HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-2009 COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES COUNCIL MEETING
November 4, 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,
November 4, 2009 at 9:10 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
Chair Asing: Can we have the first item please?
PETER A. NAKAMURA, COUNTY CLERK: The first item is approval of the
agenda.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mr. Furfaro moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by Mr. Chang,
and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next item is approval of the minutes of the
following meetings of the Council.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
Special Council Meeting of October 14, 2009
Public Hearing of October 21, 2009 re: Bill No. 2328 and Bill No. 2329
Mr. Furfaro moved for approval of the minutes as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next item is a communication, communication
number C 2009-334.
COUNCIL MEETING - 2 - November 4, 2009
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2009-334 Communication (10/22/2009) from Bill "Kaipo" Asing, Council
Chair, requesting an update by Dr. Karl Kim and the Planning Department on the
Important Agriculture Lands Study:
Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, I would like to suspend the
rules.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Chair Asing: I guess we will have Ian up first.
IAN COSTA, PLANNING DIRECTOR: Aloha kaka hiaka Councilmembers.
Ian Costa, Planning Director. I am excited to announce that we have begun our
long awaited important ag land study mandated by Act 183, H.R.S. We did initiate
our study by way of conducting a public meeting on September 30 which some of
you may have attended, and we did get a request for our consultant from the
University of Hawaii, Dr. Karl Kim to make the same presentation to you today.
So without further ado, I am proud to introduce Dr. Karl Kim from the University of
Hawaii.
DR. KARL KIM, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII: Good morning.
ALL COUNCILMEMBERS: Good morning.
Dr. Kim: Thank you for this opportunity to give you an
update on our project. I want to express our appreciation on behalf of the University
of Hawaii, on behalf of the faculty, the researchers, the staff, and especially the
students many of whom are working on this project for the support of this research
that we are doing. We think this is a really important project and I am really
excited to be involved in this. I have been an Urban Planning Professor for more
than 25 years at the University of Hawaii and I have to say that this is a very
interesting, challenging, and I hope ultimately useful project to you all. If I might, I
know... I brought a PowerPoint presentation along and I have timed it for about
15 minutes or so. If it would be okay, I'd like to proceed and do that, and then open
it up for any kind of questions or discussions or suggestions.
Chair Asing: Yea, let me just comment Dr. Kim when you say if
it is okay and you make reference to 15 minutes. As far as this Council is
concerned, you take as much time as you like to do a good presentation. That is our
intent. Prior to asking you to come over here, I did check with Councilmember
Furfaro who is the Planning Chair, and he also concurs that, you know, the
information that you are going to be presenting to us is very important to us, to
Councilmember Furfaro who is the Chairperson of the Planning Committee. So we
are at your pleasure.
COUNCIL MEETING - 3 - November 4, 2009
Dr. Kim: Okay, great. If I can, I would like to move.
Mr. Furfaro: And we are going to get ourselves a little resituated
here as well, so we can see the screen.
Dr. Kim: What I would do here briefly is go over the
background to our study, talk about some of the goals and the objectives, review our
timeline, talk about our process of encouraging public input, describe the process
that we are using, and then also highlight some of the planning activities that we
have underway. I have updated this since the kickoff meeting as well too, so I have
added some data that we have collected (inaudible). Our research team includes
faculty from the University of Hawaii including Dr. Carl Bonham who is the
director of the University of Hawaii economic research organization, and we also
have an agricultural economist as well too, Dr. Donna Lee who is also helping with
some of the agricultural economics, as well as the team of graduate students and
others who are working on this project. I think as mentioned before by Director
Costa, we had a kickoff starting announcement project on Wednesday,
September 30. We gave a background to the study, we described the different
approaches and methods and tools that we are using. We stressed the importance
of public participation. At that kickoff, we also reviewed the timeline and the
deliverables and we had a set of activities... both large group activities as well as
smaller group activities, so that there would be some participation, engagement,
and involvement in this project, and we also described the next steps.
At that session too, we also introduced the technology that actually is not
that strange to the University. We use this in testing a lot in large classes. It is
called the I-clicker technology, so what we did was we used this in that session. We
wanted to experiment with it to see how people liked it, and it also gave us a way of
collecting feedback in an organized manner... immediate feedback. What these
clickers do is that they allow participants basically to vote, and we can
accommodate up to a hundred individuals at a time to collect, to capture their
views. And so what we did with this is we have a series of large group exercises
where we ask people to describe themselves, we ask people to give their input in
terms of the criteria, we organize that, and then took the overall results, and gave
that to the small groups for more discussion. And then the small groups met,
reviewed the criteria, ranked them, identified other concerns and issues as well too.
And, again, this was just for the kickoff and we wanted to test this technology yet
introduce people to some of the issues. We intend to employ a version of this
technology with our regional meetings as well too. We all know about the
importance of agriculture to Kauai, to its history, to its economy in terms of its
landscape, in terms of the lifestyles here. We recognize that. We were reminded of
that, we had a booth at the farm fair and I saw many of you at the farm fair as well
too, and we received input from the public and a reminder of how important
agriculture is. The importance of agriculture is also reinforced by our constitution
which says that the State will conserve and protect agricultural lands, and assure
COUNCIL MEETING - 4 - November 4, 2009
the availability of agriculturally suitable lands, and also we will designate or
identify important agricultural lands as well too.
And as many of you... Act 183 passed which basically discouraged the
fragmentation of agricultural lands, it had a number of other provisions to direct
non-agricultural uses to other areas, to limit development on agricultural lands to
keep these lands affordable for farming, and there were other provisions that
supported and maintained infrastructure for farming, and also increase the
viability of agriculture. We axe doing a more in depth analysis of Act 183 as part of
the study, but one of the things that I do want to point out that the designation
allows for two (2) processes. A direct landowner petition for the designation, and we
have some experience with Alexander & Baldwin properties on Kauai, but also a
County led process. So what we are working on is the County led processes, working
closely with an advisory committee to develop recommendations to the Land Use
Commission, and that is what we are supporting. Our approach is to work closer to
the community to encourage to the extent possible deep, meaningful, engaged
participation. What we are trying to do is to integrate both technical data and
public input. We had not just the kickoff meeting, but we also have the series of
regional meetings planned, and more routine meetings with an advisory committee.
This is to be a data and an assumption driven approach. We built a website, blogs,
and other tools to distribute this information, and what we are trying to do with
this is to have a public open participatory process in which there is shared learning.
The technical advisory committee is designed to have islandwide
representation as well as knowledge of agriculture, planning, and community
issues. Their role is to review the technical data, the mapping information to
review the criteria, incentives, the urban growth models that we have developed, as
well as the underlined assumptions regarding population, and economic growth.
And so what we have planned for this, islandwide representation, and monthly
meetings. Our outreach efforts include not just the kickoff, but two (2) rounds of
public information meetings which will be broken up into three (3) regional areas in
the north, central, and west areas, and then monthly technical advisory committee
meetings. A technical advisory committee is to have representation across all six
(6) districts, as well as representation from landowners, farmers, stakeholders,
government agencies, and relevant organizations, and we will try to distribute this
information. In terms of our deliverables, it includes a technical review of Act 183,
the General Plan, the development plan, a review of other developments in terms of
agricultural land preservation. What we are doing is acquiring all the data, maps,
and then mapping the potential candidate lands for designation, applying the
criteria, and then what we are creating is a set of GIS files, maps, and information
which we will convey to the County as well too. The approach is to have a baseline
evaluation of what the growth will be into the future, and evaluate the impact of
alternative proposals for the designation of important ag lands. And then based on
that, make recommendations for the General Plan, the development plan, and the
Land Use Commission. As many of you are aware, there are eight (8) different
criteria for the important ag lands. They include whether or not lands are currently
COUNCIL MEETING - 5 - November 4, 2009
used for agricultural production, whether or not the lands have soil and growing
conditions that support agricultural production, whether they are identified under
rating systems such as the ALISH system as lands of the importance to the State of
Hawaii, whether they are associated with native Hawaiian agricultural uses, and
whether they are sufficient quantities of water to support viable agricultural
production.
Another criteria is the consistency with general development and community
plans of the County, and whether or not the designation helps to maintain critical
land mass important to the agricultural productivity into the future. And, finally,
whether or not the lands are with or near support infrastructure necessary for
agricultural productivity. So a good chunk of this project involves the mapping of
important ag lands. As many of you know, we did a pilot study for the Land Use
Commission. I came before the Council and presented our findings from that pilot
study. That pilot study was a test of different data and methods and tools. We did
it in the Koloa/Po`ipu area. It allowed us to acquire the different data, it allowed us
to build an urban growth model, we received feedback. One of the things that... one
of the concerns that we received was there was not enough public participation in
the process. Well, in part, because it was a prototype pilot study, but this time what
we have done is we redesigned this modeling mapping procedure to try to include
much more public participation. So we are trying to do a better job which involves
bigger more involved public involvement. So we want to use the regional meetings
as well as the stakeholder advisory committee meetings to garner the necessary
public input to really do a more complete job in terms of mapping the candidate
sites.
As many of you are familiar... our process was to acquire all of the base maps
of this region and then basically map the eight (8) different criteria, and then
develop urban growth scenarios, and then look at different policies in terms of
designation of important agricultural lands. What this gives us is... it is sort of a
working draft that we are using. It is something for people to critique and comment
on and we are working to refine and improve this underlined model. It has really
two (2) components. It has a growth model which indicates where growth will be
occurring driven both by population and land use assumptions, but it also has a set
of policy prescriptions in terms of the designation of agricultural lands. And so by
working at this, we can look at a range of different alternatives and assess what the
impacts will be. One of the challenges has been the inclusion of incentives as well
too. There are seven (7) different incentives. We are actually... we have actually
started an analysis of the incentives and the impact of the incentive, and it is a
challenging process to say the least, but we are working on that.
Our timeline for the project is that we started on August 1. We had a kickoff
meeting on September 30 and we are in the process now of reviewing the various
relevant laws and acts. We are in the process of appointing the advisory committee
meetings. We have done a lot of work in terms of gathering the data and starting
some of the mapping. We are continuing to refine the urban growth model. We will
COUNCIL MEETING - 6 - November 4, 2009
have regional meetings in early January. I am sorry, we will also have an advisory
committee meeting shortly and we hope to have that before the holidays, the start,
and then the strategy is for us to pull together, compile as much data and
information as we can, and then the start of the new year begin the regional
meetings and the stakeholder advisory committee meetings. And then these
stakeholder meetings will continue throughout the year 2010 and so we will work to
have an initial work done by 2011 in terms of the draft study and that we should
hope for recommendations to emerge sometime in the Spring of 2011. This gives us
adequate time to work with the stakeholder committee meeting and to work with
the stakeholder as well as to have two (2) rounds of regional meetings to ensure
sufficient public participation. So we are looking at basically a two (2) year project.
As I mentioned earlier, we begun a process of farming islandwide
information... one of the recommendations that was made at one of the meetings
was to apply our information on the ahupua`a locations, and so we have begun to
map them, and then convert them to the grid base structure that we are using. We
are also acquiring all the other relevant data like the State Land Use classifications
and converting this to our grid base structure. The agricultural data as well too and
then also information... for example from the census and if you know the census
blocks and census tracks... go up to the tops of the mountains where no one is
living, and so what we are doing is reworking this based on the roadway... where
the roadways are located and incorporating land use data to estimate the
population areas as well. This is somewhat tedious work, but, again, it will help us
to have the underlined information that is necessary for this.
So I want to report to you that we are making good progress. We are more or
less on schedule and I think I have taken up my 20 minutes, so I will open this up
for questions.
Chair Asing: Okay, we will take a five (5) minute break, so I can
get the Councilmembers back and you can go up to the podium there, and we will
start the question and answer period.
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 9:33 a.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 9:48 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: With that, Councilmembers, any questions?
Councilmember Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you for the summary
presentation. Could I ask you to... I need to find the page, I am sorry, but could you
expand on the section that is dealing with certain criteria and in particular on the
criteria for important ag lands, item number 5. What exactly is happening there
to...
COUNCIL MEETING - 7 - November 4, 2009
Chair Asing: Councilmember Furfaro, why don't we do this
Councilmembers just so that it will help all of us. Take your handout and mark the
pages 1 through... I marked mine 1 through 27 and the item that we are making
reference to right now for Councilmember Furfaro I believe is on page 13.
Mr. Furfaro: Yes. And in particular that deals with what are you
looking for as you map out water resources for agricultural land. Is it based on the
current inventory of reservoirs based on old plantation irrigation systems and only
requires some repair maintenance, could you expand on that for us?
Dr. Kim: What we have done is to identify and map all of the
ditches, the irrigation systems that there are reservoirs, and that is the way that we
had approached this initially using a combination of aerial photographs... other
information that we received. One of the concerns that was raised was that we may
be missing some due to the ahupua`a or other water related structures, so that is
one of the reasons we included the ahupua`a locations as well too. What we are
trying to do is to have a complete picture of both the human introduced systems as
well as the natural systems as well too. Some of you may have seen the recent
paper that was done that was actually looked at the water resources and
agricultural systems on all the islands, so what we are trying to do is to use the best
available data to estimate the water... the location and the adequacy of these water
resources.
Mr. Furfaro: Were there any assumptions made on the potential
development of collecting surface waters and in the future. I mean were there areas
that were identified as potential collection points with existing storage in a nearby
reservoir. Is there any part of the study that touched on those assumptions?
Dr. Kim: You know, those are the types of things that we
would want to have handled through the stakeholder or through the advisory
committee as well too. Based on the kickoff meeting and the initial input that we
received, water has been identified as very critical issue for us to focus on, so we
know that we have to spend a bit more effort than we did in the pilot study on this,
so... and part of the reason for having these regional committee meetings or these
regional meetings as well too is to review the quality of our mapping efforts as well
too. Did we miss certain water infrastructure, did we miss certain water resources,
and so what we are trying to do is to use community input as a way of checking
some of our assumptions.
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much. I have no more questions.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Councilmember Chang?
Mr. Chang: Doctor, thank you for joining us this morning. You
know, I just had a question out of maybe curiosity and I don't think I heard it, but
when you do your studies are we 4 by 4, are we hiking, are we using local
COUNCIL MEETING - 8 - November 4, 2009
knowledge within the various areas of the community, are we doing aerial studies, I
mean how does this process work as far as finding out what you are looking for?
Dr. Kim: Well, we are trying to begin islandwide because this
is an islandwide study and to acquire the best available islandwide data. And then
what we did was we divided the island up into three (3) regions and the idea was
that what we would do is go and collect regional specific information for those three
(3} regions. We have been working with the Planning Department as well too to
identify what those boundaries would be as well too. We are actually in the process
of producing, but basically it is the northern region, central region, and then a
western region on the island. And the idea is that we would take the available
islandwide information and in some cases down to the parcel level, right, for those
three (3) different regions, and then map the eight (8) criteria, and then get input
from the community at that level, so we have proposed two (2) rounds of these
regional meetings. One at the start of the project and then one after the bulk of the
work has been done with the advisory committee with their recommendations, with
their... and then we will take the results and findings out to the community to see if
we have missed anything in terms of either the assumptions that went into the
model or, you know, the data that we have collected. As I mentioned in my
presentation that this is a data driven, assumption driven process, and what we are
trying to do is to collect best available data, to share that data broadly, have people
critique it and to say, no, no, this is junk, it has been changed or development in
this area, and then use that as the basis for testing certain policy choices.
Mr. Chang: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any other questions? Councilmember
Kawahara?
Ms. Kawahara: Thank you Chair. Good morning. It is good to see
you. I was lucky enough to be able to attend your kickoff in September and I wanted
to acknowledge and recognize the fact that you were getting a lot of public input,
and that became part of a big way of approaching this study, so thank for that and I
want you to continue to do that. My question is, when you say that your data
assumption driven approach and you were explaining it a little bit there, so I like
that. So you are going to look at assumptions that have been made in the past and
use public information and public input to address and test those, and then add it to
the data?
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Ms. Kawahara: Okay, great. Two (2) more questions. The
stakeholder technical advisory committee. I see a deadline here for the 30th. Have
you... I know that we have submitted names.
Dr. Kim: Yes.
COUNCIL MEETING - 9 - November 4, 2009
Ms. Kawahara: Everybody submitted names and how far along are
you because it said it was not appointed yet.
Mr. Costa: We did set a soft deadline if you will for applications
to be submitted by October 15 and are strategically looking at November 15 or
providing a recommend... an ST or stack committee recommendation by the Mayor
by November 15.
Ms. Kawahara: (Inaudible) just in process, it goes to the Mayor and
takes those names and give them...
Mr. Costa: Right now, we have compiled all of the applications
and we have received approximately 30 and we are going through those and
providing a recommendation to the Mayor. So, again, we anticipate that the Mayor
will be making his decision and announcement by November 15.
Ms. Kawahara: Okay, thank you and the last question is on the
water. I am so glad that Councilmember Furfaro asked about that. Are you going
to be determining importance of ag land by the type of water available like potable
versus ground and surface? Are you going to be making distinctions on importance
of availability of those different types?
Dr. Kim: We have to make those sorts of distinctions, but,
again, what we are trying to do is to work closely with the advisory committee to
resolve some of those questions about how we best determine what the water
conditions are.
Ms. Kawahara: Okay, thank you very much and thanks for being
here.
Dr. Kim: Okay.
Chair Asing: Let me ask a follow up question Ian that
Councilmember Kawahara asked and she asked about the committee makeup and
so the question I had is how many do we plan or expect or is there a target that we
are going to have 30, we are going to have 25, is that going to be kind of fluid or is
there a definite number that we are saying, 25 or 30, and that is what the target is.
Mr. Costa: It is, in essence somewhat fluid. In our scope of
work, we did target a makeup of the committee of approx... a range between 12 to
15 and it is very clear to us that we will exceed.
Chair Asing: 12 to 15 is your target?
COUNCIL MEETING - 10 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Costa: Yes, but at this point it is clear to us that we will
likely exceed that. I think we are trying to keep that committee to no more than two
(2) dozen, but probably in the range of between 20... I mean 16 to 20. It looks like it
would be our recommendation and I guess pending the Mayor's decision on actual
appointment.
Chair Asing: Okay, thank you. Councilmembers?
Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Good morning Dr. Kim. Let me start by saying that
your relationship with the County is now several years old, right, between the pilot
study and now... I mean it is like it is IAL and I want to acknowledge that, you
know, what I have seen in your responsiveness to input from the Council and from
the community that you really are listening to that and modifying your approach.
You know, although this is based on your pilot, it is really more extensive and is
going into a lot of other areas that will be very helpful for this County not only to
identify important ag lands, but for other policy choices that we make in the future,
and so I am very appreciative of this process and the tools that you are going to give
us to make better decisions, so thanks for that responsiveness. And having said
that, when you were here last about the pilot study, you received a lot of questions
about, well, how did you make this assumption or why did you pick this value, and I
just wanted to underline that because you, I thought were very clear at the time.
Hey, I am doing a study, this is a model, I had to make some assumptions to
exercise the model, but a lot of those are policy choices, and they will be made by
the Council, the Mayor, and the elected officials along with that community input.
Have I got that right?
Dr. Kim: Yes, yes.
Mr. Bynum: So I think it is important for the public and people
that are watching this process to say if you plug in some assumptions or some
numbers, you know, you are creating a model for us that eventually those won't be
decisions of Dr. Kim, they will be decisions from the policy makers, right?
Dr. Kim: That is correct.
Mr. Bynum: And I thought that was important given... I thought
misunderstandings about your first pilot study that came from some members of
the community. And having said that, I wanted to go in just a couple of areas and
ask a couple questions.
Dr. Kim: Sure.
Mr. Bynum: You know, you have the slide on Act 183 and then
you had a slide on incentives which was Act 233 if I recall.
COUNCIL MEETING - 11 - November 4, 2009
Dr. Kim: That is correct.
Mr. Bynum: And, you know, a lot of us that have followed this
process were concerned about some elements of 183 and 233 that seemed
inconsistent with the goals. So, for instance, in Act 183, it talks about lending
development on ag lands and, you know, that are viable, but yet Act 183 has a huge,
in my view, loophole of a 50%. Can you explain that to us?
Dr. Kim: Again, this is one of the concerns that we have as
well too in terms of interpreting what is the intent of both 183 and 233. We are
actually in the midst of a process right now to really understand what the intent
was. So we have done some initial analysis, but I don't feel comfortable reporting on
that right now because we have not as yet finished speaking to all the different
groups that were involved in putting this together. We have done our internal and
like you, have many questions and some concerns about how all of this is going to
play out, but I think it would be premature for me right now to sort of spill the
beans as to where that is until we really complete that. But I want to assure you
that we are looking at these concerns, that this is part of the study as well too, that
we are interested in not just the criteria, but actually what the effect of the different
incentives may be in terms of growth and the sort of feedback from the system that
is created. In part to deal with these questions about the economic incentives and
some of the other concerns regarding the issues of agricultural viability and the
economics of farming. We have really broadened the team to include I think some of
the best economist in the State. If you know UHERO and there are the ones who do
lots of different studies in the (inaudible)... they are helping us with the forecast of
not just the population, but also economic activity as well as the economic activity
by important sectors on Kauai as well as throughout the State. So I think by
having those numbers... I would prefer to have Professor Bonham respond to some
of the questions about the economic incentives as well too because he certainly has
some views on this as well too.
Mr. Bynum; I appreciate that feedback and it sounds like that is
someplace that we will go during this two (2) year process.
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: But just to outline the part that is important to me
today is that, you know, people have questions about the intent of 183, and it is
basically... on one side, it is like the stated intent is pretty clear that this is to
preserve ag land and to help make policy decisions about the preservation of ag, and
then there is the concern that there may be others who would use this process to
say, well, what isn't designated ag is open fair game for other purposes. And so
what is important I think to me anyway is that land use issues are largely a County
based and County driven... not completely with the Land Use Commission, but, you
know, historically, the counties control their destiny. And so in 183, you may
identify lands that are important ag, but there is a provision in there that allows
COUNCIL MEETING - 12 - November 4, 2009
the landowner to exempt 50% of those lands. And so our Planning Director in the
past has said quite wisely I think that we are going to determine based on the
criteria. We are not going to put those political consideration or those provisions
into the data, and the determinations or recommendations you make that is going
to be pure, is that correct?
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, so we may end up with a situation where you
identify ag lands of importance and because of the way that the law is written, the
landowner can say, well, at least for State purposes, these lands... you know, I get
to exempt 50% of these lands at my choice, but that doesn't mean that they won't be
identified as ag lands of importance to the County of Kauai, right? And we still will
have some say through our development plans, our General Plan, and the decisions
that are made by policy decisions about the eventual outcome of those lands, is that
correct?
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, so, you know, that is an important part of the
dialogue about how we use the data to realize the vision that our citizens have laid
out for the future of Kauai, so I appreciate that acknowledgement, and it is similar
in Act 233, there is a provision that allows landowner to designate 15% of the
dedicated ag land as for rezoning into urban or rural, and I won't go into details
about that, but I appreciate the approach that our Planning Department is taking
and, you, or saying we are going to provide policy makers the data and the
information to make good decisions, and even though they may not be designated as
important for the State purposes in the way that they have outlined their law, we
are getting information that will help the County make good decisions about land
disposition in the future. Have I got this right?
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, I appreciate that. So the data that we
generate from this study, we can use in our General Plan Update, in our community
development plans. You know, it is going to be helpful data because this is a pretty
extensive study, it has a lot more funding than your pilot study, and I think my
choice about voting for that was because of those kinds of deliverables, and I am
very pleased with the direction you are headed in terms of giving us those things. A
couple more specific questions, and then I will be done. Just that, you know, you
didn't go into detail today, but part of what, you know, your study did, your pilot
study, and I know what you intend to do now talks about urban growth and urban
containment. And that is very similar to the dialogue that we are having in the
Kapa`a/Wailua Development Plan about the community providing input, and
eventually that development plan to what extent do we want to make decisions
COUNCIL MEETING - 13 - November 4, 2009
about how much we spread our development around land, and how compact we
make our towns and communities, right? Have I got that right?
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: So that is a very helpful model for us as well and, in
general, the idea of urban containment is consistent with the idea of smart growth
principles, is that right?
Dr. Kim: Yes, in part.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, I just want to make sure my assumptions are
clear going into this because, you know, I think the study is great because we have
many specific decisions upcoming over the next six (6) or eight (8) years at the
County of Kauai that this data will be very helpful and this dialogue and this
understanding for both the community and for decision makers. Thank you very
much for being patient with my questions.
Mr. Costa: If I could I just wanted to clarify that although
Dr. Kim has been involved in studies on Kauai for a few years, the pilot project was
actually contracted directly with the Land Use Commission, so this is the first
contract that we are directly contracting with the University of Hawaii.
Mr. Bynum: Great.
Chair Asing: Any other questions Councilmembers? If not, let
me just follow up on one of the items. You know, I guess when we have the two (2)
Acts, they are not that clear and I think it is not going to be easy for you also. But
the follow up question is, what happens after this Council adopts the plan? Now
what happens to the plan? We adopt the plan, what happens to that plan? Can you
give me some idea on what you think the process is presently?
Dr. Kim: I think that it would go to the Land Use
Commission as a petition and, so in conferring with the Land Use Commission,
what we need to do is work with them throughout this process as well too. In part
of our work has to be after the designations... the identification of what the
important ag lands are is to review the implications in terms of the General Plan,
the Development Plan, and the zoning ordinances as well too. That is part of what
we have to do at the County level and because those sorts of questions and concerns
will be raised by the LUC as well too. And if there is agreement consistency,
support of the Planning Department, I believe that things will go more smoothly
with the Land Use Commission.
Chair Asing: One of the reasons for that is, you know, although
we would like to think that we control our destiny.
COUNCIL MEETING - 14 - November 4, 2009
Dr. Kim: Right.
Chair Asing: And that is not the real life that I know in the
environment that we are in and we have been under all this time because no matter
what we do, after we get through making changes and how we see it, the end result
as I understand it and you correct me if I am wrong. It goes to the State Land Use
Commission and they make the final decision period. If they decide differently than
we what we recommended it is going to be uphill, but I like what you said Dr. Kim
in that you will be working closely with them throughout this process, so we will
always be touching base, and if we do that I think what you are saying is that
things will go smoothly at the end because we will be touching base all the time.
Am I correct?
Dr. Kim: Yes, and if I may, I think there is something else as
well too. This is a data driven process as well too. Different types of data about not
just the land use and the agricultural sector conditions, but also input from the
public as well too, and input from the Planning Department and other relevant
units on Kauai. So I have to believe that if we are all together here on this island,
then things will go more smoothly with the Land Use Commission.
Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, Councilmember Kawakami?
Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Council Chair. Thank you for your
presentation and I guess I have a question that kind of follows up with yours, but it
drills down maybe another layer, so if it is an unfair question, I can send it over in
writing, but... you know, one of the main concerns that I have is we are going to do
this study and we are going to identify all these important ag lands, and we are
going to fulfill the mission of preserving all of this ag land, but do we have the
farmers who farm the land, but what do we do? Do we let it lay fallow until we can
get the farmers? Are we working in parallel with CTAHR to see what the
enrollment is? Are we trying to market that this is going to be the direction that
our diversified economy is going to be driven towards the revitalization of
agricultural and we are taking all of these steps, and at the end of the day, if we
don't have the farmers, what is next because we have land now that is laying fallow.
Dr. Kim: You know, these are excellent points, excellent
questions and concerns that you are raising. The first point to the difficulty of
agriculture... I mean as we all know and the recent advance showed that even on
Kaua`i... even though it has been expressed by the constitution, by our General
Plans, by the public that we have interacted with that there is a strong desire to
have agriculture, to preserve agriculture, to make sure that agriculture is in our
future, it is a very challenging business to be in, a very challenging industry to be
in. So I think the types of concerns that you are raising actually underlie the
reasons for Act 183 and the incentive program as well too. We have been looking at
different national programs across the country. We are not the only ones to try to do
this and I was speaking to an expert on this, and he said, you know, one thing that
COUNCIL MEETING - 15 - November 4, 2009
Hawaii did get right not knowing the details, but this idea of doing both... treating
this both as a zoning issue with the IAL issue is as well as thinking about the
incentives or agricultural subsidies that are needed. It is not just land. That is not
the only... it is not just water, but it has to do with other factors related to the
agricultural industry as well too. And that is why it is critical for our technical
advisory committee to have the people who are knowledgeable... not just about
agriculture, but agriculture on Kauai. And even if we can't get some of these people
because they are too busy farming and trying to make their businesses work, we
want to get their participation, and so we are trying to think about ways in which
we can do that and work more closely with the other agricultural units. But, again,
I appreciate the importance of your questions that you are raising.
Mr. Kawakami: And you raise good points. I guess this is the time
where we are going to have to start thinking outside of the box and creating
incentives and subsidies and creating scholarships to motivate these kids to, you
know, invest their future in ag. I mean that is where it is going to come down to. It
is that next generation of farmer. The average farmer now is almost ready to retire
and their kids don't necessarily want to farm anymore, so it is... I guess it is time to
think outside of the box and how do we promote farming without, you know, giving
away the farm so to say, so thank you.
Dr. Kim: One other point that I did want to make is that, you
know, I spent four (4) years as the Chief Academic Officer at the Manoa campus,
and one of the things that came out was the importance of combining agriculture
with science and technology. And then if we look at this as really what... not the
way that we looked at agriculture in the past, but to the future, I think that there is
more hope or more possibility as well too. There has been growth in agriculture
programs especially with the connections to technology, to sustainability, to other
types of industrial development, so I think potentially this could be much bigger
than just a zoning project.
Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Mr. Chair.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any other questions Councilmembers?
Go ahead Councilmember Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Just a follow up on some of the things that I heard
from my members here I think both made really outstanding points, and the Chair
correctly saying that as much as, you know, we want to control our land use destiny,
that is always the case in the State of Hawaii, and I think correctly saying that we
can make a recommendation, but in the long run, LUC will make a decision about
the designation of State IAL lands, right? But I have also seen in your deliverables
a legal technical review of the Kauai General Plan, development plans, and CZO,
and we have a new CZO coming right? So I am assuming... seeing that this is a
two (2) year that that review will be the updated CZO because presumably we will
have that in place, you know, during this same time period. Is that correct Ian or?
COUNCIL MEETING - 16 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Costa: It is correct that we are on the cusp of providing the
decision makers updated CZO. I am not sure if you were implying that within two
(2) years we would update that CZO to recognize IAL.
Mr. Bynum: No.
Mr. Costa: Because that would likely not happen.
Mr. Bynum: It is just based on this great data collection and
data driven model that is happening, it says in the deliverables in the handout we
were given that there will be a legal technical review of GP, DP, and CZO as well as
recommendations.
Mr. Costa: Correct.
Mr. Bynum: And I just want to thank the Planning Department
for looking at the scope of work as not narrow to just meet our requirements under
183, but broader to give us tools to address a myriad of issues we face regarding
land use ordinance.
Mr. Costa: Sure.
Mr. Bynum: But, you know, the Chair is totally correct that
when it comes to that Act 183, we are going to do all this work that the State LUC
is likely to decide, and if we are not happy with that decision, that is the difficulty.
That is just about the relationship within the State and counties around land use.
Mr. Costa: Chair, if I could, can I make a couple comments.
Chair Asing: Sure, go ahead.
Mr. Costa: First of all, I can see that is likely that in our
petition to the LUC once we complete this study, we would likely have some
recommendations as to how Act 183 might be amended to better, you know,
implement it, and make it more effective maybe for us, our perspective on Kauai.
And the other thing that I wanted to touch on was in the many forums that I have
participated in, it has become clear to me that, you know, probably less than 10% of
the population actually actively farms, and I think to make this goal of 183
successful, that is going to have to change, and many more of us will have to be
actively participating to assure that ag is sustainable.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Anymore questions Councilmembers?
Councilmember Furfaro?
COUNCIL MEETING - 17 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Furfaro: Yes, thank you. I was very delighted to hear
Dr. Kim that it looks like, Ian, we are very much on target or very close to it, and I
just want to remind my colleagues at the table some of the moving parts we have
been talking about today was laid out including the CZO as well as the important
ag land study completion. Our target was September 2011... we are now probably
be looking at about a two (2) month adjustment at most, and we also will be seeing
something very soon, maybe towards the beginning of next year on the CZO
updates. So please, if we could, make reference to the earlier schedule that we got
from Planning on the nine (9) major projects, but I would want to ask Dr. Kim. I
think you have said it clearly that our petition when we go to the LUC, we need to
make sure that all the Kauai agencies are reading from the same music sheets, and
that, in fact, will get our composition probably bounded and out to the public if we
are all on the same page.
Dr. Kim: Yes.
Mr. Furfaro: And along those lines, you feel very comfortable
about completion date at this point?
Dr. Kim: Yes, thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Anymore questions Councilmembers?
If not, I had one last question and it is on page 13, and it is the criteria for IAL. Now
I know that this is not yours, you know, it is what the Leg (Legislature) put out, but
I have this burning question on number 1. Currently used for agricultural
production. What is your feel? I mean is there land out there that is not currently
used for ag production that could be IAL type lands, so what is your feel or am I
interpreting this incorrectly?
Dr. Kim: You know, the challenge that we face is to interpret
these criteria, and what we have is a degree of latitude, and we have a degree to
which we can come up with an interpretation that makes sense on Kauai. This is
overarching legislation and as long as we can justify this interpretation either
through the involvement of our advisory committee or through what other counties
are doing or through what other perhaps best practices in terms of... you know, we
spend a lot of time going through each one of these and there are different ways in
which we can make decisions about this, and that is why it is really critical this go
around to have this advisory committee, to have a public process to... actually, this
came up in the kickoff meeting as well too because we went through an exercise in
terms of how would you interpret this criteria? We have how we did it before, but it
is interesting the way in which we look at this as well too. The other point that I
would like to make is that currently used for agricultural production is one of eight
(8) different criteria, and the way that we are looking at right now is that all eight
(8) criteria are equally weighted. It may be the case through this process that we
say that some of these criteria are more important than others and that we want to
attach a stronger weight... one of those that sort of emerged I think initially was
COUNCIL MEETING - 18 - November 4, 2009
the availability of water, and water infrastructure as well too. And so part of what
we are trying to do is work closely with the community, work closely with the
advisory committee, and make some of these sorts of choices, but I think you raise
again important questions which we are onto.
Mr. Costa: And Chair, although the Act 183 does identify and
say that... as one of the criteria using lands currently used for agricultural
production, it does not preclude lands that are not being currently used nor
historically used.
Chair Asing: Great. Thank you. I don't have any questions.
Councilmembers, any other questions? If not, thank you Dr. Kim.
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you very much.
Chair Asing: What I would like to do now is open it up to the
public. With that, Mr. Taylor? Thank you Dr. Kim.
KEN TAYLOR: Chair and members of the Council, my name is Ken
Taylor. I want to thank Chair for having this presentation today and thank Dr. Kim
and the Planning Department for a good presentation. I do have some concerns as
we move forward that I think need to be part of this process, and I think in the end
we are going to... as part of this, we are going to need strong urban growth
boundary to protect ag land. And without them, we will see things tribble along
and the ag lands disappear. I also believe that this is a very important step forward
because as we have reached the end of cheap oil, we know that it is going to be more
and more important to develop our own ag products here on island and with 95,
98% of our food being imported, we know that if currently what is going off-island or
producing buying this percentage, if we could just save 10%. The numbers are
around $15 million that would be inserted into the local economy... that is 10%. If
we could get it up to 50, 60, 70%, we have a tremendous situation and it is not just
about farmers growing product on island, but it is the after... added value items and
we have a strong beef growing activity here on the island, but we don't have the
processing facilities to slaughter and package that product and the same thing with
vegetables from freeze drying to canning whatever it is, but... so there is a lot more
to it than just producing farmers, but I think the reality is and this becomes part of
the mindset that each of you have to have in moving this forward is to make sure
that the community is well aware of the fact that we are at the end of cheap oil, and
things are going to be changing, and they are going to be changing drastically.
Things aren't going to be like they have been for the last 20 years, it is going to be
different, very different in the next 20 years, and we have to start preparing for it,
and there is no better way than to prepare for eating because as you all know we
can do without a lot of things, but we can't do without food or water. So as we move
forward, I think one of the most important things to keep in mind as the process
moves and we adopt this process, part of it has to be strong urban growth
boundaries, period. Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING - 19 - November 4, 2009
Chair Asing: Thank you Ken. With that, Glenn?
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Kaipo. For the record, Glenn Mickens. I
appreciate Dr. Kim's fine presentation. I want to pick up on what Derek said. It is
my sentiments exactly. It seems like we are putting the cart before the horse here
simply because unless you find the people that are willing to go out and farm this
land no matter how important the agricultural land is, it is all moot isn't it? There
is no... Daryl I think is probably the greatest example. He is a farmer. I don't
think Daryl in a congratulatory way is able to farm his land enough to make a
living off of farming alone. He has to do something else to subsidize and I think
most farmers are probably the same way. I am sure they making... get enough crops
to go to the Sunshine markets and stuff, but the farm enough to get us 90% off of
imparted the things, I just don't think it is possible. So we are spending a huge
amount of time and effort in finding these important ag lands, but, again, unless we
have the labor and we know that it is economically feasible to farm them, why are
we pursuing this line of thought? Again, you know, I thought Derek, what you are
saying I thought was outstanding and what Ian made the point, I think that there
is only 10% of our land that is being farmed at this stage of the game and, you
know, what is happening is happening. So, again, I think we have to pursue and,
again, nobody more than you Daryl knows how hard farming is. It is a back
breaking job. I wouldn't farm it a thousand years no matter what I had to do. I
wouldn't go out and, you know, and pick those crops and do things, and I guess you
have cattle and everything else going, but it is hard, hard work. And today, if you
are going to try and get the kids from today to go out and do it, you are dreaming.
Kids won't go five (5) blocks to school without an automobile and to say that they
are going to go out and farm this land, I think it is a dream. Anyway, this is my
thoughts and as Kaipo pointed out to the Land Use Commission is going to make
the final call on this, so the efforts in work that you are going through at this stage
of the game, we are going to kind of be up to them regardless. Thank you Kaipo.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Glenn, hang on.
Mr. Kawakami: I want to kind of just make a point and try to craft
it into a question, but, you know, but those points that I made was, you know,
geared towards how do we now, you know, create the incentive and create the
excitement. I mean we are trying to strive into diversify our economy. We have
identified some points that we want to get into and ag being one of them, health and
wellness, high technology, so how do we create the market for it? I mean how do we
create the success. You know, we have to be a part of that equation and a lot of it is
partnering up with the private sector. I mean how do we educate the farmers on
what it is going to take to market their product to create... you know, to turn a
strawberry into a Kula strawberry, to turn an onion into a Maui onion, to turn poi
into Hanalei poi, so that it is marketable. You know, with the beef industry, we
have the slaughter house, how do we create the market where we are offering the
retailers and the wholesalers a product that they want and desire because they
COUNCIL MEETING - 20 - November 4, 2009
don't want to deal with quarters anymore. They want to deal with break beef that
is broken down that is ready for the shelf. So I mean there is hope in all of this and
the important ag land study is a piece of the puzzle, but how do we now move
forward to create the market because, I don't know, if enrollment, and that is why I
asked the question with CTAHR if enrollment was up or down, where the trends,
biotechnology seems to be the direction that we are moving in, so that is all good
points he made and it is not to discourage... my comment wasn't to discourage the
IAL study, but it was to raise a valid concern that after all the lands are identified.
Mr. Mickens: I agree 100% with what you are saying too. It is
going to take a huge, huge incentive... anymore than solar, you know, now it is
$4,500 with incentives, I think they are down to $1,500. That is a huge incentive to
go ahead and put solar on your houses, but I am not sure in the people part of this
thing that there is that incentive. How you are going to get that incentive and how
you are going to get that incentive into people to go out and do what Daryl is doing
over there. Again, I salute these people for looking to these lands and stuff because
I am sure you don't want to see these lands over developed. I love open space. I
don't want to see this become Oahu or Maui, but, again, you know, you are right on
target. It is going to have to be some (inaudible)... like cars, all these cars you turn
back in and you are going to get 18 miles a gallon, it worked, you know. But, again,
this was a factor that wasn't really involving people that much. It was monetary
and with the other factor that you are bringing up, it is going to have to be, so, you
know, you are going to have to be able to do something with the people, and I don't
know what that fact will be. But like you said, I do appreciate the efforts of
everybody going through this exercise to be able to do something about it. Thank
you.
Chair Asing: Thank you Glenn. Don?
DON HEACOCK: Good morning Mr. Chair and members of the
Council. I want to agree with everything that I heard here. I didn't come in early
enough to hear Dr. Kim speak today, but I heard him speak in front of the
Kapa`a/Wailua neighborhood boards about a month ago. One of the things that I
remember he said was in his review of the literature, 34 States have developed
criteria for protecting important agricultural lands, and the most important one
that they all agreed on was the need to conserve the best agricultural lands.
Mr. Chair, the question said, are there lands today that aren't in agriculture that
are potentially could be the best ag lands. Absolutely yes. In 1835, there were
20,000 acres of taro loi on kuleana lands in the State of Hawaii, 20,000 acres. Do
you know how many there are today? It is sad to say, but we could probably count
them... the hundreds of acres on one hand. Those lands are not only the best lands,
they have the most fertile soils, they have abundant water resources, this is why
our Hawaiian brothers and sisters once farmed them, but they have something else
that no other agricultural lands have. They provide an abundance of ecological
services free. They provide excellent water bird habitat for four (4) species of
endangered water birds. They trap nutrients, sediments, and woody debris washing
COUNCIL MEETING - 21 - November 4, 2009
out of the forest and protect our coral reefs and our coastal water quality because of
them. These lands, without a question, are lands that are... not of just cultural
importance, they are best of the best. As far as the criteria that Dr. Kim has been
given to work with, they are incomplete, they are very incomplete. But the one
criteria that should be addressed in a general way is gravity flow non-potable water
available to that land. We have approximately 150,000 acres of ag land, less than
40% of that has gravity flow non-potable water available to it. Those are the lands
we are allowing some of those lands to be urbanely developed right now, right as we
speak. That is the picture here. We are challenged... this is a piece of the puzzle.
We are challenged with trying to develop sustainable watershed communities...
people, plants, animals, healthy streams, healthy coral reefs. This isn't going to do
it all, but it is a very important step. I would just wrap close by saying Karl... and I
told this to Dr. Karl Kim in his meeting in Kapa`a. He needs to broaden those
criteria. They are very limited. It is what the Legislature gave him. I don't know if
Bernard, our Mayor, has already chosen the STAG... what does that stand for? The
Stakeholder Technical Advisory Committee... if he has not already chosen that, I
would offer what services that I may be able to provide. Third, we absolutely need
to take a watershed approach to this. It isn't just about identifying important ag
lands. It is about identifying where we are going to allow urban growth to increase
and where it needs to stop now where it has already gone too far.
Water runs downhill and if they are too many impervious services, it will
cause not only damage to our streams, but to our coral reefs. Lastly, I know Karl
Kim... last statement. That he mentioned that he is working with a number of
economist. I just want to point out that economist for many years have stated that
there are too many ecologist, but they have never stated that there is too may
economist, and there are broad differences between the neoclassical old school
economist that don't look at certain issues, and the new ecological ecologist that
look at everything. Thank you.
Chair Asing: Councilmember Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: Don, just for your general information. Before you
came into the meeting, there was a portion of questions that were directed at Karl
regarding water and mapping of the water, all irrigation systems, surface collection
water...
Mr. Heacock: Right.
Mr. Furfaro: And although it didn't get into, you know, the long
term issue about gravity fed irrigation systems and so forth, the intent was also
focused about the cost of pumping. His response to us was from this citizen group.
They will be really making deep inquiries into water and the mapping of such.
Regarding your questions on the Mayor's selection, the Planning Director told us
that there were 30 applicants for what might be about 18 positions. Well, he gave a
COUNCIL MEETING - 22 - November 4, 2009
range, 16 to 20, so if there is interest on your part, I would certainly suggest you
contact Planning.
Mr. Heacock: Actually, thank you. You just reminded me. I
think I submitted an application. Thank you Jay.
Mr. Furfaro: Well, it is important to have a balanced group. I
mean they want people to have a, you know, irrigation, water fluid engineers,
farmers, people that know the land, hunters, but just to answer your question, he is
making his decisions by November 15 I think the date was.
Mr. Heacock: Thank you Jay.
Chair Asing: Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Yea, Dan, thank you for your excellent testimony
here today and, you know, this process was anticipated with the State Constitution,
and so it is pretty long overdue and the point that you made that had we done this
years ago, there are places where we defacto urbanize even though we still call it...
that we may not have if we had this information and also your points about, you
know... my term, the way that I was thinking was a difference between kind of
industrial ag and sustainable ag, and the impact and the knowledge and wisdom
that comes from the Polynesian culture in the way that they did land use. And I
think Dr. Kim is being responsive to that, so I just wanted to make those points,
and thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Heacock: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you.
Mr. Heacock: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Is there anyone else? 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: And with that, I don't believe we have a motion on
the floor. Can I have a motion to receive please?
Mr. Kawakami moved to receive C 2009-334 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang,
and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Yes, Councilmember.
COUNCIL MEETING - 23 - November 4, 2009
Ms. Kawahara: Yes, I just did want to say that I think this IAL
study is going to be very helpful. I am... Councilmember Kawakami, I was glad to
hear that you said that you weren't saying that you weren't against the IAL, that
you cleared that up, and clarified that because I was concerned that there are
people here that are not hopeful at all that agriculture will be able to be able to be a
viable thing here on Kauai. I think it is no longer a choice whether it is going to be
viable, not it has to be viable. And as policy makers and government decision
makers, I think it is up to us to make it viable because we are quickly running out
of any kind of resources of our own to provide food for us if we ever have an issue in
getting stuff over here. So it does need to become something that is unquestionably
needing to be supported, and that the government and the public policy officials
have to make it viable. And I think we as policy makers are here to ensure that
there is better land use policy that is consistent with farming that will enable
farmers and the Farm Bureau to bring people into farm. I understand the concern
about that, but there is going to need to be... and I know they are stepping up that
program to be sure that we have farm land... it is no longer an option to not
consider that it is not going to be viable. In doing this, I think is a first step from
giving us the tools to make policy on it. Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Councilmember Kaneshiro?
Mr. Kaneshiro: Thank you Mr. Chair. I think it is important for all
of us to realize that outside... when you look outside of the box, there is so much
more large landowners that have lands that are either in agriculture or coming out
of agriculture that hasn't been identified as IAL lands. I think, you know, for small
farmers like me regardless if it is an IAL or if it is not because traditionally, I have
been brought up as a third or fourth generation farmer, I am going to farm that
land regardless if it is or not. But I think it is important in a long run for us to
realize that if you take the total acreage on the island and compare it to what is
really in ag, you will find that there is a tremendous amount of acres out there that
hasn't been identified. So I know Mr. Mickens brought up some points about, yea,
we have to look for farmers and I know that Derek did that too, but at the same
time, if you have the large landowners and their land identified, I think that is
when the incentives would come in as to how we can help to provide that. But for
small farmers or ranchers like we are, I mean regardless if it is IAL or not even if it
is the poorest land that I ever have, I am still going to try and farm it, and make
that land farm because traditionally, it is our way of being able to protect the land
and to be stewards of the land. So I just wanted to point that out since part of that
was brought up through the dialogue. Thank you Mr. Chair.
Chair Asing: Thank you Mr. Chair. Any other discussion?
Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Thank you Mr. Chair. I wanted to thank you for
putting this on the agenda today and for the excellent comments that I heard from
all of the colleagues, and I look forward to us continuing the dialogue with Dr. Kim
COUNCIL MEETING - 24 - November 4, 2009
because, you know, just from the short discussions, we can see how complex the
issues are. And, you know, we have some expertise around the table and retail
marketing and farming that will really help us educate one another. I think that is
a... I just wanted to acknowledge that and also just to answer Glenn quickly, you
know, it says in the criteria, food, fuel, and fiber. So food is an important thing that
a lot of people are focused on, but we have some proposals kicking around now
about ag land for fuel and having sustainable renewable energy production on our
ag land, so that is a very interesting dialogue. Thank you very much Mr. Chair.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? If not, all those
in favor say aye.
The motion to receive C 2009-334 for the record was then put, and unanimously
carried.
Mr. Nakamura: The next matters are communications for receipt.
On page of the Council's agenda communication C 2009-335, communication
C 2009-336. On page 2 of the Council's agenda communication C 2009-337,
communication C 2009-338, communication C 2009-339, communication C 2009-
340, C 2009-341, and at the bottom of page 2, communication C 2009-342, and
communication C 2009-343.
C 2009-335 Communication (09/18/2009) from the Chief of the Engineering
Division, Department of Public Works, transmitting for Council approval,
resolutions to establish crosswalks, stops, stop lines, speed limits, school bus stops,
and public transportation bus stops within the Port Allen Residential Subdivision,
Koloa District: Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2009-335 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Chang.
Ms. Kawahara: You know, is there... did somebody want to
separate something out?
Chair Asing: Yea, we have someone who wants to speak. Why
don't you come up. Go ahead, come up.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ROB ABREW: Aloha Councilmembers. Rob Abrew for the record.
You probably call this the Abrew resolution. Concerning this rule change or this
rule clarification or whatever. Back in June or July when there was some
discussion about how the agenda was...
Chair Asing: Let me do this. It is coming up on the resolution.
Do you want to speak on the resolution? This is the communication to the
resolution.
COUNCIL MEETING - 25 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Abrew: Are you going to receive this or you are going to
defer?
Chair Asing: We are going to take up the resolution. This is just
the communication that is going...
Mr. Abrew: Okay, I will do that. I just didn't know (inaudible).
Chair Asing: Is there anyone else? 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: We have a motion on the floor to receive.
Mr. Nakamura: This would be to receive from page 1
communication 335 to the top of page 3, communication C 2009-343.
C 2009-336 Communication (10/01/2009) from the Chief of the Building
Division, Department of Public Works, transmitting for Council information, the
Building Permit Information Reports for August 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. Bynum moved to receive C 2009-336 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-337 Communication (10/OU2009) from the Chief of the Building
Division, Department of Public Works, transmitting for Council information, the
Building Permit Information Reports for September 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. Bynum moved to receive C 2009-337 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-338 Communication (10/07/2009) from the Assistant Chief
Procurement Officer, transmitting for Council information, the Fiscal Year 2009-
2010 First Quarter Statement of Equipment Purchases: Mr. Bynum moved to
receive C 2009-338 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-339 Communication (10/08/2009) from the Chief of the Engineering
Division, Department of Public Works, transmitting for Council approval, a
resolution which establishes a 15 m.p.h. speed limit for the entire length along
COUNCIL MEETING - 26 - November 4, 2009
Makamae Place for the Canela Residential Subdivision in Hanalei: Mr. Bynum
moved to receive C 2009-339 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-340 Communication (10/09/2009) from Councilmember Derek S.K.
Kawakami, transmitting for Council consideration, amendments to Chapter 16,
Article 20, of the Kauai County Code 1987, by adding a new section relating to the
use of mobile electronic devices while operating a vehicle: Mr. Bynum moved to
receive C 2009-340 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-341 Communication (10/15/2009) from Council Vice Chair Jay
Furfaro, transmitting for Council consideration, amendments to Chapter 5A, Article
11A, Section 5A-11A.1, of the Kauai County Code 1987, by amending the
Limitations to Taxes For Property Used for Long Term Affordable Rental: Mr.
Bynum moved to receive C 2009-341 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-342 Communication (10/23/2009) from Councilmember Tim Bynum,
transmitting for Council consideration, a resolution amending the County Council's
rules to permit the Council Chair to place items received after the deadline set forth
in Rule 15 on the agenda, provided that notice meets the requirements of
Section 92-7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes: Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2009-
342 for the record, seconded by Mr. Chang.
C 2009-343 Communication (10/23/2009) from the Housing Director,
transmitting for Council consideration, an amendment to the 2009-2010 Capital
Budget Ordinance -General Fund appropriation for Affordable Housing which
intends to expand the proposed use of said funds beyond just infrastructure
improvements: Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2009-343 for the record, seconded by
Mr. Chang.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any discussion? All those in favor say
aye?
The motion to receive C 2009-335, C 2009-336, C 2009-337, C 2009-338, C 2009-339,
C 2009-340, C 2009-341, C 2009-342, and C 2009-343 was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval is communication
C 2009-344.
C 2009-344 Communication (10/01/2009) from the County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to write-off delinquent tipping fees in the amount of
$6,044.98 for Eric Taniguchi dba Eric Taniguchi Trucking & Equipment
("Taniguchi") (Account #55445-432027), pursuant to Kauai County Code Section 21-
9.4, relating to uncollectible delinquent tipping fee accounts (Department of Public
COUNCIL MEETING - 27 - November 4, 2009
Works Solid Waste Division): Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-344, seconded
by Mr. Kawakami, and unanimously carried.
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval on page 3 is
communication C 2009-345.
C 2009-345 Communication (10/01/2009) from the Office of Economic
Development Director, requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, indemnify,
and expend approximately $100,000 in grant funds from the Hawaii Tourism
Authority's Natural Resources Program which will help to fund the Po`ipu Beach
Restoration Study: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-345, seconded by
Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval is communication
C 2009-345.
C 2009-346 Communication (10/06/2009) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to apply for, receive, indemnify, and expend $132,000
in Fiscal Year 2009 Administration Fee Funding for Housing Choice Voucher
Family Self-Sufficiency Program Coordinator salaries from the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development which will be utilized to fund two (2) existing
positions, and applicable fringe benefits associated with the positions:
Ms. Kawahara moved to approve C 2009-346, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair, just note for the record that was
communication C 2009-346.
Mr. Furfaro: I think you earlier stated 345.
Chair Asing: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval is communication
C 2009-347.
C 2009-347 Communication (10/12/2009) from the Boards and Commissions
Administrator, requesting Council approval to erase and/or dispose of all stored
analog and digital audio recordings from various boards and commissions meetings,
all of which have been transcribed into minutes and approved by the respective
board or commission:
Chair Asing: I believe we have a communication from the
Administration withdrawing this item, am I correct?
COUNCIL MEETING - 28 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Nakamura: We are distributing the memo now Mr. Chair.
Chair Asing: We will take a few minutes break, so you can...
Mr. Nakamura: We can make it is a caption break Mr. Chair at this
time. Caption break, 10 minutes.
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 10:50 a.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 11:10 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: With that, Mr. Clerk, next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: We are back on page 3 of the Council's agenda on
communication C 2009-347.
Chair Asing: Thank you. We have a request from the
Administration to withdraw the item. Before we do that, can we have the public up
please?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ROLF BIEBER: Good morning Mr. Chair, Mr. Vice-Chair, and
Council, Rolf Bieber for the record. As a disclosure item, I am also on the Board of
Ethics for the County and I am here to speak to you on agenda item 2009-347.
ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR., COUNTY ATTORNEY: Excuse me, excuse me.
Al Castillo County Attorney. Mr. Bieber.
Mr. Bieber: Mr. Bieber.
Mr. Castillo: Mr. Bieber, I would like to inform you that you
being on the Board of Ethics, your testimony before the Council today is in violation
of the County code, would be in violation of the County Code if you proceed, and
would be in violation of the County Attorney's opinions that you have received as a
member of the Board of Ethics. So I warn you that should you proceed any further
regarding this agenda item, you will be in violation of the County Charter.
Mr. Bieber: Thank you. I will not be testifying today, but I will
be sending the Council a communication, and it will have details of why I am here
today and what this is about.
Chair Asing: Thank you.
Mr. Bieber: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING - 29 - November 4, 2009
Chair Asing: Is there anyone else who would like to speak on
this 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: And Peter, shall we have a motion to withdraw?
Mr. Kaneshiro: Receive.
Mr. Nakamura: This will be to receive.
Chair Asing: Move to receive.
Mr. Furfaro: Based on the correspondence that we received from
the Office of Boards and Commission, I move that we receive this item 347.
Mr. Furfaro moved to receive C 2009-347 for the record, seconded by Mr. Bynum,
and unanimously carried.
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval at the bottom of page
3 of the Council's agenda is communication C 2009-348.
C 2009-348 Communication (10/13/2009) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to decline repurchase of Unit No. 73, Villas at Puali,
located at 1978 Hokulei Place, Lihu`e, Hawaii 96766, and provide the owners a
one-year waiver of the County's repurchase right effective the date of the Council's
decision: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-348, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The matter at the top of page 4 of the Council's
agenda is communication C 2009-349.
C 2009-349 Communication (10/13/2009) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to decline repurchase of Unit No. 81, Villas at Puali,
located at 1481 Haleukana Street, Lihu`e, Hawaii 96766, and provide the owners a
one-year waiver of the County's repurchase right effective the date of the Council's
decision: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-349, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval is communication
C 2009-350.
COUNCIL MEETING - 30 - November 4, 2009
C 2009-350 Communication (10/13/2009) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval to decline repurchase of Unit No. 35, Villas at Puali,
located at 1961 Hokunui Place, L%hu`e, Hawaii 96766, and provide the owners a
one-year waiver of the County's repurchase right effective the date of the Council's
decision: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-350, seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter for approval is communication
C 2009-351.
C 2009-351 Communication (10/16/2009) from the Executive on Aging,
Agency on Elderly Affairs, requesting Council approval to receive, expend three (3)
Federal grant funds, and indemnify the State Executive Office on Aging, in the
amount of $271,399 which is the combined total that covers funding from July 1,
2009 through September 29, 2012 as follows:
1) "Development and Implementation of a Person-Centered Hospital
Discharge Model" is for the period of July 1, 2009 through September 29, 2012 in
the amount of $154,750 over a three (3) year period;
2) "Aging and Disability Resource Centers: Empowering Individuals to
Navigate Their Health and Long Term Support Options" is for the period of
September 30, 2009 through September 29, 2012 in the amount of $58,286 over a
three (3) year period; and
3) "Hawai`i's Community Living Program: Supporting Choice and
Independence in the Community" for the period September 30, 2009 through
September 29, 2011 in the amount of $58,383 over a two (2) year period:
Mr. Furfaro moved to approve C 2009-351, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: Mr. Chair, at the bottom of page 4, communication
C 2009-352, could we ask that this matter be moved to after the executive session
briefing.
Chair Asing: Thank you. So noted. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: On the top of page 5, communication C 2009-353 if
we could also ask for this matter to be moved until after the executive session
briefing.
Chair Asing: Thank you. So noted. Next item please?
COUNCIL MEETING - 31 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter on page 5 of the Council's agenda
for approval is a LEGAL DOCUMENT, attached to communication number
C 2009-354.
LEGAL DOCUMENT:
C 2009-354 Communication (10/19/2009) from the Housing Director,
requesting Council approval of Contract No. 4359, Pa`anau Development Sewage
Treatment Agreement, Third Amendment as follows:
Third Amendment to Contract No. 4359 between Kukui`ula South Shore
Community Services ("KUSSCS") and the County of Kauai establishing new
fees for sewage treatment services to the Pa`anau Development for a five (5)
years period beginning July 1, 2009 which establishes a new base fee of $4
per thousand gallons and a minimum monthly charge of $2,600.
Mr. Furfaro moved to approve LEGAL DOCUMENT: C 2009-354, seconded by
Mr. Chang.
Chair Asing: Any discussion? Yes, go ahead.
Ms. Kawahara: I just wanted to thank Director Eugene Jimenez
and his staff Gary Mackler and others for working out a great contract on this.
Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? All those in
favor say aye?
The motion to approve LEGAL DOCUMENT: C 2009-354 was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing; Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter is a claim.
CLAIMS:
C 2009-355 Communication (10/19/2009) from the County Clerk,
transmitting a claim filed against the County of Kauai by Juliette Souza for
damages to her vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai:
Mr. Furfaro moved to refer C 2009-355 to the County Attorney's Office for
disposition and/or report back to the Council, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ECONONIIC DEVELOPMENT/HOUSING CONIlVIITTEE REPORT:
COUNCIL MEETING - 32 - November 4, 2009
A report (No. CR-EDH 2009-09) submitted by the Economic
Development/Housing Committee, recommending that the following be received for
the record:
"EDH 2009-8 Communication (10/20/2009) from Committee
Chair Dickie Chang, requesting the presence of George Costa, Director of
Economic Development, to provide an update on the Office of Economic
Development's activities relating to the Kauai Marathon and to hear
from Bob Craver, Director, Kauai Marathon,"
Mr. Kaneshiro moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter at the bottom of page 5 is a
resolution. The first resolution is Resolution No. 2009-62.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2009-62, RESOLUTION AMENDING RULES OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF
COMMITTEES AND THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS (Travel Requests):
Mr. Furfaro: Mr. Chair, I would like to move that we receive this
with an understanding that going forward, the travel policy that we should follow
up on is the similar one in the Finance Department.
Chair Asing: Yes, can I have a second to that?
Mr. Furfaro moved to receive Resolution No. 2009-62 for the record with the
understanding that going forward, the travel policy that we should follow up on is
the similar one in the Finance Department, seconded Mr. Kaneshiro.
Chair Asing: Let me explain a little bit on this. The Finance
Department has a travel policy for County employees and officers. The Council, this
Council has always made it a policy to follow the Administration's policy. The
policies have differed from different Administrations and there has been some
changes, but generally spe... not generally speaking, we have always followed the
Administration's travel policy. The exception to the policy is as written rule 3 still
applies to us as far as Councilmembers that the Chair approves the travel policy.
Other than that, everything that is in the travel policy is governed by that policy. I
will be sending that, a copy, of that policy to all Councilmembers including staff.
So, with that, any further discussion on this item? If not, all those in favor say aye?
COUNCIL MEETING - 33 - November 4, 2009
The motion to receive Resolution No. 2009-62 for the record was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Mr. Nakamura: The next Resolution for approval at the top of
page 6 is Resolution No. 2009-63.
Resolution No. 2009-63, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A CROSSWALK
AT PORT ALLEN RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, KOLOA DISTRICT, COUNTY
OF KAUAI: Mr. Furfaro moved to adopt Resolution No. 2009-63, seconded by
Mr. Bynum, 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 Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2009-64.
Resolution No. 2009-64, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SCHOOL BUS
STOP AT `OKUPU STREET, PORT ALLEN RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION,
KOLOA DISTRICT, COUNTY OF KAUAI: Mr. Furfaro moved to adopt Resolution
No. 2009-64, seconded by Mr. Chang, 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.
Mr. Nakamura: The next Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2009-65.
Resolution No. 2009-65, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS
WITHIN PORT ALLEN RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, KOLOA DISTRICT,
COUNTY OF KAUAI: Mr. Kawakami moved to adopt Resolution No. 2009-65,
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?
COUNCIL MEETING - 34 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Nakamura: The next Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2009-66.
Resolution No. 2009-66, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION BUS STOP AT `OKUPU STREET, PORT ALLEN
RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION, KOLOA DISTRICT, COUNTY OF KAUAI:
Mr. Chang moved to adopt Resolution No. 2009-66, seconded by Mr. Kawakami, 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: Thank you. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter is a Resolution for approval,
Resolution No. 2009-67.
Resolution No. 2009-67, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STOP SIGNS AND
STOP LINES ON COUNTY ROADWAYS WITHIN PORT ALLEN RESIDENTIAL
SUBDIVISION, KOLOA DISTRICT, COUNTY OF KAUAI: Mr. Chang moved to
adopt Resolution No. 2009-67, seconded by Mr. Bynum, 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: Thank you. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2009-68.
Resolution No. 2009-68, RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING SPEED
RESTRICTION FOR MAKAIVIAE PLACE, HANALEI DISTRICT, COUNTY OF
KAUAI: Mr. Furfaro moved to adopt Resolution No. 2009-68, seconded by
Mr. Chang, 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: Thank you. Next item please?
COUNCIL MEETING - 35 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter is Resolution No. 2009-69.
Resolution No. 2009-69, RESOLUTION AMENDING RULES OF THE
COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI FOR THE ORGANIZATION OF
COMMITTEES AND THE TRANSACTION OF BUSINESS:
Mr. Bynum moved to approve Resolution No. 2009-69.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Councilmember Chang?
Mr. Chang: I am sorry.
Chair Asing: I believe you have a motion on the floor.
Mr. Chang seconded the motion.
Chair Asing: No, the motion was to receive.
Mr. Chang: Oh, I am sorry. Aye?
Chair Asing: The motion was to receive.
Mr. Chang: He made the motion to receive?
Mr. Bynum: I made a motion to approve.
Chair Asing: Are you going to make the motion to receive?
Mr. Chang: Motion to receive.
Mr. Chang moved to receive Resolution No. 2009-69.
Mr. Kaneshiro: But he made a motion to approve.
Chair Asing: No, I recognize Councilmember Chang who made
the motion to receive. Is there a second? Councilmember Kaneshiro?
Mr. Kaneshiro: Is there a motion on the floor?
Chair Asing: Councilmembers, I recognized Councilmember
Chang for making the motion to receive. Can I have a second please?
Mr. Kaneshiro: Can I have a five (5) minute recess?
COUNCIL MEETING - 36 - November 4, 2009
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 11:24 a.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 11:35 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: And let me try to clarify this. You know, under
normal Robert's Rules or even the Council rules, the Chair need to recognize the
speaker first before we accept a motion. In this case, I did not recognize
Councilmember Bynum, but that is beside the point. I am going to just put that on
the side for now and say, we will handle it this way. Councilmember Bynum did
make a motion to approve. Councilmember Chang did make a motion... I am sorry.
Councilmember Chang made the second to the motion to approve, so now we are
going to have discussion on the floor. With that, let's suspend the rules and come up
please?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Abrew: Is there a motion on the floor?
Chair Asing: Yes, a motion to approve.
Mr. Abrew: Aloha Councilmembers. My name is Rob Abrew for
the record. I am not here for anyone else, for myself, or the citizens of Ka.ua`i. One
o£ I believe this rule, in my opinion, should not be changed. There are ways this
rule can be complied with by posting our agenda with our rules. Back in June and
July when there was a lot of discussion about the rules, the Council told the public
that the rules that were voted on in January are the rules that the Council follows.
With that, in section 3 on the resolution, it says that all meetings and deliberations
of the Council shall be governed by the rules. To me, that is very simple. All the
rules of prior Councils are hereby repealed, so from my understanding and that this
Council is governed by the rules they voted on in January. On August 5, 2009, I
approached the Council, notified the Council... that this Council that items on the
agenda did not follow rule 15b on being placed on the agenda. During the meeting,
I mentioned this rule before the Council, discussed each item, noting that this item
did not follow rule 15b. Not one of the members here asked for clarification on this
rule or until after the third time it was brought up at that time by Councilmember
Chang, asked if we could hear from the County Attorney for clarification on the
Council rules. Pulling from the minutes, I would like to quote the County Attorney.
It says, I would like to clarify some misunderstanding that the public may have
regarding the application of County Council rules which via resolution and H.R.S.
92. The point is, my objection to this rule had nothing to do with H.R.S. 92. I know
that the Garden Island asked me for clarification, but let me do it right here.
Basically, in interpreting the rules of the County Council, the interpretation of the
rules are basically... what you do is try to carry out the majority view and the
resolution is basically a written guideline, so why have rules. That is coming from
the attorney that is advising you guys. Now in one of those agenda items, the way
agenda items are placed on the things, anything that comes... that are properly
brought before the Council which means...
COUNCIL MEETING - 37 - November 4, 2009
Chair Asing: Okay, go ahead.
Mr. Abrew: Properly brought before the Council which means
they follow the guidelines in our Charter that resolutions and ordinances are
brought with some wording and communications are brought and received by the
County Clerk. Item 5, the officer and duty rules is of the Chair, the presiding officer
shall receive and determine for disposition all matters properly brought before the
Council. So every matter that is brought before this Council that is received that
meet the requirements, need to be disposed of, and a vote needs to be called on. So
nothing can be sitting in a box there for two (2} years if it has been properly
received by the County Clerk. So eventually, all the matters need to come here and
be voted on of yes or no. That is what rule 5 says. In rule 3, number 5, that is the
Chair's job. Now if we go to rule number 10, this is building the... this is where I
come into what we have. Rule number 10 is general provisions regarding bills and
resolutions, so once again... placement on the agenda. All bills and resolutions
must be initiated by the Chair, Council, or in the Chair's absence... to be placed on
the agenda. Now we go to 15b. 15 describes the rule, agenda, and priority of
business. 15b, pursuant to Chapter 92 H.R.S., the County or Committee shall not
change the agenda once filed. They need to be filed on number b. All
communications to be placed on the agenda must be initialed by the Council Chair
and received by the Council, Office of the County Clerk before 4:30 p.m. on Friday
two (2) weeks preceding the regular meeting.
When I brought up this issue, some of the responses from the members of the
Council were, well, that is not.., that is to make our staff not work so hard, not to
bombard the staff with all those things. I have no problem with that. If some of the
other comments that were... what if something urgently needs to be addressed?
Well, if everything is in by the Friday, everyone here has all that information, it
could be known to the public what has come and what could possibly be placed on
the agenda. Now if something comes in there that needs to be placed on the
agenda, the Chair has the option to call a special meeting. So if there is something
that comes from the Administration on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday...
Chair Asing: Okay, your six (6) minutes has expired, you want to
just wrap up?
Mr. Abrew: Okay. So if something comes after this date, the
Chair has two (2) options or this body has two (2) options. (Inaudible) has one, he
can call a special meeting and note it per H.R.S. on that Thursday and have a
special meeting here at 8:30 on those specific items that come in after 10... after
4:30 on that Friday.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Go ahead Councilmember Furfaro.
Mr. Furfaro: I am not going to pose a question to the speaker.
COUNCIL MEETING - 38 - November 4, 2009
Chair Asing: Oh, okay.
Mr. Furfaro: But I want to say a few things that address his
comments.
Chair Asing: Okay.
Mr. Furfaro: And so that...
Chair Asing: With that, why don't we hang on then.
Mr. Furfaro: I will wait until you call the meeting back to order.
Chair Asing: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else? 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: Any further discussion Councilmembers?
Mr. Kaneshiro: Mr. Chair, before you do, can I have the County
Attorney up.
Chair Asing: Yes.
Mr. Kaneshiro: I have a question.
Chair Asing: County Attorney please.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
ALFRED B. CASTILLO, JR., COUNTY ATTORNEY: Good morning
everyone.
Mr. Kaneshiro: Good morning A1. A1, you know, according to the
rules that we adopted I guess through Resolution No. 2009-02 on December 1, 2008,
if you look at rule number 15, section c, that specifically states that meetings must
comply with Section 92-7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Isn't this just telling us
that basically we need to meet that rule, 92-7?
Mr. Castillo: Yes.
Mr. Kaneshiro: As you post?
COUNCIL MEETING - 39 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Castillo: Councilmember Kaneshiro, yes. When I reviewed
the proposed Resolution, it is basically what is contained in that particular section
that you read, so it would still require the Council to be in compliance with Chapter
92 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes.
Mr. Kaneshiro: Okay, we are covered?
Mr. Castillo: You are.
Mr. Kaneshiro: Alright.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Go ahead Councilmember Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, so the proposed resolution says that it has to
become compliant with H.R.S. 92-7 which we always have to be because that is the
law, but the rules... so there is an overlay. We have to meet the lay, but our rules
could be more stringent, is that correct?
Mr. Castillo: The rules could... generally speaking, if this Council
would like to promulgate rules that are more strict or more stringent, the answer to
that question is, yes. However, if I can relay... if I may relate it to the proposal
here, it is... how can I say? It is almost redundant. I mean it is in there already
like I did opine and I believe it was either in July or August when I did say earlier
that within the resolution which is a guideline for this Council. The Chapter 92 is
covered and the requirements are there. To highlight one particular item in
Chapter 92 would just be an additional effort by the Council.
Ms. Kawahara: May we ask...
Mr. Bynum: So I understand that we always have to be
compliant with H.R.S. Section 92-7, but we had a community member come up and
say that the rules as currently written say... have everything in here two (2) weeks
in advance, and I agreed with Councilmember Kawakami that as a rule, that is a
good idea to protect the staff, to properly plan for the agenda that in most instances,
it is a reasonable expectation that things come in two (2} weeks in advance which is
what our rules currently say. This is just clarifying that there are instances when
the Chair at his discretion says, hey, this didn't meet the two (2) week deadline, but
it is within compliance with H.R.S., it is a matter that is important for the Council,
and, you know, it should be on the agenda. I agree with that. I want the Chair to
have that discretion. I also want our rules to be clear for the general public that the
Chair has that discretion. So this rule is just to bring us clearly in compliance with
our current practice which I agree with. So is there any harm in this rule in
making it consistent and clear?
Mr. Castillo: Councilmember Bynum, I am trying to digest what
you are saying. I see two (2) points here. One is, it would be inappropriate for me
COUNCIL MEETING - 40 - November 4, 2009
to opine regarding the policies that this body commits itself to. However, when I
read Resolution No. 2009-2, to me, it is clear when it says that this Resolution is to
provide a guide for the Councilmembers, and to me, it is clear when it says that this
Council must abide by Chapter 92. To me, Chapter 92 must be read in its entirety
and now go and highlight the importance of a certain section regarding Chapter 92
would be a policy decision for the Chair and for this body, and I... it is neither here
nor there for me. I cannot make any judgments as far as what happens with the
Council. I can only tell you what the law is, whether or not it is clear from the
Resolution regarding Chapter 92 and I have said in the past that it is clear that this
Council has been abiding by Chapter 92.
Chair Asing: Any other questions for the County Attorney?
Councilmember Kawahara?
Ms. Kawahara: Hey Al.
Mr. Castillo: Good morning.
Ms. Kawahara: Good morning. I understand that we are talking
about the 92-7, but the beginning of the sentence and it doesn't matter to me, but...
does right now currently is it clear that the Chair has discretion to receive items
after deadline, the 4:30 deadline?
Mr. Castillo: I am sorry. I am trying to understand your
question.
Ms. Kawahara: The beginning of the actual amendment says, at the
Chair's discretion, items received after the deadline. At the point right where we
are at now, it is not clear that he can take stuffs after the 4:30 deadline.
Mr. Castillo: To me, the question that would be appropriate for
your legal team to advise you on is... it is a Sunshine law application and it is
basically whether or not this Council is in compliance with the Sunshine law and it
is not when things are received, it is basically when things are posted that matters.
Ms. Kawahara: Right.
Mr. Castillo: And the posting is the requirement because it gives
the public advanced notice as to what is coming up. So the deadlines regarding
receiving items and the deadlines or the discretion that the Chair has in
determining what is to be placed on the agenda, that is not for me to say. For me to
basically opine on is whether or not the agenda item met or meets the Sunshine law
meets the requirement of Chapter 92.
Chair Asing: Thank you.
COUNCIL MEETING - 41 - November 4, 2009
Ms. Kawahara: I just... yea, we always do... we always are sure of
that, the Sunshine law. It is just that we are trying to give the Chair more leeway
in taking stuff that is received after our arbitrary 4:30 deadline on Friday.
Mr. Castillo: And I don't want to encroach on that aspect of this
Resolution.
Ms. Kawahara: Thank you.
Mr. Castillo: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Oh, I am sorry. Councilmember
Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: I don't have a question for the County Attorney. I
would just like to be recognized after he is done.
Mr. Kaneshiro: Thanks Al.
Chair Asing: The meeting is now called back to order.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: With that, Councilmember Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you. You know, I just want to give some
clarity here to the speaker that came up earlier and so forth, and focus on what the
County Attorney have said. This rule is about complying to the posting deadline.
The posting deadline for the public to get the appropriate notice, so let's say for
today's meeting on November 4, this rule about posting two (2) Fridays before the
meeting is basically addressing an 11 day period. Now for this meeting, we would
have had to post the agenda on October 29 to meet the Sunshine rules. Contrary to
what the testimony was made in the stands about to make it easier on the staff, the
reality is posting the Friday, two (2) Fridays before this meeting, allows the staff
only five (5) days to organize the agenda. That is to look for research, material,
information, and get it posted. Therefore, for the November 4 meeting, the agenda
needed to be posted to comply to law by October 29, and the Friday before that
would have been for October 24. This is not about the Chairman's discretion. This
is basically an administrative standard to tell the Administration across the street,
you want to get something on the agenda that we can appropriately research it like
a grant, funding, major capital project, and so forth. You need to get it in to be
reviewed by the Chairman, two (2) Fridays before the meeting. So everything that
came up on today's agenda, should have been submitted to the Chair by the 24th of
October allowing the staff just five (5) days to work on the material. Now, I take
that very serious because it references a standard, a standard operating procedure
that everyone can comply, and without that standard, you will find yourself making
COUNCIL MEETING - 42 - November 4, 2009
exceptions. Well, during the time that I was honored with being the Chairman and
during the time Mr. Asng was the Mayor, I actually wrote a memo on August 21 of
last year saying to the Mayor, we would not make any exceptions for the two (2)
Friday rule. And it wasn't directed at my discretion at Chair, it was directed to
Departments such as Planning, Parks, Housing, Engineering... hey guys, you have
an obligation to get us material in. So, therefore, I understand the generosity that is
being proposed here and the flexibility, but the reality from an administrative
standpoint this directive is focused on all the Division Heads across the street to get
their things in on a timely basis, so that our staff can give it the appropriate
attention that it needs before it gets posted five (5) days later, so I will not be
supporting this change.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: I appreciate Councilmember Furfaro's explanation
that I think everyone here agrees with that this is an appropriate standard of
practice for our conducting our business, and I agree with that. There have been
circumstances when things were on the agenda that didn't meet the standard and
there were good reasons. We had an example that pops to my mind there... our
grants that have deadlines, the department across the street says, hey, this grant
has a deadline, our rules and laws here say that you can't apply for a grant without
permission of the Council, and so they say, hey, this is matter that is time sensitive
and in those instances, the Chair has appropriately, in my opinion, used his
discretion to place things on the agenda, you know, with that reasoning. I think all
of us take that standard seriously that is why the communication for this proposed
Resolution was posted on the 23rd meeting the criteria for the two (2) week deadline.
But in those instances where something is time sensitive and is important for the
Council, the Chair has used his discretion which I totally support. However,
members of the public came up and said... because the clear reading of the rule as
currently written, it doesn't address that discretion for necessary reasons... it just
says, it has to be here, so to me, this is just a logical amendment to the rules that
would reinforce the Chair's discretion when it is appropriate at his choice to put
something on the agenda, and make it clear to the public and avoid the kind of
confusion and the dialogue that we are having here, so I urge support of this
resolution. It is clear. It just brings clarity to our current practice.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? Councilmember
Kaneshiro?
Mr. Kaneshiro: It could also affect us adversely because you are
going to have the Administration take this as a serious... you know, if we put
language like this, we can show them, eh, no matter what, we get until couple days
before to present, you know, or bring forth the communication. So I don't want to be
sending messages like this. I think it is clear. We want it two (2) weeks ahead of
time whenever possible. We need it. When the Chair can address that, initial it, put
it on the agenda, but to put this directly into the Resolution may give perhaps when
COUNCIL MEETING - 43 - November 4, 2009
we are not here, you know, it may give different Councilmembers or different
Administration different perspectives for what we are really expecting. So I am not
going to be able... I am not supporting this in other words. I am going to vote "no"
for this proposed change and I think as the attorney had stated, we are covered
under Section 15... under rule 15, section c on where we need posting requirements
that comply with 92-7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, so I am satisfied.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Councilmember Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: Again, I just want to reiterate. We are setting a
standard here not for the Chair, but for the Administration. We are also allowing
our staff five (5) days to appropriately prepare for a Sunshine posting that is
required for the public. I just want to make certain that we also understand that in
the event of an emergency as stated by some of you who testified, the Chair has that
discretion. A change in this rule loosens up the expectations that we have and the
standards that we have for the Administration.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion? If not, I will
not be supporting this. I do not feel the amendment is necessary, so with that, roll
call please?
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Kawahara TOTAL - 2,
AGAINST ADOPTION: Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro,
Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 5,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0.
Mr. Nakamura: Five (5) nos, two (2) ayes.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matters are bills for first reading. The
first bill for first reading is Proposed Draft Bill No. 2336.
BILLS FOR FIRST READING:
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2336 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 20, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED,
RELATING TO THE TRAFFIC CODE: Mr. Kawakami moved for passage of
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2336 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a
public hearing thereon be scheduled for December 2, 2009, and that it thereafter be
referred to the Public Safety/Intergovernmental Relations Committee, seconded by
Mr. Kaneshiro.
Chair Asing: Any discussion? Oh, I am sorry, Glenn?
COUNCIL MEETING - 44 - November 4, 2009
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Kaipo. For the record, Glenn Mickens. I
just want to applaud Derek for introducing this Bill 2336. I believe that no driver
should be using a mobile electronic device while operating a vehicle. A vehicle could
be a 2,000 pound accident waiting to happen and the driver should have total
concentration. The only thing I would disagree... there is... you've got in there, $50
fine. I think the fine should be greater. If the fine for littering is $1,000, I think
this is a much for egregious thing than littering the highway. But, anyway, I do
compliment Derek for introducing this thing. I think it is wise. Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Is there anyone else? 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: We have a motion and a second. Roll call please?
The motion for passage of Bill No. 2336 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: Thank you. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next bill for first reading is Proposed Draft Bill
No. 2337.
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2337 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
CHAPTER 5A, KAUA`I COUNTY CODE 1987, RELATING TO LIMITATION OF
TAXES ON PROPERTY USED FOR LONG TERM AFFORDABLE RENTAL:
Mr. Kaneshiro moved for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2337 on first reading,
that it be ordered to print, that a public hearing thereon be scheduled for
December 2, 2009, and that it thereafter be referred to the Budget & Finance
Committee, seconded by Mr. Furfaro.
Ms. Kawahara: Did someone want to speak from the public?
Chair Asing: Oh, I am sorry, did somebody want to speak? Let
me hold off then. Hold on with the roll call and what I would like to do is suspend
the rules and come up please.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
COUNCIL MEETING - 45 - November 4, 2009
HAROLD MATSUNAGA: For the record, my name is Harold
Matsunaga. Sometime ago, as you know, I came to testify for this tax break on
affordable rental thing. And for a while, I really thought that this was a forgotten
matter and maybe some of you dropped it on the carpet, and the janitor's swept it
under the rug because I didn't hear from what was going on about this. So I did call
on Daryl Kaneshiro although I don't want to really bother people, you know, when
they are home, but he was nice, he explained to me that... what was going on that
they wanted to have the Administration have input on the matter. So then I waited
a while more and Lani was nice enough to call me and told me about this meeting
that Jay Furfaro made the proposal on this new bill. And also I had somebody from
the Council Clerk's Office call me about this meeting. I just felt that I had to be
here to thank all of you for keeping this thing alive and from the indication that I
have from you that you are favorable about passing this bill. I just wanted to be
here to thank all of you for this and, by the way, I don't know if you have like a
petty fund, but you have your County Attorney to represent you and I am just
happy that I have somebody like Glenn Mickens as our special counsel, so it would
be nice if you could send... add him to the payroll for the people of Kauai. Glenn
Mickens has really been a big help. I am sure that it is not only for me, but for
other people that have questions. Again, I want to thank you, all of you, concerning
this matter.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Go ahead Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Mr. Matsunaga, I wanted to thank you for bringing
this issue to the Council's attention and there really is a responsive and reasonable
group here, and thank Councilmember Kaneshiro and Furfaro for responding to...
bringing that to our attention because it is the right thing to do.
Mr. Matsunaga: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Chang: Thank you.
Ms. Kawahara: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Is there anyone else? If not, I'd like to
call the.... I am sorry, Glenn?
Mr. Mickens: Thank you Kaipo again. Glenn Mickens. I just
want to salute Jay Furfaro for introducing this resolution (meaning bill). I think it
is common sense in... I am sure that Mr. Matsunaga is extremely grateful and there
will be a lot of people out there that see what you Councilmembers have done using
common sense, and I hope this same tact can be used in more issues that come
before you. Sometimes, it just seems that common sense prevails. It took a lot of
time for Mr. Matsunaga to bring this thing up, but what he brought up was, you
COUNCIL MEETING - 46 - November 4, 2009
know, nothing but the right thing to do, and you did it, so I appreciate it. Thank
you.
Mr. Furfaro: Glenn, I want to make sure that you understand
that this piece is for those people who have participated in the past. This is a bridge
bill, so it is not opening new opportunities, but it is...
Mr. Mickens: No, but for people like Mr. Matsunaga that was
kind of under the radar screen and you brought it forward, no, so I understand what
you are saying. Thank you Jay.
Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, I'd like to call the meeting
back to order and can we continue Mr. Clerk. I believe we were in the process of
voting, am I correct?
Mr. Nakamura: Yes Mr. Chair, why don't we just start from the
beginning of the roll call.
Chair Asing: Yes please.
The motion for passage of Proposed Draft Bill No. 2337 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 last bill for first reading on the top of page 7 is
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2338.
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2338 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B-2009-691, RELATING TO THE CAPITAL BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF
KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2009 THROUGH
JUNE 30, 2010, BY REVISING PROJECT DESCRIPTION IN THE GENERAL
FUND (Affordable Housing - $1,000,000.00): Mr. Kaneshiro moved for passage of
Proposed Draft Bill No. 2337 on first reading, that it be ordered to print, that a
public hearing thereon be scheduled for December 2, 2009, and that it thereafter be
referred to the Budget & Finance Committee, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and carried
by the following vote:
COUNCIL MEETING - 47 - November 4, 2009
FOR PASSAGE: Bynum, Chang, Furfaro, Kaneshiro,
Kawahara, Kawakami, Asing TOTAL - 7,
AGAINST PASSAGE: None TOTAL - 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL - 0.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Next item please?
Mr. Nakamura: The next matter is a bill for second reading which
is Bill No. 2319, Draft 1.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2319, Draft 1 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND
CHAPTER 8, KAUAI COUNTY CODE 1987, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINANCE (Amending Article 27, Chapter 8,
Kauai County Code 1987, relating to Shoreline Setbacks and Coastal Protection):
Mr. Bynum moved for adoption of Bill No. 2319, Draft 1 on second and final reading
and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by
Mr. Kaneshiro.
Chair Asing: I believe we have two (2) amendments to the bill.
Before I do that, I'd like to open it up to the public first. Is there anyone in the
public who would like to speak on this bill?
Ms. Kawahara: Peter, can... how does it work?
Chair Asing: We will have a short recess, so that members can
review the amendment.
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 12:10 p.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 12:27 p.m.
Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair, we are on a bill for second reading,
Bill No. 2319, Draft 1. We have a motion and a second to approve the bill and
amendments have been circulated.
Chair Asing: Hang on. Can we get Councilmember... Okay, the
meeting has been called to order and we have two (2) amendments on the floor. The
first amendment is by Councilmember Kawakami, so I would like to have a motion
to amend.
Mr. Kawakami moved to amend Bill No. 2319, Draft 1 as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Furfaro.
Chair Asing: Any discussion on the amendment. Councilmember
Kawahara?
COUNCIL MEETING - 48 - November 4, 2009
Ms. Kawahara: There has been a question about the portion of the
amendment that includes the shoreline survey stamp by a licensed surveyor
registered in the State of Hawaii, and I was wondering how important... whether
that can be struck while maintaining the intent of the amendment.
Chair Asing: Go ahead.
Mr. Kawakami: Thank you Councilmember Kawahara for bringing
that to our attention. You know, I am going to start this off by giving you the
background and the reasoning behind this amendment. I hope I can address that
concern. The proposed amendment is to clarify that the shoreline setback ordinance
is consistent with the Planning Commission's rules regarding special management
area permits. Those permits may require the applicant to submit current shoreline
surveys, that the amendment is to insure that the ordinance is consistent with that
requirement. The amendment also remedies concern raised by a constituent, Caren
Diamond who worked hard on this also regarding the requirement of a certified
shoreline for private improvements and public improvements that require SMA
permits. So at the back of the proposed amendment in Section d is, to me, where it
ties everything in and it clarifies that nothing can supersede the rules that are in
place already, and that is read that nothing in this section shall be deemed to
amend, modify, or superseded any provision of the special management area rules
and regulations of the County of Kauai. So I hope that that can address some of
the concerns that were posed.
Chair Asing: Any further discussion?
Ms. Kawahara: Do you know Council... may I address...
Chair Asing: Go ahead.
Ms. Kawahara: Do you know if the SMA management area rules
allows for a licensed surveyor to do the certified shoreline without going through the
State?
Mr. Kawakami: No, I am not sure.
Ms. Kawahara: Because I guess that was the concern that was
brought up is whether or not that stamped survey by the licensed surveyor actually
gets approved by the State. Whereas, in general, that is what usually happens I
think.
Mr. Kawakami: Is that what usually happens?
Ms. Kawahara: That is my understanding.
Mr. Kawakami: I don't have an understanding on that.
COUNCIL MEETING - 49 - November 4, 2009
Ms. Kawahara: So that is why I am curious. So my question is
going... my question is only about that and I would like to... I would like to get more
clarity on that before I would vote, but it is up to the majority of course.
Chair Asing: Okay, any further discussion? Councilmember
Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: I just want to say that I support the amendment as
written.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Mr. Furfaro: I also support the amendment as written.
Chair Asing: With that, there is a motion to amend as circulated.
You want to speak on the item? Come up please. The rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
CAREN DIAMOND: Aloha, Caren Diamond. Thank you. I like this
draft a lot better. I am not sure which amendment you're considering at the
moment, but I have just a couple of suggestions. In the amendment by Mr.
Furfaro.. .
Mr. Furfaro: No, it is not...
Ms. Diamond: Actually it is in both of them, so sorry.
Mr. Furfaro: The verbiage is similar, yes.
Ms. Diamond: Yea. In both of them, I would ask if you could
include that it is consistent with Section 5-27.3 and that section actually says, it is s
a shoreline setback determination establishment of the shoreline setback line. And
it says, no shoreline setback line shall be established for any lot subject to this
article unless the application for a shoreline setback line includes a shoreline survey
certified not more than six (6) months prior to submission of the application. And so
I am okay with this as long as it is consistent with that, but wherever it seems to
get rid of, the requirement for a certified shoreline, you are not going to be
consistent with the other, so I ask if you would take out the part that says, you
know, that is okay for just a regular surveyor. And the only... I think this is a lot
better and I especially like the last sentence which says nothing in this section shall
be deemed to amend, modify, or supersede any provision of the SMA area rules and
regulations. So I think this is a lot better. I would also prefer that if the private
structures were separated from the public structures and one of the problems that
we are having is valuation of improvements in Wainiha. You could look at the
structures that turn themselves repair and they often go from 1,000 square feet to
COITNCIL MEETING - 50 - November 4, 2009
3,000 square feet. They dramatically increase the size and I know if you read
through the shoreline setback bill, you are not allowed to increase the size of
structures, so that should take care of it. But I would caution that that is not always
how it is interpreted at Planning, so you might want to separate out the private
here from the public. I want to thank you for cleaning up all the errors in here and
I think it is far better than it was.
Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, is there anyone else? 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: We have a motion on the floor. We have the motion
to amend as circulated. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye?
The motion to amend (Councilmember Kawakami's amendment) as circulated was
then put, and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: I believe we have another amendment.
Councilmember Furfaro?
Mr. Furfaro: This amendment actually also kind of touches on
Caren's comments, but for public improvements and facilities (inaudible) valuations
not exceed $125,000 which is the cutoff for minor SMA versus major. And the
repairs to lawfully existing private structures as delineated in Section 8-27 is
capped in this amendment at $125,000, so it does basically say that someone is
pursuing a point that they have an existing structure, and they are doing repair
work on it. The 125 would actually.
Chair Asing: Be a cap. Thank you. Any further discussion?
Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Mr. Chair, during the break, I tried to get a hold
Public Works and I think staff is still trying and I just have some questions for
them regarding this amendment.
Mr. Furfaro: I can respond to that. I have attempted to talk with
Planning and Public Works. Mr. Haigh is out of town, but the Planning Department
indicated that they did not have any ADA or other projects that they thought would
exceed the 125.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Any further discussion?
Councilmember Bynum?
Mr. Bynum: Yea, I believe we can get Donald over here and then
I just asked during the break, so what I heard from staff was a little bit different
COUNCIL MEETING - 51 - November 4, 2009
than what I heard from Mr. Furfaro regarding a separate issue which is... the way
that this is worded... does the 125 cap apply to private repairs as well? Because the
way that I read it, it applied to public improvements, but didn't apply to private
repair.
Mr. Furfaro: I guess what I am saying, it is clear for the public
improvements, but at 125, it would trigger the SMA major, would it not? I am
trying to answer your question. You can address it to him if you like Mr. Clerk. I
am asked the question and I want to get some clarity. Currently, we have a 125...
Chair Asing: Let's have the County Clerk up please.
PETER A. NAKAMURA, COUNTY CLERK: Peter Nakamura, County Clerk
for the record. I am sorry Mr. Chair, I didn't catch the question. My apologies.
Mr. Furfaro: Here is the question, I will repeat it. The 125,000
major SMA is triggered whenever a project is for more than that dollar value or
estimate.
Mr. Nakamura: Yes. If a project is in the special management area
and if it exceeds $125,000, it is required to get an SMA major permit which requires
a public hearing in front of the Planning Commission and decision by the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Furfaro: So this amendment doesn't change that rule?
Mr. Nakamura: No.
Mr. Furfaro: This amendment basically says the County on
public improvements must keep their work inside the SMA under 125,000.
Mr. Nakamura: I think what it does is it just reflects that break
point in the SMA... in the coastal zoned management act, the special management
area that says, if you exceed $125,000, then special management area major permit
is required.
Mr. Furfaro: It will be triggered?
Mr. Nakamura: Yes.
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you.
Chair Asing: Thank you. Go ahead.
Mr. Bynum: You have the amendment there Peter? I just want
to make sure that it is worded properly to... for public improvements and facilities
COUNCIL MEETING - 52 - November 4, 2009
whose valuation does not exceed 125,000 and repairs to lawfully existing private
structures as delineated in Section 8-27.7 (a)(6}.
Mr. Nakamura: Uh huh.
Mr. Bynum: So the way that is worded, does the 125 apply to
private repairs as well or just the public?
Mr. Nakamura: I think on... I believe it just... as it is written,
applies to the public improvement and public facilities whose valuation does not
exceed 125,000. That is the way that I am reading the amendment.
Mr. Bynum: So was the intent to have the cap for both?
Mr. Furfaro: I am saying that the law already exist on the 125.
Mr. Bynum: Well, it exist for both. The delineation between
SMA minor and SMA major, but this bill is to allow waiver of the certified shoreline
which could occur in a major or a minor as I understand it potentially.
Mr. Nakamura: Mr. Chair, if I could just ask for a short recess just
to clarify that with our staff.
Mr. Furfaro: But you understand my intent?
Mr. Nakamura: Yes.
Mr. Furfaro: Thank you.
Chair Asing: You want a short recess?
Mr. Nakamura: Yes.
Chair Asing: Why don't we do this? Why don't we take lunch and
come back for lunch because we still have to take care of the executive session, so
we will break for lunch, and come back at 1:40 p.m.
Mr. Nakamura: Thank you Mr. Chair.
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 12:40 p.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 2:12 p.m.
Mr. Nakamura: Mr. Chair, we are on a bill for second reading, Bill
No. 2319, Draft 1, and I believe the first amendment... Councilmember Kawakami's
amendment was adopted and we are now on a second proposed amendment from
COUNCIL MEETING - 53 - November 4, 2009
Vice Chair Furfaro, and I believe the latest version of that amendment has been
circulated.
Chair Asing: Thank you. With that, there is an amendment.
Mr. Furfaro: Yes, Mr. Chair, the amendment 2 has been
circulated again here and it does address the... whose valuations exceed 125,000 for
public improvements, and we reiterate the earlier section set forth referencing
8-27.3. That piece talks in terms of the fact that existing structures whether those
permits are to repair roofs, interiors, but do not enlarge the footprint is being
reiterated here. But I would like to ask our Legislative Analyst Peter Morimoto to
come up one more time. If you could Peter? And I think this does satisfy
Mr. Bynum's query.
Mr. Bynum: Yes Sir.
Mr. Furfaro: Okay.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
PETER MORIMOTO, LEGAL ANALYST: Good afternoon Councilmembers,
Peter Morimoto.
Mr. Furfaro: Peter, could you reference for the Council group the
reintroduction of a section that was already in place in the bill, but is reiterated
under Section 3 here.
Mr. Morimoto: Yes, in Section 8-27.8 (c)(3) of the floor amendment,
it makes it clear that the shoreline setback determination that is required is the
shoreline setback determination as set forth in Section 8-27.3 of the ordinance. And
8-27.3 lays out the procedure that must be followed in order to do a shoreline
setback determination.
Mr. Furfaro: I appreciate that although it has been a little bit of
a redundancy. It is for the purposes of reassuring this particular section. I guess if
anybody has any questions.
Chair Asing: Okay, does anybody have any question of Peter
Morimoto? If not, thank you Peter. I'd like to call the meeting back to order.
The meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: Do we have further discussion on the motion to
amend? If not... was there a motion,
Mr. Furfaro: I made a motion. I don't think we had a second.
COUNCIL MEETING - 54 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Furfaro moved to amend Bill No. 2319, Draft 1 as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Kawakami, and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: We are back to the main motion as amended. With
those two (2) amendments, we are now back to the main motion as amended. Any
further discussion on the amended motion?
The motion to approve Bill No. 2319, Draft 1, as amended, on second and final
reading, 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: Thank you. With that, can we have the County
Attorney up please?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Castillo: Good afternoon, Al Castillo, County Attorney.
Chair Asing: Good afternoon.
Mr. Kaneshiro: Good afternoon Al.
Mr. Castillo: So are we going on the next couple of matters?
Chair Asing: Yes.
Mr. Castillo: Three (3) matters.
Chair Asing: We have three (3) executive session items.
Mr. Castillo: Okay, so on ES-407, 408, and 409, I will read them
one at a time.
ES-407 Pursuant to Haw. Rev. Stat. sections 92-4 and 92-5(a)(4), and
Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is to
provide Council with a briefing and to request authority for a possible settlement
proposal in the case of County, of Kauai vs. Kauai Village Associates, et al., Civil
No. 09-1-0153 (Fifth Circuit Court) and related matters. This briefing and
consultation involves consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities
and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
COUNCIL MEETING - 55 - November 4, 2009
ES-408 Pursuant to Haw.Rev.Stat. §§92-4 and 92-5(a)(4), (6) and (8),
and Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E}, the purpose of this executive session is
to provide the Council a briefing on Kathleen Ah Quin v. County of Kauai,
Department of Transportation (USDCT) Civ. No. 08-00507 JMSBMK and related
matters. This briefing and consultation involves consideration of the powers,
duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the Council and the County as
they relate to this agenda item.
ES-409 Pursuant to Haw.Rev.Stat. §§92-4 and 92-5(a)(4), (6) and (8),
and Kauai County Charter section 3.07(E), the purpose of this executive session is
to provide the Council a briefing on Michael G. Ching v. Kauai County Council,
Civil No. 05-1-0080 (Fifth Circuit Court); County of Kauai, et al. v. Office of
Information Practices, et al., Civil No. 05-1-0088 (Fifth Circuit Court) and Ram
L. Chuan and Walter S. Lewis v. County of Kauai, et al., Civil No. 05-1-0168 (Fifth
Circuit Court) and related matters. This briefing and consultation involves
consideration of the powers, duties, privileges, immunities and/or liabilities of the
Council and the County as they relate to this agenda item.
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: And have a motion to move into executive session.
Mr. Bynum moved to go into executive session on item ES-407, ES-408, and ES-409,
seconded by Mr. Kaneshiro, and unanimously carried.
There being no objections, the Chair called for a recess at 2:20 p.m. The meeting
was called back to order at 3:15 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Asing: With that, Mr. Clerk, can we go back to the two (2)
items that we need to complete.
Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair, we are back on page 4 of the
Council's agenda on communication C 2009-352.
C 2009-352 Request (10/29/2009) from the Office of the County Attorney for
authorization to expend additional funds up to $65,000 to engage special counsel to
represent Defendants Department of Transportation and County of Kauai in the
lawsuit entitled Kathleen Ah Quin v. County of Kauai, Department of
Transportation (USDCT) Civ. No. CV 08-00507 JMSBMK and related matters:
Mr. Furfaro move to approve C 2009-352, seconded by Mr. Chang, and unanimously
carried.
Chair Asing: Next item please?
COUNCIL MEETING - 56 - November 4, 2009
Mr. Nakamura: Mr. Chair, the last item at the top of page 5 is
communication C 2009-353.
C 2009-353 Request (10/29/2009} from the Office of the County Attorney
requesting approval to expend up to $25,000 for special counsel's continued
representation of County defendants in Michael G. Chink v. Kauai County Council,
Civil No. 05-1-0080 (Fifth Circuit Court); County of Kauai et al v Office of
Information Practices et al ,Civil No. 05-1-0088 (Fifth Circuit Court) and Raymond
L. Chuan and Walter S. Lewis v County of Kauai et al ,Civil No. 05-1-0168 (Fifth
Circuit Court) and related matters: Mr. Chang moved to approve C 2009-353,
seconded by Mr. Furfaro, and unanimously carried.
Chair Asing: There being no other items on the agenda, the
meeting is adjourned. Thank you.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:16 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
PETER A. NAKANIURA
County Clerk
/lki