Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-20-2009A Council Meeting Minutes COUNCIL MEETING May 20, 2009 The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai was called to order by the Council Chair at the Council Chambers, Historic County Building, 4396 Rice Street, Room 201, Lihu`e, Kauai, on Wednesday, May 20, 2009 at 9:50 a.m., after which the following members answered the call of the roll: Honorable Tim Bynum Honorable Dickie Chang Honorable Jay Furfaro Honorable Daryl W. Kaneshiro Honorable Lani T. Kawahara Honorable Derek S.K. Kawakami Honorable Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Council Chair APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mr. Furfaro moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council: Special Council Meeting of April 29, 2009 Council Meeting of May 6, 2009 Public Hearing of May 6, 2009 re: Bill No. 2310, Bill No. 2311, and Resolution No. 2009-32 Special Council Meeting of May 13, 2009 Mr. Furfaro moved for approval of the minutes as circulated, seconded by Mr. Chang, and unanimously carried. COMMUNICATIONS: Chair Asing: Next item please? PETER N~?]:~AM-URA, COUNTY CLERK: Mr. Chair, at this time on page 3 of the Council's agenda if we could... a communication for approval C 2009-186. C 2009-186 Communication (04/30/2009) from the Fire Chief, requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, and expend $104,800 or 80% from the Assistance to Fire Fighters Grant (AFG) to purchase a Combination Fire Safety/Sprinkler House Trailer and the Kauai Fire Department will be responsible for 20% or $26,200 for a total of $131,000 which include tax and shipping: Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2009-186, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: At this time Mr. Chair, if we could go to page 4 of the Council's agenda for communication C 2009-163. C 2009-163 Communication (04/22/2009) from Councilmember Tim Bynum and Councilmember Lani T. Kawahara, requesting the Administration to be present to give an update regarding the erosion and water safety issues at Po`ipu Beach: Chair Asing: With that, I would like to suspend the rules. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. JIM O'CONNELL, U.H. SEA GRANT PROGRAM ON KAUAI: Good morning Councilmembers. Chair Asing: Good morning. Ms. Kawahara: Good morning. Chair Asing: Go ahead. For the record... Mr. O'Connell: My name is Jim O'Connell. I am coastal geologist from the University of Hawai`i's Sea Grant Program and I am here primarily at the good graces of the County because that is primarily where my funding comes from. I am here to assist the County in all coastal related matters. Chair Asing: I understand that you are going to do a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. O'Connell: Yes, this morning, I have a PowerPoint presentation. I was asked primarily just to do an overview of the County's proposal to do some restoration down in the Po`ipu Beach Park area. I am here to basically to summarize what that project is all about. Several members of the Administration should be here any moment to answer questions that... about the logistics in terms of funding and timing. I am going to primarily talk about the technical aspects, but that is the primary reason I am here is to provide technical information and technical assistance to help design and implement and monitor shoreline projects. So I will primarily be focusing on the technical aspects of the Po`ipu Beach Restoration Project. Chair Asing: Good. Thank you. Mr. O'Connell: So I will do my PowerPoint presentation. COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Okay, go ahead. Let me... Councilmembers, you want to step aside? Mr. Furfaro: I have a question first. Chair Asing: Go ahead. Mr. Furfaro: Jim, could you tell me, is there... more specifically what portion of your presentation will be with loss prevention and water safety. Mr. O'Connell: I am primarily going to talk about the... primarily it is sea and restoration project, but folded into that project is the... we will also be addressing one of the primary public safety issues in terms of swimmer safety in the Po`ipu and Wai`ohai area. They are directly linked which I will show you in just a moment. Mr. Furfaro: And you are aware that the I~aua`i Ad Hoch Committee on Water Safety has many times promoted the fact that there should be contributions from the hotels in the Po`ipu area for the staffing of additional lifeguards and water safety. Are you aware of that (Monty Downs group)? Mr. O'Connell: I did attend the water safety conference. I believe it was about two (2) months ago and that was brought up at that conference. You know, there are very few... I am a former lifeguard myself, but there are very few although some of the prettiest beaches that do have lifeguards and water safety personnel there, but there are a lot of beaches that don't. And I would have to agree with you that a lot of the resort areas do have some of the most densely populated beaches in terms of use, so I think a topic of great interest. Mr. Furfaro: I will concur with you on that and I myself am a water safety instructor or was when I was a little thinner and had more hair for the City & County of Honolulu. But we did give a model to the Hotel Association with Hapuna Beach and the Hapuna Prince Hotel who actually have responsibilities with the hotel guest as well as the public access beach at Hapuna. Is that going to be any part of your presentation? Mr. O'Connell: No. I believe the Fire Chief was invited to talk about... primarily about water safety itself. I am primarily... I am a coastal geologist by training, so I am primarily going to be sticking to that. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you for clarifying the water safety portion of what is on the agenda. Thank you and I will move now. Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, Jim? COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - May 20, 2009 Mr. O'Connell: Again, I want to thank the County Council and the County of Kauai for providing the funding to the Sea Grant Program at the University to... that allows my presence here to help and participate and assist the County in all... you know, as I said, coastal related matters primarily dealing with coastal processes and coastal geology, shoreline change, and storm mitigation matters, and so forth. I am primarily here to talk about the Po`ipu Beach Park area and two (2) issues that are actually directly related which I hope I will make that point in my PowerPoint presentation. One is the erosion of the Po`ipiz Beach Park area and in that Po`ipu Beach general area and also directly relating to that is the water safety issues. There has been a number of rescues down in the Po`ipu Park area and to the west as well, and that is directly related to the loss of sand... the erosion as the result of the hurricanes that we had particularly in 1990 and a chronic erosion as well. So I am going to link the two (2) of those... the coastal erosion and water safety in a proposal that the County now is moving forward... it is primarily moving forward through the efforts of the County Parks Department who is spearheading the beach restoration project down this area. So I am going to address two (2) issues. One is the erosion of the Po`ipiz Beach area, but particularly we are going to focus primarily on the Po`ipiz Beach Park. The County park itself in terms of erosion... both chronic erosion, the annual erosion that we are seeing and maps since the early 1900's and also the swimmer safety issue primarily the loss of that little sand spit connecting Po`ipu Beach Park with Nukomoi Point. Just to familiarize yourselves and the audience just to get an overview of the area here. This is 2006 aerial photograph above the Po`ipu Beach area. It is either the Po`ipu Beach Park, the County park is right here, we move over to the Wai`ohai, Koa Kia, the Kiahuna, and the Sheraton, so that whole area there is an area that we are going to address. I wanted to introduce a geologic term that now is gaining great focus around the country in terms of managing shoreline areas and that term that I wanted to introduce is what is called the littoral cell. I am going to show you an example of that littoral cell in a minute and that is one of the reasons why I showed you this whole area here starting with the Po`ipu Beach Park area moving over to the Sheraton itself. In terms of addressing the first issue which is coastal erosion, the University of Hawaii has just recently completed a shoreline change mapping project for the entire island of Kauai. Through the efforts of Dr. Chip Fletcher at the School of Ocean and Environmental Technology, he now has... he will be coming actually in June to meet with the Planning Commission to present this shoreline change data. But as you can see and I am going to show you examples of this in just a minute. Sorry about that. What Dr. Fletcher has done with his staff over there is he has mapped the entire shoreline of Kauai in terms of what has happened in terms of shoreline change primarily mapping erosion since the mid 1920's. These data are now on his website although he is calling it still draft data although the analysis is done until it is accepted by the County because the County paid the (inaudible) of the funding to do the shoreline change mapping. But if you go on the website, the University of Hawai`i's website to the School of Ocean and Environmental Technology, what you will find is... if you just did a search for that and searched on coastal erosion maps, you will find this diagram here. Now on the , COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - May 20, 2009 website, if you click on anyone of these boxes here, what will come up is a map of that area showing you what the shoreline has done since the early 1900's whether it is eroded, whether it is accreted, whether it is moved back and forth, but these data are now available on the website. I had mentioned the term littoral cell. I want to introduce this term here because this is something that all the States in the country now are managing the shoreline. A littoral cell is the equivalent to a watershed. It is basically the end points within in which sand moves back and forth and on and off shore. So if you can identify the end point of a littoral cell, you've got a management unit. As I mentioned, very similar to a watershed unit. Most of Kaua`i's beaches are little pocket beaches... Wailua, Kealia, Donkey Beach, the area down on Po`ipu which I will show you in just a minute, but we can identify the end points with sand is moving back and forth and on and off shore. If some... if a homeowner or a County wanted to do an action within one section of the cell, that is going to have a direct impact adverse or positive to another area in that cell. So what you want to do is you want to manage the shoreline based on the in limits of these littoral cells because one action in its cell will have a reaction somewhere else in that cell. So it is important to know what your neighbors and what is happening down drift in these littoral cells. So if we do go to the area of interest today on the southshore, we can identify a littoral cell here which includes the Po`ipu Beach Park area all the way over to the Sheraton and you can see that Mahawena Point is one end of the cell here and I am not sure if I am going to pronounce this correctly, but the Kamilo Point on the other end here, but this is a littoral... this could be identified as a littoral cell. You can see all the small little pocket beaches... sandy pocket beaches in there and you can see the sand, the light colored offshore. These are little sand pockets offshore. So what happens in one area of the littoral cell could very well have a direct relationship to any of those on the beach within that cell. So it is important to look at the entire cell when you are doing one project which in this particular point, we are looking at the Po`ipu Beach Park area. This is an example of the shoreline change map for the Po`ipu area on the southshore that we will find on the University of Hawai`i's website. This is a shoreline change map identifying... (inaudible) all the ax'ea from the Po`ipu Beach Park area all the way over to the Sheraton here. So I am going to show you a close up of this in a minute and show you exactly what these diagrams are depicting, but you can see offshore of anyone of these shoreline change maps around the island. What you will see is a histogram here. This histogram shows whether it is eroding which would be the color red or priding which would be the color blue. So these shorelines go back to... as I said, 1920's all the way up to 2007, so this tells us what the shoreline has been doing. Now this is basically just the... this is a subsection of the sandy beaches within that littoral cell within the Po`ipu Beach area and you can see starting over here, we have the Po`ipu Beach Park area. Since 1927 and there is about... I believe there are 11 shorelines that will map between 1927 and 2007, so there is actually... I believe there are 11 shorelines that will actually show us where the shoreline was in 1927, where it was in 1940, where it was in 1950, 1978, 1990, COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - Ma 20, 2009 Y and the early 2000. So it shows us where that shoreline is and then what the scientist do is they will draw a line, a transept perpendicular to all the shorelines and calculate what the shoreline has been doing in those short term increments, and then give us a long term average erosion rate for the entire timeframe. So, for example, in the Po`ipu Beach Park area, since 1927 looking at those 11 shorelines, the Po`ipu Beach Park area has been eroding at approximately one (1) foot per year. Now we know that shorelines don't erode at one (1} foot per year. They don't erode at an average rate. They will fluctuate seasonally which I have seen significant changes seasonally. If we have a storm, there will be a large pulse of erosion, but what we do for geologist, for the management purposes, is to look at what is happening on an annual rate. For example, the new County ordinance that was passed last year is based on shoreline change rates particularly erosion. What we've got to do is average what the erosion rate is over that entire timeframe and then calculate where the shoreline will be 20 years from now, 30 years from now, 50 years from now based on that long term average. So the Po`ipu Beach Park area has been eroding at approximately one (1) foot per year. If we go over to the next sub-cell within that major littoral cell, we see that in front of the Wai`ohai... we've got an erosion rate since 1927 of about .3... it is actually between .3 and .5 feet per year. Moving over to the Kiahuna area here and the Sheraton, again, we've got an erosion rate of approximately one (1) foot per year and that is what this histogram reflect here. This line here is a -1 erosion rate here, so you can look at any area around the island to determine what has been happening with the shoreline since that timeframe. We are primarily interested, at the present time, in the Po`ipu Beach Park area. So we focus in just on this area here, again, the Po`ipu Beach Park area which is this area here. Here is Nukomoi Point and it has been eroding about one (1) foot per year and a slightly less erosion rate over here at the Wai`ohai area. There are geological reasons why one is eroding faster than the other. I don't have time to get into that at the present time, but we will, in a report, as we go through the planning for the project for the Po`ipu Beach Park restoration. So we are talking about two (2) types of erosion. One is the chronic erosion, that annual erosion that is happening due to waves and currents, but specifically and importantly for these areas here is storm damage. Now Hurricane Iniki overtopped the entire beach. The sand made it all the way to the road and to the other side of the road, so the damage... the alterations to the beach that are being caused by these hurricanes and these periodic storms are very important. Now you notice that I didn't... I hesitated to say the word damage to the beach because when you get a storm, it is not damaging a beach, it is a natural process. What the beach is trying to do is the beach is trying to move landward as sea level rises, the beach needs to move landward. If you don't let the beach move landward... for example, putting a seawall up or a revetment, the beach will eventually narrow and pinch out and eventually as you have seen around the island, I think in front of a lot of the revetments and the seawalls that you have lost the dry beach. That is because that beach is eroding. It is eroding, but it is trying to move landward to maintain its width. If you stop its migration landward, you will eventually eliminate the dry COU1~iCIL MEBTING - 7 - May 20, 2009 beach and that is one of the issues we need to deal with when we are talking about seawall and revetment, and bulkhead construction. So one of the prime issues here is because this beach is eroding, we have old fill that was put in several decades ago, we have a lot of boulders exposed on the beach, and it doesn't appear as if it is a... as great an experience using this beach as it is for other beaches where you just have sand, and you don't have the fill and rocks exposed. Moving further down,. I believe this was Kiahuna... I think I made a mistake and said Wai`ohai. Say that again? Mr. Bynum: Kiahuna. Mr. O'Connell: Kiahuna, excuse me, yes. It was Kiahuna. I made this mistake... these are photographs that were given to me courtesy of Tim Bynum here, but what we are talking about here is in Kiahuna, the shoreline erosion rate is about a foot per year or less, but this primarily being caused by storm. You can see in the year 2000, here is a boardwalk that was put in front of the I~iahuna. In the year 2000, you can see that the sand was healthy, it was up to the boardwalk, but we go to 2009, here is what has happened to the boardwalk. Again, the beach is eroding during storms, it is trying to migrate land, but it can't because we are trying to stop it in its present location. So as a result of (inaudible) annual erosion, you can see what has happened just in nine (9) years from the time that boardwalk was first installed, and this is what it looks like now. The boardwalk has since been removed because it was a public safety hazard, but, again, thank you Tim for providing these good demonstration projects about the short term storm erosion. These are two (2) more photographs again of a boardwalk... a perpendicular boardwalk to the beach in the I~iahuna area. Am I saying that right Tim? Mr. Bynum: Kiahuna. Mr. O'Connell: I~iahuna. Again, Tim provided these photographs to me as a good demonstration of what is happening in this particular area due to erosion, but you can see that the sand is at grade at this boardwalk here, and if you go to 2009, you can see that the sand has actually dropped anywhere from three (3) to four (4) feet. So we are losing a lot of sand in the area and making it a slightly less pleasant. experience for the beachgoers here. I wanted to address a little bit of swimmer safety as well because this is directly related to erosion of the beach. So we talked a little bit about erosion, I talked a little bit about swimmer safety now, and then I will talk about the efforts of the County primarily to the Parks Department and the County Council involvement on the restoration project itself. But in terms of swimmer safety, talking to the lifeguards down there and just watching... I have gone down there quite often to look at the conditions down here, but one of the primary reasons why there are so many rescues down here is, one, of course the beach just west of the park is very heavily used by both island folks and visitors as well. But because of the elimination of this sand .split that usually exist between the Po`ipu Beach Park area and i~Tukamoi Point, there was (inaudible) to COUNCIL MEETING - 8 - May 20, 2009 put there at one time. When that sand split disappeared as a result of Hurricane Iniki, there were very, very swift currents that now move through there. So as folks are coming to here, they are trying to get out to Nukomoi Point and there is a very, very strong current, and some of the swimmers are being swept off their feet, over into this area, and from talking to a couple of the lifeguards down there, there has been a significant increase in a number of rescues just to the west of the Po`ipu Beach Park area. This is an example from the air. The reason why these currents are being significantly increased here... this was in December 1990... just before Hurricane Iniki... you can see that here is the Po`ipu Beach Park area, here is Nukomoi Point... you can see the sand split here. As 75% of 80% of the year, we have the tradewinds coming from the west. When the tradewinds come from the west, we have a current that is being setup because the wind is creating waves and the waves are creating currents. So the current is primarily going from east to west traveling along the southside of Kauai, coming into this area, coming into the Po`ipu Beach area. So what we've got 75% to 80% of the time of the year, it is this current that is moving along here right into the Po`ipu Beach Park area. Now when there is a sand split connecting Po`ipu Beach Park with the Nukomoi Point, the current is significantly... the current strength is significantly reduced, but after the hurricane as you can see up here in 2006, that sand split connecting Nukomoi Point has disappeared. It has tried to come back, but there is not enough sand in the system, in my opinion, for the tombolo which we call a tombolo... that is the (inaudible) that connect the end. So we have this very, very swift current moving to the Po`ipu Beach Park area, people trying to walk out to Nukomoi Point and being swept off their feet, and they are going into this area again being rescued here. Again, the report from the lifeguards and the Fire Chief and the water safety folks could address this much better than I, but there are, I guess, a significant increase in the number of rescues just of the west. And this is just the ground photograph showing the phenomenon that I just explained. We've got this swift current moving through here right into the Po`ipu Beach park area, continuing down here, and here is where that sand split.., what we call geologist call a tombolo. It used to connect Nukomoi Point with the beach and that no longer exist, so that current is rapidly escaping from the Po`ipu Beach Park area to the west and catching swimmers by surprise. This is the area here. There has been some rocks that have appeared recently. I believe probably in an attempt to slow the current velocity, but there is still a very, very strong current. There are warning signs, they are warning swimmers that there is a strong current, but if you went down there on a Saturday or a sunny Sunday afternoon, you will find that people disregard these signs and they continue to want to go out there and get a nice view back to the beach itself. So the goal of the safety project, basically, and again, I am going to relate this right to the sand replenishment project. The goal is basically to try to reduce the volume and the strength of that current, so that we can make... have the swimmers be a little bit more safer and reduce the number of rescues in that area. But, again, I COUNCIL MEETING - 9 - May 20, 2009 think the Fire Chief and water safety personnel can answer those questions much better than I. So when you have an erosive situation here crossing a less pleasant experience on the beach... we've had a water safety issue as a result of the loss of the sand, the erosion... we have a number of alternatives, we can do nothing, and again, we need to decide which one to do, but do nothing would continue to have an unpleasant experience on the beach as well as the safety. (Inaudible) with the seawall which is generally a reaction to a homeowner who has a building' that they want to protect. These two (2) are what we are really looking at here in terms of the restoration of the Po`ipu Beach Park area. We can either relocate, meaning that we could relocate the beach a little bit farther landward, and create a wider dry beach which would be a more pleasant experience for the beachgoers, but that would not alleviate the situation in the near shore area or on the beach face itself. We have this fill and we have the rocks exposed. The preferred alternative that we are looking at now is to add sand to the beach... what we call beach nourishment. So what we are looking at here is if we can add sand to the Po`ipu Beach area, compatible beach sand, we have awin/win situation. We can probably solve both problems because if we are going to put a significant volume of sand in the Po`ipu Beach Park area, in order to retain that sand and make it cost effective, we are going to have to slow the current velocity here, so that the sand that is placed on the beach isn't immediately lost in the next storm or the next heavy wind or heavy wave episode. We are going to need to not necessarily close that off, but to partially close it off, close the currents down, so we can maintain the sand that the County is proposing to put on the beach. At the same time, if we can reduce the current velocity, we are going to alleviate or at least reduce the swimmer safety issue as well. So the proposal right now before the County and, again, and this is being spearheaded by the Parks Department, and I am working with Lenny Rapozo and Dave Caylor, and Mel Nishihara, and others at the Parks Department who are moving forward on this project now. But what they are looking at now is to address it in three (3) phases. Phase 1 would be a sand nourishment project... adding sand to the Po`ipu Beach Park area in the volume of slightly less than 500 cubic yards... the reason we are looking at less than 500 cubic yards is, two (2)... one (1)... we can do it relatively quickly so to speak in terms of adding large volumes and 2, the DLNR has a small scale beach nourishment process. If you were to add less than 500 cubic yards of sand, we can expedite the timeframe for permitting through the State and you get the sand hopefully on the beach fairly quickly. Phase II, we are looking at adding approximately 6,000 cubic yards of sand, and then phase III, we are looking at a long term project. Sand on the island is a commodity. There is not a lot sand... beach compatible sand readily available, so Phase III which I will talk about in a minute is looking for sand in the near shore area just on the other side of the reef. And I will say in my work along the eastern seaward of the United States, a cubic yard of sand generally cost in the vicinity of eight {8) to ten (10) maybe $12 a cubic yard. I come to the island here and sand is COUNCIL MEETING - 10 - Ma 20, 2009 Y anywhere between $150 and $200 a cubic yard, so sand is gold on this island. Sand is gold and we should really look for its highest and best use. In terms of cost, it is an incredible difference between the mainland and on the islands here. So, again, we are looking at Phase I. Phase I is just under 500 cubic yards of sand, so we can go to the small scale beach nourishment permit process hopefully relatively quickly. We have also got permits that are going to need to be obtained from the Planning Department as well, but Phase I, we are looking at about 499 shall we say cubic yards, and then 6,000 cubic yards for Phase II. The sand is readily available right now. The sand is available from the... you can help me out on this word as well... the Kawaiele Wildbird Sanctuary which was created by the DLNR just several years ago. The excavated sand... this is old (inaudible) dune beach sand that was excavated to create a wildlife or a wildbird sanctuary. Well, that sand now was given to the County and it is being stored at the Kekaha Landfill, so what we have worked out or what the Parks Department and the Administration has worked out is to be able to obtain approximately 6,500 cubic yards of that sand from this bird sanctuary to be used for beach and recreational purposes. So what we are doing is Phase I and Phase II. Phase I is basically we just want to rebuild the dune and you will see it in the subsequent picture, but it was in the other pictures as well. There is a scarp of about two (2) to three (3) feet in the dune in front of the lifeguard stand at Po`ipu Beach. So what we want to do first is with this small amount of material... this 500 cubic yards of material is basically build a small mountain of sand, a small dune, to cover over that scarp. The scarp is a hazard to people who are trying to get to the water, so we just want to basically do a nourishment project for Phase I. Phase II will be the larger project where we will actually extend the beach out slightly, and create a slightly wider dry sand beach and cover some of the fill and some of the works that are presently on the beach itself. Yes, a scarp... this is Phase I... here is the scarp here. This is where we want to build the dune. This was done in 2005 and I will show you a picture of that, and that was about 500 cubic yards as well in 2005. But here is what we are trying to do. What we want to do is we want to cover... build a dune right in this area here... the County Parks Department wants to build the dune right here, cover up this scarp, so that people don't have to jump down or walk down here, take a chance of falling, plus when we have that dune there, people walking over the dune and small waves will eventually take that sand and actually put it in the beach, but all the sand is going to be placed mauka of the high waterline. As long as you can stay above the high waterline, we won't have the permits with the Army Corp of Engineers, we ,more than likely won't have to go to the State Department of Health as well, as long as we are staying above the high waterline, and that is the plan. Here is what the project looked like in 2009. There was approximately 500 cubic yards of sand that was placed in 2005 as well as an experiment to see how it worked. You can see that as folks walk over that and small waves lap up here, you can see even here... that was 2005 and about eight (8) months later, you can see COUNCIL MEETING - 11 - May 20, 2009 that there was a scarp that had reformed as a result of waves, but you can see that the sand was actually migrating onto the beach itself covering over the fill, covering over the rocks, and making it a much more pleasant experience for the beachgoers. Just another picture of what it looks like now and hopefiilly what it looked like in 2005, and hopefully what it will look like within the next year, but the Parks Department can talk a little bit more about the timeframe itself. That is what we basically want to do is cover that over. In Phase II, we want to add approximately 6,000 cubic yards of sand. Again, we have about 6,500 cubic yards of sand from the Kekaha... being stored at the Kekaha Landfill. Phase II is going to be a lot more expensive and is going to take a much longer timeframe in terms of permitting. More than likely, there will be an environment assessment, we will have to go to the Army Corps of Engineers, as well as the Department of Health because some of the sand, more than likely, will be placed seaward makai of the high waterline in that larger project, but that will create a beautiful wide sandy beach for beach goers itself. Now there are two (2) ways we could do that. Again, we could just put the sand on the beach itself, and, again, maybe supplement the dune material that may have eroded away from Phase I. We would be placing the sand on the beach and covering over some of these rocks that you see here, some of the fill over here, and making it a much more pleasant experience. We could also extend the dry beach itself a little bit into the grassy area to make it a wider area, a wider plan form for folks to spread out and enjoy the beach a little bit more. Phase III, as I mentioned, sand... there is not a lot of beach compatible sand readily available on the island... anywhere from $100 to $150 to $200 for a cubic yard of sand. It is incredible, so what we are going to do on Phase III is we are going to do a sand on the outside of the reef. A lot of the sand in the... here is the reef here. A lot of the sand here on the dry beach and then in the inter-tidal area here, and the sub-tidal area. During storms, that sand will move along the shore just like I had showed you. When the strong currents... when the long shore currents are moving along the shore, eventually, the sand will be pulled offshore during a storm due to large waves... particularly the shape of the wave will pull it offshore. When they pull it offshore, it ends up basically on the outside of the reef. So we believe that there are large sand deposits, beach compatible sand deposits on the makai side of the reef, so what we want to do in Phase III is try to search for beach compatible sand deposits, and do a long range study of some of the more important beaches on the island that may need sand in terms of tourism, tourism dollars, and the enjoyment of the island residents themselves. Basically, this has been done on the island of Maui and to a degree on Oahu as well, but they did do extensive studies on the eastern shore of Maui to find these sand deposits, and this is basically just a map showing what the results of a sand search study in the offshore area. These... the technicians and the scientists are using side scan (inaudible) profiles... it is a proven technology that can show you where the deeper sand deposits are, beach compatible sand deposits are, so this is COUNCIL MEETING - 12 - May 20, 2009 the sand deposits on the eastern shore of Maui, and that is precisely what we are going to try to do look for here on this other side of Kauai. You can also get the thickness of the sand (inaudible), so you can actually calculate a volume of sand that is available there, match it to a beach after we do some studies, and one of the reasons why I am here is to go around the island, study the beaches, determine what beaches are most important to the island in terms of what the County Council may think, what the Parks Department or DPW may think, but identify the important beaches and why they are important. (Inaudible) for these sand deposits and then determine what beaches you may want to supplement sand for, so that would be Phase III. In terms of where we are right now on the Phase I project, particularly the Parks Department has been working diligently in trying to move Phase I forward which is the 500 cubic yards of sand. We have already done the sand sampling which is required by the DLNR and the Planning Department... done the sand sampling both at Po`ipu Beach and at the Kekaha Landfill to determine the compatibility, to determine whether the sand grain size is relatively similar which... it needs to be relatively similar and preferably a little bit courser, but you can go a little bit finer as well because it is a mix of sandy beach. Both fine sediments, sand grains, and medium and course grain sands as well. We have already done the sampling and we have found out that there is a compatibility between the sand that is at the Kekaha Landfill and the beach itself. We have researched the Parks Department just with my assistant, but they are spearheading it again. We have done research on the past project history, what happened to 2005, how long did the sand last, did it work? At the present time, the next step, the important step is we need a survey, we need a topographic survey in order to get a certified shoreline from DLNR. We also need to go to the Planning Department to get an SMA minor permit to the DLNR for a small scale beach nourishment permit... whether there will be water quality monitoring, we are not exactly sure. We need to talk to the Department of Health, but as long as we keep it... the sand above high water in particularly above the spring high water. Chances are we may not have to do the water quality monitoring for Phase I, but we will definitely have to do it for Phase II. And the beach replenishing work itself... at the present time, I believe... and again Lenny Rapozo can answer this question and others from the Parks Department. I believe the beach replenishing work for the Phase I which is the 500- cubic yards of sand will be done by the County which will save significant cost and hopefully quicken the project, and we do project oversight in terms of monitoring the sand, how long it will last, where it is going, and use that basically as a test case for the larger project to ensure that the larger project... the 6,000 cubic yard project was actually going to be beneficial which I am convinced right now that it will be. That is about all that I have for the project in terms of summary right now. Chair Asing: Thank you Jim. Councilmembers, do you have any questions for Jim? Councilmember Bynum? COUNCIL MEETING - 13 - Ma 20 2009 Y Mr. Bynum: Good morning Jim. Thank you very much for that rapid fire and (inaudible) presentation. I know that your delivery style is rapid like that because you want to share a lot of information. So you mentioned the kind of prior... when we are having beach erosion, that is a natural occurrence and sometimes we can retreat right? That is maybe the preferable thing where there is room is let the ocean do its stand. Have I got that right? Mr. O'Connell: Yes, I mean... as I mentioned, I don't use the word damaged to beaches even after storms. Damage happens to build things, damage doesn't happen to the natural system if human beings hasn't altered it to a point. So it is a natural system where the beach and dunes and the shoreline is actually trying to move makai... excuse me, mauka... it is trying to move landward and I won't do it here, but in terms of sea level rise, you know, there is a prediction now that the sea is going to rise within the next 100 years more than likely two (2), possibly even three (3) feet. As a result of that, our entire shoreline is going to want to move landward and if we try to halt it, you are going to narrow the beaches, so that is a planning process that I think we all need to be cognizant of, and really start addressing it seriously. Mr. Bynum: And I think that was the motivation for the Council to pass the shoreline bill last year to say that as human beings, we need to take into consideration these changes. But human beings do things that interfere with that natural process, right? So we build buildings close, we plant grass, and take out dunes, and how does that impact, you know, a situation like this? Mr. O'Connell: In terms of removing dunes and planting vegetation? Mr. Bynum: Right. Mr. O'Connell: Well, dunes are a source of sand for the beach during storms, so if you can keep your dunes naturally or even supplement them for that matter if you have a high density public use beach. When a storm comes and removes sand from the dune, that sand actually ends up on the beach, and sometimes in the near shore area, and it helps reduce the wave energy, it helps keep the dry beach wide for recreational purposes, but it also reduces wave energy, and helps protect landward areas. So preserving dunes, it is critical if you want to maintain your dry beaches, and you want to help protect landward areas. In terms of planting vegetation, you know, there is a prohibition of planting vegetation seaward, makai of a certified shoreline. So if you know where the certified shoreline is, you know that line is there, but how often do you really know where the certified shoreline is, but vegetation... but vegetation can go both ways. Vegetation will trap, help trap wind blown sands. A lot of States around the country encourage waterfront homeowners and owners of waterfront properties to plant vegetation to help trap windblown sand to help build the dune volume and keep the sand from blowing more mauka where it wouldn't be lost from the system. There are a lot of COUNCIL MEETING - 14 - May 20, 2009 States that actually encourage planting vegetation to help supplement and help build the dune system as long as you don't build (inaudible) the vegetation makai of the certified shoreline or thereabout and interfere with the public rights to use the beach itself... then it couldn't be a very beneficial process... Mr. Bynum: So depending on where you plant the vegetation and what type, it can be beneficial or it can be problematic. Mr. O'Connell: It can be problematic in terms of public access, particularly to the beaches of Hawaii where the citizens and the visitors have a right to enjoy the beaches here. I came from a State most recently where private property... owned a home to low water. There are six (6) States in the country where the private property owner owns to low water. You don't even have a right to even use that dry beach. You can't even walk on the dry beach. You can only walk in the intertidal area if you have a fishing pole in your hand, a pair of binoculars, or you are hunting, fishing, fowling, and navigating. You can't stop even in the intertidal area, so to have beaches like I see here in Hawaii is an incredible pleasure to be here. And, you know, maintaining public access in Hawaii is a tremendous benefit both to the island residents and the visitors. Mr. Bynum: So you have outlined the three (3) phases of this plan. The third phase is identifying these offshore sources of sand, so we don't have to truck it in, we can get it nearby from the ocean, is that correct? Mr. O'Connell: That is correct. Mr. Bynum: And tell us about that mechanism. How does that happen? If we identify the sand, how would we move it into the ocean area to protect the beach and keep it wide? Mr. O'Connell: It is a question of... once we identify that the offshore sands... how then... what is the mechanism to get that sand up on the beach? It is a very common practice on the mainland doing beach nourishment... basically adding sand to the beach by hydraulically pumping it from the sand source up onto the beach itself. It is a proven technique. Actually, about two (2) years ago on Kuhio Beach on the eastern shore of Waikiki, there was approximately 10,000 cubic yards of sand that was pumped from about 2,000 feet offshore up onto Kuhio Beach. As an experiment to see whether or not it was feasible in the State of Hawaii to be able to pump. Hydraulically pump near shore or offshore sand sources up onto the beach itself, and the project was considered a success, so that has already taken place. There has also been a beach nourishment project on Maui on the Spreckels fill area on the northshore of Maui. That sand was actually trucked in and placed and shaped to match the contours of the beach itself, and that was written up in a journal article as a success project as well. So we have the experience on Oahu, we have the experience on Maui, now we just need to make sure that we have positive experience on Kauai and maintaining the most COUNCIL MEETING - 15 - May 20, 2009 important beaches you folks could identify. So it is basically hydraulically pumping it up and then just shaping it to the contour of the beach itself. It can be problematic in terms of... and you need to know... and recognize this upfront. If the sand is placed makai or seaward of the high waterline, there are a lot of marine organisms, important marine organisms particularly in the shallow near shore areas that are highly protected and should be protected. So we need to make sure that when we design these beach nourishment projects that were not going to adversely impact a number of the marine organisms, particularly the reef organisms. So we have to be very, very careful in terms of designing a beach nourishment project to ensure that it is a win/win situation both for the marine environment and for human beings to enjoy the beach as well. You will find that out when we go through the permitting process how vigorous the monitoring and the review of the sand... larger sand projects like Phase II will have to go through. Mr. Bynum: So Phase I and II address kind of the sand issues at Po`ipu Beach right now and make it a more pleasant beach experience, cover up some of the rocks and stubble, but it doesn't address tombolo issue and the current that you discussed earlier, is that correct? Mr. O'Connell: And that is correct. The swift current velocity as a result of the loss of that tombolo... that sand connection between Po`ipu Beach and the offshore rock. At the present time, Phase I, we will more than likely will not address that because we are trying to get this project through... as an experiment to ensure that it is going to work and learn from it. In the Phase II project, the 6,000 cubic yards of sand, we will have to have the engineers look at the wave climate, the current velocity and determine what we can place there to supplement the tombolo. It may be sand... it more than likely will be some temporary erosion control measure. It could possibly be, for example, along that tube or (inaudible) which is a geotech style fabric filled with sand. We may use that as a temporary measure to slow the current velocity to try and maintain and keep the sand on Po`ipu Beach as long as possible. What we don't want to do... it prevents that sand from slowly leaking through and over where the tombolo would be, so that it can feed the rest of that littoral cell, and that is the natural process. The natural process is to allow the sand to move along that entire cell and during storm, it moves offshore... some of it may come back on, so we want the engineers to model and design something to replace the tombolo, but we don't want to completely close it up because we want to make sure that we are feeding the entire cell, so that the other beaches will receive some of that sand eventually as well. Mr. Bynum: So Phase III contemplates a study for this littoral cell to determine the parameters of doing that kind of work long term? Mr. O'Connell: Correct. Mr. Bynum: And so that takes time I assume? ' COUNCIL MEETING - 16 - May 20, 2009 Mr. O'Connell: That would be several years in the making in terms of getting a consultant on board, making sure that they are qualified and have the right equipment. They are actually... we do have... the County... the Building Department has a project out at the Kapa`a Shore right now to do precisely that. They have already identified a contractor, we have had several meetings with the contractor, and that is to Ryan... that will probably take place within the next... begin within the next six (6) months or so. So they have already identified the consultant from Honolulu who has the equipment to go out and identify some of the sand deposits. They are doing that primarily as a long range vision from the Kapa`a Beach Park area in terms of if we have a major storm where we lose some of that sand, perhaps there will be sand deposits available to hydraulically pump up there to maintain the Kapa`a Shore. We should learn a lot from that process that we will be able to apply in the Po`ipu Beach project, Phase III. Mr. Bynum: So the County has already embarked on kind of this long range visioning about how to manage our shorelines in a way that protects the environment and also keeps our beaches in a recreational and usable state, and pleasant for visitors and people who live here. So, I mean a summary of what I am hearing you say is that adding sand into the system is the preferable route whether it comes up trucked over land from sources in Kekaha or brought offshore... that is kind of the management practice that other islands and other States are using to address the shoreline. Mr. O'Connell: It is a proven methodology to be able to provide both the storm damage and flood protection to landward areas, and at the same time, generate a wider recreational platform for people to enjoy as well. And just to address one of your comments, yes, I think the island is... the Council and the Administration and the agencies on the island here are very progressive. Looking for sand sources offshore, looking to do beach nourishment, passing the setback ordinance... the setback and coastal protection ordinance, these are very progressive measures that (inaudible)... have traveled around the country. I have seen what other States are doing and I think the island of Kauai is being very progressive and proactive, and I think that is going to pay dividends in the future... in the near future as well as the far future. Mr. Bynum: I know that we are all really appreciative of your presence here, the Council last time supported your position, and it is great to actually see something that we talk about happen. Mr. O'Connell: You can thank the Administration because they are really the ones who are really.:. Mr. Bynum: Absolutely. Mr. O'Connell: I am assisting them. They are really (inaudible) and moving the project forward. COUNCIL MEETING - 17 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Bynum: And I really appreciate that collaboration that is occurring and, you know, just one last thing is that if we don't do this, we know that, from the study, that the situation is not going to improve on its own. The last resort to protect is the shoreline hardening which causes beach loss in the long run. Mr. O'Connell: Yes. Mr. Bynum: So that is something that we axe trying to avoid because, so thank you very much for your presentation and answers. Mr. O'Connell: Thank you for your support as well. Chair Asing: With that, Councilmember Kaneshiro? Mr. Kaneshiro: Jim, on one of your slides, you showed that since 1927 Po`ipu Beach has been eroding at about a foot a year on the average. I believe one of the slides showed that. When was the most rapid erosion taken place? Could you tell by your study? I know you said over the average from 1927, but there has to be a time when there was the most rapid erosion taking place whether it was after Hurricane Iwa or Hurricane Iniki. Do you have any facts to that or any studies that show that? Mr. O'Connell: I will very soon. When Dr. Fletcher turns the shoreline change database over to the County, then the project will be complete. I have asked him to give me the data that is behind the data. In other words, what he is going to present, basically is a summary... the long term average annual shoreline change rates, but we've got... depending on the area of the island between nine (9) and eleven (11) shorelines, so to answer your question for any area around the island, once we have that data, we will be able to look when we had rapid erosion, when we even had accretion in certain areas. And one of my roles is to identify those areas and then try to figure out why areas were eroding and why areas were accreting. So if you have areas of interest around the island, once we have this data base, a simple request to do an analysis of an axea, I will be able to answer that question directly. Mr. Kaneshiro: And the follow up to that is that because in 1991, the tombolo on your slide was present and it seems like after 1991... soon after Hurricane Iniki I believe, but tombolo was slowly starting to appear. You know what, discipline... in other words, the water starting taking its toll and was any thoughts given about the breakwater that is in the small baby pond area being that it is too high, and that it might be causing the rapid acceleration of currents shooting across? Because I believe prior to that, during Hurricane Iwa time or even prior to Hurricane Iwa, the water used to flow right over where the baby pond was where you have that rocks... we could surf right over it before. Currently, I know that it is high and I am not sure if you have any thoughts or studies maybe given COUNCIL MEETING - 18 - May 20, 2009 into that? That the height of the breakwater might be causing some of this strong currents to push forward towards the Wai`ohai area? Mr. O'Connell: (Inaudible) observation... yes, I think that breakwater may be causing some of the issues there in terms of increasing the current velocity coming through there. That little breakwater was rebuilt... I am not sure of the year, but it was after Iniki. It was built slightly higher and there are some suggestions, and I would like to see this pursued further myself, but I think that may be accelerating the current velocity going through there resulting in the loss of more sand than would naturally be lost, and possibly affecting that tombolo as well. And the Phase II project, because it being the 6,000 cubic yard project, we will have the engineers... they are going to have to model that area. They are going to have to take current measurements, they are going to have to model the wave climate, and at the same time, we will have them do an analysis of what the impacts of that breakwater are in terms of increasing currents and increasing waves. But my preliminary investigation suggesting that it may very well be impacting and causing higher current velocities in that area. Mr. Kaneshiro: I was just wondering about that and even some of the old timers, you know, the old fishermen who say that in all the previous years from the 1950's, 1940's, the water always used to just flow over. And in the '60's or early `60's, we could surf right over it on high tide, and now I guess after 1991 or after Hurricane Iniki, they let it build higher, and suddenly you see all of this happening. Like you said, the tombolo problem that we are having. Mr. O'Connell: When the waves overtop that breakwater, you have actually dissipated some of the wave energy and actually slowed the current velocities because it hit the rocks and then overtopped it. Now it is not. Whenever you constrain water or even air for that matter into a more narrow area, it generally accelerates the velocity, and I believe that is what is happening there. But on the flip side, Daryl, because it was raised, it created this little quiescent area for small children to be able to play in and be safe. So if they did lower it, so we are going to have to look at a balance and look to folks to make the final decision. It is more important to have that area completely safe or is the impact significant enough where a suggestion to be lowered again, and that is something that we will be looking at in Phase II. Mr. Kaneshiro: Well, that was where I first started to swim anyway, so it must have been safe in those days. I wasn't a good swimmer when I first started, you know, everybody goes through that where you go in there and kind of play around in the baby pond. The water used to come right over and we used to have fun kind of hiding behind the rocks, and let the water flow right over you. Mr. O'Connell: It is more realistic too. If we are going to have to learn how to swim, you don't want to learn, you know... COUivCiL MEETiI~TG - 19 - May 20, 2009 ' Mr. Kaneshiro: It is best place to swim because you can just stand up, you know, in case anything happened. You know, paddle around, but stand up, but anyway... just one follow-up question if I could. I noticed on the slide, you said that there were some rocks put in the tombolo area, has that caused any effect at all... has that slowed the current flow? I probably heard you say "no", but somehow, some menehunes put some rocks. Mr. O'Connell: I am not familiar with the introduction of what happened there. Mr. Kaneshiro: But have you had any results or any... from that regarding currents? Mr. O'Connell: I wasn't here when there was nothing there, so I don't know when they really appeared when we could look at aerial photos to determine that, but I am not familiar with how or when they came there because I wasn't here when the rocks were not there. I can only look at it presently and say that the current velocity at the present time even with some of those rocks there is still pretty significant. I have kayaked through there and... at the right time of the tide or the wrong time of the tide, that current could be, I would suggest, anywhere from two (2), maybe four (4) knots which were... somebody was trying to walk across there could be pretty dangerous, but I am not familiar with the history of when those... when they appeared and why. Mr. Kaneshiro: Okay, thank you. Chair Asing: Any other questions for... go ahead. Mr. Bynum: I just... what Councilmember Kaneshiro is talking about kind of the local knowledge I heard from him and from other people and there is probably a lot of wisdom and to have local knowledge, but I know that the County understands that in this day and age, we have to really... like you said, get the proper permitting, do the proper studies to kind of set the baseline for changes that we make, but the study that we are contemplating in addition to finding offshore sand, would kind of address all of those potential remedies, and make recommendations. Is that correct? Mr. O'Connell: Yes, we will probably do that in Phase II, before Phase III although I would like to see them move in tandem, but in terms of looking at the kind of velocity what we may want to put in that particular area, we will address that in Phase II for sure. Mr. Bynum: So the things that Daryl is suggesting may be part of the solution in the long run. Mr. O'Connell: Yes. COUNCIL MEETING - 20 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Bynum: But we have to be cautious what menehunes do because we can have unintended consequences. Mr. O'Connell: I think we need to be cautious of the menehunes, but we don't see them, so we don't know when it happens. It would be equivalent to the Boston leprechauns. Mr. Bynum: Thank you. Chair Asing: Any other questions for... go ahead. Mr. Furfaro: The tombolo as well as Nukomoi Point area, has there been... has the archaeological question been answered if that is not a significant part of any of the heiau complex in Po`ipu? Mr. O'Connell: To the best of my knowledge, we have not addressed that problem yet, but I am confident that will be addressed before anything is done including Phase I. But in Phase I, basically, it is just that small dune covering the dune scarp, but I think it is important to... Mr. Furfaro: Answer my question. There has not been an archaeological query if that is part of any of the complex? Mr. O'Connell: To the best of my knowledge, no, not yet. Mr. Furfaro: And the Administration has allocated I think $150,000 in this budget? Mr. O'Connell: The funding issue is something that I tried to stick (inaudible). Mr. Furfaro: Any conversation with them? Mr. O'Connell: I am unclear of the funding Jay, so I can't really answer the funding question. Mr. Furfaro: I am just... Mr. O'Connell: I am sticking with the technical aspects. Mr. Furfaro: Understood, and in the technical aspects, when some of the questions came about regarding the long term goals and how we are going to achieve them especially in Phase II and III, I have heard responses that indicated that it is future funding. How far off? Two (2) years... I mean we have an EA, may have an EIS, we have an SMA, we have an engineering study, we have to COUNCIL MEETING - 21 - May 20, 2009 have an understanding of what has happened with the tombolo. We have the question about, is this an area (inaudible)... we have those questions that actually need to be addressed before Phase II. Do you have any idea from the experiences that we have had on Oahu and Maui what some of those cost might be? Mr. O'Connell: For Phase I, it is going to be completely done, I believe, by the County. We have the sand already. In terms of Phase II, I am trying to get a handle on the cost differences between what I have experienced on the mainland and what I have experienced here, and I am finding out that there are (inaudible) of magnitude more expenses on the island, than I am familiar with. So I would have a cost estimate in my head for (inaudible) Phase II or even Phase III if I were anywhere on the mainland. So I am rapidly trying to get more familiar with what the cost are here. I do know that offshore sand study in Kapa`a is in the vicinity of $300,000 and that was... Mr. Furfaro: I was leaning on what you said. We have the experience and knowledge from Oahu and Maui especially on some of these projects where they did some offshore vacuuming of bottom sand. I think they did that at Ho`okipa and some of those areas. is Sea Grant able to share any of that information with the Administration? Mr. O'Connell: Yes, the Kuhio Beach project on the eastern portion of Waikiki, that was actually done by the DLNR themselves. That was approximately 10,000 cubic yards of sand pumped from about 2,000 feet offshore. That was about $500,000 and that was... they had a prior contract... Mr. Furfaro: I don't need to know. I just want to make sure for the future that these are things that are shared with the Administration. Mr. O'Connell: Oh yes. Mr. Furfaro: Because, you know, you are saying that these decisions will be made jointly with the Council, but obviously, we have to do something there, but I think we need to understand all the moving parts, all the components in Phase I. It sounds like Phase I, you are banking on the fact that you will not have to do... you will... I guess you are placing your hopes on that you are only going to have to do a minor SMA if any for Phase I. Mr. O'Connell: Those are preliminary discussions between Parks and Planning, yes. Mr. Furfaro: I mean, that is... Mr. O'Connell: Preliminary discussions, yes. COUNCIL MEETING - 22 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Furfaro: But that is what we are hoping on. It will be a minor SMA and that, obviously is driven by the cost of the work, and then it seems Phase II, Phase III, really raises a lot of these other engineering permitting cost that we should have some exposure to... might help us make the decision what way we go. Mr. O'Connell: Right. I can provide you with the information on the Kuhio Beach project. Mr. Furfaro: I don't need it. The Administration needs it. Mr. O'Connell: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: Parks & Recreation, they need somewhere to go for some, you know, qualified cost in Hawaii. Mr. O'Connell: Well, that is something that I am... actually, when I was sitting there, I was thinking if we've got some experiences on the island as well, I think I should put that into a report for anybody to be able to look at, and that will be one of my plans. I will have that as soon as I can get that together. Mr. Furfaro: You knew I was raising the question for everyone and it is not a report that I need, you know, I think we need to have a clear understanding on what the maximum exposure could be on something that includes all three (3) phases. Mr. O'Connell: Right, okay. The best I could do would be, again, as my role here is to generate all the... together, all the technical information from any beach restoration project on any of the islands and put that and have that readily available for anybody, and that is a good suggestion. Your comment will make me move even quicker on it. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you and I know you give great urgency to that question. Have you ever recapped the 2004 fill and how it kind of disintegrated over a five (5) year period what the cost of that project was on the short term solution and what it might have averaged out over these years as far as understanding the yearly cost of replenishment. If one of the options is just going to continue to replenish until such time that we can find all the funds, it would be important for us to know what that cost impact might be, let's say, in five (5) year increments. Mr. O'Connell: We have all the... Dave Caylor and myself and others at the Parks Department have been combing all of the files that we could get on the 2005 project, but I haven't run across any costs, so I am just looking at... I am looking at the technical aspect, so I can't answer your question in terms of cost. COUNCIL MEETING - 23 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Furfaro: Somewhere, we have to find out what those costs were. Mr. O'Connell: Most definitely, yea. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you and thank you for an excellent presentation. Mr. O'Connell: Thank you. Chair Asing: Any other questions Councilmembers? If not, I believe we have... are we going to have Lenny, are you going to be making a presentation? Thank you Jim. Mr. Bynum: Thank you Jim. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. LENNY RAPOZO, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION: For the record, Director of County Parks & Recreation Lenny Rapozo. What is being passed out before you is the timeline that we have been working with to give you and those involved with this project some idea as to how long it is going to take to have the sand placed at the beach park. So the first page is a written description of the timeline, but the second page is the graph of what... the visual graph as to what we have done so far, what we are in process of doing, and where we are going. The purple is the actual beach replenishment and we are targeting September 15... between September 15 and September 20 to have everything in place and the actual work being done for the sand to be placed on the beach. We are currently in the application process and we are currently working on completing the application for the SMA minor permit as well as the SSBN permit application and review. But what is very apparent and, again, it is part of our learning process in doing this project is that what we do need is the certified shoreline survey and certification. So the different colors... there is a legend on your right side. Green being Parks & Recreation, the red be Planning, and so forth. Before any of those permits can be issued would be a certification of the shoreline, however, those applications from what we have been told may be submitted during the survey process. So we are moving forward in getting those... securing those permits. Chair Asing: Councilmember Furfaro? Mr. Furfaro: Lenny, thank you for a very complete flow chart on this first phase, but I guess I am making an assumption and I want to make sure that we are all pretty clear on... we are, like I said, earlier to Jim... we are probably banking on a minor SMA? COUNCIL MEETING - 24 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Rapozo: We have had the discussion with Planning and it looks like it is minor. Mr. Furfaro: And you are going to have some cost to certify the shoreline? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Mr. Furfaro: And we are hoping... we know the sand is free that we take. Mr. Rapozo: Yes. Mr. Furfaro: And we are hoping that sand meets some kind of a qualify control test? Mr. Rapozo: The sand and sampling has been done by Glover and it does meet... Jim has been the lead on that and it does meet... it is compatible to the beach, but what will need to occur is it needs to be sifted and washed before it is placed on the beach, so the compatibility is there, correct. Mr. Furfaro: So then the cost would be... I am very glad to hear that the quality is good... the washing and the delivery of the sand would be another incurred cost. Mr. Rapozo: We plan to use in-house Public Works to assist us with the delivery and Parks & Recreation's equipment assets that we have to place it on the beach, so hopefully to minimize that cost. Mr. Furfaro: And then if that is the case, can I make a request that we document our in-house staffing and equipment use, so we understand what we the overall credits that the department should get for this one time project if we are going to do some of this (inaudible). You know, we just came out of budget and I want to say that I saw a number of only $150,000 for the sand project. Mr. Rapozo: Actually, that was more towards leaning towards the study. Mr. Furfaro: So do we have money budgeted for the SMA minor and do we have money budgeted for the certified shoreline? Mr. Rapozo: No, we will be looking at what we currently have in some of our accounts and with the partnership hopefully with the private sector to help with the cost of this project. COUNCIL MEETING - 25 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Furfaro: So as we approach the end of the year, the cost for the SMA minor and the shoreline certification might come out of what is considered surplus reserved funds? Mr. Rapozo: Yes or with a partnership with a private entity. Mr. Furfaro: May I ask why you may have taken the date of September 15 as the start date? Mr. Rapozo: Well, we looked at the process, yea. The process and, again, this timeline has been revised maybe three (3) or four (4) times because, again, we are learning the process with the permitting. And initially, we looked at the process and it came about... we want ~to get the sand as quickly as possible on the beach, but we looked at the process and it looked like September 15 to September 20 is when we can move forward with the delivery of the sand. During the process, we have found that the application process might take a little bit longer, but we are hoping that the review process will continue to remain the same and looks that way. We have a... we built in a window in there for any problems that may come up, so we are confident that September 15... between the 15+~ and the 20+x, that we can make that delivery down to the beach park. Mr. Furfaro: And I just assume that this critical path has been discussed with the Po`ipu Resort operators? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much Lenny. Mr. Rapozo: Okay. Chair Asing: Thank you. Anything else? Tim? Mr. Bynum: Good morning Lenny. Mr. Rapozo: Good morning. I just want to start by saying that I am very appreciative of the Parks Department moving on this and, you know, giving it priority and doing a good job so far. I really appreciate it. Mr. Rapozo: Thanks. Mr. Bynum: And I have a series of questions because this whole issue goes back many years and it may be more appropriate at the Administration level about parks, right? So you just let me know. So this is for Phase I... we are involved in a similar kind of effort for Phase II, is that correct? COUNCIL MEETING - 26 - Ma 20, 2009 Y Mr. Rapozo: Well, based upon Jim's discussion, right now Parks is our phase is to get the sand on the beach. Jim is working on the other stuff for Phase II, and as he needs us to be involved with our Planning Department in Parks, then we will get involved, but he is definitely working with our Parks Planner for Phase II. Mr. Bynum: I mean we have 25,000 cubic yards of sand at Kekaha that came from the excavation. Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Mr. Bynum: And initially DLNR, you know, gave us permission for that sand for beach nourishment and recreation purposes, but now some of that sand is... a bulk of that sand is going to be used at the landfill. And what the 6,500 is what is designated to be used for beach nourishment and (inaudible)... have I got that right? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Mr. Bynum: Okay, and so, you know, and beaches... sand is a huge commodity. Luckily we have that, we already possess it. Do you know anything about... I think there is going to be further excavation and the potential for more sand from DLNR. Is that being pursued to your knowledge? Mr. Rapozo: I don't have any information on that. I am sorry. Mr. Bynum: Because it is such a valuable commodity and one of the things that got my attention back on this even though I have tried to track it for a long time was, you know, the sand really being used for the landfill purposes rather than its originally intended purpose. And I think for Po`ipu Beach Resort and for those of us who were looking at beach nourishment was like, well, wait a minute, I thought that sand was for... but I understand that sand is a commodity that the County needs to use where it is appropriate, so maybe I will ask that question of the Administration of whether other potential sources of sand. In terms of the Phase III project, the budget has $150,000 for the study, but we estimate that it will cost $300,000. Is there any sense of where that additional funding will come from at this point? Mr. Rapozo: Well, it is in our proposed budget there right now and until it is finalized, but I think we need to collectively discuss the possibility of having it in a form of a grant and maybe a matching grant. Mr. Kaneshiro: Matching funds. COUNCIL MEETING - 27 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Rapozo: To put it out there as a grant and hopefully somebody will help us and whatever else moneys they may need. They may need to have to find the moneys to help us with the study. Mr. Bynum: Well, I think (inaudible) supportive of the idea that we collaborate with the State eventually, hopefully with the Po`ipu Beach Resort Association, the HTA, you know, for contributing to these needs. You know, I certainly have been having dialogue with our Legislature about planting seeds for the future because on Oahu the DLNR and the State is partnering with visitor industry for projects, so that is certainly a model that we want to look at. But, short term, we have the sand washing and other potential cost that were exploring the possibility of private entities as you mentioned contributing to that. Is that correct? Mr. Rapozo: Correct. Mr. Bynum: And I think that collaboration is great. My concern and I may address it with somebody else in the Administration is that it takes the County six (6) to eight (8) months to procure a consultant to do a study. The study itself will take eighteen (18) months to two (2) years, so a very ambitious timeline would be two and one-half (2 1/2) years before we had the results of that study and could move. So I am very interested in finding the source of the funding for that study 'and hopefully not having to wait two (2) years to find the funding, and then wait two and one-half (2 1/2) years more, then we are five (5) years down the line. So, you know, and I know you may not have those answers right now, but it is great that we have Parks Department with a Park Planner and the staff to work on these things. Thank you very much for moving forward. Mr. Rapozo: They are doing a good job. Mr. Bynum: Yes, absolutely. Chair Asing: With, that... Mr. Kaneshiro: I believe on our budget, the $150,000 is a matching fund, so we need to aggressively go out and find some other matching funds to be able to meet the standards of the full funding. I am not sure if this is part of the subject and if I am going a little bit off of the subject, you can stop me Mr. Chair, but I believe... Tim brought up a pretty good idea... the County side would take so much time for procurement, so speaking about a grant might be the way to go. You know, but we haven't addressed that in the current budget. Currently, I know we had it there as a matching fund, $150,000, and we can find some other matching funds from different organizations, but, to me, the grant way is the way to go. We grant it out and have them do the study. This way we don't have to go through the long process of the procurement process, so that is... Anyway, I don't want to get into too much more detail into that, but you brought it up, you talked about it... I heard you mention about the grant, and you talked about the timeline. COUNCIL MEETING - 28 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Bynum: So you are saying that we would use our $150,000 to grant to someone else to do the study? Mr. Rapozo: A matching. That is a discussion that I think we need to have a little bit more. It is in the proposed budget, but I think those are some of the ideas that were coming out instead of we funding the whole thing. So that is a discussion that we would like to have with you folks as well as the Administration. Mr. Bynum: And who would be potential entities that we would grant those funds to? Mr. Rapozo: At this time, I don't know. Maybe the Sea Grant, I don't know. Mr. Kaneshiro: Anyway, I don't want to take this time up as, you know, those are budget issues. So he mentioned it and I know that Lenny mentioned it, so thank you Mr. Chair. Chair Asing: You know, we have to take a caption break now. Lenny, are you having anybody else up? Mr. Rapozo: No, unless you guys want them. Chair Asing: Okay, then with that, why don't we just have the caption break now. Ten (10) minute caption break. There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 11:09 a.m. The meeting was called back to order at 11:25 a.m., and proceeded as follows: Chair Asing: What I would like to do right now is let me just... Lenny, since there are no questions for you from other Councilmembers, let me just do a short slide presentation. With that, let me just do it. Let me turn it over to you while I do the presentation. Mr. Furfaro: Mr. Asing, the floor is yours. Chair Asing: Thank you. I want to just put up two (2) slides and I just want to express my concerns about the things that we do or don't do regarding shoreline replenishment. I agree with the replenishment program. I agree totally with that, but I would want to caution the County on being sure on what we do. With that, put on the first slide Peter. This happens to be Kekaha. This point here is the Kekaha Small Boat Harbor right here and this entire line here, this is... Peter... this is Davidson's Point here. Now, the erosion rate in this area is about and we don't have to show that... is about 2.4... I am sorry, about 2.1 foot loss t COUNCIL MEETING - 29 - May 20, 2009 erosion rate per year. That is the average between this point and this point here. So it is quite great and if you compared the Po`ipu area, the Po`ipu area was about one (1) foot per year roughly and this one here is two (2) feet per year. But the important thing that I would like to point out is, remember now this is the small boat harbor here going towards Kekaha, so you have the erosion rate of about 2.1 foot per year. Now let's look at the complete opposite side of the harbor. Again, see the small boat harbor here. This is the small boat harbor and on the opposite side going from the small boat harbor towards... that is the Waimea River, so if you look at this section here, this section is the complete opposite. It is accretion and the accretion rate in this particular area is huge. It is 2.4, so it is a huge amount and according to the study, apparently what Dr. Fletcher is saying is that the structure of the harbor is what caused either/or. Now when I say either/or I am talking about either accretion on one side and erosion on the opposite side. So I bring that up because I want to make sure that whatever we do does not affect some place else. Now with sand replenishment, that is not a problem, but whatever we do in the ocean, as an example... you can turn on the light now and you can knock the screen off. As an example,' we do know here at the small boat harbor, what was done there affected someplace else either/or plus or minus... either accretion or erosion. Now, we do know, as an example that in `Aliomanu, there is and we have records that show seawall built, we have erosion problem, loss of property, one (1) house completely in the ocean was taken down. We know that. We know that in the Kapa`a area, dredging work was done in the ocean. The dredging work affected the Kapa`a Beach Park area... our loss was one (1) restroom facility in the ocean taken down. So all I am saying is that I agree with replenishment of sand, but let's be careful on what we do, so that we do not affect other areas. We also had another example of that in the Wailua Golf Course area where we had the wall that was put up which caused erosion down the line. So, again, it is just a word of caution, but I agree that the way that we are progressing, I think it is a good way to go. But I bring this up because I think it is important for us to be sure that we look at what has happened before, what we have done, and the consequences that we face. So with that, Lenny, do you have anyone else who is going to make any presentation? Mr. Rapozo: No. Chair Asing: If not, thank you very much. Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Members, do you have any questions of Mr. Asing before I turn the meeting back to him? Mr. Asing, I turn the meeting back to you. Chair Asing: With that, Glenn? There being no objections, the rules were suspended. COUNCIL MEETING - 30 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Thank you Lenny for all your hard work. GLENN MICKENS: For the record, Glenn Mickens. Thank you Kaipo. I appreciate Jim and Lenny's fine presentation. I think it is very informative. I guess I have a couple of questions in relation to these. The sand, why does ,the sand on Kauai cost so much more? He said $200 a cubic yard as I think here as compared to the mainland. To me sand is sand. Maybe you can answer it, maybe Jim can answer it. Why does DLNR have to monitor the type of sand we put on our beaches whether it is fine or course? And I know all the permits and everything you said have to be gotten for doing this, but sand is still sand whether it washes from the ocean or washed up on the beach or we are pumping it out of the ocean onto the beach. So I am not sure why that has to be. The cost part of this thing... the total part of... Jay, you know, pretty much went into this. The $150,000 was going to be for study. You know, we seem to have a habit of putting on these papers what the price is, but it doesn't easily say that is the study, you know. We still haven't got to the figures of what the total cost is going to be for this project. From what Jim is saying, it sounds like it is going to be huge or whatever it is going to be. And, you know, again, if the people want to, they want to fund this type of thing, fine. And the other question, when you... I presume that this study is going to show this. If you go out and... the beaches that he was talking about to replenish themselves and the other beach he was talking about like at Po`ipu, one (1) foot a year you are losing. That is considerable. Are we going to take that beach and go ahead and put the replenished sand out of the ocean back on that beach and keep on doing it? It is going to be a tremendous cost, but, again, I guess if the County wants to fund it, that the people want it rather than have it wash away, but the beaches that he was talking about where the sand replenishes itself, it comes back in every year. Like even down at Kealia Beach, you go down there in the Winter time sometime, the rocks are this high along there and where does those rocks ever come from. Summer time you go back and they are completely gone, so it replaces itself. So I guess I presume then if I am right that they will go ahead... the research will show which of the beaches is going to be the ones that replenish themselves and which beaches are going to have to have the sand pumped onto the things. Anyway, these are just a few of the questions that I had. Chair Asing: Councilmember Furfaro? Mr. Furfaro: Thank you Mr. Asing. I will try and answer a couple of your questions and just a reminder that I am answering your questions, and I am not asking any new ones. First all, the Department of Land & Natural Resources by the constitution... when land accretes itself as Chairman Asing has pointed out on the map, the rules are accreted land actually goes automatically into an open category on land classification and becomes under the control of the DLNR. A perfect example of that was the Hanalei River mouth that the Mayor... that Mayor Baptiste had to work through the Department of Land & Natural Resources to give us a right to enforcement on the accreted lands. Secondly, because it is COUNCIL MEETING - 31 - Ma 20 2009 Y under DLNR, they have the authority and require these SMA permits and so forth for work and the contribution of any material is subject to their standard of testing, and that we need to comply to. Mr. Mickens: Is that the washing too that you are talking about Jay? Mr. Furfaro: Yes. Mr. Mickens: Why is that? Why do they have to wash that sand? Mr. Furfaro: Because it needs to meet a certain quality level and I do not have the chemistry to explain that portion, but it is under the realm of DLNR. Mr. Mickens: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: Okay, the third portion is... the questions that I was asking the Administration more focused on Phase I which they are now expressing to us they are doing in-house. They are doing the trucking in-house, they are doing the washing in-house, and they will incur only an SMA minor permit, as well as certification. Mr. Mickens: How much is that SMA minor permit... what is it? Two hundred thous... Mr. Furfaro: It is not that kind of money and we will probably see a money bill for that. Mr. Mickens: Okay. Mr. Furfaro: The Phase II and III is what the study is driven and that was the clarity I was trying to get. None of the money in the study is dealing with Phase I, and I think they answered that they will be looking for major grant money Glenn. The fact of the matter from engineering study, permitting, SMA major, an EA, and all of those particulars will add the cost, but that was not the phase that they are moving forward on and we have encouraged Jim to share with the Administration the similarities and cost that were driven on Maui and Oahu beach properties. I hope I have answered some of your questions. Mr. Mickens: Yes, you have. Thank you Jay. Chair Asing: Thank you. Mr. Mickens: Thank you Kaipo. COUNCIL MEETING - 32 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wants to speak on this item? Jody? JODY KONG-KJELDSON: Aloha Council Chair Asing and members of the Council. I am Jody Kono-Kjeldson with the Po`ipu Beach Resort Association. It is a member based organization of about 150 businesses on the southshore and I am here to share our concern about the health and safety of our beaches particularly Po`ipu Beach. Over the years as you have seen in the presentation, we have seen serious degradation to the beach park and it is affecting not only the aesthetics and the quality of the beach and ocean experience, but also the safety... more importantly, the safety for residents and visitors. We would like to thank really the Mayor and his Administration and the County Council for focusing attention on a project that has been stalled for nearly three (3) years. We are strongly supportive of a short term, mid-term, and long term solution for the plan and encourage you to support this as well. We are willing to contribute to the solution of this project and are looking forward to ongoing dialogue with the Administration on how we can make that happen. So we just like to thank you for your time and consideration and for bringing attention to this issue. Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, Councilmember Furfaro? Mr. Furfaro: Thank you for being here to testify Jody. It seems from the testimony from the Administration that Phase I... as you know, I have requested them to keep track of our own internal cost, but when you say willing to contribute to its progress, may I interpret that, that might possibly mean that any financial studies that are required for Phase II and III, that the association may be willing to participate especially in the pursuit of grants and... can I interpret that? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Actually, let me clarify that. We have been in communication with the Administration about Phase I. So in Phase I, we are talking about possibly financing a shoreline certification study and/or the sand washing, and that has just been the dialogue for the short term. Mr. Furfaro: Okay. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: We have not yet gone into the discussion for the mid and long term, but I am... you know, you can assume that there will be some partnership from PBRA or the hoteliers on the southside. Mr. Furfaro: I appreciate your clarification on that, so the minor SMA and/or the shoreline certification for Phase I, there is a possibility that you are willing to participate with the County in maybe sharing some of those costs? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Correct. We have a board meeting on June 2 at which time Jim and Dave are both coming to present and we are going to talk about that possibility. COUNCIL MEETING - 33 - May 20, 2009 Mr. Furfaro: Thank you for clarifying that for me. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Thank you. Mr. Furfaro: Thank you Mr. Chair. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any other questions? Councilmember Bynum? Mr. Bynum: Hello. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Hello. Mr. Bynum: Thanks for coming today and your willingness to be a partner and, you know, one of the things this year... there was a study about the economic impact of beach loss and it was focused on Waikiki. Are you familiar with that? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Vaguely familiar, yes. Mr. Bynum: You mentioned that the... kind of the visitor experience there at Po`ipu is somewhat degraded from where it was ten (10) years ago. Have you noticed that the beachgoers are shifting where they land on the beach for their recreational experience? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Absolutely. They are shifting further down the beach and a lot of times... we have received quite a few letters from returned visitors saying that Po`ipu Beach is just not the same, so they are finding themselves looking for other beaches or other islands to visit because Po`ipu Beach was their favorite place to vacation to and now it is not just the same experience. So that has definitely affected... Mr. Bynum: I heard that from visitors on the beach down at Po`ipu, but you have received letters to that effect. So we are, already having an economic impact from beach loss at Po`ipu Beach it sounds like. You know, we didn't talk a lot about that today, but, you know, there is the experience on the beach for the visitor... impacts their choice and that was the study that the University of Hawaii did that said the potential economic impact of beach loss was in the billions literally and the study which is available... you know, ask people if there was less beach, would you be less likely to come. It was a very interesting study because visitors from different parts of the world said different things. But the largest response was that the beach was a huge part of the reason they were here in the first place and if the beach experience was degrade or too crowded or... so my own observation at Po`ipu... it is one of our premiere beaches obviously. COUNCIL MEETING - 34 - May 20, 2009 Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Uh huh. Mr. Bynum: But if you think about it, there is not a lot of beach in Po`ipu. It is not like Kekaha or Hanalei where there are huge beaches and so in front of the Wai`ohai, it looks like Waikil~ sometimes. I mean there are people covering almost every square foot at times, so do you agree with my observation? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: I do. And, you know, it is interesting... we did a study of our visitors on the southside and asking them why they chose Po`ipu or what drove them to select a property on Po`ipu and the number one thing was the beach. Beach environments and especially for families because I think Po`ipu offers a variety of recreational activities whether you want to surf or kayak or go to the kiddy pond... there is really something for everyone. It is blessed with great weather as well, so it really is a critical component to our industry. Mr. Bynum: Thanks for being here today and your willingness to partner. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Absolutely. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any other questions? Mr. Chang: You know, Jody, recently we met in regards to this sand discussion and recognizing that Po`ipu Beach Park was voted the number one beach in the U.S.A. in 2001. You recently had a travel writer or a publication or someone that did not physically come to Kauai that wanted to present an honor in regards to Po`ipu Beach and I remember you were saying that you didn't want to be around or you didn't want to take the picture because it would be a embarrassing situation. Can you tell us about that or follow up with what that conversation was all about. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: We got a phone call from a Parks & Recreation magazine saying that they wanted to honor Po`ipu Beach Park with an award for an esteem park in the U.S. and they asked for someone who had expertise on the beach environment and someone who could talk about what changes had been done to the beach over the years. I wasn't comfortable talking about that and, you know, in all honesty, the beach is not what it used to be. And if Dr. Beach would come down and try to give us that same award in 2009, I am not sure we would get that award that we got five (5) years ago. It is just something that concerns us and something that I think needs to be taken cared of for our residents and visitors. Chair Asing: Good. Thank you. Any... Mr. Chang: And I have one last question. When we met with Dave and with Lenny a couple of weeks ago, I think we were waiting on some of our answers in regards to the chart. In regards to the 6,500 cubic square yards, the / ~ COUNCIL MEETING - 35 - May 20, 2009 first phase, 500, did we ever get an answer... remember during that whole washing process and separating the finer or the course that will match Po`ipu, did we ever get an answer that we would get a net 500 cubic square yards when things are separated, washed, sifted, etc.? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Not to my knowledge. That has not been confirmed. Mr. Chang: That is the goal to make sure that we get the total 6,500 cubic square yards? Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Net, yes. Mr. Chang: Thank you. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: That is our goal. Chair Asing: Maybe I can assist a little bit. I believe that you will get the 500 no matter what it takes. In other words, we will get the sand and after it is sifted, you will get 500. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Thank you. Chair Asing: That is the question. Is there anything else for Jody? If not, thank you Jody. Ms. Kono-Kjeldson: Thank you. Chair Asing: Anyone else who wants to speak on the item? If not, I would like to call the meeting back to order. The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Chair Asing: Can I have a motion to receive? Mr. Furfaro moved to receive C 2009-163 for the record, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro. Chair Asing: Any discussion? Councilmember Bynum? Mr. Bynum: Thank you Mr. Chair. I am very appreciative of us having to this presentation today and I want to just share some of my thoughts regarding some of the history of this. I am thrilled that we are moving forward on what Jody has indicated a project that seems stalled. And I am very appreciative of the Administration and the Parks Department and Mr. O'Connell for getting this on track. This is, to me, a very important issue for a number of reasons. One is just the quality of the recreational experience. We all love Po`ipu Beach Park. It is unfortunately not the same beach that it was. You know, I frequent the beach park ' COUNCIL MEETING - 36 - May 20, 2009 and it is not the same quality of recreational experience and if you go down there now, people aren't really using the beach park area very much. They are moving down in front of the Wai`ohai into what is the narrowing beach and we just opened a new property there. We are all thrilled with that, but there is less beach and as those pictures that I took in 2000 and again in 2009, they are very dramatic that the changes that are occurring there. It also has the concurrent kind of safety issues in terms of where the rescues occur and the seriousness perhaps of the rescues. And then this is this overlay of the economic impact of beach loss and, you know, it is sad to say that we are already experiencing that and Po`ipu is a critical and important part of our economy. For all of those reasons, I have a sense of urgency about moving forward with this because we know that nothing moves quickly in the County of Kauai or in any County. It is just that government time is slow. I like some of the ideas that I have heard today about partnering and perhaps getting the beach study done through anon-profit or through another entity because I have some experience with that at Lydgate Park about the publiclprivate partnership helping us use our funds more wisely and to expedite that process. You know, in terms of cost, Jim said that sand is $150 to $200 a cubic yard. You know, even if it were $50, you said that the moving 10,000 cubic yards at Kuhio cost $500,000. Well, if you were purchasing the sand at $50 a cubic yard, 10,000 cubic yards would be $500,000 just for the sand, and not including the cost of moving it. We got a strong example of that this year when Public Works came to us and said that the 25,000 cubic yards that we have stockpiled was in the way of the lateral expansion of the landfill and they needed to move it. They were going to move the sand from Kekaha to Wailua and just moving it was... I think it was $750,000, so that brought up some issues like, well, wait a minute. This sand was intended at least a significant portion for Po`ipu Beach, so we raised those questions. Then as things unfolded, it turned out that we were going to use the sand at... for the expansion of the landfill and then that raised some red flags I think for Po`ipu Beach Resort Association who said, well, wait a minute, I thought that sand was slated for us. So we... and the State indeed gave us that sand with the intent that it be used for beach nourishment and recreation. You know, I know that our needs at the landfill are great and we made a decision as a County that I accept that... the bulk of that sand is going to be used at the landfill and the 6,500 that we are discussing is what has been set aside for Po`ipu Beach and I am really appreciative that those things are moving forward. My biggest concern is about the study... the Phase III that really looks at the littoral cell, looks for sources of offshore and gives us the ground work that we would need to have a solution or a bigger or longer term solution to address the tombolo, to address the safety issues, and to come up with a management plan to keep this incredible asset at the state that we need for our economy to be. And so I am very hopeful that we can find from some source, you know, in the relative near term to get that study going because it takes several months to procure the study. The study itself will take 18 months to two (2) years, so at the best case scenario, if we had the funding today, we would be three (3) years off before we could actually look at making any significant change on Phase III. And more likely COUNCIL MEETING - 37 - May 20, 2009 longer than that, so, you know, I am appreciative that there is $150,000 in the budget... that is about half of what we need and there will be a partnership. We know and we have that commitment from the Po`ipu Beach Resort Association, but they don't have hugely deep pockets. The State has done the projects at Kuhio Beach, they set aside $2 million into a beach nourishment fund is likely going to be used in Waikiki, so we have that precedent. So I think in the long run, you know, this beach management issue will be something that is a partnership with the State, perhaps the Federal government, and those are things that I am looking into and working on right now. But in the short run, the resort association is looking at contributing to sand washing and shoreline surveys and may not have the resources to fund that study at least in the short term. So I hope that we can be creative and find that source of that funding because if we delay that study for two (2) years and then it takes two (2) years, we are six (6) years down the line and we haven't really addressed the issues which are there right now today. So I am very appreciative for this time today and I think we will collaborate as a community to get this job done, so thank you very much. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any other discussion? If not, do we have a motion on the floor? Mr. Furfaro: I made the motion to receive. Chair Asing: With that, any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. The motion to receive C 2009-163 for the record was then put, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: We are back on page 1 of the Council's agenda. Communications for receipt on page 1 is communication C 2009-175, communication C 2009-176 and on page 2, also communications for receipt... communication C 2009-177, C 2009-178, C 2009-179, C 2009-180, C 2009-181, C 2009-182 and on the top of page 3 communication C 2009-183. Chair Asing: Can I have a motion to receive? C 2009-175 Communication (02/04/2009) from the Chief of the Building Division, transmitting a request to amend Ordinance No. 857 by correcting inadvertent errors (i.e., typographical errors, citation of sections, etc.) which would amend Chapter 12 of the Kauai County Code 1987, entitled "Building Code": Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-175 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. COUNCIL MEETING - 38 - May 20, 2009 C 2009-176 Communication (04/14/2009) from the -Chief of the Building Division, Department of Public Works, transmitting for Council information, the Building Permit Information Reports for March 2009 that includes the following: 1) Building Permit Processing Report ' 2) Building Permit Estimated Value of Plans Summary 3) Building Permits Tracking Report 4) Building Permits Status Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-176 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-177 Communication (04/27/2009) from the Director of Finance, transmitting for Council information the Period 9 Financial Reports -Statement of Revenues as of March 31, 2009: Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-177 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-178 Communication (04128/2009) from the Executive Assistant, Kauai County Housing Agency, transmitting a request to amend Chapter 6, Article 9, of the Kauai County Code 1987, as Amended: Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-178 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-179 Communication (04130/2009) from the Director of Finance, transmitting for Council information, supplemental information pertaining to the estimated reduction in real property tax revenues as a result of various tax relief measures enacted by the County Council: Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009- 179 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-180 Certification (05/01/2009) by the Director of Finance of the 2009 Real Property Assessment List within the County of Kauai: Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-180 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-181 Communication (0 5/0 112 0 0 9) from the Planning Director, transmitting the Planning Commission's recommendation to amend Condition No. 10 of Ordinance No. PM-31-79 (Moana Corporation) as directed by Condition No. 2 of Ordinance No. PM-2001-354, to obtain access to Po`ipu Road (Kiahuna Land Company and Po`ipu Town Center, LLC, Applicants): Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-181 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-182 Communication (05/04/2009) from the Director of Personnel Services, transmitting for Council information, the following classification requests which the Department of Personnel Services will be reviewing and taking appropriate action: • Fire Department, Position No. 791 (Reallocation of Present Class of Fire Fighter to Fire Fighter Trainee) - - Ma 20 2009 COUNCIL MEETING 39 y , • Fire Department, Position No. 780 (Reallocation of Present Class of Fire Fighter to Fire Fighter Trainee) • Fire Department, Position No. 776 (Reallocation of Present Class of Fire Fighter to Fire Fighter Trainee) Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-182 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. C 2009-183 Communication (05/05/2009) from the Housing Director, transmitting for Council consideration a Resolution to authorize the filing of a Substantial Amendment to the Kauai County 2008 Action Plan of the 5-Year Consolidated Plan to HUD, to expend funds under Title XII of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Community Development Block Grant Program -Recovery Act (CDBG-R): Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-183 for the record, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: At this time, we are on page 3 of the Council's agenda which is communication C 2009-184. C 2009-184 Communication (05/06/2009) from the Mayor, submitting his supplemental budget communication for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 and proposed amendments to the budget bills: Mr. Kaneshiro moved to schedule public hearing for May 27, 2009 at 8:30 a.m. and thereafter refer to the Special Council Meeting on May 27, 2009 at 8:45 a.m., seconded by Ms. Kawahara, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: Next matter for receipt is communication C 2009-185. C 2009-185 Communication (time stamped-05/05/2009) from the Director of Finance, transmitting for Council information, Statement of Condition of the County Treasury as of March 24, 2009: Mr. Kaneshiro moved to receive C 2009-185 for the record, seconded by Mr. Bynum. Chair Asing: Any discussion? Mr. Furfaro: Mr. Chair, as we read the Mayor's message and I think this is my second request. I was hoping that the Council staff could reaffirm what my request was that each quarter that we receive the Treasurer's report as mandated by the Charter, that they give us a comparison from the previous report. I would like to see that during these challenging economic times if they could actually give us that variance report comparing the previous quarter with the quarter report that they are giving us now and show us the variance. I would like to make that request again for the next quarterly report. COUNCIL MEETING - 40 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: So noted. Mr. Nakamura: So noted Mr. Chair. Chair Asing: Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. The motion to receive C 2009-185 for the record was then put, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval on page 3 is communication C 2009-187. C 2009-187 Communication (04/30/2009) from the Prosecuting Attorney, requesting Council approval to expend $2,250.72 of their State Asset Forfeiture Funds (Account #251-0401-513.62-01/Small Equipment, Project A08101) for the purchase of six (6) file cabinets: Mr. Bynum moved to approve C 2009-187, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The matter for approval on page 3 is communication C 2009-188. C 2009-188 Communication (05/08/2009) from Derek S.K. Kawakami, Hawaii State Association of Counties (HSAC) Vice President, submitting for Council approval the HSAC Fiscal Year 2009-2010 Proposed Annual Operating Budget: Mr. Furfaro moved to approve C 2009-188, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: At the bottom of page 3 Mr. Chair on communication C 2009-189 and if we could move this to the end of the agenda until after the executive session. Chair Asing: So noted. Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next item on page 4 of the Council's agenda for approval is a LEGAL DOCUMENT: C 2009-190. LEGAL DOCUMENT: COUNCIL MEETING - 41 - May 20, 2009 C 2009-190 Communication (05/04/2009) from the Chief of Field Operations and Maintenance, Public Works Department, requesting Council approval to indemnify the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and to execute the First Amendment to Right-Of--Entry No. 344 with the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in order to access their property for the purpose of an emergency by-pass road allowing the public to traverse the former Wailua cane haul road when Kuhio Highway is shut down due to a vehicular accident or emergency repairs: 1) First Amendment to Right-Of--Entry Permit No. 344 (ROE 344) by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands for granted use for the County of Kauai for the period of five (5) years from April 22, 2009 through April 21, 2014: Mr. Furfaro moved to approve C 2009-190, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro. Chair Asing: What I would like to do is suspend the rules at this time. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. Chair Asing: With that, Glenn. GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Kaipo. For the record, Glenn Mickens. You have a copy of my testimony and I would like to read it for the record and for the viewing public. My opinion is way past time that this so-called emergency bypass road be made operational to all through traffic. Since Hawaiian Home Lands is already giving permission to use this property as an emergency road, when Kuhio Highway is blocked, why not ask them permission to say road to be used full- time. A former writer for the Garden Island, Bill Legro once wisely said that it would be a good idea to fully pave that road, make it one way going south bound and make Kuhio Highway one-way going north bound. This would eliminate the head on collisions on Kuhio plus the bypass could be made wide enough to funnel cars in both directions if Kuhio were closed. I believe that Mayor Baptiste cut the ribbon for usage of this road three (3) or four (4) years ago. But, as you know, accidents and fires along Kuhio Highway have happened and this bypass has not been operated. We must stop looking at our needs on Kauai through the wrong end of binoculars and address the big picture. We desperately need more alternate roads on Kauai and here we have a chance to get one. The road is already there, the cane haul road and instead of thinking emergency bypass, let's go after Federal funds that Governor Lingle is talking about and make it a true bypass as.was done with the Wailua bypass road that has been in success at alleviating traffic on Kuhio. Examples of how badly we need more alternate roads on Kauai, were seen when that Ka Loko dam broke. Kuhio Highway was cut off so that the people on the north side of the break had to pay huge helicopter fees to catch their flights back to the mainland as you people all remember. And even more recently a two (2) or three (3) car accident on Kuhio Highway by Kealia Beach backed traffic up miles waiting for the accident to be cleared. They had no way... they couldn't get by that, you know, little fender bender really and it wasn't that big of a deal. The DOT is COUNCIL MEETING - 42 - May 20, 2009 going to spend $20 million to add one lane to Kuhio from Coco Palms to the bypass road to supposedly alleviate traffic in that area. With one new signal going in by the low income housing and two (2) signals already there at Haleilio Road and Kuamo`o Road about a quarter of a mile, how will that one lane ever ease traffic for $20 million. Our money especially now is extremely finite, so why not use it for a true bypass from the river to Hanama`ulu? We must look at the big picture before we continually reach and push that "go" button. Again, basically, I am just saying that, hey, I think we've got a chance here to do something with that bypass road. It has been talked about over and over and I read the thing saying that is made now, you know, for temporary emergency bypass road. But I am just saying, can't we investigate and find out to be able to open it up because we obviously... we have to have more roads to go from point A to point B on this island. You cut one ribbon off of that main highway around this island and we got big problems. Thank you very much Kaipo. Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, I'd like to call the meeting back to order. The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Chair Asing: We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. The motion to approve LEGAL DOCUMENT: C 2009-290 was then put, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next matters are claims on page 4 which is communication C 2009-191 and C 2009-192, claims filed against County. CLAIMS: C 2009-191 Communication (05/11/2009) from the County Clerk, transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Caren F. Diamond, for damages to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai: Mr. Furfaro moved to refer C 2009-191 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Ms. Kawahara, and unanimously carried. C 2009-192 Communication (05/1U2009) from the County Clerk, transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Sherri Silva, for damages to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai: Mr. Furfaro moved to refer C 2009-192 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Ms. Kawahara, and unanimously carried. COUNCIL MEETING - 43 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next matter are the Committee reports. COMMITTEE REPORT: BUDGET & FINANCE COMIVIITTEE REPORT: A report (No. CR-B&F 2009-12) submitted by the Budget & Finance Committee, recommending that the following be approved as amended on second and final reading: "Bill No. 2308 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 3, SUBSECTION 19-3.2 (b) AND SUBSECTION 19-3.2 (i) OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INCREASING THE PLAYING AND DRIVING RANGE BALL TOKEN FEES AT THE WAILUA GOLF COURSE," Mr. Kaneshiro moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Furfaro. (See later for Bill No. 2308, Draft 1) Chair Asing: Any discussion? Yes, Councilmember Kawakami. Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Council Chair. I do have a floor amendment. Mr. Kaneshiro: We will do it on the bill. Mr. Nakamura: We have a motion and a second. Chair Asing: Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor say aye. The motion to approve CR-B&F 2009-12 was then put, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next matter on the top of page 5 is a resolution for approval. This is Resolution No. 2009-44. RESOLUTION: Resolution No. 2009-44 -RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO THE KAUAI COUNTY 2008 ACTION PLAN OF THE 5-YEAR CONSOLIDATED PLAN WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, TO COUNCIL MEETING - 44 - Ma 20, 2009 Y EXPEND GRANT FUNDS UNDER TITLE XII OF THE AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM -RECOVERY ACT: Mr. Bynum moved to adopt Resolution No. 2009-44, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and carried by the following vote: FOR ADOPTION: ,Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro, Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7, AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL - 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next matters are bills for first reading. BILLS FOR FIRST READING: Proposed Draft Bill No. 2314 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 12 OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE-1987 ENTITLED "BUILDING CODE": Mr. Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2314 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for June 16, 2009, and that it thereafter be referred to the Public Works/Elderly Affairs Committee, seconded by Mr. Kawahara, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro, Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL - 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next draft bill for first reading is Proposed Draft Bill No. 2315. Proposed Draft Bill No. 2315 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ARTICLE 9 OF CHAPTER 6, KAUAI COUNTY CODE, 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE HOUSING REVOLVING FUND: Mr. Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2314 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for June 16, 2009, and that it thereafter be referred to the Economic DevelopmentlHousing Committee, seconded by Mr. Kawakami, and carried by the following, vote: FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro, Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL - 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0. COUNCIL MEETING - 45 - ~ May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: Last bill for first reading is Proposed Draft Bill No. 2316. Proposed Draft Bill No. 2316 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ZONING CONDITION IN ORDINANCE NO. PM-31-79, RELATING TO ZONING DESIGNATION IN PO`IPU, KAUAI (Kiahuna Land Company, a Hawaii limited partnership; and Po`ipu Town Center, LLC, Applicants): Mr. Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2314 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for June 16, 2009, and that it thereafter be referred to the Planning Committee, seconded by Mr. Bynum. Chair Asing: Any discussion? Mr. Furfaro: Yes, Mr. Chair, since this will be in my Committee, I want to make a special note at present. The original ordinance in 1979 may have some conflicts with an amended ordinance in 2001. I would like to move forward with scheduling the public hearing, but I would like to at least ask the County Attorney to look at any possible adjustments that we need to make on those two (2) ordinances. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? If not, roll call please. The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2316 was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro, Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7, AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL - 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0. Chair Asing: Next item please? Mr. Nakamura: The next item is a bill for second reading which is Bill No. 2308, Draft 1. BILLS FOR SECOND READING: Bill No. 2308, Draft 1 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 3, SUBSECTION 19-3.2 (b) AND SUBSECTION 19-3.2 (i) OF THE KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO INCREASING THE PLAYING AND DRIVING RANGE BALL TOKEN FEES AT THE WAILUA GOLF COURSE: Mr. Kaneshiro moved to approve Bill No. 2308, Draft 1, seconded by Mr. Bynum. ' COUNCIL MEETING - 46 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: I believe there is an amendment. Councilmember Kawakami? Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Mr. Chair. There is an amendment that has been circulated. Basically, it was brought to my attention by the Parks & Recreation Department that had inadvertently put in $18.50 as the amount for the twilight daily rate for non-residents. The amendment changes that amount to $30 which reflects half price for daily rate for non-residents. And that being said, that is the gist of the floor amendment. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any discussion on the amendment? Was there a motion? Mr. Mr. Kawakami moved to amend Bill No. 2308, Draft 1 as circulated, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: Any further discussion on the amendment? All those in favor say aye. Is there any discussion on the main motion? Councilmember Kaneshiro? Mr. Kaneshiro: I have one Mr. ,Chair. I know that for the twilight daily, somehow there wasn't any rate put in for the super senior, so I am not sure of what the charges would be, but for me, you know, as a super senior, I would say that they should be free and not even at twilight time. If they want to play, it be zero, but I just wanted to note that for the record. I don't see, like I said, a break here and I am hoping that the Administration won't charge them, you know, a super senior rate or a senior resident rate, so I just wanted to note that for the record. Chair Asing: Any further discussion? Yes, go ahead Tim. Mr. Bynum: I am just... we looked at the fees for the golf course. I am pleased that we created along with suggestions from the golf community and that the Parks Department supported... created a super senior rate for the first time and kept the fees the same as they have been. Last week, this Council concurred that we keep the junior rates at $1.00, so it is not to have an obstacle for our junior golfers. I think we will probably follow up with a discussion because we had questions that I think are being sent over about where we go if anywhere from here in the future, and I am looking forward to those future discussions about... and getting the answers from the Administration regarding our enterprise fund for the golf and then eventually having the discussion amongst ourselves about the (inaudible) policy, but I think this rate increase was intended to be for this year without looking at the future. (Inaudible) that I assume that we will do that in the future and I am glad that we came to a consensus on how to go this year. COUNCIL MEETING - 47 - May 20, 2009 . Chair Asing: Okay, any further discussion? Councilmember Furfaro? Mr. Furfaro: Chairman Asing, I have sent over five (5) questions that will not prevent me from voting for this bill, but those five (5) questions deal with the discussion we had at the meeting. There was no adjustment for the visitor rounds in their forecasted formula. The question about peak times as well as the definitions of twilight and so forth that I think need to be eventually looked at a future time, but I did send over those same questions earlier. Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? If not, roll call please. The motion to approve Bill No. 2308, Draft 1 as amended was then put, and carried by the following vote: FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro, Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7, AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL - 0, EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0. Chair Asing: Can we have the County Attorney up? Mr. Nakamura: At this time Mr. Chair, there has been a request on page 6 of the Council's agenda to defer executive session item ES-385. ES-385 Pursuant to Haw.Rev.Stat. Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(4) and (8), and Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is to provide the Council a briefing on the Charter amendments adopted in the 2008 General Election and other related matters. This briefing and consultation involves the consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to legal ramifications and/or requirements and/or claims and/or potential claims relating to this agenda item: Mr. Furfaro moved to defer ES-385, seconded by Ms. Kawahara, and unanimously carried. Chair Asing: We have the County Attorney up now. There being no objections, the rules were suspended. ALFRED CASTILLO, JR.: COUNTY ATTORNEY: Good morning Council Chair and Councilmembers. I am assuming that we are going to go... I am going to talk about the 189 first? COUNCIL MEETING - 48 - May 20, 2009 Chair Asing: No, ES-384. Mr. Castillo: Okay, 384. Chair Asing: On page 6. Mr. Castillo: Okay, I got it, so this is for executive session 384. ES-384 Pursuant to Haw.Rev.Stat. §§92-4 and 92-5(a)(4)(6) and (8), and Kauai County Charter §3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is to provide a Council briefing on Gerard R. Bosma, et al. v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. No. 08- 1-0052 (Fifth Circuit Court); Ronald and Gina Calisher v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. No. 07-1-0106 (Fifth Circuit Court); Bruce Fehring, Individually and as Special Administrator of the Estates of Aurora Fehrin~, et al. v. James H. Pflue~'er, et al., Civ. No. 06-1-0082 (Fifth Circuit Court); and Bette Midler, et al. v. James H. Pflue~'er, et al., Civ. No. 06-1-0110 (Fifth Circuit Court) and related matters. This 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. Chair Asing: With that, I would like to call the meeting back to order. The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows: Chair Asing: Can I have a motion to move into executive session? Mr. Kaneshiro moved to go into executive session on ES-384, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried. There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 12:15 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 1:35 p.m., and proceeded as follows: Chair Asing: With that, I believe we have one more item. Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair, at the bottom of page 3 of the Council's agenda which is a communication for approval. C 2009-189 Request (05/14/2009) from the Office of the County Attorney for authorization to expend up to $250,000 from the special counsel account to continue to retain outside counsel to represent the County in Gerard R. Bosma, et al. v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. 08-1-0052 (Fifth Circuit Court); Ronald and Gina Calisher v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. 07-1-0106 (Fifth Circuit Court); Bruce Fehring Individually And As Special Administrator of the Estates of Aurora Fehring, et al. v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. No. 06-1-0082 (Fifth Circuit Court); and Bette Midler, et al. v. James H. Pflueger, et al., Civ. No. 06-1-0110 (Fifth Circuit Court) and related matters: Mr. Furfaro moved to approve C 2009-189, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried. OUNCIL MEETING - 49 - Ma 20 2009 C y , Chair Asing: There being no other items on the agenda, the Council meeting is adjourned. Thank you. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 1:36 p.m. Respectfully submitted, PETER A. N County Clerk /lki