HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/30/2018 Council minutes COUNCIL MEETING
MAY 30, 2018
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kaua`i was called to order
by Council Chair Mel Rapozo at the Council Chambers, 4396 Rice Street, Suite 201,
Lihu`e, Kaua`i, on Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 9:39 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
Honorable Mel Rapozo
APPROVAL OF AGENDA.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Before I ask for the approval of
the agenda, please note that due to an inadvertent error, Resolution No. 2018-14,
Draft 1, should read, "Resolution Establishing The Real Property Tax Rates For The
Fiscal Year July 1, 2018 To June 30, 2019 For The County Of Kaua`i."All attachments
and other references thereto were correct, including the Committee Report. Can I
have a motion to approve the agenda with that one (1) correction?
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for approval of the agenda, as amended, as
circulated, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Motion carried. Next
item, please.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
May 9, 2018 Public Hearing re: Resolution No. 2018-14, Bill No. 2698, and
Bill No. 2699
May 16, 2018 Council Meeting
May 16, 2018 Public Hearing re: Bill No. 2704, Bill No. 2705, Bill No. 2706,
Bill No. 2708, and Bill No. 2709
Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve the Minutes as circulated, seconded
by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion or public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 2 MAY 30, 2018
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
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
C 2018-120 Communication (05/08/2018) from the Mayor, submitting his
Supplemental Budget Communication for Fiscal Year 2018-2019 and Proposed
Amendments to the Budget Bills, pursuant to Section 19.02A of the Kaua`i County
Charter.
C 2018-122 Communication (05/08/2018) from the Hawai`i State Association
of Counties (HSAC) President, transmitting for Council approval, HSAC's slate of
officers for the HSAC Executive Committee and Board of Director nominations for
the National Association of Counties (NACo) and the Western Interstate
Region (WIR) for the 2018-2019 term, pursuant to Section 5, Section 5A, and
Section 5C of the Bylaws of the Hawai`i State Association of Counties, Inc.
C 2018-123 Communication (05/11/2018) from the Hawai`i State Association
of Counties (HSAC) President, transmitting for Council consideration, a Resolution
Approving The Fiscal Year 2019 Proposed Operating Budget For The Hawai`i State
Association Of Counties.
C 2018-124 Communication (05/14/2018) from Councilmember Yukimura,
transmitting for Council consideration, a proposal to amend Kauai County Charter
Section 19.15, Article XIX, to earmark a minimum of three percent (3%) of real
property tax revenues for the purpose of affordable housing.
Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2018-120, C 2018-122, C 2018-123,
and C 2018-124 for the record, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there 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 2018-120, C 2018-122, C 2018-123, and C 2018-124 for
the record was then put, and unanimously.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
COUNCIL MEETING 3 MAY 30, 2018
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2018-125 Communication (05/04/2018) from the Executive on
Transportation, requesting Council approval to release and indemnify Wilcox
Memorial Hospital per acceptance of the indemnification language contained in the
revised Grant of Easement Document: Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve
C 2018-125, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion or public testimony?
Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the Transportation Agency?
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
JEREMY KALAWAI`A LEE, Program Specialist III: Good morning. For
the record, Jeremy Lee.
Councilmember Yukimura: Good morning, Kalawai`a. Can you tell us
about the indemnification language? Is the Grant of Easement document for the bus
shelter?
Mr. Lee: Yes, that is correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Lee: We have been working with Wilcox Memorial
Hospital to be able to redevelop the existing public bus stop on their property, which
we would like to include a vertical shelter structure at that location. In order for us
to do that, they have asked to have this indemnity clause put into that agreement.
What the revision does is that it actually further specifies the County's liability to
that vertical structure, the bus stop, and the use of it. I think the revised language
it is actually helping the County.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. Is that bus stop going to be by the porte-
cochere?
Mr. Lee: Just fronting it. If you are facing the foyer
area, it is just to the right of it. They redeveloped that entire area as part of their
master plan for their parking structure, built this nice, big, concrete pad that is
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible, and will accommodate the shelter
needs.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is a frequent drop-off and is also where
people board the bus, so boarding and drop-off. That is a major place for us.
COUNCIL MEETING 4 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Lee: Yes, the fixed route does provide service
directly to that property. There are a lot of employees and customers that use that
facility.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is good. Related to that, one day I saw
that our buses had a hard time driving into the main entrance since they built that
sidewalk because there are a lot of people going out in that lane. When they turn into
the lane, I saw a bus driver have to actually back up a little bit to get around the curb.
Maybe you can look into that, because it seemed problematic for the drivers.
Mr. Lee: It might be better answered by Public Works
or the administrators of the facility. I believe all of those intersections are designed
with State and County standards in mind. Our vehicles should be able to access that
property. Based on the judgment of the driver at the time, they have the ability to
make adjustments in their movements to accommodate the safety.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Is it possible to poll your drivers and
see if that is an issue?
Mr. Lee: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Because it looked like an issue for me sitting
in my car.
Mr. Lee: Just to be clear, are you asking about the
main entrance of the Wilcox Memorial Hospital property and not the first entrance
into that first parking lot where the foyer area is, or are you talking about that entire
area?
Councilmember Yukimura: No, the main entrance from Kuhio Highway.
Mr. Lee: Okay. Sure, I can ask our drivers about that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, great. Thank you very much.
Mr. Lee: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Are there any other questions for
the Transportation Agency? If not, thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there further discussion? The motion is to
approve.
COUNCIL MEETING 5 MAY 30, 2018
The motion to approve C 2018-125 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2018-126 Communication (05/08/2018) from the Acting County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to accept, receive, and expend State funds in the amount
of $254,433.82, from the State of Hawai`i Department of Health (DOH), and
indemnify the State DOH, for the Fiscal Year 2019 grant cycle for the HI-5 Deposit
Beverage Container program: Councilmember Kagawa moved to approve C 2018-126,
seconded by Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura: Could we have Solid Waste Management?
Council Chair Rapozo: Public Works or Solid Waste Management.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Councilmember Kagawa: We both had questions, so who is first?
Councilmember Yukimura: Go ahead, you can go first.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
LYLE TABATA, Acting County Engineer: Good morning, Councilmembers,
Lyle Tabata, Acting County Engineer.
ALLISON FRALEY, Solid Waste Program Development Coordinator: Good
morning, Allison Fraley, Solid Waste Programs Coordinator.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you. Is this a recurring grant? Is this
similar to...
Ms. Fraley: Yes. We have had this grant since the State
law went into effect in 2006.
Councilmember Kagawa: So basically, nothing has changed?
Ms. Fraley: Nothing has changed. The basic grant is we
have two (2) staff people who inspect the retailers and also the redemption centers to
make sure that the law is working properly. They answer any questions from the
public and manage any complaints. They also try to increase HI-5 redemption
recycling, so they loan out bins at events, give bins to nonprofits and schools, do
education at schools upon request, and things like that.
Councilmember Kagawa: Does most of the grant go to the salaries?
Ms. Fraley: Yes, most of it is salaries.
COUNCIL MEETING 6 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Kagawa: Can you just talk a little bit about trends? For
example, how has the HI-5 been going over the past few years?
Ms. Fraley: Actually, last year was the lowest, except for
the inception of the program, in the HI-5 recycling. This is a statewide rate. They
cannot do it island by island. But statewide, we know that within the last year, a lot
of the redemption centers closed on O`ahu where most of the activity is taking place.
So that lack of customer convenience probably resulted in lower recycling rates.
Councilmember Kagawa: Back when it started, I lived in Honolulu and
we had to drive all the way to someplace in the Salt Lake area. Then when we got
the moneys, it would be twelve dollars ($12) and after a while, we were like, "Wow,
we cannot even buy lunch." Two (2) people get all stink, bag it, bring it there, and get
twelve dollars ($12) minus your gas, you probably made about five dollars ($5). Yes,
I can see that inconvenience. If there are not readily available HI-5 redemption
centers near the residents, then that could cause a deterrence where they would
rather throw it in the rubbish can. Where are our HI-5 redemption centers located
now? I know when we closed the one at the transfer station, the one down at
Nawiliwili had long lines. There was a time when, I stood in the line and I was there
about an hour before they closed on a Saturday. I do not know if they close at 12:00
p.m., but I was there before 11:00 a.m. and I was the second car away from the
entrance at about 11:45 a.m. They told the car in front of me, myself, and everyone
behind, "We are done." They could have shut it off way back, but it is not your
problem. I am just saying those experiences kind of damper people's recycling efforts.
What people really do not know is unless they gather a lot of the HI-5 items, they do
not make a ton of the money. People's time is money, right? Your time on the
weekend is time to play. Where are our HI-5 redemption centers right now that
people on Kaua`i can use?
Ms. Fraley: Starting in the north in Kilauea, behind the
Mini Golf Course at Anaina Hou Community Park. We do recycling Tuesdays and
Fridays from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. That is actually a private operator.
Councilmember Kagawa: Is that Reynolds?
Ms. Fraley: No. It is Kaua`i Community Recycling
Services (KCRS).
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay.
Ms. Fraley: Then, in Kapahi on Kawaihau Road, Reynolds
operates behind the Menehune Food Mart. They operate Monday through Saturday
from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. They do take a lunch break from noon to 1:30 p.m.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay.
Ms. Fraley: Then in Kapa'a Town at Arzadon Industrial
Park, KCRS operates from Tuesday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. So
that is another one in Kapa`a. Then in Lihu`e, we have Reynolds Recycling. It is the
COUNCIL MEETING 7 MAY 30, 2018
same hours as on Kawaihau Road, Tuesday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m. Then in Koloa, on Thursdays and Sundays, by the fire station at the
roundabout, they operate 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Thursdays and Sundays, like I said.
That KCRS. In Kekaha, Wednesdays and Saturdays KCRS operates across from the
Old Mill, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Councilmember Kagawa: So there is none in the Hanapepe/Ele`ele area
and Waimea?
Ms. Fraley: No, there are not.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Council Chair
Rapozo.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Allison, the situation described by
Councilmember Kagawa is problematic, if people who arrive within the time of
working hours....
Ms. Fraley: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: ...are cut off. Is that something that we can
address?
Ms. Fraley: Yes. First of all, it is a private agency. We do
not...
Councilmember Yukimura: But they are on contract with the County.
Ms. Fraley: They are not, actually. They are in contract
with the State.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Ms. Fraley: But we did advise them that it would be
helpful if they had someone monitor the lines and tell customers waiting in line, "Hey,
it is probably going to take an hour for you get through, so you could leave because
we are going to close at 12:00 p.m.," or something like that. We had offered that
suggestion. I do not know when that happened, but we have not heard any complaints
lately. Was that a while back?
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, it was a while back.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
COUNCIL MEETING 8 MAY 30, 2018
Ms. Fraley: Okay. I think they got another staff person.
They have really been able to move the lines well, so we have not had a lot of
complaints, or any complaints, about Lihu`e lately. That is great. Reynolds is doing
a great job.
Councilmember Yukimura: Councilmember Kagawa also asked about the
trends and you said last year for Kaua`i or for the whole State?
Ms. Fraley: For the whole State. They can only measure
the statewide redemption rate because they...
Councilmember Yukimura: They do not measure by County?
Ms. Fraley: Well, they know how much is redeemed on
each County, but they do not know how much is distributed to each County, and that
is how they create rate; what is distributed versus what is redeemed. They know
what is distributed in the whole State, but how it goes from County to County is an
unknown.
Councilmember Yukimura: In this day and age, we are not able to track
that?
Ms. Fraley: That is the information that the State is
giving us.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. We had a group of 4th and 5th grade
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) students from Wilcox
Elementary School. They shared their ideas about recycling and one of them had
generated some discussion amongst the Councilmembers there. Councilmember
Kaneshiro described what happens in Oregon where he went to school, where the
stores redeem the returnables.
Ms. Fraley: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Why is that system not in place?
Ms. Fraley: That is what the lawmakers originally
proposed actually, or those who introduced the bill, I should say. They proposed that
and there was a lot of pushback from the retailers who did not want to have that
responsibility. So, it just is not the law that stores have to do that. They can do that,
but they do not. We would have to change the law.
Councilmember Yukimura: Councilmember Kawakami, who is a retailer,
described that it benefits the retailers because people take the refund and spend it in
the stores where they get the redemption. So it is kind of a win-win.
Ms. Fraley: Right. It is additional work depending on how
they handle it. Also, we used to have these reverse vending machines and they did
not work very well and were costly for the operators to service, but I think they used
COUNCIL MEETING 9 MAY 30, 2018
those on O`ahu, too. They were not the best machines, so we just do not have a perfect
system for the stores to use at this point.
Councilmember Yukimura: But Oregon has been doing it the last
forty (40) years, so they must have figured out a good way to do it. We could learn
from them. I know this system not only keeps the cans and bottles from being thrown
out in the parks, but they also actually are a source of income for people who are
willing to go through the trouble of collecting them. There is a real socially redeeming
value in that.
Ms. Fraley: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: But we are not able to track how we are doing
here in the County of Kaua`i?
Ms. Fraley: We know how much is recycled, it is millions
of containers. We just do not know how much comes in to create an actual percentage.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is the number of containers?
Ms. Fraley: I do not have it memorized.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can you provide that to us?
Ms. Fraley: Yes, certainly.
Councilmember Yukimura: Over the last five (5) years?
Ms. Fraley: Yes, of course. I can send you the State's
statistics.
Councilmember Yukimura: Has that number been going up or down?
Ms. Fraley: I could not tell you off the top of my head, but
I will send you the data so you can see it.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay, because even if we do not know the
total number of beverage containers coming in, if we get a rising number, that is still
an indication of some increase.
Ms. Fraley: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kawakami.
Councilmember Kawakami: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. In Oregon,
do we know if it is mandated that retailers are recycling centers as well?
COUNCIL MEETING 10 MAY 30, 2018
Ms. Fraley: I would imagine that it is. I can check into
that. There is a really great website called BottleBill.com, that I can look at any law.
There are only ten (10) laws throughout the Country. Oregon was the first, so I would
imagine that is required by law.
Councilmember Kawakami: Even if it is not mandated in Hawai`i, Big
Save, at the time, was very interested in becoming a recycling center because there
are definite benefits when you can increase foot traffic. The few stumbling blocks
that we came upon is, quite frankly, when we talked to the very first gas station that
became a recycling center on Maui, he said that some of the challenges that he was
having from the public health and safety side, were rodent control and increased
insects, because you are bringing in not necessarily trash, but they are waste items
that we are recycling. It is a dirty business. So, that was one of the things that
popped up. The other thing that popped up is, some of our stores just had limited
capacity for space. Then, we heard about some of the challenges with those reverse
vending machines and the amount of money he was spending on the repairs and
maintenance. But I am sure that things have changed since then, but we are out of
retail business. We definitely did see some net benefits if we had gone that route at
the time, but we did not have the resources to move in that direction. I will go look
at that website to see which states are actually mandated. Thank you, Council Chair
Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there anyone else? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Yes, last question. Were you folks tracking
the bill to increase the redemption rates? What happened to that? The proposal was
to go up to...
(Councilmember Brun was noted as not present.)
Ms. Fraley: Ten cents ($0.10) a container. They dropped
that.
Councilmember Kagawa: They dropped it?
Ms. Fraley: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: Okay. We will see next session.
Ms. Fraley: It would have been nice.
Councilmember Kagawa: Maybe they need to look at a compromise,
maybe seven cents ($0.07).
Ms. Fraley: Right.
Councilmember Kagawa: Because money talks, right?
COUNCIL MEETING 11 MAY 30, 2018
Ms. Fraley: Right.
Councilmember Kagawa: Money talks. If you are trying to reduce the
amount that goes into the rubbish cans, because when I go to the parks, I see HI-5
items regularly in the trash bins. When it is mixed with food and whatnot, you do
not want to stick your hand in there. There are maggots and whatever. I am just
thinking that is a no-brainer, that you want to increase the habits so that we do not
throw it in the landfill.
Ms. Fraley: The States with the higher redemption rates
have the higher fees, so it does work.
Councilmember Kagawa: If you go from five cents ($0.05) to ten
cents ($0.10), of course it is hard to bite. You are doubling the price. They should
have just gone to seven cents ($0.07) or something like that. Anyways, thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Seeing none, thank you very
much.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there further discussion? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I want to thank our Solid Waste
Management for monitoring this because it is basically the direction in which we need
to go. I want to acknowledge one Kaua`i business that is offering fifty cents ($0.50)
for every bottle returned, that is Kaua`i Juice Company. You can believe that I make
sure every bottle that I use gets recycled because it really adds up at fifty cents
($0.50). That is the kind of incentive that is needed to promote this sustainable
system of the beverage containers. Thank you very much.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: As I look at a lot of questions we are asking
Allison, like why the fee did not get increased? "Oh, it is a State issue." Why do we
not have better monitoring of lines during problem times? "Oh, it is the State." When
you think about it, why is the State controlling the recycling fees and those kind of
the things when the Counties do all the work? It should be the Counties determining
it. I demand a Constitutional Convention (con-con). Counties need to control the HI-
5 regulation. It just makes no sense that the State is calling the shots when they do
not even have to bury the rubbish. It is crazy.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 12 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: I concur with Councilmember Kagawa. I
would imagine that we can increase the incentive by ourselves subsidizing or adding
to the amount we redeem our bottles for. So maybe Kaua`i County could put aside
some money to increase the refund to ten cents ($0.10) or seven cents ($0.07), and see
how it works. That might be something we should look into. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Seeing none, the motion is to
approve.
The motion to approve C 2018-126 was then put, and unanimously carried
(Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmembers Brun and Kawakami were noted as silent (not present), but
shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
C 2018-127 Communication (05/18/2018) from Councilmember Kawakami
and Councilmember Kaneshiro, transmitting for Council consideration, a Proposed
Draft Bill to amend Section 5A-9.1 of the Kaua`i County Code 1987, as amended,
relating to Real Property Tax, to provide a one-time extension to dedicated
agricultural parcels that have been damaged or destroyed as a result of the natural
disaster on April 14, 2018 and to maintain their approved agricultural dedication
without penalty, rollback taxes, or fair market value assessment: Councilmember
Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2018-127 for the record, seconded by Councilmember
Chock.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there any discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I just want to understand this Bill if the
introducers might explain it. Are we allowing them time to apply?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Do you want to do it on the Communication or
wait for the Bill?
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify on this?
There being on objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: If not, we can have the discussion now. This
is a first reading bill. If you can explain at least...
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Real quick, in order for a property to maintain
its dedication, they need active agriculture for ninety (90) days.
COUNCIL MEETING 13 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: I see.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: A lot of these farms got so damaged that they
are not able to keep that requirement of active agriculture for ninety (90) days. This
is basically to give them a reprieve from that for the ones that got damaged by the
floods.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is a very appropriate relief. I appreciate
that you and Councilmember Kawakami have co-introduced it. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, the motion to receive.
Is there any further discussion?
The motion to receive C 2018-127 for the record was then put, and unanimously
carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of
Kaua`i, Councilmembers Brun and Kawakami were noted as silent (not
present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item.
C 2018-128 Communication (05/22/2018) from the Director of Planning,
transmitting for Council consideration, a proposed Emergency Ordinance pursuant
to Charter Section 4.02K, which sets the permitting processes for those buildings,
structures, and property damaged in the recent rains and floods on April 14th and 15th
of this year: Councilmember Kagawa moved to receive C 2018-128 for the record,
seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can we have the Planning Department come
and explain this, please?
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. With that, I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
MICHAEL A. DAHILIG, Planning Director: Good Morning, Council
Chair Rapozo and Members of the Council. Mike Dahilig, for the record. We
transmitted this proposal for an emergency ordinance to the Council that, we believe,
encompasses some of the real-time needs of the people that have been affected by the
historic floods back on April 14th and 15th of this year. The model for the proposed
ordinance is largely based upon the series of ordinances that was passed by the
Council back in 1993 and 1994, with respect to damages and reconstruction after
Hurricane Iniki. One thing that you will notice that is different between this
ordinance and what was proposed back in 1994, is that our Department is going to be
acting as a central repository agency. It also addresses a lot of the needs and concerns
that we are aware of in the aftermath of the Office of Emergency Permitting, I guess,
implementation. Namely, that because the regular ordinances were passed by the
Council more than a year after Hurricane Iniki, we know that people on Kaua`i are
COUNCIL MEETING 14 MAY 30, 2018
resilient to the fact that they will help themselves and will start reconstruction with
or without permits.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as present.)
Mr. Dahilig: A big hurdle that was identified by people
that we know that worked in the Office of Emergency Permitting twenty-five (25)
years ago, was that there was no baseline or database to be able to compare
after-the-fact construction with what existed prior to either the hurricane or right
after the hurricane in the immediate aftermath. What this emergency ordinance
proposes is the ability for the County to create a database to understand, at this point
in time, what exactly is on a declared damaged property that needs reconstruction.
You will notice that throughout the Bill, there is a set of timelines that lays forth
someone that wants to come in, receive after-the-fact permitting and fee waivers, and
the requirement to allow our staff and any other County or State staff to go on the
property and document what they see.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Mr. Dahilig: What we noticed already in certain situations
is that people are already starting to reconstruct and expand their structures that
may not be in accordance with our Codes. I want to be very clear that this Bill does
not ask for any policy changes with respect to any of the health, safety, form, or
character laws that are currently in the effect across our various Codes that are laid
out in Section 2 of the Bill. Essentially what this is, is a way to try to re-stagger the
timing that would be required under normal process, to allow those that are already
starting to engage in reconstruction, the ability to do so without inhibiting their
progress. But we need the ability to come in and document and understand where
they are at this point so that the County, in the after-the-fact permitting process, has
a baseline to be able to compare that reconstruction.
Councilmember Yukimura: This is requiring permits, right, for the
rebuilding?
Mr. Dahilig: Permits for rebuilding would be required
under the normal process. What we are essentially asking in this case, is saying we
know that there is an immediate health and safety need for shelter or be able to
stabilize properties, so if you are engaging in activities that would normally require
a permit under our present Codes, you can go forward without being fearful of being
pegged with either after-the-fact permitting fees or violations thereof.
Councilmember Yukimura: If you get permits?
Mr. Dahilig: If this Bill is adopted by the Council, this
would create an after-the-fact permitting process, but the after-the-fact permitting
process is hinged upon the premise that you allow people to come onto your property
to document what is there right now so that we do not have any questions concerning
what was on the property before this rebuilding activity took place.
COUNCIL MEETING 15 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Do you not want to know what was on the
property before the flood occurred?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: And that should be in the records already.
Mr. Dahilig: That will be part of the record.
Councilmember Yukimura: As I recall after Hurricane Iniki, building
permits were required. People could not build until they got a building permit, but
there was an Office of Emergency Permitting that fast-tracked the permits. You said
that this is based on the Hurricane Iniki Ordinance. It does not sound like the...
Mr. Dahilig: The framework of it is largely based on it, but
where there are key differences, as I mentioned earlier, is that it hinges largely on a
pre-registration process that requires documentation of the property or the structure.
That is what it hinges on, first and foremost. Secondly, the Office of Emergency
Permitting was not stood up after Hurricane Iniki until over a year after the event.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry?
Mr. Dahilig: The Office of Emergency Permitting, at least
what we understand from the Ordinances and looking specifically at Ordinance
No. 642, from what I recall, Hurricane Iniki occurred September 11, 1992. This
Ordinance was not adopted and signed into law until December of 1993. In that
period of...
Councilmember Yukimura: But the Office of Emergency Permitting was
started way before that.
Mr. Dahilig: Without parameters that established it in
law. This law actually created that and codified it. When we are looking at the actual
Ordinance in and of itself, those policies and those procedures were not laid out until
1993.
Councilmember Yukimura: But there was an emergency permitting
process early on so that people could get permits and start rebuilding. Is that being
provided?
Mr. Dahilig: Well, that is why we are asking for this
process to come into play, because one thing that we do understand is that people
may not have the access to be able to get an architect or an engineer immediately.
But there is emergency work that needs to be conducted in order to either shore-up
properties or shore-up buildings. The timeline for that implementation for being able
to allow for that emergency work is not—I would say, it is not conceivable that they
are going to be able to retain these types of professionals to come in the normal
process immediately.
COUNCIL MEETING 16 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: How are you distinguishing between
emergency requirement and just regular rebuilding?
Mr. Dahilig: If you look under Section 4 of the Bill, it
outlays what emergency repairs are.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry. What Section?
Mr. Dahilig: Section 4 on page 2 of the Bill. This is similar
language again, to Ordinance No. 642, that we did copy that talks about emergency
repairs and providing some consent to that, understanding that there needs to be
some shoring-up that needs to be done.
Councilmember Yukimura: One of the things that happened after
Hurricane Iwa was no permits were required and what happened was people rebuilt
closer to the shoreline, they did not rebuild with hurricane-resistant features, and
things like that. So when the next hurricane came, they were very vulnerable.
Presumably, will this prevent that kind of the building that does not meet Code and
requirements?
Mr. Dahilig: That is the overarching goal on this. What we
are saying is the current laws for health, safety, form, and character are still in place.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Dahilig: After Hurricane Iniki, there was a
progression in the amount of hurricane-resistant construction as well as going up
until the most recent adoption of the International Building Code by the Council. The
resilience factor that has come into play with these structures has increased over
time. We are saying, "You need to still build at that level." We are not reducing that
level of health and safety items. So what we are asking for in this case, is to stagger
and retime the way that applications come in for that construction, which is
after-the-fact.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Since we are at first reading, can you
provide a flowchart that shows the distinction between emergency repairs and
regular repairs, and the timetable for permitting that will be implemented under this
Bill?
Mr. Dahilig: We can provide a flowchart if that is what is
necessary for the Council.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am sorry?
Mr. Dahilig: We can provide a flowchart if that is
necessary.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING 17 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Just real quick. I just had a clarification from
the County Attorney that this is an Emergency Ordinance, so it is one (1) reading.
Councilmember Yukimura: Oh, okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: One (1) reading and that is it. We do what we
want with it, but it is only good for sixty-one (61) days. Mike, if you can help me
visualize. You have a person that has been affected that qualifies for this Bill, what
is the difference between the process now and the process should this pass? What
would be the advantage? I understand you are basically saying that we are allowing
after-the-fact permits. We are openly allowing it. I know that in the Bill, it says that
any violations will require the person to destroy or demolish whatever they did. It is
a "shall" and not a "may."
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: What happens if that owner says, "No, I am
not tearing anything down"? Do we have the ability to go in and tear it down and bill
them? Start with hypothetically, what happens.
Mr. Dahilig: In that situation where someone does not
avail themselves?
Council Chair Rapozo: No. As it stands today without this
emergency bill, what the process is for the homeowner and how it changes should this
pass?
Mr. Dahilig: Right. Under current law, there is an
allowance under building, that any repair work under ten thousand dollars ($10,000)
does not need a building permit, but it could require a zoning permit and it could
require other laws that are laid out in Section 2 of this measure. It is a gamut of
them. If they have to come in for the normal permitting process, they would have to
hire an architect or an engineer, or they would have to put together plans before they
can come in and actually apply for the permit. Then, they would get submitted and
routed to each of the various Departments like Zoning, Building, Engineering,
Department of Health, and in some cases, even the Fire Department. But that
routing would undergo a normal process if this Bill did not exist. If and then when
there may be an issue with the way that the plans are drawn or there is a question,
the cycle of review stalls and then at that point, corrections to the plans have to be
made. In certain cases, like for instance with our Department, we would potentially
even require things like an agency hearing. Let us say that it is within a shoreline
setback, it may require a Class IV permit. Those types of things could come in play.
So it could be an order of months before you are actually given permission to build by
getting these permits normally. What we noticed is that people are already starting
to engage in self-help. We know that lumber is going into Wainiha and Ha`ena.
People are working on homes already. We know of people that are making complaints
about homes that are starting to be expanded in some of these areas. So, that work
normally would require a permit. All of that work right now, is considered violations
of the Code because they are conducting it without permits. Now, there are certain
COUNCIL MEETING 18 MAY 30, 2018
allowances within say our jurisdiction, the Planning Department, where we allow for
after-the-fact permitting. But after-the-fact permitting costs five hundred
dollars ($500). That would still require building plans be drawn up, be submitted to
our Department, and then processed under normal process. What this does is it allow
people, because of the health and safety needs of providing themselves shelter and a
safe place to live, to make that progress towards reconstruction without feeling as if
they are violating the law. The window, Council Chair Rapozo, I want to point out is
under Section 5 of the Bill. If they do avail themselves of this process, what it does
is it provides a certificate, if issued, for them to come within eighteen (18) months to
submit the building plans. We are not asking for the building plans to be submitted
within sixty-one (61) days. What we are saying is, "Register with us, document your
property with us, we will tell you what laws are applicable, and then you have
eighteen (18) months to come in and submit the actual formal plans." That is the
timing that we are trying to elongate for them so that they are not coming in and
being concerned about conducting work on the property that may not be permitted.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock and then
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Chock: Mike, do we have an estimate of how many
homes need permitting?
Mr. Dahilig: The universe that we are operating under is
what was collected through the Integrated Damage Assessment Model (IDAM)
surveys that were led by Real Property Tax as part of the attempted Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) qualification for individual assistance.
To-date, what we have is three hundred eighty-one (381) individual records, but of
those individual records, it ranges from very minimal damage all the way up to total
destruction. If you take the realm of major to total destruction, it is less than one
hundred (100) structures that we are aware of. So the universe of what could be
applicable for this Bill is not an infinite amount or very large amount that our
Department does not feel like it cannot necessarily handle this type of process. I
think the reality is we believe we can handle some kind of documentation process and
then run the after-the-fact permits through our normal permitting process without
having to stand up an Office of Emergency Permitting.
Councilmember Chock: Do we know how many of those one
hundred (100) to three hundred eighty (380) were unpermitted or illegal?
Mr. Dahilig: We have not run that analysis. What is laid
out as part of this analysis is that the certification for after-the-fact permitting would
not be given to those structure as through our analysis if something is identified
through the pre-inspection that was either not permitted, illegal density,
non-conformance, and those type of things. The analysis will come as part of this
registration process.
Councilmember Chock: Okay. Due to the floods and these homes will
now be under the current regulations, do these regulations need to be revisited first
in order to ensure health and safety? We are saying, "We are going to allow you to
COUNCIL MEETING 19 MAY 30, 2018
build," but based on what we experienced, do we have enough of an evaluation to
make a determination that those things need to be revisited or revised?
Mr. Dahilig: I will concede that in having spent some time
over there, I understand some of the living conditions and living situations that
people have situated themselves in. A lot of them are living in unpermitted units on
properties that do not have density for those types of structures. If we were to take
a very hard read of this, then consequentially, they may be out of a house and home.
So not trying to get into the realm of the larger policy waivers, we initially set forth
this proposal because we wanted to leave the health, safety, form, and character
parameters as status quo. But if there are things that the Council in its wisdom feels
that is necessary to do things, for example, grant density waivers or grant those types
of form and character accommodations for setback. Those are things that we can
implement. It is not without possibility to do so. As the lawmaking body, it is within
your purview to make that kind of policy determination. What I will say though, is
that one thing that we are not asking for and being very clear about in terms of waiver
from a health and safety standpoint, is compliance with the Flood Ordinance. The
Flood Ordinance is key to ensure the County's compliance overall through its
permitting program, that we remain in good standing with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. Those are things that I think if we were to be asked to waive,
Flood Ordinance type of the requirements, let us say for instance, building above
baseline elevations, we would probably have some consternation with that because it
could place the County's overall eligibility for flood insurance in jeopardy.
Councilmember Chock: Just so I am clear, essentially, you have those
who can rebuild because they have the money to start the process already and are
moving on it, and this is going to help them take care of what they need to take care
of under the current laws?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Councilmember Chock: Then, you potentially have a group of people
who are unpermitted, have been unpermitted, and do not have the money to rebuild.
I guess the scenario that I am building up is, what occurs as a result of us moving on
this policy? How would it affect them negatively, for those who have been affected by
the storm and now may get more scrutiny and homeless, as you had mentioned?
What I am hearing you say is that maybe we should be looking at potential density
waivers.
Mr. Dahilig: Well, it is something that if there is a need to
address those structures that were housing households that did not have density, and
there are some. I concede that there are some. It becomes a very tough policy call
concerning how the law should be molded around that scenario. I do not have a
definite or clear answer for you, Councilmember Chock. I think it is definitely the
consequence of not providing a density waiver, as you mentioned, that could
potentially displace a household. That is a reality of this. However, it is not
something that from a standpoint of form and character, would be outside the realm
of what is within this body's purview to do so and provide that additional density. We
COUNCIL MEETING 20 MAY 30, 2018
are trying to simplify the purpose, not to address that here with this particular Bill.
But if that is something that needs to be done, then we can accommodate it.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, Mike, you are kind of disturbing me
with this talk about trying to accommodate those who have violated the law. We are
going accommodate them with laws that allow them to break the law in the first place.
I am not okay with that kind of thing. We have ninety-nine point nine percent (99.9%)
of the people on Kaua`i following the laws, doing things right, and that is the only
way to do things. You cannot do what you want, where you want, and when you want,
just because you want to. No sense have laws if we are going to do that. No sense
having a permitting department. Everyone take off. How we solve that other problem
about displacement is another issue, but I think we have laws that are not to be
broken. We have to follow the law and follow the process. This is not a third-world
Country.
Mr. Dahilig: I understand.
Councilmember Kagawa: That is where I stand. My question is, we
heard about Hurricane Iniki. To me, Hurricane Iniki was apples and oranges. There
was a lot of wind damage, roof damage, and no room to go add more walls or whatever.
The walls were there, most of the walls were there. The foundation was the same.
We just basically had to reroof a lot of homes, right? How much did we have to reroof
with permits after Hurricane `Iniki?
Mr. Dahilig: I do not have that.
Councilmember Kagawa: We are not sure of those numbers? That
would be a little bit helpful.
Mr. Dahilig: We could probably dig out Office of
Emergency Preparedness (OEP) numbers, if that would help.
Councilmember Kagawa: And how many were substantial? There were
some houses that were flattened.
Councilmember Yukimura: Two thousand (2,000).
Councilmember Kagawa: Two thousand (2,000) homes were flattened.
I think it is much less than that. How much homes right now are totaled? Is it less
than one hundred (100)?
Mr. Dahilig: Based off of the estimates that we are getting
from the documentation submitted to FEMA for the individual assistance
qualification, three hundred eighty-one (381) have registered, but that ranges from
very minimal damage all the way to total destruction. If you take the top two (2)
COUNCIL MEETING 21 MAY 30, 2018
categories, which is total destruction and major destruction, those two (2) are less
than one hundred (100). We know that in terms of the scale comparatively to what
Hurricane Iniki created for the whole island, it is not at that level in terms of the
volume that needs to be processed, and that is why we are not recommending a
standing up of any type of Office of Emergency Permitting through this Bill. We
think we can work around the bump in volume that will happen for permitting if we
re-stagger the way that these permits come in.
Councilmember Kagawa: Does this Bill here address the ones that are
totaled, the less than one hundred (100) that you said?
Mr. Dahilig: No.
Councilmember Kagawa: This Bill does not address them because if
they got totaled, then they have to go through the regular process, right?
Mr. Dahilig: They would be eligible for this process. But
the way they would be eligible for this process is that agencies, let us say for instance,
like the Flood Ordinance, the Flood Agency or Engineering, would say, "Look, because
you have a total destruction, you are over fifty percent (50%) of the building value, so
you have to follow these parameters to reconstruct," which is the current law. All of
the current laws that are going to be applicable to the situation are going to be
tailor-made to each individual applicants. None of laws that would normally apply,
let us say if you want to do a total tear-down and a rebuild, those types of laws would
still apply in the circumstance if there was a total destruction type of situation. As I
stated previously, Councilmember Kagawa, what we wanted to not do is make any
deviation from any of the health, safety, form, or character laws that are currently
across our ordinances because we believe that is sound policy.
Councilmember Kagawa: I think the worry I hear from a lot of people
that I have been talking to is that they are worried that if you take three hundred
eighty-one (381) minus one hundred (100) is two hundred eighty-one (281). Two
hundred eighty-one (281) will try, some of them or a lot of them, will try to use this
after-the-fact to expand their current homes.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Councilmember Kagawa: It is unfortunate, but it is a reality, right? We
have a documented history, Joan Conrow wrote in Kaua`iEclectic, showed numerous
houses. I do not know if it was thirty (30), which she proved with evidence, that
previous the Planning Administrations basically dropped the ball in trying to catch
these people from putting up these illegal structures. Some or many were granted
after-the-fact permits, which okayed their violations of the law at the time. I just do
not want us to go down that road again. I do not know if this Bill helps or hurts that,
but certainly from this Council seat as a layperson, I have to trust you, the Buildings
Division, and everyone else. But certainly, after-the-fact permits leave a bad taste
in, I think, a lot people's mouths. It leaves a bad taste in the mouths of the ninety-
nine point nine percent (99.9%) that follows the law.
COUNCIL MEETING 22 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Dahilig: We thought long and hard about whether or
not an Emergency Ordinance was appropriate to present, versus just a change to our
Code. This is an extraordinary request that we understand is being asked and it is
going to take the unanimity of this body or six (6) out of the seven (7) votes on this
Council to actually have this pass. So that extraordinary request is not lost on why
we are doing this. I think what is the hallmark or the primary concern to address
what you are alluding to, Councilmember Kagawa, is that in order for to us engage
in appropriate enforcement, we have to have a baseline. This process allows us to
provide a window for people to come in and avail themselves of the process. If they
do not avail themselves of the process, then they are subject to normal enforcement
action. That is why we want them to build after-the-fact, provide for after-the-fact
permitting within certain parameters that we define. So it is not a free pass. It is an
after-the-fact allowance that says, "You have to build within these requirements,"
which are the current laws. We just provide an analysis for the applicant because
under the normal process, they would have to hire a consultant to do that analysis
potentially, and they would have to hire an architect to do that type of analysis for
them. What we are trying to do to facilitate some of their immediate health and
safety concerns, is give them the actual parameters upon which they have to then
engage in reconstruction. If these people do not want to avail themselves of the
process, let us say the three hundred eighty (380), they do not come in for the
after-the-fact declaration, then they are subject to normal permitting process. If they
choose to expand their home or if they choose to not build to Code, they are subject as
laid out in this law, to either tear it out, be subject to fines, or those types of things.
We are providing a very narrow allowance for these after-the-fact permits.
Councilmember Kagawa: Their last permit that they pulled is the
baseline, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Not necessarily. This was one of the
consequences of how the immediate emergency response was conducted. We also
have optometry flyovers of the island that show very recent aerial photographs of
what was on the ground. What we suspect may happen and some people will say,
"Look, I had two (2) dwellings here." Our paperwork may show only one (1), and the
aerial photographs may only have one (1). We would then issue an after-the-fact
certificate for only one (1), not for two (2). But we suspect that people may try to come
through the process to try to expand those uses or expand the density. We make it
very clear in the law that we are not asking for authority to add for additional density
or to allow for unreasonable adjustments to the square footage of industrial or
commercial space. That is laid out in Section—let me see. Section 6(b), 6 "bravo," on
the top of page 6 the Bill, where we make that clear that we do not allow for that type
of additional accommodation. We stick to the current laws.
Councilmember Kagawa: Well, you know where I am coming from. I
just want to make sure that we are not permitting, even if they, like you said, if they
have two (2) houses and only have one (1) house permitted. I want to make sure that
the second house does not go up. If this Bill supports those efforts, then I will support
the Bill.
Mr. Dahilig: I understand.
COUNCIL MEETING 23 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Kagawa: I hope that we can tighten up the law now
that this happened. We can use the damage as a way to improve our existing laws
and make sure we follow the laws, make a level playing field for all of Kaua`i and not
have people have advantages because they cheat. It is not right. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Real quick, not too many people with an
unauthorized house on their property are going to come in and register.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Let us be real. They are not going come in and
say, "Oh, okay. I have had this illegal dwelling all along and I now I want to come in
and let you know because I am a nice person." That is not going to happen. Now, as
I read this Bill, we are talking about emergency repairs, right? Is this not limited to
emergency repairs only?
Mr. Dahilig: It is emergency repairs and then, it is also for
any permanent repairs within an eighteen (18) month window that comply to a
certain...
Council Chair Rapozo: So this goes beyond the emergency repairs?
Mr. Dahilig: It does.
Council Chair Rapozo: Then it is not an emergency. Number one, it
is not an emergency bill, because I think if we are going to go down this road, we need
a public hearing. When I go to Section 4, it describes what emergency repair is.
Mr. Dahilig: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am going to read it because I think the public
needs to know, "...shall mean temporary work done to any building, structure, or
property to meet an immediate threat and essential to saving lives and protecting
and preserving property or public health and safety." So that, to me, is worthy. If
you have to fix your roof or if you have to fix something, then it qualifies. But if you
are telling me that this is going to allow anyone that suffered some damage through
the storm to get an"okay" to do an after-the-fact permit to completely rebuild a house,
even in areas—in other words, let me just do it this way. Emergency repairs for a
house, and I am not talking about the ones that are destroyed completely, emergency
repairs may cost fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). But to do the job that they want
to do because it is an opportunity for them to renovate, maybe it is one hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($150,000) or two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000). We are
going to let them go for two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) on an after-the-fact
permit allowance, but the basis for the emergency is fifteen thousand
dollars ($15,000) or twenty thousand dollars ($20,000) worth of roof repair? I cannot
support that, Mike. If that is what this does, then I am going to have a tough time.
But if you are telling me for the part of that renovation or the part of that repair is
limited, in other words, you want to utilize this Bill to fix your roof because you need
to fix the roof to protect your inside, your family, and go back into the house, I am
COUNCIL MEETING 24 MAY 30, 2018
okay with that. But to open this up now, I share the concerns of Councilmember
Kagawa. People are going to use this as an opportunity to go in and now rebuild the
homes, and we know. They are going to go bigger. I am not into that. The other
thing is you talked about the displacement and legislatively, you have that discretion
right now, right, as the Planning Director?
Mr. Dahilig: To provide for additional density?
Council Chair Rapozo: No. If you come across a violation and
someone lost their home and camping or staying in a structure that is not approved
for that density, you have the discretion at that point as Planning Director, because
it is storm-related, not to prosecute that person, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Theoretically, yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes. We do it all the time.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Drive through Hanama`ulu. There are a lot of
violations that we are not prosecuting. I understand what you are saying, if that is a
policy issue of this Council. No, it is not. It is really your Department. You have
that discretion. Obviously, if someone lost their house and they are camping out in
someone's backyard, what are you going to do? You are not going to fine them.
Mr. Dahilig: That makes sense.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is your discretion, but I appreciate the
offer to look at that policy. Finally, is the ten thousand dollar ($10,000) building
permit exemption in the Bill?
Mr. Dahilig: I believe that is in the buildings section.
Council Chair Rapozo: Buildings permit.
Mr. Dahilig: Buildings section.
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you know what that ten thousand
dollar ($10,000) number was passed?
Mr. Dahilig: I do not know.
Council Chair Rapozo: Probably when it cost eight thousand
dollars ($8,000) to fix a roof. Would it not make more sense to increase that number?
Find a number that they cannot turn a place into a castle, but to take care of those
emergency repairs. Would it not make more sense to increase that number rather
than create this whole new—this is just abuse waiting to happen, in my opinion.
Then, we have to go fight in court, possibly, because someone had the reliance or
whatever you call it, detrimental reliance, that County said, "Okay." Now, we are
COUNCIL MEETING 25 MAY 30, 2018
going to court. "We are going to tear down your building." "No, you are not going
touch my building. We built it." I have a lot of concerns with the way this is written.
If it was limited to the emergency portion of the repair, I am okay. But as I read it,
it opens up the door for—"Hey, you can do whatever you want." Come get
pre-registered, but then you do what you want and then we will come back later and
make sure that you followed the law. If you not, I do not think this County has the
gonads to make someone tear down their house. I really do not think so.
Mr. Dahilig: Council Chair Rapozo, if I could kind of
address some of those concerns. I think what you raise is the exact same kind of
concerns that we are concerned about right now if we went under the normal process.
The reason why is we are already seeing the rebuilding activity go underway. That
is what we are primarily observing and we are concerned about, because we already
know that many of these activities that are going on throughout the island in flood
damaged areas, they are engaging in self-help. We have a choice whether or not to
go in, as you mentioned, to say, "You have to stop because you need a permit," or do
we allow them to continue to build? That is a tough call.
Council Chair Rapozo: But they do not need a permit for ten
thousand dollars ($10,000) or less.
Mr. Dahilig: But the way to be able to verify whether it is
ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or less, or if they raised the amount, is that they need
to come in and avail themselves of letting us know what is on property and what they
are doing. That is really what more so after in the registration process, is to be able
to create that point-in-time documentation, because that verification of that amount
is impossible if, let us say, they go ahead and do it in next two (2) to three (3) weeks
and we have no idea what got added or changed to the property. Hence, the
emergency element is really more the capture of that and the capture of that
information because going forward, we will have a very difficult time enforcing on the
backend if we do not have that point-in-time information based off the work that they
are doing to be able to verify whether it is ten thousand dollars ($10,000), twenty
thousand dollars ($20,000), et cetera. I think the raising of that amount is not a bad
idea. I think understanding what you just articulated with eight thousand
dollars ($8,000) in roof repairs or even let us say a whole roof is gone, that is twenty
thousand dollars ($20,000) to twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000). It does not
necessarily meet that threshold, but what comes into play is not only that Ordinance,
but the other Ordinances that potentially get triggered, not aside from that Building
Ordinance that you are referring to or that is being commonly referred to as the "ten
thousand dollar ($10,000) rule." So, there may be repairs that are conducted that
may be in violation of Chapter 8, which is our Zoning Ordinance. That is the kind of
thing that we also need, that point-in-time guidance, to be able to reference and
backfill. It really is that intention, Council Chair Rapozo. If we are going to go under
the normal process, these residents that have been affected are going to be doing the
work anyway, we end up in an enforcement level, we tell them "Stop," or we allow
them and we give them guidance to do so. That is really what Section 5 is meant to
do, to provide that guidance so that they are on-notice as to what they are supposed
to do versus just doing things on their own, because we know that they work is
already being done.
COUNCIL MEETING 26 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you have a list of all of these homeowners
that are basically breaking the law now and where the lumber went? Do we know
where these places are? Have we talked to them to find out what they are doing? It
is an emergency? Are they expanding?
Mr. Dahilig: They are expanding.
Council Chair Rapozo: They are expanding?
Mr. Dahilig: In some cases, they are expanding. We are
sending inspectors already, so we are doing the chase-work in terms of some of the
complaints that have been coming in where we know that people are already engaging
in that self-help.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am hoping that we issue the notices to stop.
Mr. Dahilig: We are working on it. I think that is why our
civil process, as you know, takes a little bit of time to engage in that cease and desist
and building that probable cause to make entry into the property. That is why we
are trying to take care of a class of people that, as Councilmember Kagawa
mentioned, would normally follow the law, put them in a category, and leave them on
the side because we know that they are going to follow those parameters. What we
need to focus our efforts on are people like you are characterizing where we are having
to go and send inspectors out already because they are doing that pre-work without
any kind of permit, and expanding. The difficulty to be able to enforce in that
situation is we have a very limited record when it comes to our reference point to say,
"You have expanded your structure," or "You did not have density to do so." That is
why the right-of-entry element in the Bill, in order for people to get the
pre-registration is in there, because in order for us to even get on the property, we
have to establish some degree of probable cause to be able to assert some type of
evidentiary gathering.
Council Chair Rapozo: If you have a complaint, you can go.
Mr. Dahilig: We can go and observe.
Council Chair Rapozo: Right.
Mr. Dahilig: We cannot necessarily enter the property and
in a lot of the situations, the areas that were devastated are in areas that are not
easily visible from the road.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Real quick, this would be available to
those homes that are in the floodway or the flood zone? They could proceed if they
pre-register?
Mr. Dahilig: They could proceed, but they would be
self-subject to the Flood Codes.
COUNCIL MEETING 27 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: I understand self-subject, Mike, but that does
not work. We are trying to protect property and life. I cannot see how we, as a
County, can allow someone to go through an after-the-fact permit process knowing
very well that should another flood come, people may get hurt.
Mr. Dahilig: Right.
Council Chair Rapozo: I will be honest, we are drafting a moratorium
bill to not allow anything in those areas that are directly affected by the streamflow,
the river flow, because I think that needs to be assessed. The experts need to come
down and take a look at these homes in some areas that should not be rebuilt. That
is my concern. When you put this Bill in, these people are going to rush, get their
pre-registration, they are going to start building, and there is nothing that we can do
to stop it. That is my concern.
Mr. Dahilig: I see Stanford and Lyle here. I do want to
premise that one of the parameters, and it is in Section 5(E). If you look at the clause
and paragraph that says that each agency "...shall provide the Department of
Planning the parameters upon which a registrant may conduct any activity to repair
damaged buildings, structures, or properties." The list that would come, for example,
if we sent the Engineering Division a property and they noticed that there is a base
flood elevation of let us say twenty (20) feet, then one of the listed items in terms of
parameters for them to reconstruct, is that you cannot reconstruct unless your home
is higher than twenty (20). That is the kind of information that we are going to be
gathering from each agency to provide that type of guidance so that if they are going
to be reconstructing, they have been put on notice that they just cannot just
reconstruct at flood level. So that analysis will be conducted by each of the various
health and safety divisions and departments to lay out ahead of time before you start
reconstructing and wasting your money. Here is what the base flood elevation is in
this area, or here is what your septic capacity is in this area. That is the kind of work
that normally would be done through a normal permitting process by some type of
professional.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as not present.)
Mr. Dahilig: So any of those types of concerns with health
and safety, Council Chair Rapozo, we share that. It is meant to be prescriptive under
a condition of the after-the-fact permit versus letting them try to figure it out on their
own.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Councilmember Yukimura,
Councilmember Chock, and then Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Yukimura: It sounds like you are saying that if people are
not able to get engineers or architects, the County is going to be doing the engineering
and architectural advice.
Council Chair Rapozo, the presiding officer, relinquished Chairmanship to
Councilmember Kagawa.
COUNCIL MEETING 28 MAY 30, 2018
(Council Chair Rapozo was noted as not present.)
Mr. Dahilig: No. What is going to happen is that if they
come in for application for reconstruction or an application for review, they are going
to come into the Department and then we distribute to all of the health and safety
agencies. All the health and safety agencies are going to look at the body of evidence
that has been gathered by our Department, photographs, current permits on the
property, the damage assessments if they are in the IDAM system, and then they are
going to make an assessment as to what laws are applicable if they want to engage
in reconstruction. So what they are going to be told is, "Here are the laws that are
applicable, not necessarily telling you exactly what needs to be designed, but here is
what needs to be followed as a consequence of you coming in for this after-the-fact
permit."
Councilmember Yukimura: If we miss telling them that a law is
applicable and they do not follow it, they build, and then we come after them for not
following it, who is liable?
Mr. Dahilig: Well, we could be subject to, as Lyle or
Stanford, may mention, certain requirements of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency with our Flood Program whether we catch it or we do not. Even if this is
being conducted without permission, we still could be called on my FEMA to say,
"Why are you not enforcing and shutting down this person?"
Councilmember Yukimura: When you tell them which laws are
applicable, that still does not get them to the place of a building application or
engineering approval. They still have to go to an engineer and get the plans done or
the work done, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes, and that is where the elongated timeline
of eighteen (18) months is to provide them the ability to arrange that.
Councilmember Yukimura: It sounds like we are making it longer and
harder rather than easier for them, to put in that extra step.
Mr. Dahilig: I think that is a concern, whether or not them
coming in ahead of time would do that. But if they are already engaging in the work
now, if we are presented with an after-the-fact permit down the line without any
parameters, which may be the case, then we are going to have to be able to do some
additional work on the backend to verify whether or not if, in fact, what they
constructed was in compliance with the law. So we know that there is going to be
some work either at the frontend or backend, and what we are trying to prevent is an
after-the-fact permitting situation that occurred with the Office of Emergency
Permitting where more than a year after, people were not clear when reviewing the
plans as to what exactly was new work versus old work.
Councilmember Yukimura: What exactly was what?
Mr. Dahilig: What was new work versus old work.
COUNCIL MEETING 29 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. In several places, there is this word
"Declaration." For example, "within three (3) business days after receiving the
Declaration," and "during the validity within fifteen (15) days after receiving the
Declaration." What Declaration is this referring to?
Mr. Dahilig: The Declaration is under Section 5(C). What
our attorneys have taken a look at is all of the conditions that if you are going to be
granted this of after-the-fact permit waiver, that you need to acknowledge a number
of these things. For instance, that you are allowing us on the property; that you are
allowing inspection as the work is going on; and that you know that if you have
anything that is illegal, that if you were trying to further something that is illegal, it
needs to be torn out. So that is where we will have them sign this as part of the
agreement under Section C 1 through 5, that lays out those protections to have the
landowner acknowledge they cannot be conducting work after-the-fact, without
understanding these consent items.
(Council Chair Rapozo was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kagawa returned Chairmanship to Council Chair Rapozo.
Councilmember Yukimura: Of those five (5) things, it says, "the registrant
shall sign a Declaration that provides..." number 2, "An acknowledgement that any
violation, deviation, or expansion from the reconstruction parameters on file with the
Department of Planning will resort to a violation and will require the registrant to
demolish and remove the repair and improvements."
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: They are supposed to declare an
acknowledgment that any violation, deviation, or expansion from the reconstruction
parameters on file with the Department of Planning. What is "reconstruction
parameters" and who does that?
Mr. Dahilig: Again, the "reconstruction parameters" are
set through a list that is compiled by the various agencies once we get a request in
for certification. A request for certification with the body of evidence that the
Department has gathered, would be sent to the Engineering Division, the Building
Division, the State Department of Health Wastewater Division, and to all of the
different applicable agencies like we would normally do under a normal permitting
process. They are going to give us a read as to what applicable laws are tailored to
that situation based on the application. Then, those lists will be compiled all together
per Section 5(A), where our Department is the clearinghouse, like we normally do
under the normal permitting process anyway.
Councilmember Yukimura: To me, this adds another layer of bureaucracy
to the regular permitting process, which already is too long for most people.
Mr. Dahilig: Right. The difference is that process, if they
would go through with it, they would either have to wait and not engage in
COUNCIL MEETING 30 MAY 30, 2018
reconstruction, or face some penalties with respect to after-the-fact permitting that
are currently on the books. They can go in the normal process and that is the way we
would instruct people to undergo the process now, but because of the way those laws
are written, they technically cannot be starting construction until they apply for those
permits.
Councilmember Yukimura: And the language, "An acknowledgement that
any violation, deviation, or expansion from the reconstruction parameters on file with
the Department of Planning will resort to a violation," do you mean will be treated as
a violation? Is that what is meant here? I do not understand the words "to resort to
a violation."
Mr. Dahilig: I probably would refer the question to the
Office of the County Attorney in terms of what...
Councilmember Yukimura: I will ask that later.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as present.)
Mr. Dahilig: I think our intention, though...
Councilmember Yukimura: No, Public Works do not go. I have some
questions for you.
Mr. Dahilig: What we want to make clear in this is that it
is a violation. We want to come as strongly as we can, to say that if you are in
violation, you acknowledge that expansion or these types of the things are going to
lead you down an enforcement path.
Councilmember Yukimura: Alright. One (1) more question for Planning
and then I have a question for Public Works. In Section 5, the first paragraph you
say, "Any repair or construction shall be in accordance with applicable standards of
safety, decency, and sanitation..." What is "decency?" It sounds like pornography
language.
Mr. Dahilig: It is not to be pornographic. I will say that.
Councilmember Yukimura: What is it meant to be?
Mr. Dahilig: In reality, some of this language mimics some
of the policy that was adopted by the Council back in Ordinance No. 642. Some of
that language actually traces things like decency and so forth. I am trying to look
through Ordinance No. 642 now.
Councilmember Yukimura: Will you object to an amendment to take it
out?
Mr. Dahilig: I am not...
COUNCIL MEETING 31 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Unless people know what it means, I do not
want it in there.
Mr. Dahilig: I agree.
Councilmember Yukimura: Alright. Thank you. For Public Works, there
was discussion earlier about people illegally rebuilding. If that building is in the
floodplain, that would be a violation of the FEMA laws, would it not?
STANFORD IWAMOTO, Civil Engineer VI: Stanford Iwamoto,
Department of Public Works. I am the Floodplain Manager. If they are not in
conformance with the Flood Ordinance, then they are not in conformation with the
Federal regulations.
Councilmember Yukimura: And if we show that we are not in
conformance, does that jeopardize flood insurance and those Federal programs that
are available now?
Mr. Iwamoto: Yes. Basically, when we reviewed the draft
ordinance, it provides a window for us to look at the submittals, and we review it just
as we do building permits now.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, but what if people do not submit?
Mr. Iwamoto: It is like how it is now, unless we go out and
find these people, we really do not know if they do not submit.
Councilmember Yukimura: But you do have a damage assessment, so you
could take a look at all of the units that are damaged and check.
Mr. Iwamoto: Correct.
Councilmember Yukimura: Is it a violation to be in the floodplain?
Mr. Iwamoto: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: It is not a violation. What about in the
floodway?
Mr. Iwamoto: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Iwamoto: You have to meet certain requirements when
you are in those areas.
Councilmember Yukimura: Even in the floodways?
Mr. Iwamoto: Yes. You can build in the floodway.
COUNCIL MEETING 32 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Really? Okay. If you can rebuild, there is an
opportunity to rebuild, but you have to rebuild it according to the floodplain or flood
regulations. What do you call it?
Mr. Iwamoto: Floodway regulations. The floodway
regulations are more restrictive.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes, because that is where the waters are the
strongest.
Mr. Iwamoto: That is one way of looking at it. The definition
is that it is the area that is reserved for the river to flow in.
Councilmember Yukimura: The area reserved for the river to flow in,
means you can build a house in the area where the river flows in?
Mr. Iwamoto: The requirement is that you can build a
structure in the floodway as long as it does not cause a rise in the base flood elevation.
Councilmember Yukimura: What about health and safety?
Mr. Iwamoto: The regulations are part of the National Flood
Insurance Program.
Councilmember Yukimura: Right.
Mr. Iwamoto: A lot of it is based on insurance type of the
regulations. The idea behind it is that people can build in there as long as the stream
area is sufficient to allow the river to flow through there.
Councilmember Yukimura: How much does flood insurance cost for a
house like that? The reality is if it is a landlord, they have to pay high flood insurance,
which they will pass on to the tenant. A lot of the tenants cannot afford flood
insurance, although I have heard that renters insurance actually covers a lot more
than what flood insurance covers. How do we make it a practical solution for people?
Mr. Iwamoto: It is a choice that the owners make for
themselves.
Council Chair Rapozo: Real quick follow-up. Is the County able to
stricken or tighten-up that Ordinance?
Mr. Iwamoto: The County has the ability to make stricter
requirements.
Council Chair Rapozo: So, we could prohibit any construction of
residences in a floodway?
COUNCIL MEETING 33 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Iwamoto: You could possibly do that, but there are
consequences. You are taking away a person's ability to build a house on land they
own.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, but...
Mr. Iwamoto: But it is a possibility.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Go ahead.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you. Do we have pretty well-defined
maps that show where the floodway and the floodplains are, or is that now going to
change given what we have just experienced? How easy is it to regulate? It means
that we need to have really clear designations of where these areas are.
Mr. Iwamoto: The maps that FEMA puts out, which are the
flood insurance rate maps, are well-defined. They are digital and are based on aerial
topography.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Iwamoto: It is very clear where they have sets the
boundaries at.
Councilmember Yukimura: Will the boundaries change, given what has
happened?
Mr. Iwamoto: That is something that FEMA has to decide.
Councilmember Yukimura: I see.
Mr. Iwamoto: It may not.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. For now, we would be following our
existing maps, and those are clear, so in terms of regulation and enforcement, that is
not a problem. We have clear maps.
Mr. Iwamoto: Yes. We know where the boundaries are.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Could we determine whether those
houses that are damaged are in those designated areas?
Mr. Iwamoto: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: What you are saying, Mike, is that assuming
people come in to do the pre-registration, you could indicate to them clearly what the
requirements are for rebuilding?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 34 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Attached to that, is there a permit so they can
go ahead and build without?
Mr. Dahilig: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: But you are saying that the enforcement
would be self-enforcing, because the requirement for a permit is the way by which we
enforce the requirements.
(Councilmember Kagawa was noted as not present.)
Councilmember Yukimura: If you tell people to tell themselves whether
they are following the requirements or not, that is really gnarly. I think Council
Chair Rapozo was saying that, too. It does not work.
Mr. Dahilig: I think that is the catch-22, where we know
people are presently already engaging in the reconstruction. How we address that
moving target is why some of the disclaimers that were put forth in the Declaration
were meant to acknowledge that if you are deviating from those standards that are
put forth by each of the different agencies, that you could be at-risk to have those
things torn-out and that kind of thing.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is not enough enforcement to just tell
them that "if you do this, you are going to have to be"—I agree with Council Chair
Rapozo, that going back to them and telling them to tear it out is really not doing
them a favor. What if we allow the real true emergency repairs to proceed and the
others have to get a permit before they start building, and we try to fast-track the
permitting to be as careful and supportive as possible?
Mr. Dahilig: I think that was one scenario we looked at in
the development of this. The ability for people to have plans drafted up and so on
and so forth in a situation where they are trying to stabilize their home, I think, is
the weighing factor, because if they come in under the normal process, that time and
that upfront resource may not necessarily be there. We know that there is a segment
of the population that can afford to go through that drawing and drafting process.
They would be available to go right now and drop those necessary documents for
permitting, currently. But for those people that are affected that do not necessarily
have the upfront resources to hire the architect and arrange that type of construction
is what we are trying to weigh in this situation by punting out a timeline to allow
them to take care of what we need from a health and safety standpoint, and then
gather, garner, and arrange the resources that they need to be able to go through that
permitting process.
Councilmember Yukimura: I would prefer if you changed the normal
process to an expedited process that we ask, like the lawyers are doing pro bono work,
we ask if there are other architects and other professionals to give either pro bono or
discounted services. We help match people up and help them actually get the right
permits rather than leave it to their own discretion to figure out what laws apply and
how to comply, and then be told afterwards that they have to remove all of the repairs.
COUNCIL MEETING 35 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Dahilig: The scenario of removing all of the repairs is
something that we would have to do anyway. If there was a situation where someone
had conducted illegal work that was not in the parameters of the law, we would have
to tell them to remove it anyway.
Council Chair Rapozo: Mike, real quick. When was last time we did
that? When was the last time we did that?
Mr. Dahilig: Well, that is...
Council Chair Rapozo: When was the last time that we did that?
Never.
Mr. Dahilig: Well, there has actually been a situation that
we have.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay, one (1).
Mr. Dahilig: Yes.
Council Chair Rapozo: That is my point.
Mr. Dahilig: And that is why the enforcement is the
difficulty one way or the other when we look at the current scenario of current
construction is, because we can either tell people "stop," which we can.
Council Chair Rapozo: Or let them build and then tell them to tear it
down?
Mr. Dahilig: Or tell them how to build.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura, I am going to stop.
Councilmember Yukimura: I am done.
Council Chair Rapozo: I know you had a question for Public Works,
but I want to let these Councilmembers go.
Councilmember Yukimura: I asked it already. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. The other thing is, in Councilmember
Kagawa's Committee next week, we are going to have the discussion item on the flood
laws and the flood rules so we can better understand. That is coming up next week
in Committee. With that, Councilmember Chock and then Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Chock: I just wanted to clarify, Mike, does this Bill in
the section that talked about right-of-entry...because what I heard was the only way
that you can actually manage it is through the right-of-entry and that is only if people
say we want to permit, right?
COUNCIL MEETING 36 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Dahilig: Right.
Councilmember Chock: So those who do not come in, the only other
way that you able to enforce or get that right-of-entry would be if there is a complaint?
Mr. Dahilig: If there is a complaint, then we would have to
establish probable cause or get permission from the landowner. In many cases, the
landowner may not give us permission to end up on the property. So to establish
probable cause in a lot of the remote areas, we would have to rely on aerial assets or
we would have to rely on visual assets from the road or from a neighboring property.
We still have to reach that threshold of either permission or probable cause to do so.
We cannot just go on a complaint.
Councilmember Chock: Is that one of the big barriers now, in terms of
enforcement.
Mr. Dahilig: Yes, and it has always been a chronic barrier
for us when it comes to enforcement in these situations. If we were able to establish
probable cause, we would have to literally go to the court and get a warrant for entry.
Councilmember Chock: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Brun: Thank you. I know we have been kind of
going long, but kind I am kind of confused. Do we have records of legal structures of
everyone's property on the island? What is permitted legal?
Mr. Dahilig: We do have.
Councilmember Brun: We do have?
Mr. Dahilig: We do have.
Councilmember Brun: I thought I just heard that if we rebuild, we
do not know what was legal and what was not legal, and we cannot go on the property.
I am getting confused with this whole thing.
Mr. Dahilig: Beyond just the structure, we have to be able
to also compare how the structure was built.
Councilmember Brun: Yes.
Mr. Dahilig: We have to build that record from a
point-in-time standpoint to be able to compare work that is done after the flood versus
what was there either now or right before the flood. In many cases, we do not have a
complete record of those things, so that is why the record building standpoint in the
Bill is meant to provide a better body of evidence for not only enforcement, but for
after-the-fact permitting, should it be allowed. If we are left in a scenario where
COUNCIL MEETING 37 MAY 30, 2018
people are doing the work anyway and they come in and get the permits afterwards
to make their house complaint with the law, we have no baseline to understand what
new work is and what was existing previously. That was the scenario that we learned
from after the Hurricane Iniki Ordinance was implemented, that because of that
timing, people just go and help themselves. It is natural to do so. This Bill is really
meant to provide guidance on how do that if you are going to help yourself.
Councilmember Brun: And then over here, five (5) days. Would we
have five (5) days to do a pre-inspection?
Mr. Dahilig: It is three (3) days to come in and three (3)
days to review the Declaration and sign the declaration. So within that six (6) day
period, they could consent to an inspection by our staff or a review of the materials.
We would conduct an inspection of the property within that timeframe and gather
materials. After the six (6) day timeframe, we would send packages out to each of the
different Departments and Divisions, and they have five (5) days to review the
materials and give their input as to what laws are applicable.
Councilmember Brun: Do we have enough staff to do it within five (5)
days? Right now, the biggest thing about people building is permits take a year and
a half, two (2), three (3), four (4), or five (5) years. We are talking about doing them
in five (5) days.
Mr. Dahilig: I get it.
Councilmember Brun: Wow.
Mr. Dahilig: The reason why it is a tight timeframe is if we
went with a normal ordinance process, because of my Department's Charter
designation, we would have to run a bill through the Planning Commission. If we
run a bill through the Planning Commission, that could take at least three (3) to
four (4) months before a bill can even be dropped on the floor here. So, we are looking
at it from the timing standpoint given the regulatory normal process that we have,
that if we have a four (4) month delay in coming to the Council with some type of
zoning accommodation, the reality of a bill coming for passage here could be six (6) or
seven (7) months down the horizon. That is why there is this accommodation in the
Charter to try to bypass the zoning amendment process, because if not, then any of
the accommodations that would want to be taken for at least Chapter 8, Chapter 9,
and Chapter 10 of our County Code, would have to go to the Planning Commission
first, and that could take months.
Councilmember Brun: I understand that we are trying to fast-track
this, but was it really thought out? This looks really broad. We can rebuild
extensions and everything, and not just what was previously there. Being on the
Council for a year and a half and all the lawsuits that we get, this is just more waiting
to happen, I think, because we are going to go over there to tell them to break down
their house. Do we have the staff to enforce this? Do we have the staff to look at this?
We are not even enforcing what we have out there right now. We are not on top of it
COUNCIL MEETING 38 MAY 30, 2018
and then we are going to let these people build. This is going to be abused big time.
I am kind of struggling with this. Thank you.
Mr. Dahilig: If I could respond, Councilmember Brun. I
think the catch here is we are trying to engage in preventative enforcement on this.
Councilmember Brun: Okay.
Mr. Dahilig: Because we know that if people are engaging
in the construction now, they are doing so underneath the law. We can either make
the choice of telling them "Stop, do not do any reconstruction until there are
ordinances or you follow the current process," which is fine. That is, I think, the
guidance that if there is the desire to want to have individuals affected by the flood
go through the normal process, then that is what we will implement. That is not a
question. This is being proposed as an accommodation for those that do have what is
a true health or safety concern. I think we can leave everything alone and have people
go through the normal process, and if that is the will of how things should be, then
we can implement that. Why we are going through this is because we know that work
is being conducted already without permits.
Councilmember Brun: I understand that. That was the same thing
in 2010. I was not here, but we passed a bill to grandfather people who were illegal
for forty (40) years and the people following the laws got screwed over because it was
not. I think we are doing the same thing right here. We have to get these people to
follow the laws and maybe you can help them out a little. But changing a complete
law because we know you are building something so we are going to try to help, I am
just struggling with this, Mike.
Mr. Dahilig: I understand.
Councilmember Brun: Sorry. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kaneshiro and then
Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I thought I had a good handle on this Bill.
When I read it, it is basically to allow residents affected by the flood to rebuild in an
expedited way where they do not have to go through the regular building process,
while allowing you folks to know who is building at the time and allowing you to
identify who is doing construction that you might not have otherwise known. They
might have just been building already. Is that pretty much the gist of it?
Mr. Dahilig: It allows us to do a sorting process where we
can prioritize that workflow. If we know that people are coming in and saying, "Hey,
I am going do this," and we tell them what to do, we do not worry about them
immediately, from an enforcement standpoint. If we have all three hundred (300)
people coming in at once doing work that should be permitted, we do not have the
enforcement mechanism to tell every single one of these people to stop. We do not.
So that is why this process is meant to try to place these people in a category that we
COUNCIL MEETING 39 MAY 30, 2018
know are law-abiding citizens that will follow the directions that are given and then
take care of them on the backend as we can push the workflow out. The one
alternative, if there is an enforcement type of the decision to want to have everyone
stop work right now, we would need the additional manpower to do so.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as not present.)
Mr. Dahilig: I think that is a reality that I will say
unequivocally, that we would need a mass of people to tell everyone to stop
construction until they come in for permits. That is what we can do. What this is
meant to do is to limit the amount of enforcement situations where we know that
people are engaging in this work and we tell them, "Follow these laws so that we can
take care of your permitting and compliance when the timing is a little more flexible."
That is why that eighteen (18) month window was there. Otherwise, if we are at this
decision point where we need to tell all three hundred eighty (380), potentially, "Stop
right now, come in for permits," and we create a permit bubble that would come in,
and then we would have to either tell them, "Okay, yes/no, yes/no," or force them to
devote resources to permitting right up front.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: We are not allowing them to build an illegal
structure or skirt any building standards that we have, right?
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as present.)
Mr. Dahilig: No.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: They have to follow our current standards.
But you are just saying that they are able to come in and say, "This is what we are
trying to do. We are trying to rebuild the house according to these standards." If
they want to expand the house, they are still going to follow the County standards
and you have the head's up that this house is going to be rebuilt. If they are doing
something wrong like building too low in the flood zone or something, you folks have
the opportunity to tell them know now, rather than people that are just building and
we have no clue. Then, an inspector needs to go out to every single house to look and
determine whether they have expanded their house or followed all of the Codes. We
are trying to be proactive in this, right? That is what I got out of the Bill.
Mr. Dahilig: That is essentially the goal, to try not to
create an enforcement bubble in one way or another. If we go under the normal
process right now, what we anticipate is that the people that are building and do not
apply for the permits, we are going to have to catch them anyway. We are in a
scenario where we talk about the Flood Ordinance, as Councilmember Yukimura
mentioned earlier. Whether or not that someone comes in and avails them self of
flood review or not, we are responsible for everything in the floodway. So that is
something that ultimately, creates an enforcement scenario whether we like it or not.
What this does, is it captures those people that are law-abiding citizens that want to
avail themselves of the process and lets them breathe a little easier knowing that
they do not have to devote the resources to be able to draw plans up, come in for
permitting, and stop any type of health or safety work that they feel could is needed
COUNCIL MEETING 40 MAY 30, 2018
upfront. I understand that the Bill has emergency repairs, but that is either very
broad or very narrowly interpreted. Some of these emergency repairs turns into
permanent emergency repairs, and so those permanent emergency repairs that turn
into permanent repairs have to be declared and have to go through the permitting
process anyway. So we want to be able to create the upfront documentation to be able
to identify those actions first.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: If a resident is going rebuild an illegal
structure, we are not grandfathering them. If they build an illegal structure, it is an
illegal structure and it is not according to our building standards. But you are trying
to catch them on the frontend so that they know that they are not supposed to do this
or they are supposed to do that. Whether they want to rebuild through this process
or another process and do whatever they way, they are going to do it anyway, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Right.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: The end result is if someone wants to build an
illegal structure not according to Code, they are just going to do it. When do we want
to know about it? Do we want to know about it now with this process, or do we want
to know about it later when we have to go and look at each house or hear about a
violation and then go through that whole process?
Mr. Dahilig: I think that, in itself, illustrates the
limitations of how effective and how expeditiously we can enforce on the frontend. I
know that it has been an Achilles heel for all our Departments and all of our
Divisions. But we would be put in that scenario where we would enforce on the
frontend and our record, as Council Chair Rapozo has mentioned before, we are not
batting very well, I will put it that way.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: If they want to build it illegally, they are going
to do it no matter what, right, and not follow the standards?
Mr. Dahilig: Whatever enforcement resources we do have,
we want to be able to target and focus on those people versus telling everyone to stop.
I think that is what the goal is here with this.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I think the benefit is the people that want do
the right thing, those that want to build right away and they want to get their house
back in living condition, they are able to come in and go through a faster process
rather than our business as usual process, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Right.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura's head is spinning.
This is like déjà vu, Councilmember Yukimura, probably twelve (12) years ago with
the Transient Vacation Rental (TVR) debacle. I remember the justification was, "We
are going to get a baseline, all of these people are going to come forward and fill out
COUNCIL MEETING 41 MAY 30, 2018
applications, we are going to know where we are at, and the number one justification
for this law is that we will have no more illegal TVRs on the island," and we know
what happened with that. Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Mike. I started off criticizing this
and the situation and I heard around the table. But you kept repeating the same
thing, that they are already building right now and if we do not do anything, this is
going to mushroom into a much bigger problem. So, you are trying to do something
right now. I think I agree. We need do something if they are already doing
something, because not passing this Bill is just going to mushroom anyway. They are
going to do whatever they want. The larger problem—I had a friend who goes to work
on the powerline road all of the time and he said that there is no doubt, in his mind,
that off of that road, that there are a lot of illegal structures down there. He said they
park on main powerline road at night. During the daytime, I guess the go to work,
so it is not too much cars. He actually had to go down for work one time and he said
that when you get down there, you are shocked by what you see. We know that these
exist. They are not going to be on these numbers, right?
Mr. Dahilig: No.
Councilmember Kagawa: They are all illegal, so they do not count as the
two hundred eighty-one (281). My question is, we had the County appropriation that
we just made five million five hundred thousand dollars ($5,500,000) and we had
twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) more to go. Is the Administration worried about
this problem to maybe add more staff to make sure that we enforce the laws that we
have? I got a complaint one time that they said, "Why do we have twenty (20) firemen
down there? They only needed two (2)." Paying the eighteen (18) firemen overtime
when they are not even needed, is the permitting—we are going to hire more retired
planners, give you more staff, and retired building inspectors, bring them onboard,
and let us go down there. We have to get our feet on the ground. This is a problem
and you are saying that we do not have enough staff, well, let us get more staff. What
are we going to do? Are we just going to pass words or bills? You have to get people
on the ground telling them, "There is a right way and wrong way. This structure is
illegal. You can come with density bill, you can try to convince the Council that you
bought it like this, and you are asking for a change to change it to make it legal, or
whatever it is. But there is a process. Your house is definitely illegal. Do not rebuild
right now. Do not spend any money because there is a right way and a wrong way to
do it." Then, you go to the next one the next one. All of these people driving up
lumber, tell them, "Hey, when you do Home Depot, you have to stop by the Planning
Department and talk story with them and make sure that we are touching bases so
that we have your name down. You are trying to do things right." But we cannot just
have people building and adding to their house and we say, "We do not have enough
manpower." Let us use some of that emergency moneys instead of only watching the
road and whatever we are doing there. I am not saying it is not important, but I am
saying that this is important, too. We have emergency moneys, let us go hire more
people and let us get on the ground and in there where we know there are a lot of
illegal things. Like Councilmember Yukimura said, why are we going to let them
money and then tell them to break it down when now is the time when we can prevent
them from spending money? A lot of them are locals, too. Not all of them are rich
COUNCIL MEETING 42 MAY 30, 2018
people from the mainland who are just exploiting the island. Let us tell them, "The
practice is going to stop now. We are going to try and improve. The practice of doing
what you want and when you want, we are trying to stop this right now. We are here
to help you. This is the way you can do it right." I think we have to get people out
there talking. You say that you have two hundred eighty (280) and let us add another
two hundred (200) more illegals. We have to go weekends and all if we can. I am
sure inspectors would not mind making time and a half. That is what the emergency
moneys are for. If the Mayor disagrees, then come to the Council for the money
because I think it is important. How we rebuild the north shore is a priority and how
we fix the illegals is a priority. I do not care what you say.
Mr. Dahilig: I understand.
Councilmember Kagawa: I think I have four (4) votes here that agree
with that whether it be four million dollars ($4,000,000), five million
dollars ($5,000,000), or whatever it is going to take to fix the future or Wainiha. We
work Saturday and Sunday if we have to. Work twelve (12) hours if we have to. Let
us get on the ground and reach everyone that we can. I am willing to support that.
But this Bill, I support it, too, rather than do nothing and let people do what they
want and then come with another bill later when they are all built. I am ready to
start today, but let us do more, get more manpower. If the Mayor disagrees, come to
the Council. The Council can make this a priority with four (4) votes. I think we
have to get on the ground. We have to bring on retirees. If we have to pay them a
little but more than they normally would make, let us—it is a priority. It is only going
to be three (3) months or whatever. Let us do it. I do not know. That is my solution.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura. We have to take
a caption break in five (5) minutes. Go ahead, Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I concur with Councilmember Kagawa in
terms of hiring more people. I do not believe that the option is to do this registration
process or do nothing. You were saying that you are worried about this enforcement
bubble that we have so many people building, and if you were to go out and enforce
right now, it is just more than you can handle without enough people, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Given what we know is the statistics, if we
were to tell people that we are engaging in the reconstruction to stop and file for
permits, that is an enforcement effort that we are going to have to expand.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. But what I see you doing is you are just
pushing the enforcement bubble down the road when all of these people build and
they have not gotten permits that really guide them in building properly. Then, it is
going to be an enforcement nightmare, or you are not going to enforce. Why not use
these extra bodies and develop an emergency permitting system so all of these people
who are legal and who want to rebuild, can do it quickly? You can also catch people
who are needing help. To me, that is a much better use of resources to help them do
it fast. Why not use this emergency ordinance possibility to do an emergency
permitting system so you do not have to go through Planning Commission and the
regular bill approval process? Do it through an emergency ordinance. I think that is
COUNCIL MEETING 43 MAY 30, 2018
how we set it up after Hurricane Iniki, the emergency permitting center. That is
how we did it, as an emergency permitting center. You could do an emergency
ordinance, but it has to be passed on one (1) reading with six (6) votes and have a
much better flow where you do not create all of these problems. From what I am
hearing, you folks are just going to tell people what the laws are, but you are not
going to go out there, inspect, and say, "You cannot build this based on the law." That
is what a permit does. It tells people what they can do, what they cannot do, and the
conditions by which they are going to do it. You are not doing that. If you do not do
that, they are going do what they think, and what they think may not be the right
thing. Then, you are going to tell them, "Oh, you should not have done that. You
were told. You had to follow the law." That seems really cruel and unusual
punishment.
Mr. Dahilig: Well, I will say this, that having expedited
permitting process with an OEP was stood up was an option that we tried to evaluate.
The reality is that per the Charter and what has been approved by the voters of this
County, is that an emergency ordinance only lasts for sixty-one (61) days. So if we
were to make changes to the Zoning Code, it can only last for sixty-one (61) days.
Councilmember Yukimura: Can you not renew the emergency ordinance?
Mr. Dahilig: You could, but it provides degree of either
continuity or predictability that if you have to keep coming in every sixty (60) days to
institute an emergency ordinance, that how people approach it could end up either
gumming up our system with a large amount of full zoning permits, or you could leave
people behind because they do not have the resources to create the documentation for
it. I just want to correct one thing, Councilmember Yukimura, we are doing an
inspection before these certificates are even put together or issued. I want to be clear
on that.
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, if you are doing that, why do you not do
that in support of getting permits rather than telling them what the laws are?
Mr. Dahilig: Because that would also be conducted
anyway. On both ends, you are going to be having these reviews. The parameters
we are working under in order to avoid a Planning Commission elongation of
Chapter 8 amendment is limited to just sixty-one (61) days.
Councilmember Yukimura: But it can be renewed.
Mr. Dahilig: It can be renewed.
Councilmember Brun: Mike, you are coming to us to approve this.
We are going on a ten (10) minute break. Councilmember Kagawa had a great idea.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as not present.)
Councilmember Brun: Within the ten (10) minutes, can you agree
that the Administration, I do not know if Wally is here or who is here, that you folks
COUNCIL MEETING 44 MAY 30, 2018
can go and we will spend some of these funds to get people on the ground to look at
these houses to make sure that we are doing what we need to do? By sitting in the
office, if they do not come, they do not come. Get people on the ground. If you folks
can commit, I will support this. If you folks can commit to emergency funding to help
get people on the ground, I will support this. If not, I cannot support this.
Mr. Dahilig: If I could just respond to that, Councilmember
Burn. We know that there is going to be a manpower bubble on this. We have already
had people reach out and we have talked with our sister Counties like Maui County,
Office of Planning in Honolulu, as well as the State Land Use Commission. They are
willing to help us out on this. We are also trying to be as cognizant of resourcing this
as possible while, at the same time, not necessarily "break the bank" either. We are
very lucky that we have people that are trained in this area from Maui County and
from our sister Planning agencies, to be able to come in and help us document. We
have those availabilities to us.
Councilmember Brun: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, we will take a ten (10) minute
caption break. Be back at 11:40 a.m.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 11:30 a.m.
The meeting reconvened at 11:44 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Are there any other questions for Mike?
Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: I just wanted to continue this conversation of
where members are because I think at least for Councilmember Kagawa and
Councilmember Brun's request, again, there is support for meeting in between as
long as we take a broader look at it and being able to address the various needs, not
just enforcement, but what it is going to take to correct and move us in the direction
in this particular place for these three hundred eighty (380) homes that have been
affected and how to get to being more of a model of changing the needle direction.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
Councilmember Chock: I just wanted to make sure that was being
acknowledged and understood of how we might be able to move forward on that. I,
for one, understand that there is a need and what you are trying to be proactive. But
I just think that there is just so much more that needs to be addressed in this that I
hope we can kind of get to middle ground for me to support it.
Mr. Dahilig: I agree. It does not preclude that further
ordinances, further changes to the Zoning Code, or any of the other Codes can follow.
I think the reality is in this immediacy, what we are concerned about if we go through
COUNCIL MEETING 45 MAY 30, 2018
a normal review process for an ordinance or ordinance change to be given some
flexibility on some of these already occurring construction items, is that we would
have to go through a lengthy process required by the Planning Commission review
and those types of things, public notices. I think there is still a number of trailing
policy questions and trailing items that I know we expect are going to be part of a
broader conversation and we are prepared to do so, whether it ranges from resourcing
the enforcement properly to providing for accommodations for certain specific policy
laws. It is a broad range. But I think what we are most immediately concerned about
right now, is that we know that the activity is already going on.
Councilmember Chock: Yes. It really illustrates the divide in our
community between the "haves" and "have nots" and how we are going to address
that, creating that ability for us to all move forward. I know you have been struggling
with, but I think here is the opportunity is I am hearing. Let us come up with a
solution for all of it.
Mr. Dahilig: I think that is the balancing element that we
are largely concerned about because if you have only limited resources as a household,
do you spend those resources towards trying to shore-up your home and have it livable
for shelter or do you spend it on permitting? I think that is the tension. It is not an
easy one.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: The intent of the Bill is to allow our residents
to move back into their houses sooner than later, right?
Mr. Dahilig: That is the idea.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: What happens if we do not do this? Then, you
will have residents that are building already that are going to continue to build.
Whether they build in conformance with our law or not, you do not know yet until
you go out and issue them a no-build warning, which some of them could be building
according to our law because they want to get back into their house. We will end up
in the same situation where you are going to have houses that are built according to
our law and those that are not built according to our law. You are just going to know
about it later than sooner, right?
Mr. Dahilig: Yes. I agree.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? This is for questions.
Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: You are going to know later that if you do not
do anything—no. If we pass this now, we will know later what should have been
done, they will have put a lot of resources and money into doing the wrong thing, and
then we are going to have all of this enforcement problem, rather than an emergency
permitting system that tells them upfront what to do and lets the ones that are doing
it easily and legally to get it through fast by using the emergency ordinance process
COUNCIL MEETING 46 MAY 30, 2018
and the extra bodies to do that work in terms of good regulation rather than nasty
enforcement in the backend.
Mr. Dahilig: I understand the perception in terms of the
difference between after-the-fact permitting versus upfront permitting. The reality
when it comes to upfront permitting, is the County could go ahead and resource that
fast-track permitting process properly, but it also depends on resources from the
community members to actually get the documentation in place. That is the big x
factor, are we going to have people in the three hundred eighty (380) category able to
provide the necessary documentation and expertise to give us the documents to
review? If that issue could be solved, then I think we would lean towards the upfront
permitting process because it is a normal process for us anyway. But what we see as
an equity concern, is that people may not have the resources to come upfront and
provide the documentation to hire an architect, an engineer, or these types of people.
So to provide the degree of flexibility within a household to determine where to place
their limited resources, really becomes a question of do we tell them, "Put your eggs
in the permitting basket first," or do you put your eggs in the permitting basket later?
I do not have an easy answer for that. But I think when we look at the equity concern
across the board, as Councilmember Chock had mentioned, we know there are
families that will not be able to avail themselves immediately of an upfront
permitting process because they do not have the resources necessarily to go and hire
the professionals to draw up the plans, et cetera. If that issue could be handled and
I do not know who would pick up that slack, whether it is a non-governmental
organization (NGO) or some type of grant program. But what we do know is right
now, we do not have individual assistance from the Federal Emergency Management
Agency. That would have freed up an x amount of money and if we were in that
scenario, it would have made available thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) to thirty-five
thousand dollars ($35,000) for these families to go and do what they need to do to get
back in their homes. The tension right now is that we are asking people that have
many means and people that have limited means to be of the same process. If the
same process is upfront permitting through an expedited permitting process, then we
need to help those people draw up those plans, and I do not know how to do that.
Councilmember Yukimura: First of all, if they do not have the resources,
there is more likelihood they are going it wrong. They are going to rebuild and do it
wrong and then, it is going to be more cost to them in the end or they are going to
have to take the whole thing out. If they cannot have the resources upfront, what
makes you think they will have the resources at the backend? We all know that it is
important to have the resources upfront because what comes afterwards could be
really wrong if you do not have the right resources upfront. Why do we not use the
one hundred million dollars ($100,000,000) that State has issued and some to the
County and give them the resources, organize a pro bono engineering and project
management or whatever is needed to help the families, help them do it the right
way, and use our emergency powers to set up an expedited permit process so everyone
will benefit, not just the families that do not have the resources? It does not make
sense. This process just says, "Here is all of the information, now you go do it, go
ahead," is not going to help them.
COUNCIL MEETING 47 MAY 30, 2018
Mr. Dahilig: Well, it is not an issue of necessarily
specifically helping them. It is providing them the flexibility to make that household
decision. The difficulty is not all households are made the same and to require an
upfront permitting process, as you mentioned, if we were to fill the gap by codifying
in law that one of the many non-government organizations has to help facilitate
design work for these people, I would be hard pressed to say that is a reliable system
to have an upfront permitting system work for as many people as possible. The
timeframe essentially is meant to provide that flexibility for those families to then
figure out how to resource around it and gives them the eighteen (18) month
timeframe. That may not be enough. That may be more than enough. But I think the
missing piece again, if we were to go with upfront permitting across the board, is that
many people will not come into the process anyway because they do not have the
resources to go and hire these...
Councilmember Yukimura: Well, that is right. If you give them the
expedited process and some help with the resources, then they will come in, they will
do it right, and they will be better off. Just giving them more time—you know how
we gave more time to the Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) on agricultural land?
We gave them five (5) more years. We gave them ten (10) more years. We gave them
another fifteen (15) years. But they do not have the resources, so it did not help them.
It might have helped some, but it is not the way to really help them. The way to
really help them is to give them a good permitting process and the resources. There
has been such an incredible—look at the attorneys. They are giving pro bono help. I
will tell you, after Hurricane Iniki, the Structural Engineers Association of Hawai`i
from off-island, because there was no structural engineer here who had not been
affected, they came and they helped us develop the new hurricane-proof building
permit requirements that we adopted three (3) weeks after the hurricane because
they came to help. Why can we not ask them to help again?
Mr. Dahilig: Again, Councilmember Yukimura, it is your
prerogative whether to rely on an upfront permitting process that is hinged on
donated help and external support. It is a model. I will concede that could work, but
it is a degree of reliance on whether or not that is going to be resourced properly. I
do not know. I cannot answer that question.
Councilmember Yukimura: But without an emergency permitting process
in place, none of this will happen.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as not present.)
Councilmember Yukimura: Why would the Structural Engineers
Association of Hawai`i volunteer to help, if they have to go through a year and a half
of permitting to get a simple building permit?
Council Chair Rapozo: Let us limit it down to questions. We will
have opportunity to have our discussion. Are there more questions of Mike?
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING 48 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Go ahead.
Councilmember Yukimura: Council Chair Rapozo, the thing that I am
asking for is some leadership from the Administration to really look at what the
workable path is and to create it, whether it is calling for help, asking Hawai`i
Community Foundation to put in the resources for some of these families, and doing
our job, which is to create an emergency permitting process.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: I agree with you one hundred percent (100%),
but this is their recommendation. So, we will get to vote.
Councilmember Yukimura: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Are there any other questions for
Mike? Thank you, Mike. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to testify while the
rules are suspended? Seeing none, I will call the meeting back to order.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. I am going to vote against this Bill
because it is not going to be helping our people to give them a pre-registration process
that does not really give them the guidance that an expedited permitting system
would, and it will cause enormous enforcement problems down the road. I do not
believe this is the best way to solve our problems, while also allowing people who have
the wherewithal to build properly to do all kinds of things and then creating a huge
problem down the line as well for us. I would prefer to deny this Bill and ask the
Administration to come back with an emergency ordinance for an expedited permit
process and perhaps inquiring of the building professionals like engineers and
architects to give some help to those families that need those resources. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Are there any other comments?
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I will be voting for this Bill. This is an
extraordinary circumstance. We had major floods. I think after reading the Bill, the
intent of the Bill is to allow people to move back into their homes sooner than later.
The Bill does not say they can do illegal things. The Bill does not say they can have
a variance from the current building standards. It just allows them to be able to come
in now and get some consulting from Planning, and it also allows Planning to
understand who is going through the construction process or who wants to go through
the construction process now, rather than later when say someone wants to build and
they just build. Planning is going to have to physically go out there and find out who
did that and when. Here, we are being proactive. I actually think it takes less
resources to pass a bill like this and have people know to come in now for their
COUNCIL MEETING 49 MAY 30, 2018
consultation. At least we can get them on the list and know where people are at on
it, rather than after-the-fact or months from now when people actually have their
architect, plans drawn, and everything. They will not be able to move in or actually
do work until way down the road. I think we are in an extraordinary circumstance
where we had flooding and we have people who had houses that were damaged. We
have them probably living with family elsewhere on the island, or I do not know where
they are staying, but they are not staying in their house. The intent of this is to be
able to get people to move into their house quicker, while also having the benefit of
being proactive, letting Planning know, letting the other Departments know who is
actually in the process of trying to build and who want to build. The people that want
to build it correctly are going to go in and see Planning. The people that are going to
do it illegally, are going to do it illegal whether we pass this Bill or whether we have
an expedited permitting process. They are going to do whatever they want. Those
are the ones that we are going to have to catch in the end no matter what we do. I
think it is a proactive approach. Again, it does not circumvent any current laws. You
cannot go and build any illegal structures. You have to build according to Code. All
it does is allow the residents that have had damages from the flood come in earlier
and be able to do the work earlier. I will be voting in support of this Bill.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I will keep it brief. It comes down to whether
I support Mike and his efforts to do the best job he can given the circumstances and
basically, seeing these people already building and what can we do? In my personal
opinion, I think Mike has been the best Planning Director we have had since I recall.
I trust his leadership and I want to support him in tackling this problem. At this
time, I feel like I trust what his message said. We have to try to do something to
tackle this problem and this is the first step. Hopefully, maybe they will implement
some of the steps that I have heard around the table. I think we have some good
solutions and we are willing to put our County dollars to enforce our laws that we
have on the books. We want to make sure that people follow the laws and there is a
level playing field for everyone on Kaua`i. Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: The intent of my proposal for an expedited
permitting process is to also get people into their houses faster. We would be
inspecting for permits, really helping them get permits rather than inspections for
finding a baseline. As they rebuild, which we do not want to stop them from doing,
we would be helping them to rebuild properly. This way, we are not going that
because they are not going to get plans drawn. They are going to be told that they
cannot build illegally, but they do not have the expertise to know whether they are or
not. A permitting process would really give them the guidance. If it is expedited, it
will save them time and all our resources will be focused on helping them do the right
thing and getting there as fast as possible.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kawakami.
COUNCIL MEETING 50 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Kawakami: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I am going
to be supporting this emergency ordinance because we are in a state of emergency.
There are families out there that have completely lost everything. If we do not pass
this, they are going to be without a home and without a house. These types of natural
disasters require us to do extraordinary emergency ordinances at times. There are
safety mechanisms built into the ordinance to try to prohibit as much of the abuse as
we possibly can. In this world, there is always going to be a few bad apples. But, do
we decide to punish the people that have already been punished by this flooding
event, or do we try to strike a right balance? I think that this measure strikes the
right balance of being able to help people recover and return to some sort of normalcy.
I think we are focused on the negatives that may come up instead of the anticipated
positives that this ordinance is going to bring as far as being able to keep people in
their homes and to help them rebuild with the resources that they have. Thank you,
Council Chair Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I fully
understand and actually support the intent of this emergency bill. I think that the
proactive approach is really where we want to go with what Mike is trying to
accomplish. I do feel that it lacks sort of an effective avenue for success and an
inclusive process to occur for all the needs that are showing up at the table that we
need to address as a community. I am really struggling with this. If we can come
back to the table with—I kind of like what Councilmember Yukimura is saying with
the expedited permitting process, because it provides that avenue for some expertise
to be implemented. I think it will provide a little bit more in the solutions. I know
we need something, and I want to support something to move forward. I am just not
clear if we are completely there yet. If we are voting on it today, I am thinking that
I may not support it, but I will wait for the Bill to come up and digest this a little bit
more.
Council Chair Rapozo: This is the Bill, so today will be a vote.
Councilmember Chock: Is this the Communication or the Bill?
Council Chair Rapozo: Oh, yes. I apologize.
Councilmember Chock: I do have a couple more minutes.
Council Chair Rapozo: The vote will come today. Is there any other
discussion? I hope we can get the discussion out of way on the Communication and
when the Bill comes up, we can just go through the Bill, because we spent a few hours
on this already. Is there anyone else? Well, I am just going to say, I appreciate the
intent because I agree with what Councilmember Chock said, something needs to be
done. I guess I just have been here long enough to know what after-the-fact permits
do. I guess I just had too many bad experiences. It is been over a month already.
April 14th to 15th was the flood. I would have much rather seen an emergency bill
come up setting up that process, like Councilmember Yukimura talked about. It is
not about the money, "Hey, we are going to put money on the table, hire people, bring
COUNCIL MEETING 51 MAY 30, 2018
them from retirement, and get them out here to do the pre-inspection or
pre-registration inspections." What these people need is exactly what
Councilmember Yukimura said, they need that guidance from the County. They need
that help and not just, "Okay, we have got a baseline, go do what you want to do, and
then we will come back later and make sure." How are we even allowing someone to
do anything without proper plans or not being able to afford an architect? What is
going to happen? You just draw your own, have the uncles come over and build your
structure, then come back and hope they conform to County Code? It is really not
about the money part because emergency funding is available to help these families
in whatever way we see necessary. In an expedited emergency permitting process,
we would set the parameters. We could set the parameters so that everyone could
qualify. If they needed assistance, we could provide that using the funds that we just
talked about. But to just allow people and hope that they do it right and only to come
back later and say, "Hey, you did not." Then, this Bill says, "shall demolish the
structure." You do not have an opportunity to say, "Oh, we are going to waive that
one." No. It is a done-deal. I said earlier in my comments, this is to assist the
emergency repairs, not rebuilding of your family room. No. This is for emergency.
What we need to do to your property so you can go back in and live. Not to make it
nicer, bigger, and all of that. Anything beyond that emergency repair should be done
through the normal process. You go get your permit like everyone else. The
emergency construction or reconstruction should be what we should be focusing on.
Spending money, we are going up tap into the emergency funding for after-the-fact
permits. Again, maybe for some of the newer Councilmembers, they are not familiar
with the TVR debacle as I mentioned earlier, too. We assumed a lot of things. The
intentions were all great, but the result was not what we had expected. In fact, I will
say that we have more TVRs today than we did back then. They are just illegal. The
intent was right. The intent was, "Hey, we are going to finally get an inventory and
now we are going to be able to enforce." That did not happen. Now, we are going to
actually set up a process where people would be able to go in and get and be okay to
do after-the-fact permits without really knowing the direction that they want to go.
I would agree the vast majority of the people are not bad people. They want to get
their homes built. The problem is they do not know how. The fact that they were
provided with the guidance or the roadmap and were pre-registered so now we know
the baseline, they are going to do what they have do to get their home fixed. I am
afraid that later down the road when they come in for the permits, they are going to
be stuck with either having to remove that structure or spending a ton more money
to come into compliance. That is what is going to happen. I think if you spend enough
time here, you can see that happening. That is not focusing on the negatives. That
is just being real. That is what I have seen in the TVR world and again, the intentions
were always good. I do not think it would take much to set up the emergency
permitting. Once the storm hit, whether it is a hurricane or flooding, it does not
matter what the disaster is. Once it hits, on someone's checklist should be "set up
emergency permitting." That should be on the list. Set up emergency permitting
parameters so that one (1) month from the event—see a lot of these people are done.
They are already did the repairs, whatever needed to be. Within seventy-two (72)
hours of the event, someone should be working on the emergency permitting
emergency bill. We have to get this to the Council now. That has to be at the Council
within a week. This is the emergency permitting process, we are going to need five (5)
more inspectors; emergency, because they are going to focus only on the damaged
COUNCIL MEETING 52 MAY 30, 2018
properties. They are not going to do anything else. That is what we do. No, not this.
This is not it, in my opinion. After-the-fact permits should be frowned upon, in my
opinion, because that is what history teaches us. When we repeat ourselves, we are
going to say, "No, we want you to get an after-the-fact permit." We will deal with it
later? Unfortunately, later is going to be more costly to that person, potentially. I
will not be supporting this today. I can tell you that I would definitely support a
process to set up that emergency permitting. I would be more than happy to post that
next week as an emergency Council Meeting, but I believe that is the way to go. We
need to be working with these victims, because that is what they are, and we have to
take many of these people by the hand and help them. That is what we need to do.
Not set it; forget it; I hope you get it right; and if you do not, well, we are going to
make you tear it down. Anyway, that is my comments. This is just the
Communication. I will say no more at the Bill. The motion is to receive.
The motion to receive C 2018-128 for the record was then put, and unanimously
carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
BUDGET & FINANCE COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-18) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Received for the Record:
"BF 2018-14 Communication (05/15/2018) from Budget & Finance
Committee Chair Kaneshiro, transmitting for proposed increases to,
deductions from, and other proposed amendments (plus/minus sheets) to the
Mayor's Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Annual Operating and Capital Improvement
Projects Budgets,"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-19) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved as Amended on second and final
reading:
"Resolution No. 2018-14 — RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE REAL
PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2018 TO
JUNE 30, 2019 FOR THE COUNTY OF KAUAI,"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-20) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved as Amended on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2698 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE
OPERATING BUDGET AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30, 2019 (Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Operating
Budget),"
COUNCIL MEETING 53 MAY 30, 2018
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-21) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved as Amended on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2699 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30, 2019 (Fiscal Year 2018-2019 CIP
Budget),"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-22) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2704 — 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
(Operating Budget Transfer to the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center -
$400,000.00),"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-23) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2705 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2017-822, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL
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 BOND FUND AND GENERAL FUND-CIP
(CIP Budget Transfer to the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center -
$1,900,000.00),"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-24) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2706 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ARTICLE 11, CHAPTER 5A, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY TAX (Automatic Fire Suppression System
Exemption),"
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-25) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2707 — 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 PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN
SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION FUND (Operating
Budget Transfer - Kekaha Coastal Property Acquisition - $599,000.00),"
COUNCIL MEETING 54 MAY 30, 2018
A report (No. CR-BF 2018-26) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee,
recommending that the following be Approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2708 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B-2017-822, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
CAPITAL 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 PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN
SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION FUND — CIP (CIP
Budget Transfer - Kekaha Coastal Property Acquisition - $599,000.00),"
JADE K. FOUNTAIN-TANIGAWA, County Clerk: We do have a
registered speaker.
Councilmember Kagawa moved for approval of the reports, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: With that, I will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: We have a registered speaker for items
CR-BF 2018-18, CR-BF 2018-20, CR-BF 2018-21, CR-BF 2018-22, CR-BF 2018-23,
CR-BF 2018-25, and CR-BF 2018-26.
ANA MODES: Aloha Council. It is nice to see all of you. The
rivers are forming, the lava is flowing, and the wind is whirling. Are we listening? I
come forward with much intensity and I understand it can be off-putting in an E-mail
or other. I was here this morning and the Kumu's halau was amazingly powerful and
translating so much. I hope I can do the same. For the Bill on the Operating Budget,
I think that to survive on this island comfortably, you need to be making one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000) or more. I think it is a beautiful thing that there are so
many employees that are at that level. I am not sure if everyone meets the
educational requirements or expertise the same as law school would, but I do think
it is a wonderful opportunity to grow and to be able have that safety net. The
discrepancy that I see in the Department of Parks & Recreation with a vast gap
between the Director, the Deputy, and the maintenance workers is something to
consider. Maybe the Director, being so generous and offering County funds to solve
a problem with a sinkhole, would understand this generosity. There is a clause with
the budget that you can disburse moneys afterwards and I know it is the final hearing
today for the budget, but there is no way to survive on forty-one thousand
dollars ($41,000). If someone is working really hard every day, it is a full-time job,
this is like a company. These are your comrades, your colleagues. Everyone should
be viewed with this respect. I feel the maintenance workers are the unsung heroes
of the island, especially for the tourist industry with everything that they need to
accomplish in order to have things pleasant for everyone. Maybe there can be a really
nice banquet to host them in a sense of appreciating their contributions. I do like to
see the Police Department and Fire Department are making money that would make
them feel comfortable and be able to provide on the island since they are our heroes.
COUNCIL MEETING 55 MAY 30, 2018
But I think it should be expanded and more broadly as the term goes, evening the
playing field with the amount of the work that is placed in order for us to experience
the island the way we do. I am disappointed about the bus not expanding with funds,
because we need to work seven (7) days a week and the lucky ones of us because of
support outside from the income that is we generate here, some do not have vehicles.
I am feeling ashamed that there is any excuse to not allow this very simple expansion.
There are only two (2) Administrators on staff in the Transportation Agency and
maybe they need a little more help in order for this to happen. The Mayor's staff is
extensive and maybe there can be some help there. I feel with that staffing and
resource availability, I would be able to solve so many problems. There is a possibility
to solve really deep issues here. As far as the capital improvements go, I hope with
all of this funding that is happening with the General Excise Tax (GET), there is no
consideration to open the powerline road even if there has been emergencies
happening here. To pave that road and to make it a highway would be tearing the
island in half and it would be non-existent for the future. Whomever is elected as
Mayor that has this power, just understand that I know I a lot of people come forward
talking about traffic and making extra roads, this is something dire. If that were to
happen, it is not just solving a traffic issue, it is mounting many more issues. What
else can I speak on? Can I speak on the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center or
is that done?
Council Chair Rapozo: You can talk about any of the Committee
Reports.
Ms. MoDes: All of the Committee Reports. Okay. As far
as the Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center goes, it was first sought for a specific
amount of money and obviously, it was not going to be enough and now it is for more.
But the issue is an underlying problem that needs to be acknowledged, that true
healing can only happen with this understanding that people have been exploited.
This is a generational issue that was shown by the Life's Choices team. If we are not
going to understand that it is a deep issue that is not going to be solve by a Band-Aid,
but is something that needs true solution of the problem as seeing everyone as equal
humans. This is a right, because what is happening is the numbing of the humanness
of the body through these choices. This is full healing that needs to happen. The
island is revealing what is truly happening and I hope you all understand and make
what you can to move forward for there to be true healing.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much.
BRUCE HART: For the record, Bruce Hart. I would like to
speak on CR-BF 2018-22 and CR-BF 2018-23, the Adolescent Treatment & Healing
Center. I was before this Council, even the previous Council, before the new
Councilmembers were here, on the same subject. I spoke more than once. I
understand every Councilmember's position and I think those that were here before
understand my position. As a Christian Minister and not disregarding people of other
faith, I have a strong belief that when you take away something, you have to put
something back in its place. These children are addicted and the drug or alcohol that
they are addicted to is a support system. We may not see it that way, but they see it
that way. When you take that away from them, you have to replace it with something
COUNCIL MEETING 56 MAY 30, 2018
that supports them, and I believe that is the Lord Jesus Christ. I have seen it. I have
worked with drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs on this island; one of them is
U-Turn for Christ, which I have mentioned before.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as not present.)
Mr. Hart: I had an encounter recently, with Pastor
Steve Rex of North Shore Calvary at Costco and I spoke to him. He is on the Board
of Directors of U-Turn for Christ and I asked him, "What are the hurdles keeping you
from developing an adolescent program?" He said, "Red tape, hurdles, and liabilities."
It is my opinion that this Council has an alternative that could be up and running in
a short period of time with U-Turn for Christ. Pastor Steve was positive in that he
said that it is not that we would not like to go ahead, it is these hurdles that are
blocking us. He even mentioned that he believed they had facilities. We had a long
conversation that I cannot go into here, but it was very productive. I would like to
just present to you and encourage you, that there are alternatives to this plan you
have. I am not disregarding this plan. I am not saying abandon it. I am saying that
there are alternatives and in the future, I intend to do all I can to present them to
you. I just wanted to get up today and let you know. I would like to do all I can to
bring about a program we can get going now. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Does anyone else want to testify?
Seeing none, I will call the meeting back to order.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: The motion is to approve the Committee
Reports. Is there any further discussion?
The motion for approval of the reports was then put, and unanimously carried
(Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Brun was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as
an affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Next item, please.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2018-14, Draft 1 —RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE REAL
PROPERTY TAX RATES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30, 2019
FOR THE COUNTY OF KAUAI: Councilmember Yukimura moved for adoption of
Resolution No. 2018-14, Draft 1, seconded by Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there discussion or public
testimony? Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I just wanted to state because I think Ana
wanted to talk about the budget on the second reading, but we will not reach that.
COUNCIL MEETING 57 MAY 30, 2018
She has to leave at 12:30 p.m., so if she wants to speak now, the staff said that she
can make her comments now because the rates relate to the budget.
Council Chair Rapozo: Did you have something? Okay. Thank you
very much for that. Is there any further discussion? Is there any public testimony
on the tax rates? Seeing none, roll call.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2018-14, Draft 1 was then put, and
carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 7*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Brun was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Resolution No. 2018-20 — RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HAWAII STATE
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES SLATE OF OFFICERS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019:
Councilmember Kawakami moved for adoption of Resolution No. 2018-20, seconded
by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there 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 Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2018-20 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
COUNCIL MEETING 58 MAY 30, 2018
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Brun was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion).
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa, County Clerk: Motion passes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next item.
Resolution No. 2018-21 — RESOLUTION APPROVING NOMINEES TO THE
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND
NOMINEES TO THE WESTERN INTERSTATE REGION BOARD OF DIRECTORS
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019: Councilmember Kawakami moved for adoption of
Resolution No. 2018-21, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there 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 Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2018-21 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 7*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai,
Councilmember Brun was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Resolution No. 2018-22 — RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FISCAL
YEAR 2019 PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE HAWAII STATE
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES: Councilmember Kawakami moved for adoption of
Resolution No. 2018-22, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion or public testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
COUNCIL MEETING 59 MAY 30, 2018
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2018-22 was then put, and carried
by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 7*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Brun was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: We are at 12:25 p.m. Councilmember
Yukimura, if you do not have a problem, we will come back to your Resolution for the
Charter Amendment after the public hearing, because I have a feeling it is going to
take a little longer than four (4) minutes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Your preference. Do you want to go?
Councilmember Yukimura: No. We can skip it unless someone wants to
testify on it and cannot stay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is anyone here to testify on the proposal for a
Charter Amendment relating to the affordable housing? Go ahead and call it.
Resolution No. 2018-23 — RESOLUTION PROPOSING A CHARTER
AMENDMENT RELATING TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Council Chair Rapozo: Can I get a motion, please?
Councilmember Yukimura moved to schedule public hearing for June 27, 2018
and referred to the July 11, 2018 Council Meeting, seconded by Councilmember
Kawakami.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. With that, I will
suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
Council Chair Rapozo: Ana, you can come up.
COUNCIL MEETING 60 MAY 30, 2018
Ms. MoDes: Since I am here, Ana Modes, for the record. I
did not say it before, sorry. I just want to encourage and approve any efforts for
affordable housing for reasons that I have always stepped forward to express. I really
do appreciate all of the work that you do to make sure that it happens. It is not the
only solution. Obviously, there are people that would not be able to be approved for
affordable housing, so we do have to look at homelessness, houselessness, and that
aspect on how to move forward with local families that have been affected.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Ms. MoDes: I, myself have gone through hardship and if it
was not for family support on-island and off-island, it would be impossible. Maybe
the County and island could be that family support for those that do not have that
link of people who have the ability to help out. I really do see you as this big
brother/big sister aspect. I am grateful to all of you for everything that you do and
continue to do. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, I will
call the meeting back to order.
There being no further testimony, the meeting was called back to order, and
proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you. This Resolution addresses,
perhaps the largest problem on the island, which is affordable housing. This
Resolution puts a Charter Amendment on the ballot that would earmark, if passed,
three percent (3%) of real property taxes for the development of affordable housing.
It insures that housing is a budgetary priority every year and much like our Public
Access, Open Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund (Open Space Fund), it sets
aside that money before we do any budgeting. What it does is it will give our Housing
Agency capital for the building and development of affordable housing. If you look at
our General Plan, it says we need nine thousand (9,000) units over the next
twenty (20) years and eighty percent (80%) to ninety percent (90%) of that has to be
affordable housing. In the Affordable Housing Advisory Committee, which included
realtors, developers, and frontline agencies like Catholic Charities, everyone agreed
that in order for a unit to be affordable, it takes about two hundred thousand
dollars ($200,000) of subsidy per unit. If you multiply that by our projected need, it
is about one billion eight hundred million dollars ($1,800,000,000) in capital that we
would need to provide those number of units. This will provide approximately four
million dollars ($4,000,000) a year or forty million dollars ($40,000,000) over the next
ten (10) years, and that is what we had after Hurricane Iniki. We had forty million
dollars ($40,000,000) thank you to Senator Inouye and the Congressional Delegation.
Because our Housing Agency used it so frugally and strategically, that money lasted
us until three (3) years ago. But also, the main thing it did was it enabled one
thousand five hundred (1,500) to two thousand (2,000) units. This would be used in
partnership with the other moneys we have such as tax credits and the obligations of
private developers doing market housing to do their share of affordable housing. For
COUNCIL MEETING 61 MAY 30, 2018
example, it would help our housing projects like Koa`e, which we recently broke
ground for. Right now, it is now it is being funded solely by tax credits, so it is limited
to sixty percent (60%) of the median income families and lower. If we had capital
that was free, available, and not tied to the sixty percent (60%) median income, we
could have done a development with a greater diversity of incomes, families with up
to one hundred twenty percent (120%) of median income, and we all know that kind
of diversity really makes for better housing projects. This will give us a lot of ability
to create good, affordable housing. I see that Kanani Fu is not here. The
Administration supports this project, and perhaps if we can...
Council Chair Rapozo: We are at lunch.
Councilmember Yukimura: If we do not act on this before lunch, then we
could have Kanani come and speak for the Administration. But I did speak to the
Mayor yesterday, and he said that he supported it.
Council Chair Rapozo: This is just to get it to the public hearing.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay.
Council Chair Rapozo: Unless there is some concern and the other
Members want to have the Administration present. I do not know.
Councilmember Yukimura: Are you thinking we would act on it?
Council Chair Rapozo: Right before lunch. Again, it is moving it to
the public hearing.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Well, I do want to say that this has
been a part of the Housing Agency's strategic plan for the last three (3) years, this
idea of earmarking three percent (3%) or a certain percentage. We have already
earmarked two million dollars ($2,000,000) in our present budget for affordable
housing thank you to all of you, if we pass this present Operating Budget. We would
need to raise one (1) of the categories about one dollar ($1), actually, the Residential
Investor class just one dollar ($1) to make four million dollars ($4,000,000). We would
not be taking away from other budgetary items, but we would be addressing a really
important priority for our people.
Council Chair Rapozo: Does anyone need to have the Administration
present? If not, the motion is to schedule public hearing for June 27th and refer to
the July 11th Council Meeting. I did speak to Kanani. She did support the measure
at this time. If there is no further discussion—I am sorry. Councilmember
Kaneshiro.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I am willing to let it go through the process. I
am not sure if am going to support it or not.
Council Chair Rapozo: I have concerns with the three percent (3%). I
think it is worthy of discussion. At this point, I am leaning to supporting this,
COUNCIL MEETING 62 MAY 30, 2018
probably not at three percent (3%), but that is just my own preference. Anyone else?
With that, the motion is to go to public hearing, roll call.
The motion to schedule public hearing for June 27, 2018 and referred to the
July 11, 2018 Council Meeting was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL – 7,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL – 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL – 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL – 0.
Ms. Fountain-Tanigawa: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. With that, we will break for
lunch. Be back at 1:35 p.m.
There being no objections, the meeting recessed at 12:35 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 1:41 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
(Councilmembers Brun, Kagawa, and Yukimura were noted as not present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Can we have the next item, please?
EMERGENCY BILL:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2713) –AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE RELATING
TO STANDARDS, PERMITS, AND FEES FOR WORK ON BUILDINGS,
STRUCTURES, AND PROPERTY DAMAGED IN THE HISTORIC RAIN EVENT
OF APRIL 2018: Councilmember Chock moved to approve Proposed Draft
Bill (No. 2713) pursuant to Kaua`i County Charter Section 4.02K, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Council Chair Rapozo, my understanding is
that we need six (6) votes to pass this emergency ordinance. According to the County
Attorney, we would have the option of deferring it to work on some of the concerns
that have been voiced around the table. I was wondering if that is an option for this
body to consider to work on the potential of expedited permitting process along with
the inclusion of the resources to address the various situations that are showing up.
Council Chair Rapozo: I think the only problem it is a whole new bill.
It would require a whole new bill. I do not think we can amend this—the change is
substantial, very substantial.
(Councilmember Yukimura was noted as present.)
COUNCIL MEETING 63 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: It is a complete departure from the intent and
the purpose of this one. I do not believe we can amend this. If it is the Council's
decision to do a permitting process, then it would have to come across as a new bill.
I could be wrong, Mr. Trask, but that is my understanding. There is no public hearing
in this one. I believe that if, in fact, the Administration is amenable to changing the
process, then it would have to come across in the form of another bill. We would
definitely work with the Administration to get it posted as a Special Council Meeting
item at next week's Committee Meeting. We would have to get the language across
by tomorrow afternoon for posting purposes.
Councilmember Yukimura: We better aim for two (2) weeks, at least.
Council Chair Rapozo: It is the decision of this body.
Councilmember Yukimura: I have a question. How long can we pass
emergency measures after an emergency?
Council Chair Rapozo: No. I think what she is asking is how long
after the event can we post? Can we pass emergency bills at any point? I would guess
we could. I will suspend the rules, if there are no objections.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
MAUNA KEA TRASK, County Attorney: Aloha, for the record, Mauna
Kea Trask, County Attorney. Under Section 402 of the Charter and specifically 402K,
it is not necessarily predicated upon an emergency declaration under (inaudible) or
anything like that, but there must be a need to meet a public emergency affecting life,
health, or property. Then, you have to clearly state the emergency, what it is, and
the rest of the ordinance follows.
(Councilmember Brun was noted as present.)
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Emergency affecting life, something,
and property.
Mr. Trask: Life, health, or property.
Councilmember Yukimura: Life, health, or property. Okay. I think we
could come within that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you.
Mr. Trask: Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I am sorry. Mauna Kea.
Councilmember Kawakami: No, I do not have a question.
COUNCIL MEETING 64 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Okay. Are there any more questions for
Mauna Kea? If not, thank you very much. I will call the meeting back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kawakami.
Councilmember Kawakami: Council Chair Rapozo, I am very open-minded
to seeking some sort of resolution to fixing this problem. I would ask that instead of
killing this emergency bill, that we perhaps take it out for a Special Council Meeting
next Wednesday, because I do think that there are some unintended consequences
both ways. It will give us a week to really measure out if this is what we would like
to do, because I can tell you that I believe that there are merits to both sides of this
solution, but I worry that the emergency permitting process will hurt local people the
most. There are some families that did not have flood insurance and because we are
dealing with water, we are also dealing with mold and young kids and kupuna who
had to go in, rip out dry wall, and do what they had to do. Government responded in
a similar fashion during that first seventy-two (72) hours. I see the merit and the
unintended consequences from both sides, but I would say that if we can kick this out
a week so that Councilmembers can go and ask the questions that they need to ask,
make sure that there are the safety measures included, and if still at the end of the
week, you are not convinced that this emergency ordinance is the right thing to do, it
will at least give us some time to do our due diligence as an elected official. Thank
you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there any further discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura
Councilmember Yukimura: The concern about responding to mold is a
legitimate one, and I am just wondering if it can come under the terms of emergency
repairs defined as "...temporary work done to any building, structure, or property to
meet an immediate threat and essential to saving lives and protecting and preserving
property or public health and safety." We could we could pass this Bill just with
Section 4 and I do not think we are really thinking about stopping people. We are
just going to tell them, "Here is a quick way for you to get your permits and this is
how we will help you." Because we have already been told that we do not have the
enforcement personnel and we want to structure our personnel to be helpful rather
than a hindrance, so let us have the extra personnel help people get their permits
quickly and we are not going to be concentrating on stopping people.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion?
Councilmember Yukimura: But right now, they do not have a route for
that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion? I do not have a
problem with a deferral for one (1) week, absolutely not. We would have to post a
Special Council Meeting. It is not a problem. My concern is, and it is really the fear
COUNCIL MEETING 65 MAY 30, 2018
of the unknown of the ramifications, the unintended consequences that was stated.
We would dictate the parameters for the permitting process just as we do. We give
the Planning Director the discretion in different types of permits and shoreline
waivers. It is on a case-by-case basis though. They would come in and at that point,
the County would set the parameters based on what is allowable by law so we could
get those local families without the resources to get started, not necessarily holding
them to the full conditions of the existing law. But at least we would have that
case-by-case examination and that, in fact, we are limiting—which is what I call is
an entitlement to the emergency repairs, and nothing beyond. That is my biggest
fear, is people will take advantage and now is the time we need to take a step back
and basically reset our process so we do not have these kinds of problems again. I
guess it would be like a hybrid, somewhat. But at some point, we have to get a better
handle. This does not do it for me. I do not see we have the controls in place. I like
the idea, take a week, ask the questions, and maybe come up with language that
makes some of the Councilmembers feel better. I am definitely okay with that and I
would support that.
Councilmember Chock: I will make the motion, Council Chair Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion first? This
would be a referral to a Special Council Meeting next week.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I think I made my reason for voting for this
clear. I think of the houses in Koloa where they had five (5) feet of water, they had
to pull out all their dry wall, and redo all of their floors. I would hate for them to
reach the limit of needing a permit and we kind of make the process way longer than
what it should be for them to get back into their house. I am sure some of them are
living with families, aunties, or other places before they can get that house back into
livable condition. I want to see these people be able to get back into their houses as
soon as possible following all of the rules, again, not breaking the rules, following the
rules and getting back into their residences as soon as possible. I know how much of
an inconvenience it is to have to not live in your house. They are probably living out
of boxes and have all their clothes in boxes, and cramped spaces. My house flooded
at one time and it was not fun not having the convenience of our home. What do we
do to get these people back into their houses as soon as possible?
Council Chair Rapozo: I agree. For those homes replacing carpet,
possibly replacing the wooden floors, or changing the floors would not require a
permit anyway. They could do that. They would not have to come to get an after-
the-fact permit for that. We are talking about much larger, and then there is the ten
thousand dollar ($10,000) waiver that people would qualify for right now even
without this Bill. That is why I am advocating for raising that number to make it
more realistic with the times. Right now, ten thousand dollars ($10,000)really cannot
get you much in the way of damage restoration. It is not going to happen for ten
thousand dollars ($10,000). But in cases like that, it would not require a permit
anyway. I think those people are covered. Councilmember Yukimura.
COUNCIL MEETING 66 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Yukimura: Just a point of clarification. The internal
repairs like replacing dry wall in a house, does that need a permit? Is Lyle here? Can
you just educate us?
Council Chair Rapozo: We will suspend the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Tabata: Good afternoon, Councilmembers. Lyle
Tabata, Acting County Engineer. The question posed was if they are just doing
internal dry wall work, do they still need a permit? The ten thousand dollar ($10,000)
threshold is the determiner.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. So replacing floors, replacing dry wall,
and carpet does not need a permit?
Mr. Tabata: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: Does not need a permit, right?
Mr. Tabata: No.
Councilmember Yukimura: Because that is not a structural repair.
Mr. Tabata: And opening the dry wall, if it exposes
electrical wiring and wiring needs to be changed or replaced because it got all wet or
the outlets, it requires an electrician.
Councilmember Yukimura: That is a good cause, because there could be
fires.
Mr. Tabata: Right.
Councilmember Yukimura: There could be hazards to safety and health.
Mr. Tabata: Yes.
Councilmember Yukimura: Okay. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: I will call the meeting back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any further discussion? I will
entertain the motion.
Councilmember Chock moved to refer Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2713) to the
June 6, 2018 Special Council Meeting, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
COUNCIL MEETING 67 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion?
The motion to refer Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2713) to the June 6, 2018 Special
Council Meeting was then put, and unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule
No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kauai, Councilmember
Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion).
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Thank you. Next item,
please.
BILL FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2712) — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
SECTION 5A-9.1 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY TAX: Councilmember Kaneshiro moved for
passage of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2712) on first reading, that it be ordered to print,
that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for June 27, 2018, and referred to the
Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there any public testimony or
further discussion?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion for adoption of Proposed Draft Bill (No. 2712) on first reading, that
it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
June 27, 2018, and referred to the Budget & Finance Committee was then put,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Brun, Chock, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL — 7*,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
(*Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of the County of Kaua`i,
Councilmember Kagawa was noted as silent (not present), but shall be recorded as an
affirmative for the motion)
SCOTT K. SATO, Deputy County Clerk: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item.
COUNCIL MEETING 68 MAY 30, 2018
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2698, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE
OPERATING BUDGET AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30, 2019 (Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Operating Budget):
Councilmember Brun moved to approve Bill No. 2698, Draft 1, on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Councilmember Yukimura.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion or public testimony?
Seeing none, go ahead. We are on Bill No. 2698.
Councilmember Yukimura: The Operating Budget.
Council Chair Rapozo: Yes, the Operating Budget.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: We are going to save our budget comments
for...
Councilmember Yukimura: This is now, I think.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Now?
Council Chair Rapozo: That is why I was going to rush.
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I have to say something. If anyone wants to
go first, I have to find my budget notes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Does anyone want to go first?
Councilmember Kawakami: Sure.
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kawakami.
Councilmember Kawakami: I am going to speak in support of this budget.
I want to commend our staff, the Administration and their staff, the Budget &
Finance Committee Chair, and the Members of this Council. This is a budget that
went through the process. It went through the due diligence and I believe that we
exercised our fiduciary duty to this County and to the taxpayers of Kaua`i. There are
going to be a lot of challenges ahead and I do believe that we made the very best effort
to come to compromises, collaborate, and to have a very robust discussion. There
were times that not everyone was happy and not everyone was mad and, to me, that
is the sign of a success because we try to strike that right balance. In doing so, it is
a balance. I believe that this a fiscally responsible budget and I am very happy to be
supporting this measure. Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Councilmember
Chock.
COUNCIL MEETING 69 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I also
would like to thank our staff every year, for putting this process together for us.
Without them and also the Administration's responses in a timely manner as well as
our Budget & Finance Committee Chair, it would not go as smoothly as we have seen
it go over these past few years. I just want to appreciate what they have put together
for us. I think this is my fourth budget at Council and every year that I have been
here, we have been sort of chasing a deficit. It seems to be a common thread ever
since we have struggled with losing the TAT and with increases that we have
experienced on an annual basis. I think every year what I have seen is this Council
really try to put a concerted effort together to try and make cuts where necessary and
question where we see some of the big numbers coming in. Councilmember Kagawa,
while not here, I wanted to mention that every year, he throws out some bombs that
I think we all have to really sit down and consider. The point is that on average, we
have been materializing anywhere from two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) to
three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) in cuts on an annual basis, which just
goes to show you how difficult it is to really cut this budget. I know there are varying
thoughts about personnel positions, but what I have seen just in having to build a
budget every year to address ongoing needs, is that we have been at capacity
administratively, that our personnel has struggled to keep up with services. I think
this was the happiest budget for me just in terms of what we were able to accomplish.
I would agree with Councilmember Kawakami that while it was challenging, I think
for the most part, our Council did our job in terms of being fiduciary stewards of the
budget. I wanted to thank the collaboration, particularly in the last hour from
Councilmember Kawakami, in collaboration of how it is we were able to insert
funding into the Housing Revolving Fund while all of us preserving our budget
Reserve, being able to address the interest of the restrooms at the Vidinha Stadium,
and the Open Space Fund. Just about everything that I think, and this is the first
year that I have seen some actual Council interest being supported or passing because
we had some flexibility or we created some flexibility for that to occur. I just want to
thank everyone for that process and hopefully, we can continue to put these good
budgets together. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Are you ready Budget & Finance Committee
Chair Kaneshiro?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I found my notes. First off, I just want to
commend everyone, the Administration and my fellow Councilmembers, for following
our Reserve Fund and structurally balanced budget Resolutions. I think we all
realize that it is a lot easier to follow the budget when we actually have a target in
mind. We have this Reserve Fund target that we want to meet and then it gives us
the flexibility if there is money that lapses, to be able to spend that money where we
need to. Anything over that target, we can spend it throughout the year on things
that are pressing at that time. Also, keeping that target in mind gives us the
flexibility to be able to move when we have situations like this flooding. We are able
to allocate five million dollars ($5,000,000) right off the bat as emergency funds for
the flooding. If we did not have this target, we could raid the Reserve any year and
not know where we want to be. I think it would be a harder pill to swallow when we
says, "Hey, we need five million dollars ($5,000,000) in emergency funds," and we say,
"We only have ten million dollars ($10,000,000) in our Reserves. We spent it all on
COUNCIL MEETING 70 MAY 30, 2018
whatever we wanted to." I applaud everyone for keeping the discipline and for
abiding by that and seeing that target because then, it allows us to be a lot more
fiscally responsible while still being able to address the needs that we have. I am just
very appreciative of that. As far as the budget goes, we did increase taxes; TVR and
Residential Investor. Before that, we already had a structurally balanced budget,
which was great. Then, we increased taxes for TVR and Residential Investor. But I
was happy in where the money was allocated to. Money went to very pressing items.
I think two million seven hundred thousand dollars ($2,700,000) went to housing,
which everyone knows housing has been a really pressing issue for this island.
Another one million dollars ($1,000,000) went back in to replenish our Reserve Fund,
which we did take money out of, which makes sense because we are going to have to
eventually pay that money back into the Reserve Fund anyway. We also had some
smaller items that the community wanted such as bathrooms at Vidinha Stadium. If
you look at budget overall, the things that people always talk about is housing and
roads. Earlier in the year, we passed the General Excise Tax, which should also be
able to take care of roads that are in dire need. Granted, that money is going to take
a little while to get into the County and then it is going to take a little while for us to
start getting ramped up with the projects, but I think looking at this budget, I would
say it was probably one of the smoother budgets that we have had ever since I have
been the Budget & Finance Committee Chair. I think we allocated the money to the
places that it needed to go. Roads has been a big issue. General Excise Tax is going
to come through. We are going to have moneys to fix the roads. We have addressed
what the public wants. Also, we did put some money back into the Open Space Fund,
which was also one of our priorities because we did take moneys from the Open Space
Fund not too long ago. We look at our priorities and where we took money out of, are
we obligated to try and put back, and we have. We put money back into the Open
Space Fund. Not all of it. I am sure we are going to work to put more back in. We
put money back into the Reserve. We put money towards housing. We have money
coming in that is going to go towards roads. We followed our policies. We followed
our Reserve Fund Policy and our structurally balanced budget policy. I am just really
hopeful. This was a great budget. I know there are going to be lapses and it is up to
the Administration and the Council to be able to say, "Okay, we have reached our
target Reserve Fund, what are our goals at this moment? What do we need to money
for? Are we going to repay back Reserve Fund, the Open Space Fund, are there
pressing needs for parks, other items on the island, or housing that we want to put
money into?" I think that is the way it should go. We spend the money when it lapses
and when it is available. I am just really happy the way the budget went. I think it
went really smooth. I want to just thank everyone, the Administration for all their
work, getting the budget together, and answering all of our questions; and then the
Councilmembers for being prepared, coming in, and abiding by our policies.
(Councilmember Kagawa was noted as present.)
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I think it was actually probably one of the
most smooth budgets I have ever seen. I also want to thank Council Staff for always
being there helping us in the back. I just want to thank everyone for that smooth
budget.
COUNCIL MEETING 71 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: Did everyone go already?
Council Chair Rapozo: No, not yet.
Councilmember Kagawa: Are we talking about the budget?
Council Chair Rapozo: Right now.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I want to
thank the staff. Again, they did a fabulous job in working with us. Everything I
asked for, I got on-time and I got a good response. I want to thank the staff, especially
Scott and Jade, for their leadership and all of our Analysts. I would like to thank
you, Budget & Finance Committee Chair Kaneshiro. You have the most patience
that I know in running this budget and you are the right man for the job. I thank
you for your patience and deliberation. I think we did a fine job. It kind of feels funny
to praise oneself, but I think overall, we did the best with where the votes fell. We
have to respect that. We are a body of seven (7). Am I totally happy that I did not
get my way with a lot of things? No. But at the end of the day, that is why the
Charter set it up this way. It was to elect seven (7) individuals that thought
independently and made the best decisions based on the knowledge that they
received. I think we can honestly say that we all did that. My proposed cuts were
quite large. It was to the three (3) largest budgets of the County; Fire, Police, and
Solid Waste. I do my homework out in the public in circle that I am around. It is a
lot of local people who are struggling, middle-class and poor, I would say. In all of the
years that I have served not one of them told me, "Hey, you are not taxing us enough.
Raise our taxes because you need more money to fix the roads to pay our County
employees. We want you to do more and we are willing to pay." Not one. I can
honestly say that I know that the majority of our taxpayers and voters do not want
to pay any more tax. They feel like they are overtaxed to begin with, and that is
mainly because the Federal and State governments takes so much. They have all of
the taxes. I get really frustrated when we say, "Well, we have to solve affordable
housing. We have got to solve homelessness. We have to solve bus transportation."
It cannot all come from this County budget. Because we are the smallest, we have
the least tax. I think we hear the people the most and we will react to what the people
want when they tell us that they are struggling and cannot afford to pay any more.
We live in the most expensive place in the Nation because we are the farthest from
the mainland. So everything that we need to survive needs to be flown in over the
ocean or shipped in across the ocean, and there is a big cost to that. That is why house
is Las Vegas would cost two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000), but we have
to pay five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) to six hundred thousand dollars
($600,000), and it is not exaggerating. There are houses up in Vegas that you can
buy for three hundred thousand dollars ($300,000) or four hundred thousand dollars
($400,000) have swimming pools. I am talking about regular houses here for three
hundred thousand dollars ($300,000), you just get a real simple, basic house on a very
small lot. Our people are struggling over here. I think the cuts that I proposed was
meant to try and not diminish public safety. It was just to try to have this Council
COUNCIL MEETING 72 MAY 30, 2018
have a check on their spending because if you give them all what they want, it is
going to lead to misspending. I can tell you right now that we will never cut their
budgets or even make a dent in their budgets unless we support the kind of cuts that
I make. This is going forward, because when these people have big budgets, you need
to restrict them and have that process where if they run into trouble, they will come
back and will ask for more and provide documentation showing that they have spent
wisely. Then, you will give them that extra that they need to keep public safety first
and foremost. If you just give them all what you want, they will never come back to
you because you gave them all what they wanted and there is no process to cut. I am
disappointed it went 6:1. But at the end of the day, like I said, I respect our individual
minds you and our votes, and I am ready to move on. I am just saying to the next
Council that gets onboard, tell me another way that we can make sure that our people
do not have to be taxed in the future if we are going to survive going the route we are
going, because I do not see it. I think we have to find ways to cut budget, show more
accountability, and force these managers do more with less. It is possible. Businesses
do it all the time. With the way that we basically approved all of what they wanted,
we did not operate like a business. I hope that the mentality can change a little bit
going forward, but as a whole, I am satisfied and I will be supporting this budget.
Again, thank you Budget & Finance Committee Chair Kaneshiro, you did an excellent
job, and all of the Members. I think overall, I cannot complain and I thank you all
for your work.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: I, too, want to start by thanking our staff.
They always give us such good support and this was a particularly difficult budget
because of the short timeframe on the supplemental, but they had it all there for us
and throughout the process, we have had such good support. First, thank you to
them. I also want to thank the Administration. We have come a long way through
the really excellent work of our Director of Finance, Budget Officer, and the
cooperation of the Departments. We have a very clear reserve policy in place and yes,
congratulations to all of us for abiding by the reserve policy in this budget. I find the
Departments are budgeting closer to actuals, which means that we are using our
money carefully and wisely. I also want to thank this Council, especially for your
vote, the six (6) members who voted for the GET, because that is what gave us twelve
million five hundred thousand dollars ($12,500,000) in this budget. If you feel it was
smoother because of the past budgets, it is because we had twelve million five
hundred thousand dollars ($12,500,000) more and four million dollars ($4,000,000)
from the tax increases. Let me first also acknowledge the Legislators who gave us for
the third time, maybe it is the fourth time, the option of having of exercising the GET,
because we would not have been able to vote for the GET surcharge if they had not
renewed the option, which expired several times. But because of that, we had a much
more comfortable margin. I am very thankful that between the excise tax surcharge
and the increase to the Residential Investor and the Vacation Rental categories, we
were able to put two million seven hundred thousand dollars ($2,700,000) towards
housing. I had hoped for forty million dollars ($40,000,000), but two million seven
hundred thousand dollars ($2,700,000) is a good start. Excuse me, I meant I had
hoped for four million dollars ($4,000,000), but two million seven hundred thousand
COUNCIL MEETING 73 MAY 30, 2018
dollars ($2,700,000) is a good start and hopefully, with just a slight increase, we can
get four million dollars ($4,000,000) a year, which will really begin to address what
we all consider the most critical issue facing our island and affecting our families. I
am also glad that we were able to move to replenish the reserve and also to address
the restrooms at Vidinha Stadium. The twelve million five hundred thousand
dollars ($12,500,000) actually made the Philippine Cultural Center possible, the five
hundred thousand dollars ($500,000), because we used the excise tax to release three
million dollars ($3,000,000) of that money from the General Fund. Everyone got a lot
of their needs met. Our Budget & Finance Committee Chair said that we addressed
the needs that we have. We addressed the needs that the public says it wants, except
one thing, we did not fund the bus service improvements in any significant way. After
four (4) years of bus riders coming to us and saying, "We support a tax increase
because we know how important this weekend service is to us on a daily basis,"
employers now are crying for workers, and one (1) employer from the visitor industry,
one (1) employer from the health care industry, and one (1) employer from the retail
industry have all told me, "I cannot get employees on weekends because the bus does
not go long enough or frequently enough." This is an urgent need that we have to
hear. It is a need of people who do not have a lot of the resources, the people that we
say we are wanting to protect and serve, and we are not doing that for them. We
could have put in the budget honoring the Administration's desire to do the efficiency
study, which was supposed to be done by now, but they said they need to the end of
the year. It is only half the fiscal year. We could put in four hundred twenty-five
thousand dollars ($425,000) of the twelve million five hundred thousand
dollars ($12,500,000) to tell the Administration that is a top priority for us, and we
did not do that. I think that is a really terrible neglect of working class people, who
need this service. I am honoring the County Attorney opinion that we cannot, which
is so ironic that we are approving the budget, but we cannot make amendments to it.
But I am honoring that and as soon as the new budget comes into place, I will
introduce an amendment to provide for weekend service in the second half of the next
fiscal year because I think we owe it to the public. They are our friends, they are the
kupuna, and this excise tax taxes everyone. We need to give them back something
that they need. It is going to help the economy, the workers, and the employers. I
really feel like we need to address that.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? No more? Okay. I
will be very brief. Obviously, I would like to thank Budget & Finance Committee
Chair Kaneshiro. I remember when he first got on the Council and I gave him the
nice news that he was going to be the Budget & Finance Committee Chair and he got
pale. He got scared and nervous. But we knew that he was cut out for the job and
has done a great job. It was a great budget session. Of course, to the staff. Again,
we keep saying it over and over and over, we have the best staff around. Through the
budget session, these people worked extremely hard and are so efficient. To the
Administration, I remember a time where it would take a long time to get from the
Administration. Over the last several years, many years, the responses to our
questions sometimes, in fact, many times, come on the same day that the request was
sent over. Of course to the public, who contributed via E-mails, public testimony, and
seeing us in the public played a key role in a lot of the things that we into the budget
as well as trying to keep the budget as disciplined as possible. Of course, my
colleagues on the Council, we are never going to agree on everything. But I think this
COUNCIL MEETING 74 MAY 30, 2018
budget went relatively smoothly. We did get some of the Council's prerogatives in
there, the Open Space Fund, Vadinha Stadium bathrooms, and Kalena Park. I look
at Kalena Park as being very special because that was brought to us by our keiki, the
kids who spent the time to go out and do their assessment of the park and came back
with recommendations. I am so happy and proud that we are able to provide them
some funds so they can move forward on their project. Malama Pono Health Services
is another one. It is very vital services that some would disagree that we should be
providing, but I think it is our duty to make sure that our people on Kaua`i are
protected. This is my fourteenth budget, it is my last one as a Councilmember, and
it is probably one of the smoothest ones. Again, not everyone gets all that they want.
But I think at the end of the day, the way our process works, it is the best process.
Everyone gets to really fight for their case and at the end of the day, we vote, and we
move on. Going forward, I think the model has been set. I remembered when Ken
Shimonishi started as the Director of Finance. I believe he really turned everything
around. He inverted the charts when we were spending more than what we were
bringing in. I will never forget the meeting that I with Ken in the conference room
with his PowerPoint when he was brand-new. He showed us the chart and said it
was his job or his goal was to invert the charts, and he did. Ken, I know a lot of that
is because of you and your input. I want to thank you and your staff for that. Budgets
are always difficult. I have been on the Council when we had a lot of money and able
to get all kinds of things. I have also been on the Council when we had no money.
We were sweating bullets on how we are going pay our bills. I think we got us to a
place now, the Administrations and Councils over the last few years, where it is
actually a manageable, meaningful, and efficient budget now. Yes, there is room for
improvement in everything that we do, but I think the course that this Council and
the Administration has taken will get us there very soon. With that, that is really all
I have to say. Are there any other comments? Okay, please.
Councilmember Kagawa: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I just want
to make a correction on the Fire vote, Budget & Finance Committee Chair Kaneshiro
did vote with me, so it was 5:2. It was 6:1 on the Police and 6:1 on Solid Waste that
I lost. The other thing is that one (1) frustration I got was that when we covered in
discussing with the Fire Department that we had the Accountant state that the
rank-for-rank accounts and some of these other accounts were holding excess moneys
that they would transfer over for regular overtime. I find it kind of disingenuous on
our part to hear that is customary when we are going through the budget and when
we discuss reducing those accounts, the response we get is, "Oh, these are already
bargained for. We cannot touch it." But if those accounts hold excess and they know
that it holds excess, then we are being provided with false information as well. How
is that fair? If they know that certain overtime accounts or what have you that are
not protected by bargaining has less money, but then they know that if we put in
these ones that are protected, then they cannot touch it because we will tell them that
is it already bargained for. I got a little frustrated when I heard that part. I am
pretty sure it happens in Police as well. This Council, I think, deserves an accurate
picture. What is the accurate picture of the budget without transfers? When that
happens, I think I will be a little bit more satisfied that this process works and this
process is fair. But if not, I would say that we need to change the way we do
budgeting. If they want to transfer from those accounts that they say are protected,
then they will have to come to Council move it. I hope we can take a look into those
COUNCIL MEETING 75 MAY 30, 2018
areas because it is fraudulent almost, to say that, "Oh, you cannot touch those
accounts," but we know there is more and we always transfer that there. I do not
know. That is my opinion. I do not know if I have agreement. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Is there anything
further? If not, the motion is to approve. Roll call.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2698, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Next item, please.
Bill No. 2699, Draft 1 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2018 TO JUNE 30, 2019 (Fiscal Year 2018-2019 CIP Budget):
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to approve Bill No. 2699, Draft 1, on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there 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 Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2699, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Seven (7) ayes.
COUNCIL MEETING 76 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item.
Bill No. 2704 — 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 (Operating Budget Transfer to the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center - $400,000.00): Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to
approve Bill No. 2704, on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the
Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to amend Bill No. 2704, as circulated, and as
shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1,
seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Did you want to
explain the amendment?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Yes, speaking of a balanced budget.
Council Chair Rapozo: Do you want me to call up Ken?
Councilmember Kaneshiro: Ken can do it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Are you prepared to explain? I will suspend
the rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Council Chair Rapozo: I know this is by request. I am assuming it
came over from the Administration.
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as not present.)
KEN M. SHIMONISHI, Director of Finance: Aloha Council Chair
Rapozo and Members of the Council, Ken Shimonishi, Director of Finance. This is a
bit awkward now after hearing all of the bright comments on the performance of the
budget, the budget hearing, and so on. Upon reviewing the Bill for the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center, we came upon the fact that the May 8th submittal of
the CIP Budget to the Council did, in fact, defund five million five hundred thousand
dollars ($5,500,000) from the Kapa'a Police Substation. That along with this
Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center Bill that was taking another one million five
hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000) would have, in fact, created an imbalance
effective July 1st. So what you see before you is an amendment to draw one million
five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000) instead of from the Police Substation
Bond Fund, from the reserves. We have a method of replenishing that reserve in
place. One was when the Administration initially submitted the Operating Budget,
there was a four hundred thousand dollar ($400,000) contribution towards the
reserve. Second, when the Council did the deliberations on the budget, that added
COUNCIL MEETING 77 MAY 30, 2018
another nine hundred seventy thousand dollars ($970,000) to the reserve, and then
come July 1st, we will submit a money bill to reduce our Section 8 housing allowance
after speaking with our Housing Director, of funds being available to go back towards
the reserve on that without any type of detrimental effects to the Section 8 program.
So we will, in fact, replenish that reserve that we are proposing to use in this
amendment.
Council Chair Rapozo: Got it. Are there any other questions for Ken?
Thank you, Ken. I will call the meeting back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded
as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: We are on the amendment. Are there any
questions or discussion?
The motion to amend Bill No. 2704, as circulated, and as in the Floor
Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 1 was then put, and
unanimously carried (Pursuant to Rule No. 5(b) of the Rules of the Council of
the County of Kauai, Councilmember Kawakami was noted as silent (not
present), but shall be recorded as an affirmative for the motion).
(Councilmember Kawakami was noted as present.)
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. Back to the main motion. Is
there any further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Yes. In Committee, I voted "no" and I will be
voting "no" again. I voted for the amendment because we needed to balance the
budget. I would like my comments from the Committee Meeting to be noted in these
transcripts so I do not have to repeat my speech (See Committee Report
CR-BF 2018-22).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. That is noted. Are
there any other comments? Seeing none, the motion is to approve as amended. Roll
call.
The moved to approve Bill No. 2704, as amended to Bill No. 2704, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Yukimura TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Six (6) ayes.
COUNCIL MEETING 78 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Bill No. 2705 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B-2017-822, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL 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
BOND FUND AND GENERAL FUND-CIP (CIP Budget Transfer to the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center - $1,900,000.00): Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to
approve Bill No. 2705, on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the
Mayor for his approval, seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Councilmember Kaneshiro moved to amend Bill No. 2705, as circulated, and as
shown in the Floor Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2,
seconded by Councilmember Brun.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. This is the companion Bill. Is
there any discussion on the amendment?
The motion to amend Bill No. 2705, as circulated, and as in the Floor
Amendment, which is attached hereto as Attachment 2 was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion is carried. Back to the main motion.
Is there any further discussion? Councilmember Yukimura.
Councilmember Yukimura: Again, I just want to say I will be voting "no"
for the reasons stated in Committee, and I would like those remarks to be referred to
and incorporated in the record here (See Committee Report CR-BF 2018-23).
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you very much. Is there any other
discussion? Seeing none, the motion is to approve as amended. Roll call.
The moved to approve Bill No. 2705, as amended to Bill No. 2705, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Rapozo TOTAL— 6,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Yukimura TOTAL— 1,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Six (6) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item.
Bill No. 2706 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 11,
CHAPTER 5A, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY TAX (Automatic Fire Suppression System Exemption):
COUNCIL MEETING 79 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Kawakami moved to approve Bill No. 2706, on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion? Is there any public
testimony?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Councilmember Kagawa.
Councilmember Kagawa: I want to thank Councilmember Kawakami
for the Bill. I realize that the Marco Polo fire just made us think about how important
fire suppression systems and fire sprinklers are in the house. I oppose it because I
do not want to see this trend of the trying to give exemptions for every good purpose
because I can think of a lot of good purposes out there that I could add to give an
exemption. It is in the paying for the system. It is just a small incentive. But when
I look at the forty thousand dollar ($40,000) exemption, so if you are in the three (3)
or five (5) tax rate, then you are talking about hundred twenty dollars ($120) a year
of break in taxes on your five hundred thousand dollar ($500,000) house on a one
thousand five hundred dollar ($1,500) bill. So now, your bill is one thousand four
hundred dollars ($1,400) or whatever. I am thinking, is that incentive enough for one
to say, "I am going a hire the plumber and put in those pipes all over my house"? I
am just thinking about the cost of all that work and then the dry wall and painting
that is going to have to take place after to make it look nice. I am just thinking that
I do not really see this being an incentive for the middle-class and the poor. To be
honest, I do not think they are going to do it. I do not think they are going to spend
fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) or whatever was the estimate was, even if it was
ten thousand dollars ($10,000). Because I do not see it, that is why I do not want to
break that habit of going into giving breaks for something that we want to see for
safety. For a good purpose, I do not want to see us dive into real property tax breaks
because where is it going to end? We are setting a trend. Then, if it works out the
way I see it where the middle-class and the poor are not going to be incentivized, then
who is going to be incentivized? Is it going to be for the rich? Why give a break to
the rich? They can already do it if they want to protect their home. It is not only
protecting the home from the fire. You are protecting the items. Who has more
important items, the poor or the rich? The rich, right? They have all of the paintings,
Barry Bonds baseball bats, and all of that. The middle-class and the poor cannot buy
those kinds of things. As I think about the whole picture, I see those things in my
dreams. I just thought about it long and hard, and I said, "The purpose is good, but
I do not know if we want to go down this road of giving a break for a good purpose
because I do not see the middle-class taking advantage of it at the end of the day."
That is who I look out for. Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion?
Councilmember Kaneshiro.
COUNCIL MEETING 80 MAY 30, 2018
Councilmember Kaneshiro: I will be supporting this. Again, it is not
intended to cover the cost of a fire suppression system. It is an option. It is not
mandatory. I look at it similar to a safe room. Not everyone can afford to build a safe
room in their house, but we do offer a tax break for safe rooms. I see this as very
similar thing. It is a tax break for something that should make your house safer in
case of an emergency, and so I will be supporting it.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? Councilmember
Chock.
Councilmember Chock: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I will be
supporting this as well, and I want to thank the introducers. I think bottom-line is
it gives us another avenue for putting a safety measure in. I also think while yes, it
might not be getting into the hands of the households that we absolutely want to see
it there, but eventually, it can over time if we start a process of creating that
opportunity. I will support this. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Anyone else? Councilmember Kawakami.
Councilmember Kawakami: Thank you, Council Chair Rapozo. I want to
be very clear, this measure has nothing to do with the Marco Polo fires. This initiative
of deploying fire suppression systems has been on my radar since my time at the
Legislature. In fact, it started with my time being here on the Council when there
was a move to mandate fire suppression systems that was pushed back on because of
the cost of the housing and additional costs that a fire suppression would have had
on the working class men and women that are trying to build their dream homes. It
became apparent that at the Legislature when they restricted Counties from
mandating fire suppression systems, it became very clear there was a pushback.
There are two (2) things do to and get people to do the right thing, and I believe these
fire suppression systems are proven to work. They are not designed to save property,
artifacts, art, or clothing. They are designed to save lives. This is what it comes down
to, public safety. We do offer incentives on a number of items that we want to see
people take advantage of. Take the hurricane safe room, for example. We have a
lack of emergency shelters if we get hit by a massive hurricane. We are trying to
encourage people that when they build, that they incorporate some of these safety
features into the construction, and it is not just the rich. As we increase density, as
we bring on additional rental units and ADUs to house local people, and as we have
an aging population with old people that may have mobility problems, you might have
a child or a family member with a disability. I have a family member with a disability
that almost perished in an apartment fire. This is the intent. It is not to give the
rich people a free pass. It has nothing to do with that. If it appears that way, then
most tax credits, yes, they benefit people with more money. When we introduced,
well we did not introduce it, but when we had the photovoltaic (PV) tax credit, that
subsidizes rich people, but there are working class people that are deciding to put PV
on their roofs. This gives people a choice and if you take a look at the hurricane safe
room, it is not just rich people that are taking a look at it. The whole purpose of this
measure was not to cover of the cost. It was to give the architects and builders a
talking point, like I said before with the hurricane safe room, that here is a possible
exemption that you may want to consider to facilitate the discussion on whether or
COUNCIL MEETING 81 MAY 30, 2018
not they want to have these systems. It does not force anyone to get one and it just
provides a small opportunity for that discussion to be had. Thank you, Council Chair
Rapozo.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Anyone else? I will just say that
I think this incentive really should come from the State. I think it was very noble or
honorable for the Legislature to consider an income tax exemption or an incentive in
income tax because that is a personal choice that benefits that homeowner versus the
community at-large. I know you could say it does because it provides public safety
and so forth. But I kind of agree with Councilmember Kagawa in the sense that not
so much the rich people, but we are using taxpayer funds to benefit that homeowner
because we want to see everyone get these suppression devices in their homes, and
that is a good thing. But I believe that should come from the real property tax
revenue. That should come from the State and the income tax. Do it as an income
tax incentive versus a real property tax incentive. That is just my opinion. Anyway,
is there any further discussion? The motion is to approve. Roll call.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2706, 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 TOTAL— 5,
AGAINST APPROVAL: Kagawa, Rapozo TOTAL— 2,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL—0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Five (5) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Next item, please.
Bill No. 2707 — 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 PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES
PRESERVATION FUND (Operating Budget Transfer - Kekaha Coastal Property
Acquisition - $599,000.00): Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve Bill No. 2707,
on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval,
seconded by Councilmember Kaneshiro.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there 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 82 MAY 30, 2018
Council Chair Rapozo: Seeing none, roll call.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2707, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: Next item, please.
Bill No. 2708 — A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B-2017-822, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL 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
PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION
FUND — CIP (CIP Budget Transfer - Kekaha Coastal Property Acquisition -
$599,000.00): Councilmember Yukimura moved to approve Bill No. 2708, on second and
final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Councilmember Kagawa.
Council Chair Rapozo: Thank you. Is there any discussion?
Councilmember Kagawa
Councilmember Kagawa: I just want to thank the Public Access, Open
Space, Natural Resources Preservation Fund Commission (Open Space Commission)
and the Planning Department for acquiring this property. We talked about it in
Committee that the next parcel does not have a cemetery on it, and I think the only
way you can justify going after that next one is if we get this one because the three (3)
will all be connected. I am hoping that the Open Space Commission will follow
through, not next year, but hopefully going forward in the future, that we can look at
the next piece and really have a nice, big piece that has a nice cemetery as well in
there. Thank you.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any other discussion? Seeing none,
the motion is to approve. Roll call.
The motion to approve Bill No. 2708, 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, Kagawa, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Yukimura, Rapozo TOTAL— 7,
AGAINST APPROVAL: None TOTAL— 0,
COUNCIL MEETING 83 MAY 30, 2018
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL— 0.
Mr. Sato: Seven (7) ayes.
Council Chair Rapozo: We have an Executive Session scheduled
today. The Office of the County Attorney has requested another deferral. They are
working on some recent developments that they will be prepared to discuss in two (2)
weeks. Correct? Okay. You can go ahead and read it.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
ES-945 Pursuant to Hawai`i Revised Statutes (HRS) Sections 92-4 and
92-5(a)(4), and Kaua`i County Charter Section 3.07(E), the Office of the County
Attorney requests an Executive Session with the Council, to provide the Council with
an additional briefing update and request for authority to settle the case of Klaus H.
Burmeister, et al. v. County of Kaua`i, CV 16-00402 LEK-KJM (United States 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.
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there anyone in the audience wishing to
testify?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended to take public testimony.
There being no one present to provide testimony, the meeting was called back
to order, and proceeded as follows:
Council Chair Rapozo: Is there any discussion before I entertain the
motion to defer?
Councilmember Yukimura moved to defer ES-945 in open session, seconded by
Councilmember Kagawa, and was unanimously carried.
Council Chair Rapozo: Motion carried. That ends the business of the
day. Thank you very much.
ADJOURNMENT.
There being no further business, the Council Meeting adjourned at 2:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
#41
SCOTT K. ATO
Deputy County Clerk
:aa
Attachment 1
(May 30, 2018)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2704, 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 (Operating Budget Transfer to the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center - $400,000.00)
Introduced by: ARRYL KANESHIRO (By Request)
Amend Bill No. 2704 in its entirety to read as follows:
"[SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 19.07B and 19.10A of the
Charter of the County of Kaua`i, as amended, Ordinance No. B-2017-821, as amended,
relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, for the
Fiscal Year July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, be hereby amended as follows:
The sum of $400,000.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the General
Fund from the following account:
Equity / Fund Balance — Unassigned [$400,000.00]
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
Transfer Out to General Fund — CIP $400,000.00
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.]
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 19.07B and 19.10A of the
Charter of the County of Kauai, as amended, Ordinance No. B-2017-821, as amended,
relating to the Operating Budget of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, for the
Fiscal Year July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, be hereby amended as follows:
The sum of $1,900,000.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the General
Fund from the following account:
Equity / Fund Balance — Unassigned [$1,900,000.00]
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
Transfer Out to General Fund — CIP $1,900,000.00
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.
Brackets around dollar amounts designated as negative amounts)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2018\05-30-2018 Bill No. 2704 CNT:aa
1
Attachment 2
(May 30, 2018)
FLOOR AMENDMENT
Bill No. 2705, A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B-2017-822, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL 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
BOND FUND AND GENERAL FUND-CIP (CIP Budget Transfer to the Adolescent
Treatment & Healing Center - $1,900,000.00)
Introduced by: ARRYL KANESHIRO (By Request)
Amend Bill No. 2705 in its entirety to read as follows:
"[SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 19.07B and Sec. 19.10A of the
Charter of the County of Kaua`i, as amended, Ordinance No. B-2017-822, as amended,
relating to the Capital Budget of the County of Kauai, State of Hawai`i, for the Fiscal
Year July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, be hereby amended as follows:
1. The sum of $1,500,000.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the
Bond Fund from the following account:
Kapa'a Police Sub-Station [$1,500,000.00]
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center $1,500,000.00
2. The sum of $1,500,000.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the
General Fund-CIP from the following account:
Transfer In From General Fund [$400,000.00]
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center $400,000.00
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval.]
SECTION 1. That pursuant to Sections 19.07B and Sec. 19.10A of the
Charter of the County of Kauai, as amended, Ordinance No. B-2017-822, as amended,
relating to the Capital Budget of the County of Kaua`i, State of Hawai`i, for the Fiscal
Year July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018, be hereby amended as follows:
The sum of $1,900,000.00 by revising the amounts estimated in the General
Fund-CIP from the following account:
Transfer In From General Fund [$1,900,000.001
Be and is hereby appropriated for the following purpose:
Adolescent Treatment & Healing Center $1,900,000.00
1
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect upon its approval."
(Material to be deleted is bracketed. New material to be added is underscored.
Brackets around dollar amounts designated as negative amounts.)
V:\AMENDMENTS\2018\05-30-2018 Bill No. 2705 CNT:aa
2