden of affordable housing inventory is upon everybody and I did not see any proposal for any type of property tax measure that you are speaking of get floated into this proposal. I am trying to look at existing vehicles that we may have. We may have a surplus, we may not have a surplus, but all we are asking for is that if there is any surplus in this General Excise Tax (GET) surcharge, that we be able to at least apply it towards one of the top priorities that we have heard, which is affordable housing. If you feel that we should not be spending COUNCIL MEETING 31 DECEMBER 20, 2017 this money to increase the inventory of affordable housing, then by all means, vote your conscience. Councilmember Yukimura: I am saying that there are other sources that are more equitable and more just to use. For example, we could propose to the Legislature a capital gains tax on high priced real estate transactions that is the purchase of second homes and speculative ventures and use that money for affordable housing rather than put it on the backs of poor and moderate-income people. If we have a surplus, we should return it to the people, that was my three-eighths (3/8) tax proposal. That we would not tax more than we really need on a regressive tax, but we have so many more options such as earmarking our real property tax for affordable housing or a capital gains tax on high priced real estate transactions, and using that for affordable housing. It seems that is much more logical because it is these high priced transactions that cause the real property values and housing to be more expensive, so why would we not do it there rather than on an excise tax? I cannot support that. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: This is unfortunate that I am being mischaracterized as trying to put affordable housing for our people on Kaua`i on the backs of poor people. I think this is politics at its worst. To characterized my initiative as putting our affordable initiatives on the backs of the poorest people, to me, is insulting and it mischaracterizes my intent. It is unfortunate that you bring up all these ideas, but I have not seen you float a single idea. I am out there trying to search for solutions to some of our problems. If you have a better idea, float the idea, but when I try...when we try as a body to be innovative and creative to say, "There might be a potential surplus, what should we apply it to." I mean, it is not going to be applied to parks, salaries, but to say that this is putting housing on the backs of our poorest people is just out of the spirit and character of everything that I stand for. Councilmember Yukimura: I am not... Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura, I do not want the back and forth to go on. I understand Councilmember Kawakami's point and I also hear your side and I think to be going back and forth at this point, we are not going to get anything productive. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, I think I have been mischaracterized and I would like a chance to say something. I am not questioning Councilmember Kawakami's intention, but I am questioning the impact of what he is proposing and in fact, the impact of what he is proposing is putting the burden of affordable housing on a regressive tax, which hurts mainly the low and moderate-income families. Whenever we propose something, we have a responsibility to make sure it is the best COUNCIL MEETING 32 DECEMBER 20, 2017 way to solve the problem and this is not the best way to solve the problem. Furthermore, there is not going to be any surplus because the needs for roads, transportation, and transit expansion are huge. In most communities, they earmark it only for transit, as O`ahu is doing, because it makes sense. Transit helps those moderate and low-income people the most and so if you take money from them, you put it back to services that will really offset the burden, but to put it into everything else, even roads, is questionable. I support it because our roads are so bad, but we have to focus on the problem and we need to really make sure that our proposals not have unintended consequences, such as impacting our lower and moderate-income families. That is why I am asking the questions and that is what we all need to think about whether we vote for this, because we know we need those moneys for roads and land transportation needs. Councilmember Kawakami: One (1) last point. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes. I will give you that opportunity because I do not think those were questions. Those were countering your idea and I believe you deserve a response and let us move on after that. Councilmember Kawakami: There is no silver bullet in solving our problems. It is a holistic approach and this is one means of solving the problem. I can tell you the GE surcharge is going to be paid by everybody, tourists included will pay a large chunk. The people that it is going to serve affordable housing are the people who we are talking about, the poorest to middle-income class people that need housing. This is where it helps people. It is a social injustice issue, just like transportation. We had no problem putting transportation and that social justice issue on the backs of some of the poorest with this regressive tax, so it is hypocritical to mention that this is such a bad proposal. It is what it is. It is something that I feel the Legislature should vet. It is the democratic process, it is democracy, to have it vetted up at a higher level to see if there is any merit to it, and with that being said, I think it is a proposal worth at least floating over to the Legislature for their purview. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. First of all, does the Administration have a response? Do you have a for, against, why, or no position? Do you understand this is proposing to leave the language open for the next Administration, not this Administration, but I know you came up with your proposal of why you support it even though it does not affect your Administration. The Mayor said, "We support it. We feel like we need to catch up on the backlog." Now that we are adding this language, it will allow us to tackle maybe some affordable housing issues that may come up, do you have a position as to whether you support or not opening up the language to affect more than just roads, bridges, and transportation. WALLACE G. REZENTES, JR., Managing Director: Wally Rezentes, Jr., Managing Director. There is a lot of talk at the Legislature by various County COUNCIL MEETING 33 DECEMBER 20, 2017 members, Hawai`i State Association of Counties (HSAC) et cetera about expanding the focus of how the GET can be used. The Mayor is very supportive of affordable housing and I think it is evidence of what we have done with the County Council support over the last couple of years. It has been great. I think we have made a lot of inroads in affordable housing. The good thing about the situation now with funding is there are outside sources of funds outside of County funds that are available for affordable housing. The Mayor stepping back on proposing the GET, he did propose the GET twice and fortunately with the support of the majority of the Council, the GET passed and we felt that the business case that Public Works as well as our Transportation Agency provided the Council. They gave more than enough of a basis to support the requests to consider the GET authority. In light of the fact that we did, the Council as well as the Mayor, did a lot of the work and made the hard call and the decision to approve the GET and because of the fact that we are not going to be here, really, as we said in our testimony. We did some of the heavy lifting, but the reality is the next Administration and the next Council will be the one that is going to be driving, long-term, how the GET funds are spent and concentrated. Whether it is how much of it will go to transportation, how much of it will go to roads, how much of it will go to bridges, but in light of the support the Mayor received from this body, if this body feels it is warranted to make appropriate adjustments, we are not going to stand in the way of the majority of the Council as to how they want to direct the future funds. Like I said, we are going to be here. It starts January 2019, right, and this Administration is going to almost maybe "tee up" a lot of things, but we are not going to be the ones doing the spend out. We hope that whoever is the next Mayor and whoever is the next Council will continue that pursuit of trying to address the backlogs, trying to address the transportation issues, and other issues that we face. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Wally. Any questions for Wally? Councilmember Chock: So, is the answer "no position" from the Administration? Mr. Rezentes: We are not going to stand in the way of wherever the majority of the Council would want to go on this issue. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anybody from the public wishing to speak on this? Alice, followed by Lonnie. Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. This is most untimely. Yes, we need affordable housing, but first, we need to fix our roads and this is not the time to go affordable housing. We cannot get to affordable housing. Thank you. Councilmember Kawakami: Quick clarifying question. Thank you, Alice. I totally agree, but if there is any chance that there is any surplus funds that is not COUNCIL MEETING 34 DECEMBER 20, 2017 used, should we be able to use those surplus funds for affordable housing considering that this General Excise stretches out until 2031? There may be a chance that there is some kind of surplus, should we be allowed to use some of that surplus for affordable housing? Ms. Parker: Sure, if there is extra money. I have not seen it yet and follow the funds that are designated for roads and make sure they are used for them. It is really disappointing. Councilmember Kawakami: Maybe it is an error on my part that we need further clarification in the language to make sure that it is just surplus funds that we are talking about. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Lonnie. Anybody else after Lonnie? Glenn. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. First, I want to thank Councilmember Yukimura for your defense of due process and the taxpayers' civil rights. I am sixty-three (63) years old and in order to get from fourth to fifth to sixth grade, I had to pass an annual examination in civics. We were taught civics in elementary school. One of the basic underpinnings of our democracy is that you people cannot tax us unless you tell us what you are taxing us for and how the money is going to be spent. It is reprehensible to tell us, what was it last week, "This is our plan. We are going to use the GET. We are going to tax you with the most regressive tax we have in our quiver and then we are going to use the money for this." Then you come back to us one week later and tell us, "Oh, our plan is out the window. We did not really have a plan, all we had was a list of talking points." Now, all of a sudden, maybe we are going to have all of this extra money. Councilmember Yukimura is correct. If there is extra money, it is supposed to come directly back to us. It is not to go into a pool of money that some future group of politicians can spend on whatever they think is a good thing to spend it on in the future. This is horrible politics and apologies, Councilmember Kawakami. I see that it is the simple way to find money for affordable housing, but as Councilmember Yukimura has rightly pointed out, this is the most regressive tax possible. Also, tourism is exempted from paying the full GET. There is a case before at the Supreme Court right now over this matter regarding rental cars. This has been in the mainstream news media for the last three (3) years. The GET does not fully apply to tourism and once again, we the citizens of Kaua`i, are being asked to subsidize every day that every single tourist spends on Kaua`i, you take money out of our pockets to subsidize their vacation. What the Council really needs to do is inform the public how much it costs per tourist, per day from County funds to fund them being here. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Lonnie. Glenn. COUNCIL MEETING 35 DECEMBER 20, 2017 GLENN MICKENS: For the record, Glenn Mickens. The public has been blocking more and more about tax raises of any kind and yet six (6) members of this Council voted to raise our excise tax by one-half percent (.5%), with only Council Chair Rapozo listening to the people who elected and voted, "No. No more tax." Supposedly this new tax was going to resurface our roads that badly need repair, but all past history of taxation on Kaua`i has shown that any specific designated funds were never used exclusively for one project, but were comingled or diluted to other uses as the Auditor Ernie Pasion said in his report. As I said before, the best example of this other usage is how seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000) a year was taken from our gas, weight registration, utility taxes for roads and only one million two hundred thousand dollars ($1,200,000) is going to resurface these roads. In one half percent (.5%) and one percent (1%) excise tax is regressive, as you heard Alice Parker and a lot of other people testify last week. How will it hurt her and thousands of her on fixed-incomes? Many vehicle users might say that a tax like this is worth it if it went exclusively to repairing our roads, but no tax in the past has ever done this, so why should the people believe that this one is any different? Even now, before Bill No. 2670 goes into effect, Bill No. 2679 is asking, "To expand the provisions for expenditure of revenue derived from a County General Excise and Use Tax Surcharge to include in affordable housing," as Councilmember Kawakami has said. Does this communication not make my case? Are we not just playing games with the people? An excise tax is levied to raise twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) a year supposedly for repaving our roads, which has been the talking point for enacting this tax. But by our Finance Director's numbers, we are taking in about eleven million dollars ($11,000,000) a year from weight and fuel tax, so the taxpayers are still getting the short end of the stick. If we cut fuel and weight tax about three million dollars ($3,000,000) as Councilmember Kawakami is proposing, that will put another twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) on their shoulders from the new excise tax. We do not need any new tax. I agree with what Councilmember Yukimura is saying, there is not going to be any excess left. We need one hundred some million dollars to pave our roads, so if we are putting a new tax on it, which again, I think the waste in this system, there is enough waste that we can take out of this system, such as people we hire that we do not need around this County. I think there is enough waste that we do not have to raise this excise tax even more, which is, like you pointed out, extremely regressive tax. Can any of you tell me if any of you ever remember a tax that has been put in any place that has been put in a lockbox and that tax stayed there for that purpose only? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Your time is up. Mr. Mickens: Okay. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anybody else wishing to speak? Ken. We will go for a second round after that if you folks have any more, followed by a caption break. COUNCIL MEETING 36 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Taylor: Chair and Members of the Council, my name is Ken Taylor. I was opposed to the half percent (.5%) increase in sales tax, but when I saw that it was pretty obvious it was going to pass, I asked Councilmember Kawakami and a couple others to include the words in the document that would require that the money collected would only be spent roads and transportation. I was assured that it was not necessary because the State pretty much had already covered that issue. I am really appalled at Councilmember Kawakami for bringing this forward at this point in time. The ink has not even dried on last week's tax increase and it is like once we got the hand in the cookie jar, we are not going to turn loose, we are just going to keep moving forward, and we are going to take a little more and a little more. I am sorry it does not work that way and we are not accepting this at all. I hope the Council sees fit to deny moving this issue forward. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Would anybody like a second round? Lonnie. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. The statement that Mr. Taylor just made, for the record, I am against moving this Bill forward for all the reasons that were brought up. As Councilmember Yukimura pointed out, you have access to how you structure property taxes. Property taxes surgically applies taxation to groups of citizens whether they are people...I guess people, because as (inaudible) said, "Corporations are people," so whether it is corporations or individuals, you can highly focus property taxes for who pays for what. What I object to...and I have been a tourist in Hawai`i, I have gone to other islands and have been a tourist, I think it is reprehensible that the citizens of the various Counties have to pay out of their own pocket to subsidize tourists being on our island. That is a Ponzi scheme. The way taxation and tourism operates today is a Ponzi scheme. Not only should tourism pay all of its own expenses for occurring here, it should be a profitable activity for us, but instead we are told, "Oh, before the Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) got cut back, we were at a deficit. We were subsidizing tourism out of our own pockets." Now that TAT got cut back, our subsidizing of tourism escalated. Now we want to subsidize tourism even more by using GET that they get a discount that the rest of us do not. This is no way to run a railroad. The GET money should be restricted to transportation because that is what you told us when you passed it and so, no; I am no in favor of using the GET for anything accept what the arguments were when it got passed. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Anybody else for a second round? Glenn. Mr. Mickens: For the record, Glenn Mickens. I was talking about a lockbox for funds. I was just wondering if any of you folks have ever seen where money was put in something and locked there used strictly only for that fund. COUNCIL MEETING 37 DECEMBER 20, 2017 I remember back in California a long time ago, they were getting enough money out of the gas tax, they all kept on saying, "To pave the roads from Los Angeles (LA) to Vegas with gold." They had that kind of money, but this huge pot of money got there and all of a sudden it was going here and there. It was going too many places. If we are going to put a tax on anything, see that the tax is used only for that purpose. Do not make it just shuffle away anyplace somebody wants to take it. That is completely wrong. I think that is one of the big things that this government can look at as when we put a tax on people, again, this tax is regressive and I am highly against it, but any tax we have whether it is property tax, or gas, or utility, or whatever happens to be, it should be used for whatever purpose it was put in there. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Anybody else for a second round? Seeing none, we will take a ten (10) minute caption break and finish the rest of this item. There being no objections, the Council recessed at 10:26 a.m. The meeting was called back to order at 10:42 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I would like to call the meeting back to order. Members, further discussion? Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: I would like to thank the people that came to testify against this measure. I am going to be perfectly honest with you, this Administration has taken great strides in increasing our affordable housing initiatives, so my next statement has nothing to pertain to their quality of work and their initiatives. Even the State Legislature has appropriated to the tune of thirteen million dollars ($13,000,000) to fourteen million dollars ($14,000,000) for our affordable housing initiative on Kaua`i. Collectively, Kaua`i County, we failed our people. When we consider our affordable housing at four hundred ninety-nine thousand dollars ($499,000), when we have people that are struggling to get into affordable rentals, when we cannot even keep up with our inventory, collectively, we have failed. I have to be honest with you, we have failed because of a lack of political will and I heard some ideas being thrown out today that I hope to see in the future. I want to be clear and clarify that the intent of this was to use any surplus to increase our affordable housing initiatives. I also want to clarify that by passing this today, nothing passes, it is only a proposal for our Legislature to consider, and that being said, that is part of the democratic process and that is part of transparency. We could have easily have just gone up to the Legislature and lobbied for this on the side, but for the spirit of transparency and public purview, we decided to put this on the Council floor to get some feedback. I did not realize so many people were opposed to affordable housing initiatives from this fund. I have no qualms to admit that this was premature and I have no problems saying that maybe there is further work that needs to be done. At this time, I will withdraw this proposal and I look forward to COUNCIL MEETING 38 DECEMBER 20, 2017 some creative ways of thinking of how we are going to address this affordable housing initiative. I want to also say that as we go around the community, the top three (3) priorities that I heard were conditions of our roads, traffic, and lack of affordable housing. Those are the top three (3) priorities. This was another mechanism and vehicle to help address the third of our top three (3) priorities. At this time, I will withdraw this and believe me, we can work on other avenues to increase our funding source for our affordable housing initiatives that we have not address, just like our road conditions and just like our traffic. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. We will have a motion to withdraw after all of the discussion. Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: First of all, I want to mention how difficult it is to actually put things on the table for this body to consider, because of exactly what we went through just now, which is these are hard decisions and there is always feedback and kickback. The only way to get them on the table them on the table and vet them is to do so. I want to go in the opposite direction and just really appreciating the introduction, because I think it is a solution. It is someone looking at a creative way of addressing a problem. I might not be that far off from Councilmember Kawakami in terms of the idea of utilizing this fund in the direction of affordable housing. That being said, while I appreciate the intention, I do understand a lot of what was said here and it makes a lot of sense what we heard from the community, which is, "Look, we have this money and it was set for a specific reason." We took multiple years to get to where we are right now in understanding what it is we were going to spend on it and we have a commitment towards it. I would like to see that we follow this and if it really looks like there is a surplus, or a need, or we cannot use the funds for the specific purpose of what is outlined for, then as it matures, as we start to come back and revisit it, that this conversation is back on the table. I like the idea of maybe some amendments that would limit it to the surplus funds, if anything. I would have entertained that as part of discussion, but with the fact that you are withdrawing, Councilmember Kawakami, I look forward to seeing this discussion again. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I appreciate Councilmember Kawakami's thoughtfulness in withdrawing this proposal. The GET bill has a really big task before it because it is earmarked right now for the fixing of our roads and bridges and for the expanding of the bus system and for where we can dealing with complete streets (i.e. safe walkways and bikeways). It could be used for the Moi Road sidewalk, or the proposed multiuse path between Waimea and Kekaha, or the ultimate design of a road from Hanapepe Heights to Salt Pond. We know our roads have to be fixed or else our people will pay for fixing their cars and we know we have to expand the bus system because so many people need it to get to work, to get to school, to get to COUNCIL MEETING 39 DECEMBER 20, 2017 basic places, and it does help to take cars off the road. This is a huge challenge and need and we are going to need all the money for it. We have developed plans about how we are going to use the money. No question, I totally agree with Councilmember Kawakami that affordable housing is a priority; indeed, I have been spending my whole time in politics working on affordable housing from the first self-help housing in Kilauea to Koa`e, which we are going to break ground for soon. There is no question we need money for affordable housing, but it should not be competing with public transportation and all these other equally important needs. This idea of surplus is a matter...people here are talking about the surplus as if it were a mathematical formula and we are going to have so much overage, no, this is about setting priorities. We will have a surplus if we say no to the expanding of weekend service on the bus or we will have a surplus if we say no to the paving of certain roads. We are not going to have a surplus if we really keep our commitments to the mandate of the existing Bill. I want to say that several of us around the table, which was a 4:3 vote, voted to create the Investor Class of real property taxes. So that for people whose residential property values are more than two million dollars ($2,000,000) and it is not owner- occupied and it is not used as a long-term rental (i.e. it is basically just for investment), it is a second home. We created this class so that we could tax them at a higher rate. In the first year, we did it. I voted for it so we could fund our Housing Agency, because we had run out of money for funding our Housing Agency. We have that kind of tool, which is much more just tool, because those properties are what cause higher prices of property and housing on this island. It makes sense that they would help us pay for affordable housing. I think we are obligated to have the right tool used in the right way that does not have unintended consequences and I feel that using an excise tax for affordable housing is going to have major unintended consequences because it is a regressive tax that hurts moderate and low-income families more than any other of the taxpayers in that category. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: When the GET first came out, I asked if we could...before this even came to us, I asked if we could actually put some money aside for affordable housing and I was told, "No, we cannot. It is for transportation and roads." I share the same sentiments as Councilmember Kawakami, so this is a struggle for me because when it came across, I looked at it, and we are going to vote on it today, but he pulled it out. I was not going to support it and it was hard for me being that I am the Community Assistance & Veterans Services Committee Chair and I know we need affordable housing. This is a real struggle. We just voted to fix roads and public transportation and then we were going to vote on using it for something else and that is why it was hard for me. I think the Administration did a good job of explaining what they needed the money for and what the money was going for. Yes, this is a hard vote for me and that is why I was trying to see where the cards laid today and I think we are moving forward in the right direction. I just do not think it was good to pull out some money right now and to move this forward. I understand COUNCIL MEETING 40 DECEMBER 20, 2017 the intent of it, "if we had surplus," but thank you for pulling that out. I agree we need to look at ways to raise money for our affordable housing. I think as far as our property tax, I do not think we use any right now for affordable housing and that might be an avenue we can look at going forward. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: I just want to commend Councilmember Kawakami for his proposal because I think the three (3) issues that he mentioned are definitely the three (3) issues we hear constantly. It is in the newspaper probably almost every other day about traffic, affordable housing, and it is a creative way of trying to resolve our affordable housing problem. In the end for me, I am hesitant in using surplus money for affordable housing. Do I think there is going to be surplus money each year? Yes, there will probably be surplus money each year where...and it can be due to many factors, fluctuations, and timing and projects. There may be a project that we were planning to spend on, but something holds it up and we end up having a surplus that year, but we are going to spend it next year. There may be some advantages to holding money back if we can get State matching money on certain projects at a certain time. The State is only going to allow certain amount of projects per year, we hold the money, but keeping it in the Highway Fund is keeping it where it was intended and where we voted for it to stay. The scary thing about skimming surplus for me, it makes me think of our conversation on ERS. ERS, the State skimmed money off the top, the surplus... Councilmember Yukimura: Excuse me, Alice talked about acronyms. Councilmember Kaneshiro: ERS is our Employee Retirement System, which the State skimmed money off the top of it. At the time, it looked fine because we had a huge surplus, not knowing that in the future that surplus that we skimmed really hurt us. I feel the same way about our roads. If we start skimming money off the roads, then as we get later down in our money and projects, we might say, "We needed that money. We could have really used that money." That is my biggest fear in skimming surplus. We keep it where it is at and that is what it is intended for. We keep it in the Highway Fund even if we have surplus at the end of the year, we know that money is going to go to highway things. The GET does not get renewed after ten (10) years, any surplus in there is going to go for highway projects and that is what it was intended for. That was my hesitation in using surplus money because we see ERS as a prime example of skimming money from a fund and same what the unintended consequence of it is in the end. We passed the GET with the intent for roads and highways and I think that is our duty to spend that money where we passed it. I appreciate the conversation we had here. I think everyone realizes that affordable housing is a very difficult nut to crack and there is no silver bullet. We only have a limited amount of resources. How do we help it? This is just a creative idea on how we could, but again, for me, I have my reasons why I think it should stay the way we COUNCIL MEETING 41 DECEMBER 20, 2017 voted on it and the way we intended on it. I appreciate Councilmember Kawakami proposing it and getting the temperature of what the public is saying and what Council is saying and whatever he wants to do with it. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: I want to talk about temperature. The temperature...I appreciate the folks that have testified, but as I went out community to community at all these events and when I bring up GE tax surcharge and the benefits and this is why this is a worthwhile tax as far as job creation, construction jobs, and all of the other jobs that come along with it, for the most part, people are very open to using this fund towards affordable housing initiative as well. By all means the temperature check I took is very warm. The temperature that I get from this Council though is very lukewarm and quite frankly possibly cold and so I am fine with it. I am humble enough to say that if I do not have the support from my colleagues, I am not going to expose them to take a vote either which way. I have no problem going back to the drawing board. That is what we do in business every single day. We float ideas out. This is democracy and if I do not feel like I can get it or if I am putting my fellow Councilmembers and colleagues in a precarious situation, I will do what is best for the body. At this point, I have to be honest, when I talk to people, the temperature check is very open, because I tell you what, there is direct correlations between affordable housing and our road conditions and our road repairs as far as job creation. These are very people we would be putting to work, if this measure had passed...and I have to be honest with you, this was only to get it to the desk at the Legislature. Nothing would have changed today. This was to increase the further debate and public purview of this type of proposal and to get anything passed the Legislature, well, let us put it quite frankly, it is slim to none to get anything passed. The whole purpose of it going to the Legislature is for the public education on what really matters in Hawai`i. The top three (3) things are traffic, condition of our roads, and affordable housing. I will be honest with you that the temperature was very warm and accepting of this proposal, but I can read the tea leaves, and it is no skin off my back to say, "It will live to see another day perhaps. We will see if we can spend down this money." I find it funny when we are anticipating no surplus and yet we have one of our Members proposing to cut the GE surcharge to three-eighths percent (3/8%). I am trying to figure out the rationale, but I look forward to looking at other ways to fund our affordable housing initiatives. Thank you. At this time, I would like to make a motion to withdraw. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I have a few comments. I just want to close by saying the affordable housing problem is very complex and I have said this several times that we need inter-governments working together and trying to solve the real issue. The real issue is the crazy way that our market values on Kaua`i have just blown out of proportion. You have twenty-five (25) year old homes costing three COUNCIL MEETING 42 DECEMBER 20, 2017 hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) that you brought in Lihu`e ten (10) years ago that is now worth five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). The houses are further deteriorated, they are older, in the same old subdivision, and their value have gone up two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) over ten (10) years. To me that is only paper value because the house has not really increased in value, but what has happen is the house gotten older. It is termite ridden, it is in need of more repairs, roofs need to be changed, but yet the value has gone up by two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). If we do not solve this issue with the federal government, the state government, we will never solve the affordable housing issue, because you can have one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) and we ask, "What is affordable?" Well, we have those duplexes out in Hanama`ulu that are as low as four hundred forty thousand dollars ($440,000). We already heard here that four hundred forty thousand dollars ($440,000) is not affordable. What will it take to get that affordable? Does it mean that we need to get it down to three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) or two hundred forty thousand dollars ($240,000)? One hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) is only going to help fifty (50) families. What about the other nine hundred fifty (950) that are in need of affordable housing on Kaua`i?What I am saying is, no matter what the amount we have, whether it be one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) or two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) to set aside for affordable housing, unless we solve the bigger problem of how we control our market values and relators and our construction industry from giving us those prices that we have to accept, we will never solve the affordable housing issue. The values just keep running away daily. Every day we talk here, our houses are going up ten thousand dollars ($10,000). That is just incredible. What is going on? Nobody has the answer to it, but unless the County, the State, and the Federal government truly try and get a handle on this, we will never solve it. It is going on all over the world. Why are we not addressing it? When the stock market crashes, we address it. This is a crash right now that is happening. It is a crash that is hurting every family that is in need of housing that is working hard, following what their parents said, doing the right things, but yet cannot buy a house because the paper value has just blown it out of proportion. No matter how much money government puts to it, we will not be able to help enough people. What I am asking for is we really have to focus on tapping the real issue and not just money. Money will not solve it. We have to solve that crazy thing that is going on in Hawai`i especially, on Kaua`i, especially. You have old houses in Hanapepe and some of my friends tell me, "I bought that for four hundred fifty thousand dollars ($450,000)," and I say, "Are you kidding me." That house is not worth four hundred fifty thousand dollars ($450,000), but that is the going rate. I would not pay more than two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) for what they bought. It is old and very conservative. I would think for four hundred fifty thousand dollars ($450,000), you can buy a golf course lot on Puakea Golf Course. Forget it. Now, you have to pay one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more for that. We have to really solve the problem and it is not going to be solved on this table with seven (7) people. As far as the GET, a lot of people say, "It is a crazy tax increase that this Council has adopted," but it is not that crazy. Do you know why?As much people that COUNCIL MEETING 43 DECEMBER 20, 2017 say, "Do not tax," they are saying, "Fix our roads, fix our bridges, and fix our congestion. What are you folks doing?" When you say, "Listen to the people," the people are telling us both things, "Do not tax, but fix our infrastructure." I have not seen any government fix the infrastructure without money and I have proposed major tax cuts, but I cannot get four (4) votes. I have policemen and firemen that are angry at me for the cuts that I proposed, but I could not get the votes and it is not personal on them. I love those people; those people are my friends and they do a great job. Like everything else, a decision has to be made. My time is up. With that... Councilmember Yukimura: I have. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I wholeheartedly agree with you about keeping the affordability and insolating the houses from the market and we saw one (1) technique today, which is leaseholds. Therefore, bravo to the Housing Agency for doing that and I think we have to explore other ways and rental units, of course, is one way to keep it affordable; County-owned rentals. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: With that... Councilmember Chock withdrew the motion to approve C 2017-279. Councilmember Kawakami withdrew the seconded, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can we have a motion to receive? Councilmember Chock moved to receive C 2017-279 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Motion carried. Can we go to the items relating to Police? There being no objections, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2678) was taken out of order. BILLS FOR FIRST READING: Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2678) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. B-2017-821, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2017 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2018, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND (Kapa'a Armory & Hanalei Substation Roof Repairs - $550,000.00): Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed COUNCIL MEETING 44 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Draft Bill (No. 2678) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anybody 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: Councilmember Yukimura: Can we ask questions? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes, sure. Who did you want? Councilmember Yukimura: Police or whomever is ready to answer questions. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Police or the Department of Public Works, we may have a few questions on the Kapa'a Armory and Hanalei Substation roof repairs. As you know, the Parks & Recreation is in charge of the maintenance and repairs. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. LEONARD A RAPOZO, JR., Director of Parks & Recreation: For the record, Director of Parks & Recreation Lenny Rapozo. ROBERT GAUSEPOHL, Assistant Chief: Rob Gausepohl, Kaua`i Police. SCOTT K. KAUI, District Commander: Scott Kaui, Kaua`i Police. Councilmember Yukimura: What is the breakdown between the Armory and the Hanalei Substation in terms of expenditures? Mr. Rapozo: We expect to expend three hundred fifty thousand dollars ($350,000) for the Kapa'a Armory and Princeville is two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). Councilmember Yukimura: We have a police/fire complex at the Princeville location, are we talking about just part of the roof? Mr. Rapozo: The whole complex. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so it is actually not just the Hanalei Substation roof, but it is also the Fire Station and Police Substation? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. COUNCIL MEETING 45 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: What is the schedule for roof replacement? Are we doing this just to stop leaking? So the problem is that with these heavy rains, there has been leakage in both the Kapa'a Armory, the Police Substation, and the Fire Station? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: Are we doing just a repair and maintenance? Mr. Rapozo: No, we are changing the roof. Councilmember Yukimura: We are changing the entire roof. Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so it is going to be a complete job that is going to be a complete job that will be good for another... Mr. Rapozo: Twenty-five (25) years. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Is the Armory in County ownership now? Mr. Rapozo: Yes, for about a little less than a year now. Councilmember Yukimura: On executive order (EO). Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: In perpetuity or until we decide otherwise. Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: So the investment, even though it may not be because there is talk about another police substation, that property will still be in the County's hands for the foreseeable future and maybe used for other things, but either way the County will be using it? Mr. Rapozo: We had a robust conversation about a little less than a year ago about having it being part of a new Parks community neighborhood center there, which is very appropriate, that is a perfect area, close to the park, and we had great discussion here with the users of both facilities, and how it would benefit long-term. Until such time that the police is able to build their substation, it makes sense that now is the time to do what we need to do to make some of the repairs. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. So, we are taking this money from the General Fund balance, right? Where is this money? COUNCIL MEETING 46 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: That is all the questions that I have. Thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any other further questions, Members? Go ahead. Mr. Gausepohl: I wanted to thank Lenny Rapozo. He was very gracious. We had to vacate the Armory because of the conditions that were there. He was very gracious to allow us to temporarily use their baseyard down there. On the record, I just wanted to thank him for his generosity and corporation with us. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: How long has it been vacant? Mr. Kaui: As far as the leaks on the roof, when we first got there over three (3) years ago, the United States Department of Defense (DOD) was supposed to repair the roof because it was already leaking back then, but I guess subsequently when they learned they were going to give it up, might as well pass on the cost, right? So, it was leaking a long time. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You folks were in there, but I guess the leaking got worse? Mr. Kaui: Yes and they got some mold issues because it was in between the walls in the offices. Councilmember Yukimura: That is not good. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Lenny, are we preparing the documents so we can expedite it? Mr. Rapozo: We have asked the Finance Director to allow us to proceed with the invitation for bid (IFB). We are scheduled to complete the IFB and get it to Purchasing for it to be advertised. Councilmember Yukimura: Can you explain IFB? Mr. Rapozo: I am sorry. The bid documents. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Mr. Rapozo: Invitation for bid. By then end of next week, because we know it is such a priority, the Director of Finance has used his authority that is not often used, but in this case, it would be appropriate so that we can try to go out and bid even though the money has not come over yet. Councilmember Yukimura: Where are the occupants of the Hanalei Substation? Do they have an alternative site, too? COUNCIL MEETING 47 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Kaui: No, right now we did some mitigation as to rearranging the desk and work areas, so that they do not get in the areas of water, leakage, and things like that. Councilmember Yukimura: Will they be able to stay in there while the work is being done? Mr. Kaui: That will be decided later, but if they had to, then they are going to come out of Kapa'a and basically utilize their computers in the car. Councilmember Yukimura: I was asking about the Hanalei people. Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Mr. Kaui: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, I see. Mr. Kaui: As far as Fire, I am not sure what they are going to do. Councilmember Yukimura: You mean Hanalei people are in Kapa'a too? Mr. Rapozo: No, no. Can you try to explain again? Mr. Kaui: They come out of Kapa`a, they brief in Kapa`a, then they drive to Hanalei, and do whatever cases they have. They need to write reports, they can come to the station, use the bathroom, and whatnot. Councilmember Yukimura: I see. Mr. Kaui: With that scenario, we are probably going to get them some bathrooms or use Fire, but then the Fire would probably be under repair too, so I think it is going to be a collaboration of getting some trailers. Councilmember Yukimura: Surely, there is some space in Princeville that can be available. Mr. Rapozo: Or Kilauea. We do have a parks facility in Kilauea that they could temporary use. Councilmember Yukimura: Kapa'a is pretty far. Mr. Rapozo: We can work on those logistics as we did in Kapa`a. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. COUNCIL MEETING 48 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Very good. Further questions? Seeing none, thank you. Anybody from the public wishing to speak on this? Alice. Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. I have a question about the Kapa'a Substation, the Armory. I understand that is in a flood zone and if they are going to build a better building there, I hope they are going to raise it, but then how will the police get out of there when it is flooded; catamarans? How are they handling the flood zone? Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: The new station is proposed to be up by the Mahelona Medical Center area, so it will be out of the flood zone. Glenn. Mr. Mickens: For the record, Glenn Mickens. I am tickled to death that they are repairing this roof. I hope it does not turn into a Kilauea Gym leak for twenty (20) years. I hope they do it better. I thought I heard that there was asbestos or something and that was one of the reasons, but maybe I was wrong. I do not think the public was notified about the closure of that station. I heard a lot of people ask, "Where do we go for police," but I do not think it was reported well enough. I am tickled to death that they are going ahead to finish that. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you, Glenn. Anybody else? Seeing none, the meeting is called back to order. There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Seeing none. Roll call. The motion passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2678) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL — 6, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. There being no objections, Bill No. 2673 was taken out of order. COUNCIL MEETING 49 DECEMBER 20, 2017 BILLS FOR SECOND READING: Bill No. 2673 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE (Prohibited Parking) Council Vice Chair Kagawa: For the public's information, we are jumping around the agenda, because we are trying to get the police items out of the way, and then we will go back to the regular order. Councilmember Chock moved to approve Bill No. 2673 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: In the Committee Meeting, Council Chair Rapozo proposed an amendment and we decided that we were going to pass what we had and have Police and the Attorney's review the amendment. If there were any changes, they were going to come back to us now. I have what came back to us from Police and I would like to amend. Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to amend Bill No. 2673 as circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any questions on the amendment? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I think we asked the Police to check with the Prosecuting Attorney, who will be prosecuting under this law. I would like to have the information about what the response was from the Prosecuting Attorney. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can you state your name? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Mr. Gausepohl: Rob Gausepohl, for the record. PETER MORIMOTO, Deputy County Attorney: Peter Morimoto, Deputy County Attorney. We E-mailed the proposed amendment to Justin Kollar. He replied that he did not have a concern with the amendment; however, I indicated that the proposed amendment seemed to kind of mix and match the areas. The initial draft of the floor amendment was going to do away with the provision regarding curbed parking and marked stalls. The Bill is actually designed for rural areas where there is no curb and there are no marketed stalls and it is basically for the Ha'ena area where because there is a lack of parking, people have been parking on the shoulder, but also partially on the road and that is what the original Bill was intended for. I spoke to Eddie Topenio and expressed my concern about the fact that they are trying COUNCIL MEETING 50 DECEMBER 20, 2017 to take a section of the Code that is designed for urban areas and mesh it into this Bill, which I thought was not appropriate. They took out that language and now it is basically back to the original form, but with the addition that if you obstruct a mailbox, then you could also get ticketed. Councilmember Yukimura: So that has not yet been presented...did we just present it? This amendment reflects your folks input and now all it does is it adds the prohibition against obstructing a mailbox. Mr. Morimoto: That is correct. Councilmember Yukimura: And you folks are okay with it and the Prosecutor is okay with it, so we can go ahead and approve it? Mr. Morimoto: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Are you ready to vote on the amendment? The motion to amend Bill No. 2673 as circulated, and as shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1 was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We are back to the main motion. Are there further questions for the Police? No. Any public testimony? There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion, Members? Roll call. The motion to approve Bill No. 2673, Draft 1 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR APPROVAL: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL— 6, AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Bill No. 2674 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE (Vehicle Towing Authorization): Councilmember Chock moved to approve Bill COUNCIL MEETING 51 DECEMBER 20, 2017 No. 2674 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any discussion? Any public testimony? There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: I thought I saw a note about having this item at 2:00 p.m. Was it this agenda item? Okay, never mind. Erase what I just said. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: The agenda item that will be at 2:00 p.m. will be on Kalihiwai Road. We will take Resolution No. 2017-73 at 2:00 p.m. for those of you who are here for that at the request of community members, one of which is flying in from Honolulu. What agenda item are we on? Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Bill No. 2674. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Roll call. The motion to approve Bill No. 2674 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR APPROVAL: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL— 6, AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL— 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. C 2017-280 Communication (12/11/2017) from Councilmember Kawakami, transmitting for Council consideration amendments to the County Fuel Tax and the Motor Vehicle Weight Tax rates to help alleviate the burden on residents as a result of a County surcharge on the State General Excise Tax that will be implemented January 1, 2019: Councilmember Chock moved to receive C 2017-280 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Brun. COUNCIL MEETING 52 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: This is just the communication and we will have the Bill up later. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: We have two (2) registered speakers for this item. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kawakami, do you have something to say now or maybe later? Councilmember Kawakami: I will discuss it when we get to the Bill. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Okay. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The first registered speaker is Alice Parker, followed by Lonnie Sykos. Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. Hold on, Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: You are going to break my heart again. Ms. Parker: Yes. No, no, no. Listen, I have tightened my belt, which is a shoestring, enough. Leave the taxes as they are and pave these bloody roads. They almost are bloody. Thank you. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Lonnie Sykos. Councilmember Kawakami: Another heartbreaker. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. My thanks to Councilmember Kawakami. It does take courage to sit before the County Council and introduce measures that are controversial to some members of the community. I certainly support his enthusiasm for finding solutions to the County's problems, including affordable housing. In this matter, I believe I understand that he is trying to ease the tax burden on the members of the public and for that, I congratulate him. However, it gets back to the issue that we have been for the last couple of years discussing a plan and now that we finally got the plan approved, we are immediately altering the plan. If it turns out, I would suggest in a year or perhaps two (2) years, that we do not need the funds for road improvements, then two (2) years from now I would say, "Yes, go ahead and repeal our current tax structure." Until such time as we have allowed our current plan to start moving towards fruition, it does not make a whole lot of sense to change it. For full disclosure, I am not affected by this. I do not own a car and so for the people that do, I am sure this is a much bigger issue than it is for me, but part of the reason that I do not own a car is because it saves me six COUNCIL MEETING 53 DECEMBER 20, 2017 thousand dollars ($6,000) to eight thousand dollars ($8,000) a year. The Kaua`i Bus, other friends, taxies, and whatever is much less convenient than a car is, but you do not have that fixed expense every money that you have to pay simply to support having a vehicle much less using the vehicle. Thank you, Councilmember Kawakami. You are definitely thinking outside the box and I appreciate that greatly. For this matter, though, no thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anybody else wishing to testify? Glenn. Mr. Mickens: Council Vice Chair Kagawa raised a good point. People want the roads pave, but they do not want the tax. My position and others are simply that we are taking in seventeen million dollars ($17,000,000) from all of the taxes that is supposed to go to our roads, but it is being siphoned off in other directions. If we were using that, we would not have to have the tax, but your point is really well taken, Council Vice Chair Kagawa. That you know we want things and, obviously, you are going to have to pay for them. Councilmember Kawakami brings up three (3) good things that we need them for and I agree with him one hundred percent (100%), which are roads, traffic, and low-income housing. Councilmember Kawakami: Affordable. Mr. Mickens: Affordable housing, okay. Low- income/affordable, I do not know exactly what that is. I think there should be a contractor sitting here to tell you what he can build it for, because he is going to have to make a profit. It cannot be for nothing. Like we were talking about, Councilmember Kawakami, you are going to have to get land to be able to build it, right? It is a real conundrum to know exactly how you are going to solve that problem, as Council Vice Chair Kagawa points out, the escalation is the problem. How do you stop that? Is it supply and demand? If the supply is there, the demand goes down or does it go up? It is a problem and I do not see that you folks on this table are going to be able to solve that, but I appreciate your efforts. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anybody else wishing to speak on this? Seeing none. There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Members, any discussion? The motion to receive C 2017-280 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Motion carried. Next item, please. COUNCIL MEETING 54 DECEMBER 20, 2017 C 2017-281 Communication (12/13/2017) from the Director of Finance and Acting County Engineer, transmitting for Council consideration, proposed amendments to Ordinance No. B-2017-821, as amended, relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i, for the Fiscal Year 2017-2018, by revising the amounts estimated in the Sewer Fund, to replenish funding of an emergency repair to a sewer manhole in Wailua, fund repairs to a partial failure of the Kapaia sewer line, acquire a new chlorine dosing system, and fund other unexpected equipment repairs for a total cost of $712,000.00: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2017-281 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can we finish off this item and then take the Bill right after, so we can get Sewers out? The motion to receive C 2017-281 for the record was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Motion carried. Can we go to the Bill? There being no objections, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2681) was taken out of order. Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2681) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. B-2017-821, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2017 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2018, BY REVISING THE AMOUNTS ESTIMATED IN THE SEWER FUND (Sewer Line Emergency/Equipment Repairs - $712,000.00): Councilmember Chock moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2681) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura, you have the floor. Can we have the Administration up? LYLE TABATA, Acting County Engineer: Good morning, Council Vice Chair Kagawa and Members of the Council. Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer. I appreciate this opportunity. We had some unplanned emergency expenses that have arisen this year, which we need to get funded so that we can get these repairs taken care of expediently. COUNCIL MEETING 55 DECEMBER 20, 2017 JASON KAGIMOTO, Acting Chief of Wastewater: For the record, Jason Kagimoto, Acting Chief of Wastewater. Councilmember Yukimura: You have several projects that total seven hundred thousand dollars plus ($700,000+) and one of them is the Wailua sewer manhole replacement, am I correct that that is the problematic manhole? Mr. Tabata: No, that is a manhole that is in Kuhi`o Highway, just heading north, right after the Shell Gas Station that has a plate over it right now. Our inspection program has indicated that manhole is ready to fill and so we are needing the funding to expedite that repair. Councilmember Yukimura: Is that related to the Wailua Houselots problem of smell and everything? Mr. Kagimoto: In some ways, yes. Basically, the flow that comes through there is currently in its current hydraulic situation, it causes a lot of turbulence which releases a lot of gas and that gas is what accelerates the corrosion, which is also related to odors. Councilmember Yukimura: The gas is also related to that manhole...I am sorry. Mr. Kagimoto: To the odors in the area. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. What we had focused on in terms of the smell was the pump station. That is not a pump station; it is just a manhole at the entrance to Haleilio Road? Mr. Kagimoto: That manhole is two (2) manholes upstream of the pump station, so the approach to the odor issue is to handle that in a phase approach. The first two (2) phases, which we have already done, is we have actually addressed the odors at the pump station, but there is a real issue with the odors that are upstream of it in the Shell Gas Station area. Councilmember Yukimura: It is kind of a regional problem, if you will. It is not just isolated at one (1) manhole. Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. We currently have a study to address or to look into ways of addressing the odors within the collection system and that is currently in a study form right now. Councilmember Yukimura: This is a manhole that is further toward Kapa'a or toward Lydgate? COUNCIL MEETING 56 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Kagimoto: It is actually right on the highway, right in front of the Shell Gas Station. Right at the bottom of Haleilio Road. If you are driving on the highway, there is a steel plate over it, so that is part of the study that we are doing for the collection system and part of the work was to do a camera inspection. The camera inspection was what kind of noticed the structural condition of that manhole, which we are now trying to address. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. It is good we caught it before it failed. Mr. Kagimoto: Yes, definitely. Councilmember Yukimura: But you are going to need to get to it right away. Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Do we have a process where emergency moneys can be made immediately rather than going through two (2) readings, a public hearing, and all of that? Do we have emergency moneys? Mr. Tabata: We do have a process, but it would have to have failed and create a health and safety condition. Councilmember Yukimura: That does not make sense. Mr. Kagimoto: What we have currently done for that project and we have encumbered the funds for and we have issued and executed a contract for that work, but in order to do so, we pulled money out of our existing budget. Basically, money or equipment that we had budgeted, now we do not have that money, so what we are trying to do is get that money back. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, yes. That sounds like good practice. Mr. Tabata: The item of the Kapaia pipe repair was what we briefed the Council in Executive Session last week. Councilmember Yukimura: And you found a partially broken pipe, which has to be fixed or it will spill sewage out on to the ground, right? Mr. Tabata: Yes. COUNCIL MEETING 57 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: I am back on the Wailua situation because that entire system is over twenty (20) years old. I think we put it in when I was Mayor and I constantly asked Wastewater how are you monitoring a twenty (20) year old system and are you putting aside replacement money or whatever it is. I think there is this cured-in-place pipe (CIPP) process where you can insert without removing the existing pipe, you can actually insert a stronger pipe. I know that Edward Tschupp, who used to be Head of Wastewater said that you are monitoring that system to track any problems that we might have and this is an example of an aging system, I would guess. Is it good news that in doing this project, you had to do an inspection? Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. This was not specifically part of our inspection program. We are trying to sort of budget for, which is like a several year process of: do the inspections first, see what comes out of that, and do the necessary repairs. That is an islandwide issue for us. We have recently done one in Hanamd'ulu and the overall arching goal for us is to try and do one and sort of prioritize our sewer systems throughout the island. Therefore, the next step would be trying to rollout inspections in different areas. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so what you are telling me and correct me if I am wrong, is that you have a repair and maintenance program that is beginning to inspect and then prioritize repairs on your aging systems. Is that correct? Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. Mr. Tabata: Correct. Councilmember Yukimura: That is very good. Mr. Tabata: For instance, we already have an upgrade in the `Ele`ele area in design right now to replace sections. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, I am recalling that in your last budget presentation. Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, very good. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further questions? I have one. Going back to a little bit about the County's maintenance program, the cameras give us a lot of COUNCIL MEETING 58 DECEMBER 20, 2017 information regarding the pipes and conditions. Do we have that capacity in-house or do we have to hire out? Mr. Kagimoto: We do have a camera in-house. The camera does have its limitations. We use the one that we have for our general operation and maintenance (O&M). If we are trying to do much more of like a neighborhood or regional type of assessment, then there are companies that have better technologies and more equipped to do so in those areas than we go out and hire. For what we do in-house is if we get a customer complaint about a blockage or some kind of issue, then we will go ahead and use our camera for those kinds of isolated things. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: But for the more of the maintenance type where we want to check the status, would we hire out? Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I hope that the maintenance program expands. The Water Department used to tell me that they would know if there were leaks when they would see an area that is really green with grass and the other parts would be less green. They would figure that there is a possible leak. In dealing with human waste, I would hope that we have that maintenance because it is not like watering the grass, it is human waste that is out there. So I appreciate that we are taking the steps that is not reacting to a break, but trying to see if there is a break before so we can prevent that waste from leaking. Mr. Kagimoto: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: My question is more around that comprehensive study. Like what we have done with the roads, I want to understand what we need to project for. I feel like it is the same question and I would not mind a response in writing or even a more in-depth discussion on projection for how it is we intend to take care of it. I know a lot of our sewer lines are outdated and need maintenance and maybe not even accounted for to whatever degree. I think we need to get a realistic look at what that is. Mr. Kagimoto: Okay. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Chock, are you asking for an inventory islandwide, or something we may have, or status that may satisfy you? Councilmember Chock: Absolutely. COUNCIL MEETING 59 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Tabata: We have our system documented. It is systems outside of our County control that we rely on others to...but for the County's system, it is documented. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: If it is one thousand (1,000) pages, we do not want the one thousand (1,000) pages. We want the summary sheet, if you folks have it. Mr. Tabata: Okay, yes. We have been doing some studies as Mr. Kagimoto has mentioned and we have designs in process, so we can summarize where we are with our system. Councilmember Chock: Do we have any collaboration with the private lines? Mr. Tabata: No. Councilmember Chock: So if it breaks, it is... Mr. Tabata: If we get calls for different spills around the island, we pretty much know who the responsible parties are and we will alert them to the issue, and we let the public know and we help follow-up. The Department of Health is the overarching responsibility for all of the island systems. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Further questions? Seeing none. Thank you. Any public testimony on this item? There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Members, further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I am really glad to hear that the Wastewater Division has been aware of and looking at the issue of aging infrastructure and apparently have a priority system and a plan for assessing the repairs needed. It will be good to get a summary of the repairs. I think, however, that there is a considerable part of the island that is sewer privately and I think the largest area is Po`ipu, which is really high density. Po`ipu is a very vulnerable place to spills because it is so economically important to the island and has really important natural and ocean resources. This thing was highlighted in our discussion during the General Plan that all of these separate private systems could be a problem and I am glad that there is also a plan to try to connect all these systems and run it in a more efficient way over time. COUNCIL MEETING 60 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? I want to thank Mr. Kagimoto. I think he is doing a marvelous job stepping in. Lyle, I am finally hearing this proactive approach like when we see these things, now we are going to try to take the further step and try and see if we can catch it before things break, and I appreciate that kind of work. Certainly, we already know that some of them are old clay pipes, you know they are going to crack sooner or later, so you know let us do the proactive measure and start checking, because the worse thing is when there is a crack and it leaks out. You will need to pay a heavy United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) fines and what have you. Those are definitely not fun for us to shell out from taxpayer money. I want to thank you folks for that. Any further discussion? Roll call. The motion passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2681) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL — 6, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. LEGAL DOCUMENT: C 2017-282 Communication (11/28/2017) from the Fire Chief, requesting Council approval of the indemnification provisions contained in the Department of Education, Hanalei Elementary School Application for use of School Buildings, Facilities, or Grounds, for the use of their facility to conduct the Community Emergency Response Training (CERT) program: Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve C 2017-282, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any public testimony? There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: COUNCIL MEETING 61 DECEMBER 20, 2017 The motion to approve C 2017-282 was then put, and carried by a vote of 6:0:1 (Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. CLAIM: C 2017-283 Communication (12/01/2017) from the County Clerk, transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kaua`i by Miles Greenberg, for damages to his vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kaua`i: Councilmember Yukimura moved to refer C 2017-283 to the Office of the County Attorney for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anyone from the public wishing to testify on this matter? Alice. There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. Council Vice Chair Kagawa relinquished chairmanship to Councilmember Kaneshiro. (Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as not present.) Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. Of course, we are going to see a lot more of these with our bad roads. Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Any more testimony? Seeing none. Any final discussion from the Members? There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: The motion to refer C 2017-283 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 6*:0:1 (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of County of Kaua`i, Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion; Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Councilmember Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Next item. COMMITTEE REPORTS: BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE: COUNCIL MEETING 62 DECEMBER 20, 2017 A report (No. CR-BF 2017-27) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee, recommending that the following be Received for the Record: "BF 2017-04 Communication (10/23/2017) from Committee Chair Kaneshiro, requesting the presence of Thomas Williams, Executive Director of the State of Hawai`i Employees' Retirement System, to provide a briefing on the State of Hawai`i Employees' Retirement System and the financial implications to the County of Kaua`i," Councilmember Yukimura moved for approval of the report, seconded by Councilmember Brun. 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 Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion from the Members? The motion for approval of the report was then put, and carried by a vote of 6*:0:1 (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of County of Kaua`i, Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion; Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Councilmember Kaneshiro: Next item. PUBLIC SAFETY & TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: A report (No. CR-PST 2017-07) submitted by the Public Safety & Transportation Committee, recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading: "Bill No. 2673 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE (Prohibited Parking)," A report (No. CR-PST 2017-08) submitted by the Public Safety & Transportation Committee, recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading: "Bill No. 2674 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE (Vehicle Towing Authorization)," Councilmember Yukimura moved for approval of the reports, seconded by Councilmember Brun. COUNCIL MEETING 63 DECEMBER 20, 2017 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 Kaneshiro: Is there any discussion? The motion for approval of the reports was then put, and carried by a vote of 6*:0:1 (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of County of Kauai, Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion; Council Chair Rapozo was excused). Councilmember Kaneshiro: Motion passes. Next item, please. RESOLUTIONS: Resolution No. 2017-72 — RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE NIGHTTIME CLOSURE OF MIHI ROAD TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AND GRANTING PARTIAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ENFORCEMENT THEREOF TO THE SEACLIFF PLANTATION COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, KILAUEA BAY, HANALEI DISTRICT, COUNTY OF KAUAI: Councilmember Yukimura moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2017-72, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Are there any questions for the Administration on the item? I will suspend the rules. Councilmember Yukimura: I think Mr. Smith was here. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: We also have a registered speaker. Councilmember Yukimura: Are you speaking? Councilmember Kaneshiro: Do you have questions for the Administration first? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I think somebody had a question about passing on the liability. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Okay. I will suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Councilmember Yukimura: And then will we take public testimony? Councilmember Kaneshiro: Yes. COUNCIL MEETING 64 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Councilmember Yukimura, can you restate your question? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I think it was raised by Mr. Sykos. Mr. Tabata: Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer. Councilmember Yukimura: We have a map, and I am familiar with that road that leads up to the cemetery and the plan is to close it at nights. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Gary, we are going to have testimony right after this. I think there were some concern that we are giving enforcement or sharing enforcement responsibilities with the community and the concern about liability, but basically, is it just to lock the gates? (Council Vice Chair Kagawa was noted as present.) Mr. Tabata: Exactly. There will be no enforcement by the community. All they are doing is opening and closing the gate daily. This area has become an area that has become a gathering place and if the people who gather are responsible and take their trash with them, we would not have this need, however, they have trashed the place and the community members, and you will hear it from them directly, have taken it upon themselves to clean it up. It is an exhausting amount of times that they have had to respond. Councilmember Yukimura: The chain itself will discourage them because they usually take their cars right up. Mr. Tabata: Right. At the end of the road is the cemetery and also the telecommunications tower. It is a nice quiet place that people go hang out to do all kinds of illegal and non-illegal types of things, as what I have been told. We are just helping facilitate. Councilmember Yukimura: I think you are trying to address a problem. Mr. Tabata: A problem, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: If the gate is chained, I do not remember how far it is to go up, but is there a chance that they will park their cars outside the chained gate, walk up, and cause the same kind of problem? Mr. Tabata: It remains to be seen. I believe it is not going to be a chain, but it will be a physical gate that will be installed. COUNCIL MEETING 65 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. We will hear from the public. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I would like to ask for public testimony at this time. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Ginny Shim. GARY SMITH: Happy Holidays to you all. For the record, my name is Gary Smith. I am the Secretary, if you can believe it or not, of the Kilauea Japanese Association. Many, many years ago, Tokomatsu Gushiken kind of hand picked me to be one of the officers. The Kilauea Japanese Association owns the land that the cemetery is on and we allow burial there by membership. Membership is two hundred dollars ($200) in January and February, and then it is just a one-time fee of four hundred fifty dollars ($450) in the other ensuing months. Anybody in the community, past residents as well, can join the association. With this association, we are the ones that also maintain the cemetery. We have the cell tower on the cemetery, so they fund a lot of the expense to maintain the cemetery. Our problem today is that...in answer to Councilmember Yukimura's question, most of these people do not go to places where they have to walk. They go there for convenience to hide and do their drugs and drink, also they use these areas as staging grounds to go into the Seacliff Plantation and steal from the houses in there. We also have a problem with the vandalizing of cars. A car smashed through the fence and then smashed several headstones in the cemetery as well last year, so this has been a difficult time for us. The only solution is to gate it and we believe during the daytime hours, it is not going to be problematic. It is the nighttime hours where the people go there and cause a problem. For our people in the association, they are all for this. None of us go there at night and I do not see any reason for anyone to go there at night anyway. That is the situation we are in and we could use your help to support this and get us our gate so that we can stop all what is going on. Thank you. GINNY SHIM: Ginny Shim, for the record. I am with the property management for Seacliff Plantation and the Board has asked for your help on this. We had property owners whose lands abuts the top of Mihi Road and we have had one property there that has had two (2) break-ins. They have taken vehicles and all kinds of things from that property. It is a back access into Seacliff Plantation and we would really like to have it just blocked off at night. Seacliff Plantation is willing to...we have our patrols already and it is convenient for us to have our security man lock the gate at night and open it in the morning. It just seems like a reasonable solution to an ongoing problem that has been going on for years. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura, did you have your question answered? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Lyle said it is not going to be a chain. It is actually going to be a gate, is that the plan? Okay. This seems like a wonderful example of the County and community working together on a solution, so I commend you and I know Gary, you have taken care of that graveyard for such a long time. I remember Mr. Miyazaki's thanks to you and to have Seacliff Plantation also involved, COUNCIL MEETING 66 DECEMBER 20, 2017 sounds like a great idea rather than Gary having to go every morning and every night to open and close the gate. Ms. Shim: Yes, no need. Councilmember Yukimura: It sounds like a workable plan. Great, thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any further questions of Gary? If not, Gary, ohayo gozaimasu. My one question is have efforts been made to get the police to do a sting and try...my favorite show right now is Live PD on channel 547 and it is amazing. They go down and shake folks down who should not be in the wrong place and they check them out. I think if we check them out, ask for a search, and they say we can search them; we can find some of those drugs and things. Have we asked the Kaua`i Police Department (KPD) for their assistance, and what has been the result? Mr. Smith: Immediately after when we discovered that two (2) of the gravestones had been damaged by the truck, we called the police and made a police report. We told them of the problem and they are aware that this thing has been going on. You can drive up there and see hypodermic needles, beer bottles, and some people just go up there and dump loads of trash, we just had that happen last week. They are aware of it and they do make sweeps at night up there periodically, but it is difficult for KPD because we know situations and my personal experience where I told the police, "I know who stole this" and someone from Anini called me today and they saw that person with that vehicle driving down the road in that area. I can tell you where the vehicle is because I know who that person is and the person on the phone said, "What color shirt was he wearing?" They all know the person. I told his name; he is notorious. They asked, "What color shirt was he wearing," I responded, "I do not know. My friend just called me and told me...this is the tip." Nothing happened, but you see what the police do a lot of times is eventually they will fall into their hands and they realize that. Eventually, these people rather than spending money on a sting and all this, these people will eventually fall into their hands. It is just a matter of time and from sometimes the public is inpatient and I think they might not want to spend their resources on a sting for just a small cemetery like that with not much outward problem to the community. We have drug houses in Kilauea and nothing gets done. It is just perennial. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I just find it more productive to do that sting rather than give some speeding tickets, but that is just my opinion. Members, are there any questions on this? Seeing none, thank you. On behalf of the County, I appreciate your willingness to try and help resolve the problem with this gate. I look forward to hearing back from you folks if problems still persist. We do not want to just do it and give up. We want to make sure we cure it somehow. Thank you. Mr. Smith: We are very hopeful that it is going to stop right now. It is quite a distance that you have to walk up that hill to do something that you could go elsewhere easier, but we would only be moving the problem elsewhere, but that is the way it is going to be. COUNCIL MEETING 67 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Doumo arigatou gozaimasu. With that, anybody else from the public wishing to speak on this item, the Japanese cemetery and these wonderful people who are trying to help resolve the situation? Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. How about installing a couple of roaming Rottweilers there? Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further testimony? I know you are familiar with this place, Lonnie. You probably drive pass there. There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Roll call. The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2017-72 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL — 6, AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Resolution No. 2017-73 will be taken in the afternoon regarding Kahiliwai Road. There being no objections, Resolution No. 2017-74 was taken out of order. Resolution No. 2017-74 — RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FUEL TAX RATE AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2013-47, DRAFT 3: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to schedule a public hearing for January 24, 2018, and that it thereafter be referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Brun. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It has been moved and seconded to refer on first reading. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Can the introducer could explain what is intended here and what the fiscal impacts are? Councilmember Kawakami: On the Resolution or on the Bill? Councilmember Yukimura: Either way. COUNCIL MEETING 68 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We are on the Resolution. Councilmember Kawakami: I can talk about it now. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: So, there is a Resolution and an attached Bill? Councilmember Kawakami: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Do you want to do it now? Councilmember Yukimura: But they are both proposing the same thing, right? Councilmember Kawakami: Yes. I would be glad to talk about it. Thank you for the question. We have just imposed a General Excise Tax surcharge for road repair, road construction, and public transportation. The thought behind this and a lot of our decision-making is just based on the life experiences that we have and my life experiences has lead me to the road of overseeing two (2) gas stations, so I know my customer base pretty well. The automotive industry has been on a diet and I mean that because vehicles are getting lighter and they are also becoming more fuel efficient and often times, they are not even needing fuel at all. For the fuel tax revenue, we are the third or fourth highest in the nation. As far as the price of fuel, we are the highest in the nation. I really feel that government has to be on a diet as well and coming from the retail industry, whenever we had an opportunity to give something back that was reasonable without breaking our budget, we did. We took every opportunity to see where we could shave some cost for our constituents and customers. With that being said though, the fiscal impact of the fuel reduction is a forced reduction from seventeen cents ($0.17) that was raised, back down to thirteen cents ($0.13). It does have an enactment provision meaning that it kicks in when General Excise Tax surcharge kicks in and there is a claw back provision, meaning it get clawed back once that General Excise Tax, if it ever, sunsets. Those are the measures that are in place. I can tell you that we need to be on a diet and we need to discipline ourselves because both vehicle weight and vehicle fuel are forecasted to be declining sources of revenue, meaning that we cannot continue to be dependent on taxing people that are required to be on the roads to drive to two (2) or three (3) jobs and drop their kids off to school because it is a declining source of revenue. What is going to happen if we do not start disciplining ourselves today, we are going to just increase the fuel tax every time we have to fill a hole in our budget. That is what is going to happen. Therefore, this provision has a fiscal impact of about one million three hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000) reduction, but to me, who it helps the most are the people that we are trying to help the most. I mean, I can tell you that Kekaha residents are out there and some of them need to drive to Lihu`e and those are the ones who are paying most into this fuel tax. How many times have I seen at the gas station, people scratching and clawing through their ashtrays just to get enough money in their fuel to get their kids to school and get to work? This is in my opinion something that is appropriate, something that is doable, and something that is responsible as far as being able to provide at least some sort of immediate relief every time somebody is at the gas pump filling up their gas tanks. Thank you. COUNCIL MEETING 69 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Have we asked the Administration how we are going to do our work without... Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can we wait until the Committee Meeting to do all of that work? Councilmember Yukimura: Well the thing is that that is after the public hearing. I think the people need to know...that is why we have been doing a lot more inquiry at first readings, so that people will know the facts of the matter before the public hearing when they can testify. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I think Councilmember Kawakami did a fabulous job of explaining. Councilmember Kawakami: I can answer the question as far as the Administration. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can Councilmember Kawakami answer your question? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, I would appreciate it. Councilmember Kawakami: Basically, in their memorandum, they spell out the fiscal impact and then they say, "for Fiscal Year 2018, the Highway Fund..." so this kicks in, in 2019 by the way when GE kicks in. In a nutshell it says, "It is likely that should the Highway Fund realize a reduction in the revenue sources as proposed by both ordinances, which is fuel and weight," which we will be talking about later, "transportation cost will need to be reallocated to other funds, such as the newly established GE tax fund." Let me remind you this is a declining source of revenue and the State has even taken a look at measures as far as, "Do we do away with fuel tax completely and move towards other methods as far as a mileage-based fee system." This is all up in the air for discussion, but basically, we passed the GE tax to address some of these needs and that is where the money comes from. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: How much is the estimated total figure per year? Councilmember Kawakami: One million three hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: One million three hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000) per year? Councilmember Kawakami: Yes, for fuel. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: And then the weight is how much? COUNCIL MEETING 70 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Kawakami: That is four cents ($0.04) per gallon. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Okay. Councilmember Kawakami: Reduction. Councilmember Yukimura: With the vehicle weight tax, it is four million dollars ($4,000,000)? Councilmember Kawakami: Total. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Total, is four million dollars ($4,000,000). Councilmember Kawakami: Four million two hundred thousand dollars ($4,200,000). Council Vice Chair Kagawa: So basically, it is twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) minus four million dollars ($4,000,000), is that what we are talking about? Councilmember Kawakami: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: If we are talking simple math. Councilmember Yukimura: I would like to ask the Finance Department and the Department of Public Works to come forward. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Finance and Public Works, if we cannot go too deep because I know we are going to go really deep in the Committee Meetings, but let us have the basic questions answered so the public knows what they are commenting on when we have the public hearing. Councilmember Yukimura: My question is first for the Department of Public Works. How will you manage our roads program with a deficit of four million dollars ($4,000,000)? Mr. Tabata: Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer. The way we view this is just a reduction on the total amount of money we will have. We are anticipating we would have to split the twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) between our Roads Division and Transportation and whatever...at the time when we come to budget for approval by the body, we will have to adjust to a lesser amount. Councilmember Yukimura: Basically you are going to be substituting the GET for the fuel tax? Mr. Tabata: We will have to make it up, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: You are going to substitute... COUNCIL MEETING 71 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Tabata: We will have, in essence, four million two hundred thousand dollars ($4,200,000) less. Councilmember Yukimura: Right, so the tendency would be to take from the GET, which is a regressive tax, which a user fee is not, it is based on use. It is like whoever uses pays, but instead we are going to make people like Alice pay who does not eve drive on the road. Mr. Tabata: I am not in the position to answer that. I am just explaining. You asked me, "What I would do," and I responded that I would take money from the GET to make up for the difference. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You can make those points in discussion, too. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, thank you. What is the position of the Administration on this Bill? Mr. Shimonishi: Ken Shimonishi, Director of Finance. I think you heard our Managing Director earlier speak about how when the Administration came forward for the GE tax surcharge that we laid out the various needs that we had which exceeded the GE tax revenue and we would like to stick with that. However, we understand that there is a want to provide some relief and again, it is really whether the Council wants to put that forward or not. We felt that we made the right argument to justify the half percent (.5%) and the needs that we could use it towards, but again, whatever the body decides. Councilmember Yukimura: So the big truckers who can pass on the cost and who can deduct it as a business expense, they will get a break and the elderly, the students, and the people who do not use the roads are going to pay for truckers and others to use the road? Is that what the Administrating is supporting? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: You do not have to answer that. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, of course you do not have to answer that. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: That would be their personal opinion. I do not think it would be the "Director of Finance" opinion or the "Public Works..." Councilmember Kawakami: I have a question. The sales of hybrids and electric vehicles are on the rise. Electric vehicles, how are they paying into our roads? Mr. Tabata: Right now, the State has a grant from Federal Highways Administration to perform a study of which I believe you mentioned a little bit about looking for different ways to replace not the vehicle weight tax, but the fuel tax. They are looking at a process to monitor vehicle miles traveled and right now, COUNCIL MEETING 72 DECEMBER 20, 2017 yes, you are right. Electric vehicles pay no fuel tax and hybrids pay quite a bit less in fuel tax and so the only means right now is the weight tax. Councilmember Kawakami: That being said, that is fine. I support, wholeheartedly, our move towards hybrid vehicles and vehicles that are not relying on fossil fuels — one hundred percent (100%), but I can tell you with the rise and the popularity of hybrid vehicles and electric vehicles, you are going to see a possible decline in your fuel tax revenue. How are you going to make up that shortfall? Are you going to use General Excise? Councilmember Yukimura: Equal miles traveled tax. Councilmember Kawakami: But that is nonexistent and please do not interrupt me. Let us be honest about the situation. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, let us. Councilmember Kawakami: This is a declining source of revenue, how are you going to make it out? On the backs of poor people, as characterized? Let us be honest, the General Excise Tax surcharge is going to fill in the gap for declining source of revenue. All this does is tell people, "Government is going to help give something back." Have we ever reduced or lowered the cost of living in Hawai`i? We have not. This is one way we can do it because it is already a declining source of revenue. It is like the tobacco tax. That is a declining source of revenue, as people quit smoking. Do you know what happened when State government was not disciplined enough? They kept on raising the tax on cigarette smokers, and whether that is the right thing to do or not or the right philosophy, I do not know, it depends on who you ask. How do you make up the shortfall on an already declining source of revenue that may be nonexistent? How do we discipline ourselves? Are you folks looking at the General Excise Tax surcharge or the General Fund? Mr. Shimonishi: I think it is an issue that is much greater than just the County's fuel tax. Obviously, it will impact the State fuel tax and the Federal government in total. That is why Lyle mentioned the grant and the study to try to move towards a vehicle miles traveled model rather than a fuel tax. The difficulty in that is that the fuel tax is easy to collect because it is right at the pump, everyone pays versus having a system that would collect on vehicle miles traveled. On Kaua`i or at least in Hawai`i, we are fortunate that we have somewhere of a system with the annual registrations or the safety checks collect that data, but obviously to get that into a form of collection and into the various agencies hands remains to be worked out. Councilmember Kawakami: And vehicle miles traveled right now is a unicorn. They talk about it, but implementation is going to be a challenge. Do you know who it will hurt the most? People that live in Kekaha who has to travel to Lihu`e to work, people that live in Anahola and Kilauea that have to travel to Lihu`e to work. Either which way, vehicles miles traveled hurts people that live on the outskirts that cannot afford to live in Lihu`e. The people who are going to live in Lima Ola are going to get hurt the most by vehicle miles traveled. Do you know who is COUNCIL MEETING 73 DECEMBER 20, 2017 hurting the most right now with this fuel tax? Those same people. That is why there is a proposal to reduce it. It is already a declining source of revenue and we have to discipline ourselves and, government has to stop being greedy. We have to find ways where we can give back too. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Do you still have questions? Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. Is the Administration working on the vehicle miles traveled tax, too? Mr. Tabata: The State Department of Transportation (DOT) is the receiving entity for the grant and they are picking select communities within the State to implement this. I have not had an update since the spring on how they are going to implement it. Councilmember Yukimura: Is there somebody from Kaua`i County that is involved in the working group? Mr. Tabata: I am. Councilmember Yukimura: You are? Mr. Tabata: Yes, and I have not had, like I mentioned, a working group meeting or any communication since spring, but I can follow-up. Councilmember Yukimura: Can you send us information in terms of the timetable when they plan to finish their work and have a proposal? Mr. Tabata: I will ask. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. That is a fair system, because it is a user fee and electronic vehicles and hybrids will pay for the use of the road, so that makes a lot of sense. Also, you can gear it to whatever the needs are for the repairs that are required caused by the users. Mr. Tabata: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Do you have further discussion? Thank you. Do we have any public testimony on this? Ms. Parker: Alice Parker, for the record. No, no, no...Okay first of all, we need to fix the roads. Second of all, yes, I do drive on the roads, but I drive a fourteen (14) year old car that gets about eleven miles per gallon, so I use the bus a lot. Anyhow, electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles, I do not know what population you are speaking of, but none of the population I know, which means we are going to have to use the bus more, which means we need good roads. "No way, Jose." Thank you. COUNCIL MEETING 74 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We are going to take this item and then have lunch. Mr. Mickens: Just to see that I understand this correctly. We are proposing to give four cents ($0.04) a gallon back to the public about three million dollars to four million dollars ($3,000,000 - $4,000,000) with the weight tax and the gas tax? Does this mean, you give us back about four million dollars ($4,000,000), but you are going to put a twenty-five million dollar ($25,000,000) tax to pay for that? That is a pretty good net loss, is it not, for the public? Am I understanding this right? Is that basically it? Thank you. Mr. Sykos: For the record, Lonnie Sykos. Thank you again to Councilmember Kawakami, for bringing this issue up. I personally think that ten (10) years from now the changes that have occurred with vehicles on the road will be astounding to us today. Europe is getting rid of internal combustion engines over the next twenty (20)years and market forces will force us, if that is what it takes, to follow. The loss of revenue is going to start occurring probably in Hawai`i in five or six years. We start to see the growth in electric cars and me following technology, battery capacities going up seven percent (7%) a year and the price of batteries is going down seven percent (7%) a year from the people that are watching that industry. My only issue with this is that once again, we just came up with a master plan for roads and now we are making an adjustment to the plan a week into it. I think that this is probably a good idea. The people who travel the furthest are helped the most, however, it is not equitable because the vehicles that cause the most damage to the road are also getting a discount on their fuel. At this point, it does not serve us to lose the tax revenue. I think this is a good idea, but it might be more appropriate to address it say two (2) years from now when our current road repair and our transportation plans have had a chance to flesh out and we see what occurs in real life. Tip of the hat because this is really forward thinking, internal combustion engines and burning fuel is pau. It is the only question to when, not if. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Anybody else wishing to speak on this? Seeing none. Further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Yukimura: Procedurally, there still is a public hearing on this? The law requires a public hearing. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to say I think this is a really bad idea. We are looking at a General Plan that says that we want an equitable society COUNCIL MEETING 75 DECEMBER 20, 2017 and this is not right to put the cost on a regressive tax. If the user should pay what they can pay, they are paying less than they paid five (5) years ago when the price of gas was almost five dollars ($5) a gallon. If we want to solve the problem of people say at Lima Ola having to pay a lot of money, we need to provide really good bus service and we need to locate homes close to job centers so they do not have as much of a commute. That is why we do have a policy in the General Plan to locate housing close to job centers. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Further discussion? Councilmember Kawakami: I think it is a great idea as far as being able to wean ourselves off of a declining source of revenue to help ease the burden of living in Hawaii. Let me remind people, we are the third highest fuel tax in the nation. We are the highest price of gasoline in the nation. On Kaua`i, we are paying almost one dollar more than the national average and in the State of Hawai`i, we are the highest except for some parts in Maui. I am going to say it again, this is a declining source of revenue and somehow, we have to be able to wean ourselves. Right now, people that do not use the bus are subsidizing the public transportation system and should be. This is a society and we all have to share the cost of some of the services, but you know to say that we are putting the burden on a regressive tax...we all passed the regressive tax; everybody here. We know that. This goes to public good. This will fix our roads and create jobs. To be characterize once again as trying to provide some sort of relief on the back of the poorest people. I can tell you from experience the people who are paying into this fuel tax and I looked at everything at how we can provide some sort of relief; property tax, but we did not want to touch property tax. This is a way we can identify where the majority of the people that are paying into this fuel tax are working class men and women. This is a one way that I saw that we could at least provide some sort of relief for those people that are trying to get to work. We have all agreed that transportation is a social justice issue and somebody being able to get to work and get their kids to school is the number one way to stay employed. Therefore, this provides some sort of relief. To say that it is premature, we are taking in a twenty-five million dollar ($25,000,000) grab. This is a four million two hundred thousand dollars ($4,200,000) reduction that I think we can afford. It does not enact itself until the GE surcharge kicks in. That being said, I think this is a worthy idea of moving forward for public discussion and we will see where it goes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I will be voting for this so that it can go to public hearing because I believe in public hearings. I want to say that it is a good thing that Councilmember Kawakami withdrew his Bill previously on the affordable housing because if this Bill passes, there will be definitely no surplus. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? I just want to agree with Councilmember Chock in that I think these ideas and bills floated are a great thing. It opens discussion. There are a lot of people not happy with the GET having passed. There are a lot of people who appreciate that will be looking at reducing a cost that is out of control. Our gas prices are out of control. The gas was below three dollars ($3) not too long ago and now it is approaching four dollars ($4) again. It is just going COUNCIL MEETING 76 DECEMBER 20, 2017 to keep fluctuating. At the mercy, the people...I will put myself in it. I cannot reduce the cost of my fuel cost. I have to drive to Kapa'a for work. I am not going to wake up really early and catch the bus. I owe it that I work hard and I deserve to go to work and return home when I feel like it. Not to say that the poor class does not do that as well. There are a lot of people who...it is more convenient for them to allow their families and children to drive rather than catch the bus. Sometimes they drive to pick up siblings, sometimes it is driving to get to work, and like Councilmember Kawakami said, I think we want to give back what we can. Now, is twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000) a year for ten (10) years needed to fix all of the things we need to fix and can we do it? That is two hundred fifty million dollars ($250,000,000) or is two hundred ten million dollars ($210,000,000), which would be twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000) a year for ten (10) years would be sufficient to accomplish majority of what we want to accomplish and still be successful, yet giving a tax break to one of the highest cost of people's budget in gas cost a break? This is not a bad idea. I believe this is a brilliant idea, however, it needs the four (4) votes and we will see how it turns out. This will go to public hearing and I do not except the public hearing to be against it. Who is going to be against a tax break or a lessoning of a high cost? But I think Councilmember Yukimura's points are valid as well and like Councilmember Chock said, it is great to have the discussion. We have to be willing to agree to disagree and I have learned that. I always wanted things my way for many of the years that I served, but it does not happen. It does not happen here. it is frustrating, yes. I feel like you, Councilmember Yukimura many times, but at the same point, we need to be more open-minded like Councilmember Chock and allow the votes to fall where they fall. That is why we are all born and raised separately, we all think differently. That is just the way of life. I want to thank Councilmember Kawakami for his proposals today and we will see where the votes fall. Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: I am going to be supporting this to get to public hearing. There are a lot of people that called about this today on my way in and yesterday and I spoke to Councilmember Kawakami yesterday about it. I will be supporting to get it to public hearing and we will see where it lays from there. I will probably need to get a legal opinion being that I live that farthest and it will benefit me the most. I do not know if I should be voting on this. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion, Members? It is time for lunch. Can I have a roll call? The motion to schedule a public hearing for January 24, 2018, and that it thereafter be referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL — 6, AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. COUNCIL MEETING 77 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Lunch break. We will return at 1:30 p.m. There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 12:28 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 1:33 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We will continue with the Council Meeting until the certificate recipients come. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Chair, we are on page 5 of the agenda, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2679). There being no objections, Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2679) was taken out of order. Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2679) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-1.1, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE COUNTY FUEL TAX: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2679) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Chock. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We already had discussion on it during the Resolution, but Members, is there any other discussion? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to say that I will be voting in favor of the Bill to get it to public hearing, but I have many, many concerns about it. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Anyone else? Seeing none. Roll call. The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2679) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura TOTAL— 6, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Next item, please. Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2680) —A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5-2.3, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO MOTOR VEHICLE WEIGHT TAX: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for passage of COUNCIL MEETING 78 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2680) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Kawakami. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Discussion? Seeing none. Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: Just for the public's purview, this is another relief measure that I am proposing. Basically, it is also in my eyes and in my opinion and the opinion of the automotive industry a declining source of revenue considering that the automotive industry is now moving towards weight reduction on their vehicles. They found out that it does not compromise safety, that it is much more fuel efficient, and it is actually the low hanging fruit as far as cutting back on carbon emissions, cutting back on our dependency on fossil fuels. This is another thing that we are going to see decline in revenue and it is another way that we can at least lower the cost of living. I want to be completely clear; it moves the passenger weight tax from two cents ($0.02) a pound down to a penny a pound. For commercial vehicles, it is three cents ($0.03) a pound to two cents ($0.02) a pour. People have asked me why am I trying to help businesses, well, I have a good track record as far as supporting businesses. Kaua`i is one of the worst places to do business in the nation. The State of Hawai`i is one of the toughest places to do business. I have to tell you everything from our groceries to our construction materials, all that cost in freight gets trickled down to us, so if we can help businesses get out, lower their costs, they will reinvest in their businesses, and pass on their savings to us. We have seen it many, many times. That is proven. I have to remind people that these trucking companies, they are "mom and pop" businesses as well. They are not large corporations. These are "mom and pop" businesses that I hope we can provide some relief to. This is sort of a package deal: fuel and weight. We can discuss it and see which one is better, which one is horrible, but these are two (2) proposals to actually help the community of Kaua`i to lower the cost of living in areas where we can afford to. Like I said, government is getting a big grab and we have to find ways where we can target it to our local people on where we can provide some sort of relief, so I took a look at the two (2) fuel and vehicle weight, and that is exactly where local people are paying. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Questions? Councilmember Yukimura: This is such an inequitable bill because the damage to the roads are caused mainly by weight and the heavy trucks are exponentially responsible for road damage. Puhi Road was probably because of most of those large trucks and when we put it on just the general fuel tax or on an excise tax, it is making people who have not caused the damage pay for the road repair. That is so unjust. In Honolulu, instead of three cents ($0.03), I think it is four cents ($0.04) now per pound for the freight trucks and that is because Honolulu has had to fix its roads—you think we kicked the can down the road, they did it even worse and when they looked at who should pay for this now huge bill, they looked at the people who were causing the damage. Sure you want to help businesses, but I have not seen businesses who are not willing to pay their fair share. If they do not pay their fair share, then somebody else is going to. Businesses can deduct it as a business expense COUNCIL MEETING 79 DECEMBER 20, 2017 and they can pass it on to consumers. Yes, they can pass it on to the food purchasers, but I do not know if it is really passing on...right now, they are saving a huge amount of money in the fuel tax because as I said, gas was five dollars ($5) a gallon about six (6) to eight (8) years ago. It is way down—that is a savings. Is that coming to the consumer? I do not know. But the consumers are also very wealthy people building big houses and they are trucking their materials and they are going to get a break too? I think it is simpler if we just have a rule that people pay their fair share, because otherwise somebody else pays. It is not fair to make those of low and moderate- income pay for damage caused by heavy trucks. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Seeing none. Anybody from the public? Go ahead, Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: I would like to make it clear that they will still be paying more. They are still a separate class. Like I said, this is the public vetting process, anybody is open to propose amendments, and I look forward to seeing more public discussion on the two (2) measures. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Seeing none. Roll call. The motion for passage of Bill (No. 2680) on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for January 24, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura TOTAL — 6, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: With that, we will take a recess. There being no objections, the Council recessed at 1:41 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 2:05 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Clerk, can we have the next item? Resolution No. 2017-73 — RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A "NO PARKING AT ANY TIME" AND "TOW AWAY ZONE" ALONG A PORTION OF KALIHIWAI ROAD, KALIHIWAI, HANALEI DISTRICT, COUNTY OF KAUAI Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Vice Chair, we do have registered speakers for this item. COUNCIL MEETING 80 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2017-73, seconded by Councilmember Yukimura. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: At this time, I am going to suspend the rules and take public testimony, or do we have questions for the Administration? Councilmember Yukimura: It is pretty straight forward. There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It is the same process. Please state your name and you may begin. DAVID SPROAT: Councilmembers, my name is David Sproat. Chair Rapozo and Members of the County Council, thank you for having us today to hear this item, especially Councilmember Chock for introducing it. I will just read my testimony real quickly. I submitted it. My name is David Keola Sproat. I live in Kalihiwai with my wife Linda Akana Sproat and our extended family. I have lived in Kalihiwai fulltime since the 1960s, have seen many changes over the years, too many of them negative. My wife's family, the Akana's, were konohiki, or resource managers for our nearshore marine areas including Kalihiwai, Hanapai, Kalihikai, and beyond for akule, he e, and mullet. I learned to fish, gather, and tend our ocean gardens from my father in-law, Boy Akana, and his father before him, Jon Keahi Akana. I have passed this kuleana on to my children and grandchildren and we continue to rely on these resources to put food on our dinner tables. For us as Native Hawaiians, this is how we live our culture. Today, Kalihiwai is a completely different place than it was in the 1960s. When I first came to Kaua`i, we fished all along the coast from Wanini to Kauapea and beyond, often using two (2) fishing trails within the area at issue and we would only see a handful of people from Kalihiwai, Kilauea, or other neighboring communities. While more and more people have used the area over the years, we have noticed a significant uptick in the numbers of visitors and tourists, in particular with the publication of guidebooks, such as Kauai Revealed. With cellphones and all of the social media things, we now have people swimming or jumping off the rocks where we would like to throw net. In the summer, you can smell the sunscreen in the water and, of course, we have noticed less fish and other resources. Even if the fish were home, they leave when people come to go swimming. Where we once had one (1) or two (2) cars parked on a busy summer day, we now have ten (10) to fifteen (15) vehicles at a time on a short stretch of Kalihiwai Road with a small shoulder and a blind turn. This is also a significant public safety issue. I drive up and down this road every single day. In the summer, it is not uncommon to have the shoulder completely lined with cars with people getting in and out of vehicles and trying to turn around at a blind turn. It is a miracle that we have not had a more significant accident. Cars driving down to the beach swerve to avoid parked cars, people getting in and out of them or folks walking on the road. Because there is a blind turn in the road, I and every other member of my family have almost been hit driving up from the beach. In addition, the congestion is so bad, it is not safe to walk along the road in this area, although many people continue to do so. When my kids were little, they used to walk down to the beach on their own. Now, our grandkids cannot do this because it is just not safe. Although these are my personal COUNCIL MEETING 81 DECEMBER 20, 2017 observations, I was formally Fire Chief for a County and was also on the State of Hawaii Commission on Transportation, so I have some experience with transportation and public safety issues both here on Kaua`i and throughout Hawaii nei. This is a significant public safety issue that needs your immediate attention. In addition, there is also a fire hydrant standpipe in the corner of the turn near one of the two trails. Often the standpipe is completely blocked by cars and inaccessible if emergency vehicles need to use the lines there. Moreover, the area makai of the fishing trails can be treacherous, while local practitioners like my ohana are selective in when we utilize the trails and avoid them when ocean conditions are dangerous. Tourists are less careful. Since 2013, four (4) people were swept into the ocean, three (3) drowned after parking here and using the trail. Personally, when I was a fireman, I had to recover a body from Waika'ama, and there was more than one (1) occasion when we were unable to find bodies of people who drowned at Kauapea Beach, sometimes called Secret Beach. The bottom line is that our makai beaches in this area can be dangerous and reducing the parking will not only eliminate a significant danger nuisance for our County, it will help reduce liability for the County. Members of our community have been meeting about this for several years trying to identify proactive solutions. We actually found Kaua`i Code Section 16-10.1(b)(2) which prohibits parking within ten (10) feet of fire hydrants, Section 16-10.1(a)(10) prohibits parking on roadways, bends, or curves where the visibility of a car from both directions is less than five hundred (500) feet. We had a surveyor come out and the visibility of this stretch of Kalihiwai Road is in the range of approximately one hundred forty (140) feet. I attached the copy of the survey. In 2015, we reached out to Public Works and I met with Michael Moule and asked him to enforce these provisions. While the Department of Public Works at the time was unwilling to take action, they suggested we follow-up with Council if it continued to be a concern, so here we are today. We thank you for your time and consideration and ask you to pass Resolution No. 2017-73. I will answer any questions if you have. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Members, any questions? Thank you. Next speaker. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Next speaker is Kapua Sproat. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Our normal process is to give the public three (3) minutes on the first round, but since you are all ohana, we will just give you six (6) minutes one time. KAPUA SPROAT: Thank you. Aloha mai kakou. Mahalo Councilmembers, for the opportunity and the privilege to be here today. For the record, I am Kapua Sproat and I wear lots of different hats in our community. I am a kupa aina of Kalihiwai, having been born and raised in this incredibly special place and many of my most cherish memories are really from this area here from Kalihiwai Bay, Waika'ama, all the way to Kauapea. In many senses, it is my experiences growing up here—when we were small, this was a cow pasture before it was all subdivided into luxury estates. In many ways, that is what instilled in me a really abiding sense of kuleana, to malama our natural and cultural resources, and put me on the path that I walk today. In my primary day job, I am a Law Professor at the University of Hawaii at Manoa's William S. Richarderson School of Law. I am the COUNCIL MEETING 82 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Associate Director of our Native Hawaiian Law Center and I want to thank all of you who came to our Native Hawaiian Law training in January here at the Kaua`i War Memorial Convention Center. I am also the Director of our environmental law clinic and I mention that only because I believe that the ordinance that is before you today, Resolution No. 2017-73, is a really important vehicle to fulfil this Council's constitutional mandates under Article 11, Section 1 of our State Constitution and Article 12, Section 7. Article 11, Section 1 is our General Public Trust Provisions, which puts our natural and cultural resources in trusts and charges government officials like you folks with the kuleana to help manage them for present and future generations. Article 12, Section 7 mandates government officials to protect and restore traditional customary Native Hawaiian practices, which for communities like us in Kalihiwai, are wholly dependent upon the resources that we have. I am really here today to say thank you because before I went into academia, I spent about ten (10) years in litigation working on Native Hawaiian rights and environmental issues. Often that was because agency decision-makers were not proactive in protecting resources and taking the steps to do what is necessary to protect our communities. Having seen many of the written testimonies that were submitted and I would note, I think it is significant that every single Hawaiian family that is still in Kalihiwai submit a testimony in support of this Resolution today. I do not want you folks to think that just because only the Sproats are here, that is an indication of the community wide support. Many people wanted to be here today, but simply could not because work and other obligations. My point is that I think passing a resolution like this is helpful to address the significant public safety concerns that many people talked about to avoid accidents. The hazards are real. All of us, including myself, have almost been banged by cars as we are coming up from the beach as cars crossing the center line. We are grateful that the Department of Public Works has striped, because we did not even have lines on the road until recently. While we are grateful that the lines have been added, they are really not sufficient. Many of us stop and talk story with the tourists and the people that are down there and they give us attitude for being concerned about their safety. I am grateful that this Council has the vision and the foresight to take action on this now. That is really what I wanted to come and say today. I think Kauai County has been leading the way in so many provisions with respect to traditional customary rights and also with respect on the public trust. I think the position you folks took on Kaua`i Springs is very important. I think this built upon that path and I am very grateful for your opportunity and leadership. I am happy to answer any questions that you folks may have. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any questions? Seeing none. Mahalo. Next speaker. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next speaker is Nanea Sproat-Armitage. NANEA SPROAT-ARMITAGE: Aloha, my name is Nanea Sproat-Armitage and I live in Kalihiwai with my husband and three (3) children. My family is Native Hawaiian and our people have lived here since time immemorial. We initially lived in the valley, but after the second tsunami in the 1950s, we relocated to Kaohe Road. My family and I drive or walk along Kalihiwai and Kaohe Roads every single day. I come from a family of fishers and farmers and my extended `ohana regularly use Kalihiwai River and Beach and neighboring areas, including Waika'ama, Pukamoi, COUNCIL MEETING 83 DECEMBER 20, 2017 and Kauapea. This is our classroom and our icebox, and we rely on these resources to feed our families and teach our kids to malama this incredibly special place in the same way that our kupuna taught us to do. Over the years, but especially since the publication of guidebooks such as Kauai Revealed and the increase in social media applications ("apps"), such as Snapchat, Instagram, and Facebook, interest in and use of our area has exploded. People come to walk on traditional fishing trails to take pictures of themselves jumping off the rocks near Waika'ama or at Pukamoi, which they call "Dragon's Breath." This has created major problems for our small community. I have had many people call me or text me and say, "Hey, where is this place I heard about called Dragon's Breath? I really want to go there." I respond, "Well, it is really not that safe. I personally do not swim there and I grew up here." But they do not care. They are still excited and want to go. There is no dedicated parking in the area, so tourists and other visitors park on the side of the road and walk on the road to the trails or the overlooks. Until very recently, we had no lines on the road whatsoever. So, cars driving down to the beach often swerve into oncoming traffic to avoid parked cars and pedestrians. This all takes place near a blind turn in the road. I have lost track of the number of times I have been driving home from the beach with my children and have almost been hit head-on by people driving down to the beach in my lane to avoid parked cars, people walking on the road, or folks getting into or out of their cars. We need your kokua please. Passing Resolution No. 2017-73 would help to resolve a significant problem for our small community. We realize that our proposed solution may upset some, but are asking for your help now before a more serious accident occurs—we have already had several. Thank you for your time and consideration. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any questions? No. Next speaker. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: The next speaker is Yoshito L'Hote. YOSHITO L'HOTE: Aloha, Councilmembers. My name is Yoshito L'Hote, for the record. I am here to represent myself as a resident of Kaohe Road and also going and bypassing that specific spot on a weekly basis. I am here today to ask you folks to pass this Resolution No. 2017-73, mainly for that safety reason. Actually, if it was up to me, I would extend a"No Parking" zone to cover the entire turn, because people park in the turn as well and they are usually half on the road. I also want to point out that that parking area really did not exist before. It was maybe that one (1) car could park and it is only because of the construction of Mr. Stiller that that area was widened to accommodate the workers and their cars and was left that way. To ensure that no further parking happens and the safety of people that are driving way too fast down that road, it would be good to pass this Resolution. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I have a question. Can we open up the map? Can you clarify to this Council what you would like to see in addition to what is on the Resolution? The Resolution has the proposed "No Parking" marked out...can we provide him with a pointer. This is not a guarantee, but this is just a request to extend and then we will have the Department of Public Works come up later and comment. This is the proposal and Yoshito, if you can just clarify what you meant about making it even safer. COUNCIL MEETING 84 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. L'Hote: Right after this area, there is a little guardrail, and then right in that turn. Therefore, it would include this portion between the two (2) guardrails. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Thank you. Do you have anything else to add? No. Mr. L'Hote: No. I appreciate your time. Thank you very much. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are there any other further questions? No. Public Works, can you come up to answer some questions? Mr. Tabata: Good afternoon, Councilmembers. Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer. MICHAEL MOULE, Chief of Engineering Division: Michael Moule, Chief of Engineering Division, Public Works. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It would be helpful if you could explain the existing Resolution and then comment on the request to extend. Mr. Moule: It is pretty much as you see in the Resolution and as the residents and citizens explained. Yes, we have worked with them on this, we have talked to them about it, and the initial request was, "Can you just put signs up to..." based on the two (2) existing ordinances that Mr. Sproat mentioned earlier. The concern we had on that one was simply that as far as the one that talks about "within a curve where the sight distance is such and such," our understanding of that is really about parking on the pavement. Therefore, parking on the pavement would be illegal and could be enforced by the police if the centerline is marked, but parking off the pavement in those situations is not concerning. We have dozens if not hundreds of places around the island where there are curves and people park in those curves and I did not want to set a precedent without some sort of legal backing of a resolution. That is why I recommended that Council can make this change and that is what is here. This does cover the area that is currently being parked in a significant amount by people that are using the trail. I have visited the site; other staff have visited the site. There is, indeed, as we just heard that a little further around the corner there is another small pullout and I have actually stopped there to watch the sunset once in the last several months. It is just between the two (2) guardrails as we heard. It can easily be extended to there and our feeling on safety of parking in general on a road like this is if it is off the pavement, it is reasonably safe. The volumes and densities that we have heard from the residents, it becomes less safe, and that is what they are explaining, they experience, because they see this every day. Certainly, if we sign the area shown on this map, people might choose to start parking on the road and then walking back up to the location, so it maybe only prudent to ban the parking in that next turnout. Although from a general safety point of view of a normal volume of cars parked on the side of the road, we did not feel that any of this would sort of require, but we recommend parking restrictions based strictly on the safety of sort of normal parking activities. If that makes sense. COUNCIL MEETING 85 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Tabata: May I add that the Bill that was passed today for second reading CR-PST 2017-07 (Bill No. 2673) should also cover. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Should help the police? Mr. Tabata: Should help the police, yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: With enforcing. Mr. Tabata: With the centerline striped now, yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Is the Department of Public Works saying that you think it will work without that extra stretch? Mr. Tabata: No, we can add it. Mr. Moule: What I would say on that is that people will start parking down there and then walk back to the trail, if we do not prohibit that. I think that if that is a concern of the residents in the area, I think then it would be prudent to extend it to include that portion. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, how far down? Mr. Moule: We can do the measurements and figure it out. Councilmember Yukimura: Well, you are going to have to... Mr. Moule: If you want to try and make the change today, we can try to figure that out very soon, if you want. Councilmember Yukimura: Or just to the next meeting, so that we can have a complete...oh, I see, we can amend it because it is going to public hearing. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: No. Councilmember Yukimura: Right, because it is a resolution. If it is going to be approved today then we should just hold off until the next Council Meeting when you can bring it in. Mr. Tabata: What we did prepare was based on what was requested and we just tried to make is as accurate as possible from what was supplied to us. We can recess and extend it to meet the needs. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. COUNCIL MEETING 86 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Let us take all the questions before we figure out what we are going to do. Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: That was my question, if I could add an amendment to this to add that on. I guess we have to ask the community if they...the only way we can do it is we are going to have to defer until the Department of Public Works can come back with the exact wording on it. It would be up to the community if they want us to defer, if not, we can do this, but we are going to have to do a whole new resolution to add that on later on. If the community wants to defer for a couple weeks, we can do that, so we can get everything in. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I hear you. Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: My feeling would be to pass it as-is and then they can start putting up the signs and then if it is the community's will to extend it, then they talk about it, bring it back, and we can add it. Our next meeting is not going to be until next year and I would hate to have everybody wait. I would rather them at least chip away at it, get this done, and then if necessary, come back with another resolution to extend it. That would be what I would think is more efficient and faster for the community. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I want to check in because what I heard from Mr. Moule is that this might be a real simple amendment in order to achieve. Mr. Tabata: Yes, we just have to extend the length. Councilmember Chock: How long do you need? If it is going to take an hour, then we may not want to stay here, but if it is going to be fairly quick, that might be an option. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: It looks like it is just changing the map, but we want to make sure it is fairly accurate as far as the map as to how long you want to extend. You do not want to have an inaccurate map and then the community is saying, "Why are you not enforcing the map," but the map is off because we just rushed. Sometimes you have to take your time a little bit. Any more questions? Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: Can we bring up Kapua and ask her what is their feeling? Ms. Sproat: I have confidence that Michael can do it very quickly. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Can you state your name again? Ms. Sproat: For the record, Kapua Sproat. COUNCIL MEETING 87 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Brun: If we would add this and we have to wait, would you folks be okay with waiting or do you want to approve what we have on the table today? Ms. Sproat: We would prefer, if possible, to just do it in one fail swoop now depending upon how long it would take to add the section. I think I definitely hear Councilmember Kagawa's concern. We want to make sure we do this the right way, but there is no harm to having the "No Parking" zone extend slightly further because this area, on the makai side of the curve, has room for maybe two (2) cars and then beyond that, there is only the guardrail and then the cliff. People cannot really park, but I actually think that even if we are slightly conservative and add a little bit more that might be helpful. Right now, people also come down, looking at the surf, driving down the road, and slow down and stop. Therefore, having the "No Parking" zone extended further on, I think, would be helpful. For the record, we did discuss this with Michael and it was because of the Department of Public Works' concern about having people on the gravel portion, that the community initially said, "Okay, we want something; this is really important," so if that is going to lead to opposition, then we will take the front part. To the degree that the Council is willing to do this, I think it was significantly address our problem because it is still a blind turn on the bottom. People coming up also cannot see people coming down and so to have the "No Parking" extended, I think, would be helpful. One thing is there are practitioners of traditional customary Native Hawaiian rights who park in that area. I was wondering about the possibility and actually...our good neighbor Ben Stiller has been very accommodating and supporting parking on his property and actually had parking noted for parking for practitioners of traditional customary Native Hawaiian rights. Is it possible to within the "No Parking" zone have one (1) spot for practitioners who are going down to throw net and if that is an issue, then I would be happy to take it off the table. I just wanted to raise that. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Do you want to discuss that proposal, Members? Are you folks for opening one (1) stall for practitioners or maybe an amendment like that would require at least a deferral to the next Council? Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I love the idea that we could specify a parking space for cultural practitioners, but I worry about the enforcement. Ms. Sproat: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: Because then any and everybody can just put their car there and say they are a cultural practitioner. At least with handicapped signs, you either have or you do not have the official designation of being someone who is handicapped. It might be something in the longer term to work on. Ms. Sproat: Absolutely. Councilmember Yukimura: But until we have a way that police, for example, the enforcing agency could identify easily, who is a legitimate cultural COUNCIL MEETING 88 DECEMBER 20, 2017 practitioner and who is not. I think it would be loophole for any and everybody to try and park there. Ms. Sproat: I definitely hear that concern and this is, for us, a long-term commitment that we are working on. We have been harassing Michael for about three (3) years now on this issue. We are happy to, if we can get the Resolution passed extending the "No Parking" zone further down to the degree that it becomes an issue, we can come back. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We have just been informed by staff that they need about half an hour. What we will do is take a break, we will go into Executive Session, and then address the amendment. Does Council agree that we need the Department of Public Works to work on an amendment? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes, okay. So you folks can work on the amendment. Do you have a question for who? Go ahead, Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: This is all a balance right. If we extend the "No Parking," then it is a "No Parking" for everybody. Ms. Sproat: Right. Councilmember Kaneshiro: But if we leave two (2) spots, then there might be parking for kupuna or whoever wants to...there "might" be because it might be taken also, so for me, I would like to hear from you folks what you folks would prefer, knowing that we cannot necessarily leave a spot because there is no way we are going to know if that person is supposed to be there or not. Ms. Sproat: Right. Councilmember Kaneshiro: We could pass it now as-is, see how it goes, see how those two (2) spots go, and obviously everybody will be fighting for those spots. Ms. Sproat: Yes. Councilmember Kaneshiro: If it becomes a problem, then we could extend it or if you folks think that, "Well, at least it gives these people the ability to park there, it might be okay," but again, I will leave it up to you to let us know. What is the best approach for it? For me, I do not think it would be me who has the best idea for it because you folks are the ones who live there and would know best. Ms. Sproat: We are really grateful to all of you for being willing to work with us on this to try and figure out what is going to be best for our community. Personally and I would welcome mana o from other people, especially I see Chauncy Pa has joined us. COUNCIL MEETING 89 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes, I think he wants to testify, so at some point I wanted to see if we could...he was stuck in traffic and drove in. Ms. Sproat: Yes, we were all stuck on the bypass, but he is one of the people that holoholo over there the most and so I would welcome mana o from him. We all go and I would rather have the safety issue addressed rather than...well anyway, I welcome Chauncey's mana o. Councilmember Yukimura: I have one (1) question. It just occurred to me this would take a change in State law, I think, but if you have a process where you could get license plates for cultural practitioners, you have to have a vetting just like our bus system has to have a vetting system to qualify real handicap. But if you could get a process that can actually identify cultural practitioners and they get license plates that are really clear for that, then that might be a way to solve the problem. It is instant identification for a police officer. Ms. Sproat: That is an excellent idea. I have actually been in discussions with the Senior Policy Manager at Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) on this particular issue and it is something that they have been talking about and grappling with. I am not sure if it can make the legislative package this year, but I am happy to continue working with them on it because this is a real concern for folks all over. I will follow-up with them. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, it may take more time to really figure it all out, but I think if it could be done, that would be a really easy way for enforcement. Ms. Sproat: Right. Excellent idea. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Any more questions for Kapua before we take the final public testimony? Councilmember Yukimura: One (1) more question. Would you prefer to have it all the way down rather than leave two (2) spots? Ms. Sproat: I would like to have the parking area extended down and have two (2) spots, if that is possible, but I would also... Councilmember Yukimura: Where are the two (2) spots? Because if you bar parking, then it would have to be really clear how far down you have to go, right? Ms. Sproat: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: Those two (2) spots are down below, right? Ms. Sproat: Or they could also be up...because it depends on how far down the road you go. If you park further up, it is not as much of an issue, kind of to the left side of where the hash tags are now on the shoulder. COUNCIL MEETING 90 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: But if you do put two (2) parking every tourists will do that and then they will try to do beyond what is there, too. Ms. Sproat: Right. Councilmember Yukimura: I think the community...Michael probably went to change the map, but the community has to kind of have a consensus among yourselves what you want to do. Ms. Sproat: Right. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We will take the final public testimony and then we will figure out what we are going to do. The other alternative is that we just pass the "No Parking" Resolution as-is with the extension and perhaps Mauna Kea can work with the community to establish what kind of options we want for cultural practitioners and kapuna. Right now, it is simple if we extend, but if we create another stall, I think we are going to need language in the Resolution that specifies what we are trying to do and I do not think we have time today to do all of that. CHAUNCEY PA: Aloha, my name is Chauncey Pa and my family is from Kalihiwai. My father is Native Hawaiian and Kalihiwai has been an integral part of my life. As a young boy, I would hear stories of my great grandmother jumping the ditch at Waika'ama. Some of my favorite memories are going holoholo with my father. There were no homes, fences, or gates blocking access to our favorite fishing holes. Today, I when I take my sons to Waika'ama and teach them our Native Hawaiian traditions, we have to navigate around fences and find parking. But, my biggest concern is the number of tourists who use the parking area and do not understand how dangerous Waika'ama can be. The surf is treacherous, there are strong under currents, and as a fireman, I have responded to calls where people have died after being swept off the rocks and drown. Whenever I am at Waika'ama checking my holes, I often warn tourists to stand back or not swim because of the high surf. When I ask how they found this place, they always say, to"The Guidebook." Tourists are not there to feed their families, as I am, but rather to take pictures and post them on social media, further exposing Kalihiwai Point. As a Hawaiian and a founding member of the Kuahui Kalihiwai, a nonprofit organization established to oversee Kalihiwai Point and protect Native Hawaiian gathering rights, I strongly believe it is important to pass a "No Parking" resolution by the access to Waika'ama. There is no dedicated parking in the areas, so tourists and other visitor park on the side of the road and walk to the trails or the overlooks. Until very recently, there were no lines on the road, so cars driving down to the beach would often have to swerve into oncoming traffic to avoid parked cars and pedestrians. Passing Resolution No. 2017-73 would help to resolve a significant problem for our small community. I would appreciate your support and kokua. In my lifetime, I have seen a lot of changes down there. It is a short lifetime, but I have seen it change from nothing to now there are houses, fences, and just a whole lot of people. They do not know what they are doing, so I do not get mad at them. They block the entire area. They are just there to have fun, but what the problem is, is on that turn, it becomes a safety problem and is dangerous. All you see are Jeeps and convertibles, and COUNCIL MEETING 91 DECEMBER 20, 2017 covertibles have big doors, so they leave the doors open, people stand back, and then people have to swerve, and it becomes a safety issue. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: How do you feel about the suggestion to possibly having one (1) or two (2) parking for cultural practitioners or what have you? Mr. Pa: Many times I want to go down there, there is no parking. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Do you support that concept of having designated stalls for cultural practitioners? Mr. Pa: Yes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: Hi, Chauncey. Mr. Pa: Hi. Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you for coming. Right now, we are looking at extending...if we could put the map up. I think it was Yoshito who suggested extending it a little bit further down and we are looking for consensus from all of you as to whether to do it. Michael Moule, the engineer, went back to his office to actually draw the map to go further down. Apparently, it will remove a couple of spots where you could have parking and I am assuming you could have parking without too much danger, but I am not clear. Mr. Pa: The one that overlooks the Bay? Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. So, that is the question. Should we extend it? Mr. Pa: Well, that is oranges. I was talking about apples. That is two (2) different...I was not prepared for that question. Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, so you are talking about up to here. Mr. Pa: I was talking about Waika'ama, right by the turn, more up. Councilmember Yukimura: You have the pointer right there, do you want to use it and show us? Mr. Pa: Where is the standpipe? Is this the standpipe? Councilmember Yukimura: I am not sure. I do not know that it is drawn here. COUNCIL MEETING 92 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Mr. Pa: Right on the turn, there is a standpipe right here. This is the house, right. I was talking about this area right over here, if you can put the "No Parking" over there and then have some parking stalls for us to go down. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but how do we distinguish, how does the police distinguish? Mr. Pa: We have to work that out. I am not sure. I cannot... Councilmember Yukimura: So until we are able to distinguish cultural practitioners, can we just do "No Parking" for now and see how it works? Otherwise, you have to think about enforcement, right? We can make the law, but if the police do not know who is a cultural practitioner or not... Mr. Pa: True. Councilmember Yukimura: ...it is not going to work because it will not be enforceable. Kapua is talking about...we talked about a license plate for valid cultural practitioners or whatever, but that is something down the line. It is not in place right now. Mr. Pa: That is fine. I can walk from my mom's house. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, you can walk, but the tourists cannot. For now, just do a "No Parking" up to what the map shows now? Mr. Pa: Sure. Councilmember Yukimura: And leave the rest open? Mr. Pa: Well, you cannot really park on the rest, right? Councilmember Yukimura: According to Kapua, you could. Mr. Pa: By where? Ms. Sproat: By the guardrail, there are two (2) spots. Mr. Pa: Are you talking about the guardrail...on this side then? Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Between two (2) guardrails, I think, she said. Mr. Pa: Okay, this is going down to Pokamoi's. COUNCIL MEETING 93 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Mr. Pa: Perfect, yes, right here. Over here is going to be the overlook to Kalihiwai Bay. So, that is fine. So, yes, to answer your question, yes. Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, what? Mr. Pa: From here to there is perfect. Councilmember Yukimura: As it is now? Mr. Pa: Yes, because that does not include the corner that overlooks the Bay. Councilmember Yukimura: So, leave it and do not extend it. Leave it as- is? Mr. Pa: That looks fine. Councilmember Yukimura: Everybody else is okay with that? Mr. Pa: Do we need to... Councilmember Yukimura: Then we do not need Mike to change the map. You have to come speak up at the microphone so we can get the recording. Ms. Sproat-Armitage: I am Nanea Sproat-Armitage. I think my concern is just being able to have spots for cultural practitioners. I go down a lot with my children and my husband and we could walk, too, it would be a little bit longer, but it would be nice to be able to have some spots. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: We have a question for Mauna Kea, but go ahead, Councilmember Chock. Councilmember Chock: I think we are trying to answer a question we cannot answer in trying to solve their problem. What we were trying to do is first address the safety issue and I think we certainly want to encourage access for those who deserve and need to be there, but we do not have that...we are not going to accomplish that today, by any means. That is the question I think we need to be asking is, either you want it now, all of it, or you do not want it. We can cut it off and you can have an extra parking on that side, but we are not going to be able to enforce that. There is no way right now. We do not have a mechanism for it, which means anybody is going to park there any time and it will most likely not be you because of how many people visit there. I am not sure how much more we can go into it. Ms. Sproat-Armitage: Can we leave it as-is now and then see how it works and maybe visit it again if we find that it is causing more problems? Actually, it is not real noticeable if there are "No Parking" signs. They have a little bit of a hard COUNCIL MEETING 94 DECEMBER 20, 2017 time where the trail is...I mean, I am sure when they come down and see all the cars parked there, then they will know that is the spot, but if nobody is actually parked there, they might miss it, and they will not know where it is. It might not pose a problem. Councilmember Kaneshiro: Councilmember Chock pretty much just summed it up. We were talking apples and oranges about license plates and things like that, but Mauna Kea, are we able to distinguish between practitioner parking or not based on our current laws and situation? MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: For the record, Mauna Kea Trask, County Attorney. The primary purpose of this ordinance is strictly public safety and so it is good because in this instance, public safety and protecting the resource align perfectly. You can otherwise do I think is use this ordinance to prohibit parking in otherwise safe area under the auspices of protecting traditional customary practices, like Councilmember Chock said. What we suggest today is to proceed with, it sounds like the extended parking restriction, but the Office of the County Attorney is definitely aware and supports protecting Native Hawaiian rights to the maximum extent legally possible under the law and what we would like to do is work with Ms. Sproat and the kama aina in that area to really look at, not only the Hawai`i State Constitution provisions, but also Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) 10(H), which is the legislative state recognition of Native Hawaiians as indigenous people and to see how much we can as a County maximize what was effectuated in state recognition albeit the Native Hawaiian Rule Commission did not proceed all the way. I think the County does have opportunity and I think in working in concert with Dr. Sproat and if she would volunteer some of her students to work with us and perhaps intern in the summer for the Office of the County Attorney for free, that would be a wonderful opportunity to look at all these options, because that is really what we want to do. I think for the short-term, let us do what we can now and then in the long-term, look what opportunities we have because like what was said, Kaua`i is always striven to be the forefront of these issues. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kaneshiro, did you have another question? Councilmember Kaneshiro: That was my question. I think we are getting way ahead of ourselves with options about license plates and things, but we do not even have that option available. It is, do we want to extend the parking or not and I think Mauna Kea pretty much answered it and it is up to us to see what the community wants. Mr. Trask: As the County knows, the term traditional practitioner/customary practitioner, these rights go to Native Hawaiians regardless. As I was educated today, perhaps non-Native Hawaiians who are traditional customary practitioners, but we will look into that later. The point being is that even within the Native Hawaiian culture, those from an ahupua a have primary rights. If someone from the south side goes to Kalihiwai, appropriate Kalihiwai has "first crack," so we want to work with them the best way that is for them. COUNCIL MEETING 95 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Are we asking for the extension from guardrail to guardrail? Mr. Trask: Yes. I believe with no parking provided at this point. I will defer. Ms. Sproat: For the record, Kapua Sproat. Thank you for being patient with us. We were not prepared to work through the extension and so we are kind of talking story amongst ourselves. In quickly pulling the folks who are here today, we would change our position and request that it just stay as-is, so that we can leave the one (1) or two (2) stalls and we will see how it goes. To the degree that it becomes and even though poor Michael has already run off to work on the map, but to the degree that it becomes an issue, we can come back. Doing so would provide parking for practitioners or other folks to be able to come. Honestly, as Yoshito pointed out in the beginning, part of the problem was the construction on the house. You could only fit one (1) or maybe two (2) cars before and it was with the extension of the shoulder that now it is just a madhouse, but thank you for being patient with us and for being willing to work with us on this. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: Yoshito, are you good with what we have instead of extending? Mr. L'Hote: Yes. Councilmember Brun: We are doing an hour meeting when we were all in consensus that this was going to pass as-is, but I do not think we should be dragging this on about practitioners or what have you. Let us take a vote and they can move on and I am pretty sure we are all going to support this any way. Lyle, please tell Mr. Moule, I am sorry. We are not going to extend it. Let us scratch the amendment and let us vote for what is on the table. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kawakami. Councilmember Kawakami: Thank you for showing up and testifying on this issue. This might be a question to both Dr. Sproat and to our County Attorney Mauna Kea, but this whole "No Parking" zone is a symptom of a bigger problem. That bigger problem is these guidebooks that are leading people down to very dangerous places such as, Queens Bath, Kipu Falls, Glass Beach, and places that are very special to local people, which have been lost forever because of these guidebooks. It is very irresponsible. I know at one-time and he got blasted for it, but we had some representatives that tried to hold these guidebook authors responsible for fatalities, drownings, and for rescues that had to happen. Has there been anything on your end as far as any type of legal recourse when they start interfering with the ability for Native Hawaiian people to practice their customary traditions, because that is a big loss as well? Has there been any interaction with the guidebook authors on your end to address it? COUNCIL MEETING 96 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Ms. Sproat: For the record, Kapua Sproat. With this particular access, Waika'ama, Ben Stiller contacted The Ultimate Kaua`i Guidebook: Kaua`i Revealed author and asked them, after the drowning of the three (3) people in 2014, and asked him to please take it out. He said it was a liability issue for him. I did not speak directly with the guidebook author, but Ben said that he said he would take it out, but it is still in there. Even if he were to take it out in the most recent version, there are so many old versions floating around that is not sufficient. Especially now with the increase in social media, Snapchat and all sorts of things, and that is where we are seeing all the videos and that is where people are coming down. Some of the testimony today talked about how whole movie crews are down there with people in custom doing things. This is a significant problem and we are very fortunate that as the County Attorney pointed out in this instance...I do not know if we are fortunate, but in this instance there is a significant public safety issue and so the County has a clear basis to be able to take action. The incidental benefit is that it is also you folks being proactive and helping to protect public trust resources and the traditional customary Native Hawaiian practices that are dependent upon them. Therefore, there is a good overlap, but we definitely need to look at other ways. I actually had meetings with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and have encouraged them to look at what potential legal action or even proactive steps could be taken at the Legislature at the liability statutes. That is definitely something that requires additional work and research perhaps that my students that the County Attorney has requested to work on. Councilmember Kawakami: Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further questions? Thank you. There being no further public testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Councilmember Chock: I would tell Michael do not stop those maps because we might have to come back to it later, so it is not "for nothing," because right now what we are hearing is, "Let us try this out." I think what this whole thing brings to me is this conversation and need for us to really start to look at how access is really becoming more of an issue and the need to actually come up with a template for managing access that we have not in the past. When we do have, like we have a community who wants to and needs to protect and preserve against the impacts and also provide safety for the community, I think that we need to be able to embrace them. Right now, that is kind of where we are in this territory. Just to give you a reflection on it—this came up two (2) years ago that we have been working on it. That is how long it takes really to figure out what it is we are going to do and how we are going to do it. The Department of Public Works did not really see the need, but when we listen to local knowledge and experiences, then we can actually make an impact. That is what I was hoping that this Council would do is to pay attention to what those people are who see and experience it on a daily basis. Bottom line for me is I think it will accomplish three (3) things. One, it will accomplish the safety aspect, which is primary to my concern and especially to the County's concern. It also starts to look at what they are talking about in their testimony which is the protection and preservation of this area of Waika'ama and Pokamoi because I know all of us have COUNCIL MEETING 97 DECEMBER 20, 2017 experiences and had issues in having to go on rescues, having to retrieve people, and the impact that they have on the environment is key for us to take into consideration. This is a good example of stewardship that we need to embrace and work through. I am glad to hear the County Attorney is willing to do so and even take it as far as some of the ideas that we talked about today. For now, I think this is a good first step and we should take it. I will be supporting it. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Kaneshiro. Councilmember Kaneshiro: I am glad we are going to move forward with this because I think it was overwhelming the consensus was everybody wants this, but when it came to extending, we were rushing. For me, I would rather pass this and if we need to relook at the extended area, then we will look at again when everybody is comfortable. I am more than happy to go vote for this right now, the way it is. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Brun. Councilmember Brun: I want to thank you folks for coming out. These kind of issues, for me, is a no-brainer. Facts were presented. You folks live there, you know what is going on, safety was there. It was not just beliefs of"I believe you do not belong parking on my place," you all came with facts. This is proven that this is an issue and for me it is a no-brainer that we are going to support this. Yes, we tried to extend it, if you folks needed that, we will be happy to introduce it and move it forward. I just think that you folks are looking what is best for your community. I am not a fisherman, so I do not have any interest of going down there to fish, but thank you for coming out and for testifying on this. I have no problems supporting this. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: I want to thank you the Kalihiwai `ohana for coming and sticking with this issue for a solution. I want to thank Councilmember Chock for introducing the Resolution and working with the community. Public access is a double-edged sword and when it includes one million (1,000,000) visitors a year, it is really problematic and so I am glad that we are beginning to address that issue. We need to really distinguish between cultural practitioners and just any old public person and I am so glad OHA, Dr. Sproat, and others are looking specifically at how to address that issue. I do think that for now, the Resolution before us is the best way to go. I am glad we have come to resolution today. Thank you. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: I just want to close with thanking the community for trying to improve the safety. Safety will always win. That is the key component of our decision-making; we have to always look at safety first. I am torn a little bit in that when the overcrowding happens, the locals suffer because we have to make these "No Parking" signs that apply to everyone and then the locals cannot easily access the areas. I get a little bit sad. We have to do it, but sometimes these measures come down to it. If there is no aloha, you have to just do it for everybody, ban everybody, but it is a struggle for me. In a perfect world, I think I would like to see us establish some signs saying "Parking for cultural practitioner and kupuna" COUNCIL MEETING 98 DECEMBER 20, 2017 and let us see if the tourists can respect that and let us see how effective that works out. That is just my suggestion. Even the education part to have the local folks say, "This is for the locals who are practitioners and kupuna to access the fishing grounds and whatnot. This is not for tourists or young people that can traverse and get down, to park in the prime spots." I would like to see those kinds of solutions and see them work. Not just do it and then the solution totally does not work because we do not have the respect and aloha. This is a tough one. Councilmember Yukimura said license plates, but you can get some people who are not really qualified and get the plates. Just like disabled parking. Some people are more healthy than us and they get the handicapped parking, because they use their mother's one. It is always like that. Everybody is going to try to make life easier, but it is sad when the locals cannot fish, because what else do we have? We do not have professional football. All we have is fishing and potluck together is what is important and it saddens me that we have to make "No Parking" because suddenly these places are overcrowded. Councilmember Yukimura. Councilmember Yukimura: The dilemma is that we have to block out local residents, too, when we block them out...and we had to make that choice at Crater Hill when we agreed to purchase that for the Wildlife Refuge and we had to fence off this wonderful place where everybody used to go and watch the sunset. That was a hard choice to make, but one of the things is maybe looking...because this is a General Plan issue, growth management in terms of how many people we accommodate in terms of visitors in our resort inventory. The other thing is this Snapchat and social media is really bringing is to a head. I was talking to the Haraguchi's down at Hanalei Valley and it is even local kids who are going to take pictures of themselves in the taro fields that are really disrupting operations over there too. Everybody wants to show their picture some place and that is bringing it to a head as it is over there at Waika'ama. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Further discussion? Seeing none, roll call. The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2017-73 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Kagawa TOTAL — 6, AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. (Councilmember Chock was noted as not present.) EXECUTIVE SESSION: ES-934 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 COUNCIL MEETING 99 DECEMBER 20, 2017 Attorney, requests an Executive Session with the Council, to provide the Council with a briefing and request for authority to settle the case of Diana Gausepohl-White vs. County of Kaua`i, et al., Civil No. CV 16-00494 ACK-KSC (U.S. District Court), and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities, and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item. Councilmember Yukimura moved to convene in Executive Session for ES-934, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Roll call. The motion to convene in Executive Session for ES-934 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR EXECUTIVE SESSION: Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro, Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 6*, AGAINST EXECUTIVE SESSION: None TOTAL — 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Rapozo TOTAL — 1, RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0. (*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember Chock was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion.) Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Six (6) ayes. Council Vice Chair Kagawa: Seeing no further business, let us go into Executive Session. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the Council Meeting adjourned at 3:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, n " JAD ' K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA County Clerk :dmc Attachment 1 (December 20, 2017) FLOOR AMENDMENT Bill No. 2673, A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE (Prohibited Parking) Introduced by: ARRYL KANESHIRO (By Request) Amend Bill No. 2673 in its entirety to read as follows: "SECTION 1. Findings and Purpose. The Council of the County of Kaua`i finds that the ordinance prohibiting parking should be clarified to specifically prohibit the parking of vehicles in a manner that obstructs the free movement of vehicles within the land of travel. SECTION 2. Chapter 16, Article 10, Section 16-10.5 of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended, is hereby amended to read as follows: "Sec. 16-10.5 Parking Not to Obstruct Traffic. [No person shall park any vehicle upon a street or alley in a manner or under conditions as to leave available less than ten (10) feet of the width of the roadway for the free movement of vehicular traffic.] No person shall park any vehicle upon a roadway, street, or alley in a manner or under conditions as to: (a) leave available less than ten (10) feet of the width of the lane of travel for the free movement of vehicular traffic; or (b) obstruct the movement of other vehicles within the lane of travel of any roadway, street, or alley:.or (c) obstr°°ucaiialbo SECTION 3. Severability. The invalidity of any word, section, clause, paragraph, sentence, part, or portion of this Ordinance shall not affect the validity of any other part of this Ordinance that can be given effect without such invalid part or parts. SECTION 4. Material to be repealed is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored. When revising, compiling, or printing this Ordinance for inclusion in the Kauai County Code 1987, as amended, the underscoring need not be included." (Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.) V:\AMENDMENTS\2017\Bill No 2673(A)Relating to Traffic Code(Prohibited Parking)(003)ET_ct.doc